Sennheiser 800 HD still the best neutral openback for $1000 used?

[Audiofire]

I've allways wondered how hifi stores can sell and advertise heavy snake oil products without getting into any trouble.

Definitely gonna report them to the Consumer Ombudsman of Denmark, who has the authority to instigate cessation of marketing claims that are misleading or have no evidence, and heavy fines for the material losses they entailed:

Påstande skal kunne dokumenteres

Virksomheder skal kunne fremlægge dokumentation for de påstande, de bruger i markedsføringen af deres varer eller tjenesteydelser. Det er en god ide at have dokumentationen klar, når markedsføringen starter.

www.forbrugerombudsmanden.dk

Placebo WORKS and ensures good sales.

I don't think that placebo is evidence when a retailer claims that a certain cable sounds better if it does not.

 

[Bow_Wazoo]

What EQ settings would you recommend for the HD800?

Sennheiser HD800S.pdf

Shared with Dropbox

www.dropbox.com

 

[xaviescacs]

Placebo WORKS and ensures good sales. All you need is a convincing sales person.

I don't think that placebo is evidence when a retailer claims that a certain cable sounds better if it does not.

If you return such a product, is not that clear if it's them that are lying or that you are not able to hear the difference, so it's potentially embarrassing. I bet many people keep those cables simply because they have been told by someone they trust it makes and improvement, even though when they can't hear it. In the end it's a matter of trust at some point. Unless you start testing things by yourself, you have to trust someone else. Of course there are things more plausible than others.

 

[solderdude]

I bet many people keep those cables simply because they have been told by someone they trust it makes and improvement, even though when they can't hear it.

That's the main reason + owners know they have a 'better' cable anyway because they paid a lot for it which brings peace of mind + on every review of a cable one finds it is better than X, Y or Z (except here)

Placebo works wonders... thinking something must be better is (almost) always going to be perceived as better, not just in audio.

 

[nonnyno]

I used to work in a hifi store that also sold (expensive) cables.
At one point my boss (at that time) hung up a sign in his shop that all cables could be returned if owners did not hear an improvement and always pointed to it when negotiating a sale.
In all the years I worked there NO cable was ever returned.
Placebo WORKS and ensures good sales. All you need is a convincing sales person.

But as a subjectivist would say. Was it the sales person or was it the cable?????????????????? Cue the twilight zone style music (that was joke btw so don't shoot me) :->

 

[Phoney]

I love the HD800s, but why does Sennheiser add a completely useless individual frequency response rather than just adding the actual frequency response? What am I supposed to do with this individually measured diffuse-field frequency response curve? They say it takes them several days to figure this out, that's some wasted work for something that nobody cares about.

 

[nonnyno]

I love the HD800s, but why does Sennheiser add a completely useless individual frequency response rather than just adding the actual frequency response? What am I supposed to do with this individually measured diffuse-field frequency response curve? They say it takes them several days to figure this out, that's some wasted work for something that nobody cares about.

View attachment 287157

Umm am I missing something here??? If no-one cares about it, why are you letting it crudle your milk rather than instead getting on with the business of enjoying the hd800's and experiencing the joy of music. Sorry I'm not meaning to belittle your post but I sometimes think we all forget occasionally what ultimately this is all meant to be about - easily done!

 

[Robbo99999]

I love the HD800s, but why does Sennheiser add a completely useless individual frequency response rather than just adding the actual frequency response? What am I supposed to do with this individually measured diffuse-field frequency response curve? They say it takes them several days to figure this out, that's some wasted work for something that nobody cares about.

View attachment 287157

Do you know what measurement rig they measured that on? If it was the same GRAS one that Amir uses or the B&K 5128 then it would be possible to add your curve to the Diffuse Field Curve of the GRAS or 5128 and then you'd essentially have your raw measurement of your headphone on that rig. You could then use that measurement however you like to EQ it. If it's been measured on the GRAS, then you could take what we worked out and then EQ it to the Harman Curve for instance.

 

[tomchris]

Here is the B&K5128 frequency response measurement of Sennheiser HD800S, courtesy of Head-Fi users, Jude & ADUHF:

Sennheiser HD800S frequency response, average of four seatings.
NOTE: When these measurements were made, the Sennheiser HD800S under test had only been worn by measurement fixtures, so the earpads were in new condition.

Diffuse field compensated graph of the Sennheiser HD800S's frequency response.
Calculated with the HBK 5128 DF response curve. The blue line represents a -1.25 dB per octave slope. The sound power response of a neutral loudspeaker is usually between about -1.0 to -1.5 dB per octave. So I'm using the above slope as a very rough guide for that.

A slightly different view of the same plot above. This also shows the HD800S's DF compensated response compared to a -1.25 dB per octave slope. The whole graph has also been compensated with the inverse of a -1.25 dB per octave slope though, so the slope now appears as just a flat blue line.

This is similar to the last graph above. But the orange line on this graph does not represent a slope. It represents the average sound power response of ten well-extended neutral loudspeakers (which is shown on the graph just below with a -1.25 dB per octave slope). And the HD800S with DF compensation, represented by the black squiggly line, is now being compared to that.

