• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

OLLO S5X Headphone Review

Rate this headphone:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 33 25.4%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 60 46.2%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 26 20.0%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 11 8.5%

  • Total voters
    130
Yes, but at the same time, tests have shown that human hearing is almost immune to distortion in the lower frequencies. It takes very high levels of distortion in the lower frequencies before it can be perceived.
Your original point was what is the value of measurements at 104 db SPL from a practical point of view. That post was answering that question.
 
Last edited:
Which post is ”that” post? My original post was about the interpretation of Rok’s answer to @khensu.
I was referring to this one.
Thank you for taking the time to explain this. My interpretation is, what amirm describe as a ”problem”, is not really a problem if you do not crank the volume to very high levels. I have the S5X and I have not experienced any distortion at all. But, I keep the volume at rather low levels. Over 100 db SPL for an extenden period is not a very healthy level for sure. It makes me wonder what value measurments at 104 db SPL do have from a practical point of view.
 
I was referring to this one.
Well, yes - I see you point - but this was my thoughts after I had read the developed and interesting post from @GM3. It was not my original post. Anyway. As I see it now, the value of 104 db SPL has to be related to frequenzy. It would have been a different problem if this distortion peak was at 1 khz.

I can see that in the poll, put up by @amirm in the beginning of this thread, about 25 percent think this is a poor headphone. I guess none or very few of those 25 precent have actually heard the headphone. So as it seems this is opinions based only upon measurements data.

In my view this is a very good headphone, and I hear no distortion at all. I have the HD600, DC Aeon Closed, AKG 701 and some other headphones, and SX5 is the headphone I like best. Still the review was not very positive. The headphone has, according to the review, ”what is clearly a flaw”. My question then is, if this is a flaw, how significant is it? This makes me think there is more to consider when it comes to the interpretation of the measurements.
 
Last edited:
Yes, but at the same time, tests have shown that human hearing is almost immune to distortion in the lower frequencies. It takes very high levels of distortion in the lower frequencies before it can be perceived.
True that distortion in bass is less easily detectable vs higher frequencies, but don't forget this is a distortion spike at 240Hz so really this above the bass (or right on the upper limit of what is determined as "bass"). Not good, and given it's such a spiked anomaly is showing that there's something weird going on there - yes it would be worse if that high distortion trend continued into the rest of the bass, in fact it would be unlistenable if the usual distortion curve started that high from 240Hz downwards, but in this case it's a local spike - I don't like it, but I can't say with certainty how audible it is. It's not good headphone performance though.
 
In my view this is a very good headphone, and I hear no distortion at all. I have the HD600, DC Aeon Closed, AKG 701 and some other headphones, and SX5 is the headphone I like best. Still the review was not very positive. The headphone has, according to the review, ”what is clearly a flaw”. My question then is, if this is a flaw, how significant is it? This makes me think there is more to consider when it comes to the interpretation of the measurements.
I guess from headphone design and execution point of view, having a resonance between 200 and 250Hz is indeed a clear flaw. We don't know what is causing it but I suspect it will not be there is S6X. From music consumption point of view, is it flawed? I don't know. You have them, you seem to like them so why worry if it is flawed or not.

Amir says he put a quite a sharp filter at around 200Hz and that it made a big difference. Maybe you can try the filter and see if that makes any significant difference for you?
 
It's not good headphone performance though.
Have you heard the headphones, and have you heard this distortion yourself when listening to music? (not test tones) The people who have heard the headphones have largely been praising them, and have made no mention of this "not good headphone performance".

20s in above timestamped video, he talks about bass, and didn't notice any issue.

"Best studio monitors for $500 ... sound has exceptional punchiness, dynamic, [...] very precise, etc." Again, absolutely nothing about upper bass distortion, or poor bass performance, or any sort of poor performance.

So... "It's not good headphone performance though.", like I said, looks bad on graphs, but if it's basically not audible...! I guess that's where a lot of people have issues with ... let's amicably call them 'measurement gurus', people who feel so confident making absolute claims on performance for headphones or speakers they've not even heard. Don't get me wrong, I 100% agree with you, it's a measurable 'issue', something that exists, is measurable, and not having would 100% be better... But having someone making absolute claims about performance; "not good headphone performance"... At best, it's a comment that could easily be misinterpreted as in; it's a headphone with poor performance. At worse, the comment is meant to be taken literally, the author inferring that it's a bad quality headphone / will not sound good / poor transducer / sounds bad / headphone with poor performance, etc...

