Most Neutral (Harman) Closed-Back Headphones Under 300$?

[James-F]

I've been looking for a closed-back pair under 300$ that has very good Harman curve tracking.
I already have the HiFiMan Sundara 2020, they are fantastic but also open back, I'm looking for better isolation with slightly more subbass extension and just as good sounding.

So far my research have come to two options;
AKG K371
Beyerdynamic DT 700 Pro X

I have been looking in diyaudioheaven, ASR, crinacle, rtings, oratory1990, youtube, all have great resources but the sheer amount of data is overwhelming, so basically I need to narrow it down as the thread title suggest, preferably backed up by science.
Are there more headphones that fit that description?

Regards,
James

 

[MayaTlab]

Is EQ a possibility ? If so, a closed back that may not track the Harman curve particularly well from the start but has other qualities (seals adequately across a large range of individuals, few coupling issues, few sharp peaks / nulls, low sample variation, etc.) will be better suited than some other closed back HPs that may track the Harman target well on an ear simulator but may struggle to deliver it on some individuals' head.
Now that's easier said than done, I'm not certain that there are a lot of closed back HPs that wholly fit these criteria.

The K371 is not the best choice if what you want is to have the guarantee that you'll be experiencing what the Harman target is meant to sound like. It is excessively sensitive to coupling issues (notably leakage). An illustration of the problem here : https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...ctivist-bang-for-your-buck.34596/post-1207611
Rtings measures the FR below a few hundred Hz on five real human subjects and the K371's FR varies quite a bit among them in that range : https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-5/graph#1671/7913

 

[Dilettante]

Bose 35 II? Just don't forget to turn them on. Decent noise cancellation as well.

 

[James-F]

Yes, I forgot to mention that they have to be passive and wired.

 

[Dilettante]

Yes, I forgot to mention that they have to be passive and wired.

Well, QC35II can be wired via 3.5-to-2.5mm and NC can be disabled.

 

[Marc v E]

I have the Bose QC35 and can really recommend them. In fact, I haven't owned a headphone I used more often.

The only downside is that there is a slight hiss when turning them on. Never noticed it during playback. Pros are excellent comfort, great noise cancellation, that is also very usable in a plane or office and good sound quality. The last can be transformed to great if you use some eq.

As a last note: the manufacturer seems to have discontinued the qc35ii, but the qc45 looks like the same headphone with a different name.

 

[Marc v E]

Yes, I forgot to mention that they have to be passive and wired.

Then I would definately not recommend the Bose qc35ii. It's made to track the Harman curve when active and intended for wireless use.

Maybe Dan Clark fits your description best.

What is your intended use? That makes quite a difference in what I would recommend.

 

[Dunring]

I've had those and the K371pro is my favorite. The DT700 pads are so firm I could only wear them for half an hour at a time. The K371 was comfortable, comes with extra cables, and even on the phone sounded fun and didn't need eq out of the box. Also they look discreet enough to wear outdoors with the short cable.

 

[Robin L]

So far, the AKG K371 has been my best closed-back under, etc. More to the point, it's the first closed-back headphones I can stand. As for the caveats, they apply to those for who such caveats would apply. They cover my ears just fine. The seal is just fine and I wear glasses. Tonal balance is fine, deep bass is present. Doesn't need much power.

I prefer open back 'phones. Favorite right now is the venerable Sennheiser HD 650 in its much cheaper guise as the Drop 6XX. Waiting for a new cable for that pair. Without eq, fine for most music, with eq and everything is covered. Sounds better with extra bass and a good headphone amp. Something of a cheaper but comfier HD 650 is the HD 579. Mids are pleasantly accentuated, cushions are larger and softer. Less audible detail than the 650s, which can be a blessing at times.

 

[KehaDNb]

So far, the AKG K371 has been my best closed-back under, etc. More to the point, it's the first closed-back headphones I can stand. As for the caveats, they apply to those for who such caveats would apply. They cover my ears just fine. The seal is just fine and I wear glasses. Tonal balance is fine, deep bass is present. Doesn't need much power.

I prefer open back 'phones. Favorite right now is the venerable Sennheiser HD 650 in its much cheaper guise as the Drop 6XX. Waiting for a new cable for that pair. Without eq, fine for most music, with eq and everything is covered. Sounds better with extra bass and a good headphone amp. Something of a cheaper but comfier HD 650 is the HD 579. Mids are pleasantly accentuated, cushions are larger and softer. Less audible detail than the 650s, which can be a blessing at times.

I can’t stand the akg. It’s an awful headphone. Good Alternative is indeed the dt 770 pro. Or a dt 1770. I found u have to mess also with different pads to find a good Balance u can enjoy.

