Looks like Drop might be 'dropping' a HD800

[odyo]

So looking at the smoothed chart of the 600 and the 800, isn’t the 600 adhering closer to Harman?

Yes according to Oratory1990's charts HD600 93/100, HD650 85/100, HD800S 86/100

 

[solderdude]

These are only tonal aspects though which can be EQ'ed.
Other aspects (driver angle/distance, radiating surface, partial diaphragm modes at higher frequencies, max excursion) can't be EQ'ed.
Also, acc. to Sean differences between the rating numbers need to be well above 5 to even 10 to really matter so 85 and 86 basically are the same.
Yet, these headphones sound and measure VERY different.
One needs to understand the rating consists of several aspects with a certain weighing. So quite different tonality but more 'evenness' in response can give a higher number yet one of them may have more bass, more midbass or different treble.
Those ratings are fun for people who value a single number and believe that it captures 'sound quality'.

 

[tknx]

Absolutely agreed that this is only part of the picture.

It seems to me that is entirely driven by the tuning and so EQ on the 800s end up in a superior listen but untuned, I can see why many prefer the 600s.

I am still deciding on what my next set will be. Right now it is between Audezes, Hifimans, HD800s, and maybe Clears. But in their EQed state, I feel like the HD800s may be the best choice. Hard to say just from reviews though.

 

[Jimbob54]

Absolutely agreed that this is only part of the picture.

It seems to me that is entirely driven by the tuning and so EQ on the 800s end up in a superior listen but untuned, I can see why many prefer the 600s.

I am still deciding on what my next set will be. Right now it is between Audezes, Hifimans, HD800s, and maybe Clears. But in their EQed state, I feel like the HD800s may be the best choice. Hard to say just from reviews though.

My 2c on your dilemma- given you are going to EQ

Get the 800s (or 800 for better value second hand) if you value absolute comfort. light weight and spacious soundstage.

Get Audeze if you like thumping bass and have a strong neck.

The Clears (for me) are a very dry sounding HP even after EQ and IMO dont take bass EQ that well- also feel and wear heavier than they are.

Hifiman are the wild card- I love my HE6 SE2 but ambivalent about their lower end models

 

[tknx]

So precogvision and some other reviewers complain about the bass on the HD800 and somewhat imply that it isn't fixable with straight EQ.

I tend to be a soft U curve person from the Harman, so definitely a bit of concern for me.

 

[odyo]

So precogvision and some other reviewers complain about the bass on the HD800 and somewhat imply that it isn't fixable with straight EQ.

I tend to be a soft U curve person from the Harman, so definitely a bit of concern for me.

Since it has a big soundstage, i assume the bass is distant in perception so it may not satisfy everyone. I see conflicting opinions on this. Some say the bass is very impressive with EQ(good sub bass due to big drivers and good punch compared to planars), some say the bass is very bad even with EQ. My guess is that if it doesn't seal well, sub bass EQ will not help much. You lose the effectiveness of added bass if you have a bad seal.
I wouldn't worry about distortion unless you listen really loud.
My humble and cheap biodyna Creative Aurvana Live headphones have actually more punchier bass than most headphone i've tried but the cost is that they sound really congested and instruments mask each other often. There is also Focal Clear which has one of the best bass according to most people but they don't have much soundstage. The bass of the headphone should be evaluated in it's context.

 

[jonfitch]

So at least from a Harman curve view - it looks like the extended treble of the HE-1 and 800S are pretty much the same, but the 600 rolls off which is definitely going to be more forgiving. The drop out around 2K is pretty consistent there in the 800/HE-1, and I expect is why people prefer the 600 in general.

The HE-1 and 800S tracking so closely is actually pretty surprising. I wonder if the waterfall would show more of a difference. Somewhere there is either (a) some difference not captured here or (b) people are just being influenced by the TOTL status of the HE-1 and it is being over-rated.

Anyway, I don't have a subscription to crin, so seems like I can't stick up two at the same time.

I think a big difference is the long decay times with electrostatics and planar drives which you can see with the impulse response. This creates a different type of sound, which I would say is softer and more euphonic in some ways but lacks dynamics and is also technically inferior to dynamic drivers. Tyll Hertson’s at the old Inner Fidelity used to call this a “soft as toilet paper” effect with these driver topologies that is quite euphonic. But it sounds IMO extremely good for acoustic or orchestral music as it enhances the liveliness that already exists in these recordings. The problem is studio recordings don’t sound anything like studio recordings anymore because it causes all music to sound “live” with the extra decay, which may sound good, but won’t sound accurate.

I would kind of liken listening to a planar/electrostatic headphone kind of like listening to a dynamic driver headphone with Dolby Prologic IIx enhancement on all your music.

 

[solderdude]

So precogvision and some other reviewers complain about the bass on the HD800 and somewhat imply that it isn't fixable with straight EQ.

Don't agree. In this case simply the wrong EQ has been used. HD800 handles low bass quite well. When HD600 and HD800(S) are EQ'ed the HD800(S) is much better at imaging.

 

[KeithPhantom]

HD800 handles low bass quite well.

I can't agree with you in this one, at least in terms of perceivable bass. I had both the HD 800 and the HD 800 S and it didn't matter how much I pushed the bass up using EQ, they felt super light in that region, and to get something similar to other headphones, something crazy like +12 needed to be used, and still was short of other headphones. And this was on two different occasions with two different pairs and two different amplifiers.

I thought I ran of out power in my then Asgard 3, but when I tried with the A30 Pro in high gain, it confirmed that power wasn't the issue, it was simply that the openness and cup design of these headphones is a detriment if you want to EQ the bass.

The first headphone that can handle low bass well (especially after EQ) and can feel very open without any sacrifice anywhere in the frequency response is the HD 560S. I have owned it twice, and both times it impressed me that it could do what the HD 800(S) couldn't do.

 

[Rayman30]

I almost purchased a pair of HD8XX until I seen reviews were overwhelmingly luke warm.

 

[solderdude]

When you have the proper EQ it will be fine (just as fine as any other HD800).

When one buys one to get the best possible sound without resorting to EQ the HD800S is a better choice. I think this is where the HD8XX is lacking.