As per the above, and many other reviews pre ASR/SBAF reviews/measurements, pretty much everyone who heard them seemed to at least think that they were good headphones. And no one seemed to notice any issue. It's almost like some people's opinions are tainted by measurements, rather than their opinions are reached through experience (ex; listening to the headphone), and then measurements used as a validation tool or something; see a flaw in measurements; it'll sound bad... Meh.. In my experience, it doesn't always translate 100% of the time. And I'm a 'measurement'-type guy.

Anyway, gave lots of examples with other headphones with similar or worse flaws, and they don't seem to matter that much... But if you read my comments in the Edition XS of a few months back, you can see my fear / reluctance in purchasing them because of those flaws. Yet, "best 500$ headphones, sound great, etc", not everyone hears or are seemingly bothered by those measured flaws. Maybe they don't matter as much as people who haven't heard the headphone make it out to be; or maybe it all 100% is audible and you'll notice and be bothered by it... Honestly, as I've said here multiple times in multiple threads, it's nearly impossible to have an idea of what something will sound like just by looking at graphs. Ex; looks something would sound awful, and doesn't sound as awful as you thought they would given measurements..

Like I said, issue might not be as serious as some make it out to be.. (or who's statements can be misinterpreted in.. hehe)

(Really, didn't mean any insult or start any sort of war, everyone please don't take issue or read this in the wrong way ... I'm guilty of the same, I do the same thing, etc., just commenting because I do find this topic interesting! ;) :D )
 
Last edited:
Have you heard the headphones, and have you heard this distortion yourself when listening to music? (not test tones) The people who have heard the headphones have largely been praising them, and have made no mention of this "not good headphone performance".

20s in above timestamped video, he talks about bass, and didn't notice any issue.

"Best studio monitors for $500 ... sound has exceptional punchiness, dynamic, [...] very precise, etc." Again, absolutely nothing about upper bass distortion, or poor bass performance, or any sort of poor performance.

So... "It's not good headphone performance though.", like I said, looks bad on graphs, but if it's basically not audible...! I guess that's where a lot of people have issues with ... let's amicably call them 'measurement gurus', people who feel so confident making absolute claims on performance for headphones or speakers they've not even heard. Don't get me wrong, I 100% agree with you, it's a measurable 'issue', something that exists, is measurable, and not having would 100% be better... But having someone making absolute claims about performance; "not good headphone performance"... At best, it's a comment that could easily be misinterpreted as in; it's a headphone with poor performance. At worse, the comment is meant to be taken literally, the author inferring that it's a bad quality headphone / will not sound good / poor transducer / sounds bad / headphone with poor performance, etc...

As per the above, and many other reviews pre ASR/SBAF reviews/measurements, pretty one everyone who heard them seemed to at least think that they were good headphones. And none seemed to notice any issue. It's almost like some people's opinions are tainted by measurements, rather than their opinions are reached through experience (ex; listening to the headphone), and then measurements used as a validation too or something; see a flaw in measurements; it'll sound bad... Meh.. In my experience, it doesn't always translate 100% of the time. And I'm a 'measurement'-type guy.

Anyway, gave lots of examples with other headphones with similar or worse flaws, and they don't seem to matter that much... But if you read my comments in the Edition XS of a few months back, you can see my fear / reluctance in purchasing them because of those flaws. Yet, "best 500$ headphones, sound great, etc", not everyone hears or are seemingly bothered by those measured flaws. Maybe they don't matter as much as people who haven't heard the headphone make it out to be; or maybe it all 100% is audible and you'll notice and be bothered by it...

Really, didn't mean any insult or start any sort of war, everyone please don't take issue or read this in the wrong way ... I'm guilty of the same, I do the same thing, etc., just commenting because I do find this topic interesting! ;) :D
That's just the defacto response, especially re "have you heard these headphones". Point is measurements are more truthful if you have to make decisions, and there are countless headphones that don't have large distortion spikes at 240Hz! (I've already decided based on the overall measurements, not just the 240Hz distortion spike, that these aren't the best headphones you can get for the money.)
 