 

[Feelas]

Sennheiser PXC550-II are known to have a pretty-close compliance to Harman. See the oratory grapher here. Just swap target response to "Harman 2018". MMX300 seem to be so-so compliant, but neither of these pairs I have listened to.

 

[markanini]

Sennheiser PXC550-II are known to have a pretty-close compliance to Harman. See the oratory grapher here. Just swap target response to "Harman 2018". MMX300 seem to be so-so compliant, but neither of these pairs I have listened to.

Apprently Beyerdynamic MMX300 uses DT770-32 drivers with velour pads, and different cups. One guy that tried both said they sounded different when I asked.

I tabulated preference scores, from 85 and up, for closed backs at one point from AutoEQ data with some extra from Sean Olive and Oratory1990. One's with asterixis are ones I've owned. AKGK371 was a favorite for sound, but ruined by poor fit

Mark Levinson 5909                                 97
Shure SRH440                                       95*                      
AKG N700NC                                         91
Dan Clark Audio Aeon 2 Closed (perforated earpads) 91
Beyerdynamic MMX300                                91
AKG K371                                           89*
JBL tune 710                                       88
Audio Technica ATH-M40x                            88
Beyerdynamic Custom One Plus                       87
Sennheiser PXC550-II                               87
NAD Viso HP70                                      86
Superlux HD 662F                                   86*
JBL Club One                                       85
Beyerdynamic DT 250                                85*
Fostex TH-X00 Ebony                                85
NAD Viso HP50                                      85

 

[Feelas]

JBL Tune 710 indeed track close to Harman (I won these once), but have problematic BT implementation (it has some digital issues, doesn't sound bad but becomes shrill over BT) with my devices. Apart from that, a very dark & V-like tuning. But well, these things are cheap like nothing else on the list. T710 also suffer from very small earcups, which must be tested before going forwards with an order.

 

[MayaTlab]

I tabulated preference scores, from 85 and up, for closed backs at one point from AutoEQ data with some extra from Sean Olive and Oratory1990.
AKG N700NC 91

Where did you source the score for the N700NC (not M2) ? I believe that Sean Olive posted several scores for the N700NCM2 but I haven't found any for the N700NC.

 

[markanini]

Where did you source the score for the N700NC (not M2) ? I believe that Sean Olive posted several scores for the N700NCM2 but I haven't found any for the N700NC.

From his twitter, when he was asked about his highest scoring headphone. Where did you get the N700NCM2 score from?

 

[MayaTlab]

From his twitter, when he was asked about his highest scoring headphone. Where did you get the N700NCM2 score from?

Sean Olive's twitter as well . He published two scores :

(first one shows the N700NC's photo, but the trace looks more like what I'd expect the N700NCM2 to measure like below 1kHz, so I think that it's just a typo).

Found it otherwise, thanks !

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1250906336646193153

Question though : is that the score derived from the predictive model, or the preference rating derived from subjective listening with a virtual pair of headphones ?

Anyway, this only consolidates for me the idea that using the predictive preference model as a way to make purchase decisions and evaluations for specific headphones models is an abysmally bad idea.

This is the difference between my pair of K371 (flattened black trace) and 1) my pair of N700NC, with ANC on and TruNote off, and 2) another pair of headphones which scored 52, with blocked ear canal entrance mics (I can repeat that with open ear canal entrance mics and while the values will shuffle a little bit it by the tune of 1dB, occasionally 2dB across narrower bandwidths above 1kHz, it won't change the story, at least up to 7-8kHz). Guess which one of the orange or blue trace is the N700NC and the pair of headphones that scored 52 ?

Please guys, don't use the predictive score as a basis for purchasing a specific model of headphones. Between sample variation and coupling issues, it won't lead anywhere.

 

[markanini]

Please guys, don't use the predictive score as a basis for purchasing a specific model of headphones. Between sample variation and coupling issues, it won't lead anywhere.

Individual differences obviously exist. But does that factor to a large enough extent that it ruins a generally well tuned headphone, say above 85 or 90 score? I'd be interested to se that tested on a large scale somehow, like you did. Because many of the top scoring headphones are well regarded irrespectively. That suggests there might be an amount of "socialization" vs. individual HRTF. Evolutionarily that would make sense as the human species has a history of hunting in groups before the invention of agriculture.

I personally have no choice but taking the scores with a grain salt. I've had a higher preference for headphones scoring lower two out of five times. That could be put as the preference model working 60% of the time, for me.

Anyway I've had the chance to demo most headphones I've bought, or at least take advantage of generous return policies. If that's not a possibility for someone you must rely on reviews and preference scores and graphs. And graphs tell me that the Harman model rather is dumb about tall peaks in the upper mids not causing higher penalties to the score IMO.