New Sennheiser HD490 Pro

[dinodino]

I agree that sturdy plastic can be pretty sufficient when it comes to sturdiness. The problem with the HD660S2 were the sounds it made when the left earcup moved a little. I also tried to extend the headband or shorten it to see if it makes a difference, it didn't. For me its just not worth the money with such build quality so I ordered the 560S again for 99€ refurbished and will see if it can replace my go-to headphone for easy listening on my desktop which is a DT 880 Edition.

I also have a Sennheiser HD-25 II and use it extensively for the gym, but also that headphone has two defective contacts on both sides now, so I need to wiggle a bit on the connections on top of the earcups. But to be fair I really used them more like a tool and didn't treat them with great care. Also I was still quite pleased with them. I bought them 5 years ago aprox.

 

[8bits]

I also have a Sennheiser HD-25 II and use it extensively for the gym, but also that headphone has two defective contacts on both sides now, so I need to wiggle a bit on the connections on top of the earcups. But to be fair I really used them more like a tool and didn't treat them with great care. Also I was still quite pleased with them. I bought them 5 years ago aprox.

As a fellow owner of the HD-25 II for about 15 years, I can safely say that this thing will survive a nuclear apocalypse easily, the only thing left will be these headphones and cockroaches.

 

[crx]

Lots of agonizing graphs and hair splitting over headphones that look like are completely unfit for any kind of "mixing" or "pro" duty.

Like asking if a 300lbs 75 y.o. or 280lbs 78 y.o. IHOP permanent resident is more fit for Ninja Warrior course.

I've had the mushy HD600 for almost 30 years, and while they're great for music listening they're not in any shape or form suitable for serious "mixing".

 

[solderdude]

I think most 'linear' headphones can be used for mixing as long as they are EQ'ed or one is familiar with the sound, in other words know what it should sound like on the HD600 to obtain the correct result.

Also, when mixing on the HD600 (without EQ) and make it sound good on that headphone you end up with a Harman-alike recording.
So a recording with deep bass, less brightness and a bit more sparkle.
The HD490 can give similar results but a bit 'brighter' when used in the same conditions.
People that enjoy the sound of a HD600 but find it a bit too 'bright' and like a bit more comfort might well like the HD490PRO with the cloth mixer pads.
Better stereo imaging too (because of the angle and dip around 4kHz.

 

[johny_2000]

According to the product specification, its part no. is 700330. However, there is not yet a single page that lists the part, not even sennheiser.

So far this cable has only been mentioned on the Polish Sennheiser website.

Przewód symetryczny do HD 490 PRO

Przewód symetryczny do słuchawek HD 490 PRO / HD 490 Plus.

sennheiser.pl

 

[johny_2000]

After digitizing this FR plot, I ran AutoEQ script with the PEQs output.

Here are the results:

I've adjusted the low and high shelf filters to my liking and it sounds pretty good so far.

 

[Makahl]

After digitizing this FR plot, I ran AutoEQ script with the PEQs output.

View attachment 363905

Here are the results:
View attachment 363909

I've adjusted the low and high shelf filters to my liking and it sounds pretty good so far.

You don't need to trace graphs from squig.link. You can download/save the source .txt by accessing the database (adding "/data" at the end of the URL)
example: https://cammyfi.squig.link/headphones/data/ -- it rules out human error.

Cammyfi seems to be using a clone rig, though. I don't know the accuracy or how close it is but if you're comparing to Harman OE you want to keep things within the standard, in this case, GRAS 45CA which has been used in Harman research and luckily Aregina from youtube graphed the HD 490 Pro using this test fixture.

Also, B&K 5128 measurements from SoundGuys (link) in case you want to try Harman Beta 2024 FWIW.

 

[johny_2000]

Thanks @Makahl!
I scoured the entire Internet in search of reliable measurements of the HD 490 Pro with producing (velour) pads.
So, I can run AutoEQ to get the compensation coefficients for the Harman 2018 curve.

Do you happen to know how to extract the digital measurement data for this graph?

Sennheiser HD 490 PRO review

Should these be your next producing and mixing headphones? Find out in our full Sennheiser HD 490 PRO review.

www.soundguys.com

 

[MayaTlab]

Cammyfi seems to be using a clone rig, though. I don't know the accuracy or how close it is but if you're comparing to Harman OE you want to keep things within the standard, in this case, GRAS 45CA which has been used in Harman research

I'm going to be a bit annoying but Harman didn't systematically use the 45CA. They used different fixtures in different articles and the latter articles used a custom pinna, which on aggregate produces some differences above 3kHz compared to GRAS' anthropometric pinna : https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...-on-kemar-but-which-pinna？.36240/post-1468193

Sean Olive occasionally seems to use the KB50x0 pinnae, which given the magnitudes involved, I guess is quite fine, if you rather see this all, as he's already expressed it, as a "guideline", instead of a standard.