That's just the defacto response, especially re "have you heard these headphones". Point is measurements are more truthful if you have to make decisions, and there are countless headphones that don't have large distortion spikes at 240Hz! (I've already decided based on the overall measurements, not just the 240Hz distortion spike, that these aren't the best headphones you can get for the money.)
Hehe yeah I get your point! And I agree on that also. :D

Ok I'll just leave it at that, finished editing my previous comment literally 5s ago (added/edited last paragraph), and like I said; I'm also in the same camp; measurement = objective = reality, whereas failing to hear a flaw doesn't mean it doesn't exist, = subjective = not reality. Peace! :)

EDIT: I hope you got my point on people making comments without having heard a headphone/speaker though!! ;) *evil*
 
Hehe yeah I get your point! And I agree on that also. :D

Ok I'll just leave it at that, finished editing my previous comment literally 5s ago (added/edited last paragraph), and like I said; I'm also in the same camp; measurement = objective = reality, whereas failing to hear a flaw doesn't mean it doesn't exist, = subjective = not reality. Peace! :)
No worries, plus I want to say to people that are enjoying this headphone that they should continue to do so, but perhaps think about trying some better measuring headphones if they haven't done already. Also the 240Hz distortion peak is a bone of contention, because first the manufacturer said it was abnormal, then they said it was normal (lol), and some other people's measurements have shown no distortion spike at 240Hz, so there's quite a bit of inconsistency going on here, and so you can't say for sure if your unit has that 240Hz distortion spike or not. It's not the best headphone for the money in terms of the measurements, but you'd be silly to chuck it in the bin if you own it, at the very least buy a very affordable good measuring headphone to compare it against.
 
No worries, plus I want to say to people that are enjoying this headphone that they should continue to do so, but perhaps think about trying some better measuring headphones if they haven't done already. Also the 240Hz distortion peak is a bone of contention, because first the manufacturer said it was abnormal, then they said it was normal (lol), and some other people's measurements have shown no distortion spike at 240Hz, so there's quite a bit of inconsistency going on here, and so you can't say for sure if your unit has that 240Hz distortion spike or not. It's not the best headphone for the money in terms of the measurements, but you'd be silly to chuck it in the bin if you own it, at the very least buy a very affordable good measuring headphone to compare it against.
Which headphone would you choose around $500? I've been looking, and like I said, this seemed to be the best/safest bet...

We don't know what is causing it but I suspect it will not be there is S6X. From music consumption point of view, is it flawed? I don't know. You have them, you seem to like them so why worry if it is flawed or not.

Amir says he put a quite a sharp filter at around 200Hz and that it made a big difference. Maybe you can try the filter and see if that makes any significant difference for you?
I'm sure then there will be other issues. In my experience, like in so many things, it's about compromise. Best example I everheard; photo tripod. Light, stable, cheap. Choose 2.

Who knows if you change their design what other issues or disadvantages there will be ... Like the Ollo is IMHO the perfect example for this, as per my above question, which other $500 headphone would you choose? None exist which are perfect. Any other recommended headphone will have their own flaws, and you'll likely end up trading one set of fault/flaw/weakness for another.

Anyway, I'm still very curious to know. If this measured flaw is audible, how could so many fail to highlight the issue? Many flaws are highlighted, take The Honest Audiophile above, watch his other reviews, he doesn't shy away from speaking his mind and highlighting flaws and weakness of products. Lots of plausible explanations, but to me, to this moment, the best explanation is that the flaw is simply not very easily identifiable / audible... So might be a case where it's measurable, exists in measurements 'realm', but, when listening to the headphones and music, it's just not going to be something you notice. (doesn't mean it doesn't exist, that nobody will ever notice, that nobody won't ever be able to notice, etc., just that it looks much worse on paper that it is in actuality.)
 
Last edited:
Have you heard the headphones, and have you heard this distortion yourself when listening to music? (not test tones) The people who have heard the headphones have largely been praising them, and have made no mention of this "not good headphone performance".

20s in above timestamped video, he talks about bass, and didn't notice any issue.

"Best studio monitors for $500 ... sound has exceptional punchiness, dynamic, [...] very precise, etc." Again, absolutely nothing about upper bass distortion, or poor bass performance, or any sort of poor performance.