Also, B&K 5128 measurements from SoundGuys (link) in case you want to try Harman Beta 2024 FWIW.

If one wants an already available target for 5128, that tends to produce similar error curves to Harman OE 2018 for 711 for over-ear headphones that are insensitive to coupling issues, I'd rather recommend LMG's 0.6 curve.

The Harman beta 2024 for 5128 target is a "pre-method of adjustment listening test" target Harman used in their preliminary listening tests for IEMs.

Thanks @Makahl!
I scoured the entire Internet in search of reliable measurements of the HD 490 Pro with producing (velour) pads.
So, I can run AutoEQ to get the compensation coefficients for the Harman 2018 curve.

Do you happen to know how to extract the digital measurement data for this graph?
View attachment 363952

Sennheiser HD 490 PRO review

Should these be your next producing and mixing headphones? Find out in our full Sennheiser HD 490 PRO review.

www.soundguys.com

You can use Webplotdigitiser for example : https://automeris.io/WebPlotDigitizer.html

But just know that there isn't a "Harman 2018 target for 5128" per se for now (please don't use the target for 711 fixtures).

If you're looking for 5128 measurements for the 490 Pro, there also are Sennheiser's, after un-compensating them, but they're a bit inconsistent : https://audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/new-sennheiser-hd490-pro.51639/post-1860967

 

[Makahl]

Thanks @Makahl!
I scoured the entire Internet in search of reliable measurements of the HD 490 Pro with producing (velour) pads.
So, I can run AutoEQ to get the compensation coefficients for the Harman 2018 curve.

Do you happen to know how to extract the digital measurement data for this graph?
View attachment 363952

Sennheiser HD 490 PRO review

Should these be your next producing and mixing headphones? Find out in our full Sennheiser HD 490 PRO review.

www.soundguys.com

Alternatively to WebPlotDigitizer you can use VituixCAD, it's a bit more straightforward. The link from my post the graph is in higher resolution, which is easier to extract.

VituixCAD Loudspeaker simulator

Tools -> SPL Trace
Align the XY axis bars (I prefer to set 100 Hz and 10000 Hz as it's always visible in most layouts)
Then click on "Trace SPL" and select the line to trace it ->Export. Done.

Sean Olive occasionally seems to use the KB50x0 pinnae, which given the magnitudes involved, I guess is quite fine, if you rather see this all, as he's already expressed it, as a "guideline", instead of a standard.

Sorry, by standard, I meant the International Standard IEC 60318-4, again, I'm not sure how close the "clone IEC 60318-4" is.

 

[MayaTlab]

Alternatively to WebPlotDigitizer you can use VituixCAD2, it's a bit more straightforward. The link from my post the graph is in higher resolution, which is easier to extract.

VituixCAD Loudspeaker simulator

Tools -> Trace SPL
Align the XY axis bars (I prefer to set 100 Hz and 10000 Hz as it's always visible in most layouts)
Then Click on "Trace SPL" and select the line to trace it ->Export. Done.
View attachment 363964

Good suggestion, Vituix seems so fast to use in comparison to WPD that I've wondered if I could run it in Parallel on my Mac.

Sorry, by standard, I meant the International Standard IEC 60318-4, again, I'm not sure how close the "clone IEC 60318-4" is.

Agreed, the variability is quite worrisome there. That being said, GRAS' own anthropometric pinna may depart a bit from some of the standards it's supposed to adhere as well. Personally I'd focus less on standards and rather on effective outcomes (ideally if feasible people using clone rigs would directly compare them with the fixture they aim to emulate and compare results, with the same samples, and the same operator, as Harman did between the KB 50x0 pinna and their own custom one, for example).

 

[johny_2000]

Alternatively to WebPlotDigitizer you can use VituixCAD, it's a bit more straightforward.

You rock! VituixCAD did a great job with this graph and I digitized the measurements into a file. I then ran it through the AutoEQ script a few times with my preferred bass and treble boost settings applied to the Harman 2018 curve, and printed out all the results. Tomorrow I'll go back to my music listening PC station and put these new PEQs into action.

 

[Emlin]

You rock! VituixCAD did a great job with this graph and I digitized the measurements into a file. I then ran it through the AutoEQ script a few times with my preferred bass and treble boost settings applied to the Harman 2018 curve, and printed out all the results. Tomorrow I'll go back to my music listening PC station and put these new PEQs int action.
View attachment 364026

Thanks for the forewarning.

 

[Makahl]

You rock! VituixCAD did a great job with this graph and I digitized the measurements into a file. I then ran it through the AutoEQ script a few times with my preferred bass and treble boost settings applied to the Harman 2018 curve, and printed out all the results. Tomorrow I'll go back to my music listening PC station and put these new PEQs into action.
View attachment 364026

Apologies for the confusion. I first intended to share the actual GRAS industry-standard graphs by Aregina, which can be used with the Harman 2018 target you're showing. Therefore, I time-stamped the YouTube video above with these graphs.