So... "It's not good headphone performance though.", like I said, looks bad on graphs, but if it's basically not audible...! I guess that's where a lot of people have issues with ... let's amicably call them 'measurement gurus', people who feel so confident making absolute claims on performance for headphones or speakers they've not even heard. Don't get me wrong, I 100% agree with you, it's a measurable 'issue', something that exists, is measurable, and not having would 100% be better... But having someone making absolute claims about performance; "not good headphone performance"... At best, it's a comment that could easily be misinterpreted as in; it's a headphone with poor performance. At worse, the comment is meant to be taken literally, the author inferring that it's a bad quality headphone / will not sound good / poor transducer / sounds bad / headphone with poor performance, etc...

As per the above, and many other reviews pre ASR/SBAF reviews/measurements, pretty one everyone who heard them seemed to at least think that they were good headphones. And none seemed to notice any issue. It's almost like some people's opinions are tainted by measurements, rather than their opinions are reached through experience (ex; listening to the headphone), and then measurements used as a validation too or something; see a flaw in measurements; it'll sound bad... Meh.. In my experience, it doesn't always translate 100% of the time. And I'm a 'measurement'-type guy.

Anyway, gave lots of examples with other headphones with similar or worse flaws, and they don't seem to matter that much... But if you read my comments in the Edition XS of a few months back, you can see my fear / reluctance in purchasing them because of those flaws. Yet, "best 500$ headphones, sound great, etc", not everyone hears or are seemingly bothered by those measured flaws. Maybe they don't matter as much as people who haven't heard the headphone make it out to be; or maybe it all 100% is audible and you'll notice and be bothered by it... Honestly, as I've said here multiple times in multiple threads, it's nearly impossible to have an idea of what something will sound like just by looking at graphs. Ex; looks something would sound awful, and doesn't sound as awful as you thought they would given measurements..

Like I said, issue might not be as serious as some make it out to be.. (or who's statements can be misinterpreted in.. hehe)

(Really, didn't mean any insult or start any sort of war, everyone please don't take issue or read this in the wrong way ... I'm guilty of the same, I do the same thing, etc., just commenting because I do find this topic interesting! ;) :D )
I think part of the issue here is that on ASR many products are evaluated and compared based upon measurements that are far beyond the threshold of audibility (think electronics in the blue region of the SINAD charts). The higher performance products are seen as being more well engineered, even if the differences are inaudible. Those same types of inaudible comparisons sometimes get made when evaluating headphones and speakers, which may or may not be relevant depending upon one’s viewpoint. I would mostly agree that inaudible distortions or FR anomalies are pretty much meaningless when it comes to transducers.
 
Which headphone under you choose for $500? I've been looking, and like I said, this seemed to be the best/safest bet...
That's a really good question, but my advice everytime now is HD560s with EQ. To me it's the most reliable headphone that I keep coming back to, it's reliable in so many ways - unit to unit variation, bass response when seal is broken, you can set the headband in notches so you're always wearing it the same way, plenty of room for your ears (& comfortable & light), the stock frequency response is good before even doing EQ, the distortion is low, the channel matching is good, the imaging & soundstage are good, it's only £139 here in the UK at the moment, etc! The bass is really impressive in the HD560s for an open backed dynamic headphone, really very good and also when EQ'd, lots of detail & definition in the bass which is one of the reasons why it's my most often favourite vs my other open backs.
 
I want to say to people that are enjoying this headphone that they should continue to do so, but perhaps think about trying some better measuring headphones if they haven't done already.

I have done so already, also listened to the S5X at loud levels and plays fine. I have no explanation for the distortion and cannot re-create it here either nor measure it.
I can tell you that it does not sound better than HD800 but it is a lot better than K702, NAD VISO and even dare to say better than my HD560S, even at higher SPL.
The HD660S2 is slightly better in some aspects (but not bass extension) but both HD660S2 and HD800 are more expensive but lack the clarity and bass extension of the S5X.

I find the explanation from Rok a bit 'weird' too b.t.w.
Maybe it is because the video was done a bit 'on the fly' too much.
 
I have done so already, also listened to the S5X at loud levels and plays fine. I have no explanation for the distortion and cannot re-create it here either nor measure it.
I can tell you that it does not sound better than HD800 but it is a lot better than K702, NAD VISO and even dare to say better than my HD560S, even at higher SPL.
The HD660S2 is slightly better in some aspects (but not bass extension) but both HD660S2 and HD800 are more expensive but lack the clarity and bass extension of the S5X.
Yeah, that's ok re your opinion on how it sounds, but it's true you didn't measure the 240Hz distortion spike, so that's one of the reasons why I said that the 240Hz spike wasn't measured by everyone, so there's some variation going on there. When you talk about HD660S2 then I'm losing you there, because it's an HD600 with worse frequency response and perhaps less distortion, so I know from owning an HD600 that the HD660S2 would for sure not be anywhere near headphone nirvana for me. But coming back to Ollo, yeah, the Ollo S5x could be kind of ok with EQ perhaps from the measurements, but not ideal.
 