As MayaTlab pointed out, the Harman 2018 target was developed using Type 2/Type 3.3 ear simulators (711 couplers) and cannot be directly compared to the measurements from SoundGuys, which uses a B&K 5128 (Type 4.3 ear simulator -- a different coupler and produce results that are not compatible).

For a proper comparison, you can upload your tracing file to https://listener800.github.io/5128.html, go to the Equalizer tab "Upload FR", select the 5128 DF, then click on "Remove Tilt" -> "Harman Filters" to get the Harman 2018 adjustments or you can also set the LMG target as pointed by MayaTlab and adjust your personalization from there. This tool also offers an AutoEQ feature and you can export the PEQ settings with just one click.

 

[johny_2000]

For a proper comparison, you can upload your tracing file to https://listener800.github.io/5128.html, go to the Equalizer tab "Upload FR", select the 5128 DF, then click on "Remove Tilt" -> "Harman Filters" to get the Harman 2018 adjustments or you can also set the LMG target as pointed by MayaTlab and adjust your personalization from there. This tool also offers an AutoEQ feature and you can export the PEQ settings with just one click.

So in this case my loaded FR data is represented as 5128 DF (Tilt: -1 dB/Oct). Is this how the SoundGuys measured it on the B&K 5128?
What confused me is that the graph is different from the one above.

 

[Makahl]

So in this case my loaded FR data is represented as 5128 DF (Tilt: -1 dB/Oct). Is this how the SoundGuys measured it on the B&K 5128?
What confused me is that the graph is different from the one above.
View attachment 364045

I forgot to mention but the graph will be loaded and compensated to the default target in this tool. To uncompensate the graph, you can click on the "~" icon twice for the target in question.

To set the targets that I mentioned above, you can select from this menu:

 

[johny_2000]

@solderdude,
Do you have raw measurement data of the HD 490 Pro with production (velour) pads?
It is my understanding that your measurement equipment follows the Harman 2018 curve.

 

[solderdude]

What is shown on the website is the raw measurement as my fixture is DIY and (purposely) has no earcanal nor pinna. The mic signal is compensated and has my own bass-target implemented in hardware.
So it does not follow Harman nor any other target but my own.
My target is a horizontal line on my plots but should have a small dip around the ear canal gain band (around 3kHz). That small dip is not included in the hardware compensation though.

One day I will create a target (including tolerance bands) for my measurements.

 

[johny_2000]

@solderdude,
Thanks for explaining all the details.
I guess I'll have to be patient to have someone with certified equipment take measurements on the HD 490 Pro.

For now, I'll be using the B&K 5128 measurements from SoundGuys to get my EQ parameters.

Preamp: -6.8 dB
Filter 1: ON PK Fc 20 Hz Gain 5.5 dB Q 0.600
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 20 Hz Gain 1.4 dB Q 4.100
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 78 Hz Gain 0.6 dB Q 2.100
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 200 Hz Gain -2.4 dB Q 0.600
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 1000 Hz Gain -0.5 dB Q 5.000
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 1800 Hz Gain 3.1 dB Q 0.900
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 2100 Hz Gain -0.9 dB Q 4.300
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 3000 Hz Gain 0.9 dB Q 5.000
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 4100 Hz Gain -3.2 dB Q 3.400
Filter 10: ON PK Fc 6200 Hz Gain -3.0 dB Q 5.000
Filter 11: ON PK Fc 9400 Hz Gain -5.4 dB Q 5.000
Filter 12: ON PK Fc 10000 Hz Gain 4.6 dB Q 2.500

 

[ZolaIII]

@Makahl to Harman over ear use DCA Stelth crinacle to JM-1 error as base to your own can's crinacle measurements no smoothing, Harman over ear 2018 target with bass and slope adjustment (-1= -5 and - 0.20 and max slope 12 dB) and if need be (depending on your can's) treble reduction at 3 KHz. That's for time being and closed back's over ear and where they naturally roll off (if they roll off in the first place) you put additional high pass filter (second order Butterwort). For open back's use diffuse field target 5128 HATS to crinacle error for your own can's, same slope no bass correction no smoothing and of course treble depending on can's. Using Auto-EQ.
Example a)

Dan Clark Stealth Review (State of the Art Headphone)

There has never been and probably there will never be consensus on which headphones sound better :) My impression based on reviews and comments online is that E3 is more widely liked than Stealth. That has been my takeaway too from what I've seen online. I just wonder what an additional really...

www.audiosciencereview.com

+ high pass (in this case 18 Hz) not shown there
Example b)

Best headphones in the $500-$800ish range?

I found them on sale yesterday for $399 new. But I still passed by because there is an opinion about their metallic sound, the sudden death of the drivers and the lack of earpads in the whole world. It feels like both Drop and Focal have given up on this model and are selling off the last...

www.audiosciencereview.com