When you talk about HD660S2 then I'm losing you there, because it's an HD600 with worse frequency response and perhaps less distortion, so I know from owning an HD600 that the HD660S2 would for sure not be anywhere near headphone nirvana.

Just because you own an HD600 you cannot say with confidence how an HD660S2 sounds as they do not sound similar nor are they designed to be/sound the same.
Just as you cannot say how an S5X sounds even when you EQ'd another headphone to the same target measured on a specific fixture.
You may have it tonally quite close but not in all aspects.

Its a bit like saying .... well I have these Nike shoes and know how they walk so all Nike shoes that look similar will walk similar.
Just because someone owning Nike's and loving them because most people have a preference for them does not mean other shoes with a good fit aren't comfortable nor can be 'just as good'. (hate car analogies so tried shoes for size... :facepalm:)
 
Last edited:
Just because you own an HD600 you cannot say how an HD660S2 sounds as they do not sound similar.
Just as you cannot say how an S5X sounds even when you EQ'd another headphone to the same target measured on a specific fixture.
You may have it tonally quite close but not in all aspects.
HD600 & HD660S2 have the same overall structural earcup/pad design, they just differ in frequency response & distortion. HD600 already has the ideal stock frequency response bar lack of bass, which is not fixable with EQ because it has high distortion in the bass. The main limitation of the HD6XX series for me is that the soundstage & imaging is bad, which is down to the overall earcup/pad design, so HD600 & HD660S2 are likely to be virtually identical in this disappointing apsect. Also I mentioned that HD660S2 stock frequency response is overall worse than HD600, so you're not onto a winner there. HD660S2 is a let down with little overall potential.
 
HD580, HD58X, HD600, HD6XX, HD650 all have the same design.
Different drivers, different pads, different tuning.... yet you can tell without ever hearing it that it is a let down with little overall potential.

I would agree that it is overpriced but isn't a let down and certainly has some good qualities.
It certainly is not as 'bad' as you make it out to be and would take it over a stock HD600 and HD650 but my taste is divergent from yours. But just because something is not our taste or does not conform to a specific measurement + target does not make a headphone a bad product.

Over the years I have learned to take (all) acoustic measurements with a grain of salt and that proof of the pudding is in the eating and not just by looking at the contents or recipe. But only with a cleaner pallet and some references alongside that pudding.
 
Last edited:
HD580, HD58X, HD600, HD6XX, HD650 all have the same design.
Different drivers, different pads, different tuning.... yet you can tell without ever hearing it that it is a let down with little overall potential.

I would agree that it is overpriced but isn't a let down and certainly has some good qualities.
It certainly is not as 'bad' as you make it out to be and would take it over a stock HD600 and HD650 but my taste is divergent from yours. But just because something is not our taste or does not conform to a specific measurement + target does not make a headphone a bad product.
Yeah, I see all of those as being potentially the same headphone if you EQ them right, including the HD660S2 you mentioned (bar distortion differences), because they're all based on the same cup/pad design - that's why I see them as nothing special because I've already experienced the HD600 that is great within it's own limitations, but it's only good because of it's stock frequency response (bar the bass), and the others don't nail that anyway, but main limitation being imaging & soundstage which I think is down to the cup/pad design which they all share, so I think I can write off all HD6XX type designs (including the HD660S2).
 
I can see that in the poll, put up by @amirm in the beginning of this thread, about 25 percent think this is a poor headphone. I guess none or very few of those 25 precent have actually heard the headphone. So as it seems this is opinions based only upon measurements data.
Indeed. Regardless of opinions on the value for the money, Ollo has achieved what they set out to do: produce a high quality studio monitor headphone. It’s no surprise people will vote these poor for many reasons, not the least of which is non-adherence to Harman. As has been said numerous times (including by Rok), the S5X isn’t intended to be an “audiophile“ headphone.
 
Back
Top Bottom