 

[Phoney]

Umm am I missing something here??? If no-one cares about it, why are you letting it crudle your milk rather than instead getting on with the business of enjoying the hd800's and experiencing the joy of music. Sorry I'm not meaning to belittle your post but I sometimes think we all forget occasionally what ultimately this is all meant to be about - easily done!

I'm saying that nobody cares about the diffuse field curve, people care about the real frequency response. It just seems odd that they measure each one so carefully and decide to provide this kind of response instead of a normal one. I care because I'm trying to equalize it. I'd never buy HD800s without eq. There's unit to unit variation. I can get better results with a normal individual frequency response provided.

Here is the B&K5128 frequency response measurement of Sennheiser HD800S, courtesy of Head-Fi users, Jude & ADUHF:

Sennheiser HD800S frequency response, average of four seatings.
NOTE: When these measurements were made, the Sennheiser HD800S under test had only been worn by measurement fixtures, so the earpads were in new condition.

Diffuse field compensated graph of the Sennheiser HD800S's frequency response.
Calculated with the HBK 5128 DF response curve. The blue line represents a -1.25 dB per octave slope. The sound power response of a neutral loudspeaker is usually between about -1.0 to -1.5 dB per octave. So I'm using the above slope as a very rough guide for that.

A slightly different view of the same plot above. This also shows the HD800S's DF compensated response compared to a -1.25 dB per octave slope. The whole graph has also been compensated with the inverse of a -1.25 dB per octave slope though, so the slope now appears as just a flat blue line.

This is similar to the last graph above. But the orange line on this graph does not represent a slope. It represents the average sound power response of ten well-extended neutral loudspeakers (which is shown on the graph just below with a -1.25 dB per octave slope). And the HD800S with DF compensation, represented by the black squiggly line, is now being compared to that.

Thanks, but I'm not sure how to interpret the respons that I was provided and translate it into a normal frequency response. I'm not planning on using their "neutral loudspeaker" target. I'm trying to EQ it to the harman curve with my specific unit. I've had good results using different measurements online, but knowing my units individual response could help me improve it even more.

 

[solderdude]

I love the HD800s, but why does Sennheiser add a completely useless individual frequency response rather than just adding the actual frequency response? What am I supposed to do with this individually measured diffuse-field frequency response curve? They say it takes them several days to figure this out, that's some wasted work for something that nobody cares about.

View attachment 287157

It is just a final check of the product and included it. They are using stepped narrowband noise measurements instead of sweeps. They just as well could use a sweep and smooth it substantially. You cannot EQ on this. Also it says nothing about the bass response which needs the most EQ. It will also say nothing about peaks in the upper mids lower treble because of the way the graph is obtained.
It is a very quick measurement b.t.w. and they only have to print it and put it in a box.

As you already said. It is useless and cannot be used to EQ on at all (target is their own).

Besides... even if you EQ to a measurement (based on a single trace) there is no guarantee it will be accurate on your head.

 

[Robbo99999]

I'm saying that nobody cares about the diffuse field curve, people care about the real frequency response. It just seems odd that they measure each one so carefully and decide to provide this kind of response instead of a normal one. I care because I'm trying to equalize it. I'd never buy HD800s without eq. There's unit to unit variation. I can get better results with a normal individual frequency response provided.



Thanks, but I'm not sure how to interpret the respons that I was provided and translate it into a normal frequency response. I'm not planning on using their "neutral loudspeaker" target. I'm trying to EQ it to the harman curve with my specific unit. I've had good results using different measurements online, but knowing my units individual response could help me improve it even more.

(Answer my question to you in my prior post & I might be able to help you.) If you can tell me or find out what rig that was measured on (the graph you showed) then if it's GRAS or B&K 5128 then we can convert it into a raw measurement, & then you'll be able to EQ it to a target curve of your choice. Better if it was done on GRAS. Otherwise just use Oratory's measurements and/or EQ's for the HD800s, and to be honest the unit to unit variation is supposed to be really quite low for top end Sennheisers like that, so we might be just wasting our time anyway - I'd just go off Oratory's measurements & EQ's for that headphone.

 

[nonnyno]

I'm saying that nobody cares about the diffuse field curve, people care about the real frequency response. It just seems odd that they measure each one so carefully and decide to provide this kind of response instead of a normal one. I care because I'm trying to equalize it. I'd never buy HD800s without eq. There's unit to unit variation. I can get better results with a normal individual frequency response provided.



Thanks, but I'm not sure how to interpret the respons that I was provided and translate it into a normal frequency response. I'm not planning on using their "neutral loudspeaker" target. I'm trying to EQ it to the harman curve with my specific unit. I've had good results using different measurements online, but knowing my units individual response could help me improve it even more.

I can see that measurement returns you to the desired standardised Sennheiser calibrated tuning to which you can then apply suitable standardised peq’s as differentials. That said it makes one wonder why they don’t just provide a set of peq settings to get you back to the harman curve instead. That way you can use the standard individual tuning and fanny around or just shovel it towards harman and fanny around from there to taste.

 

[solderdude]

Something to keep in mind:

 

[Phoney]

It is just a final check of the product and included it. They are using stepped narrowband noise measurements instead of sweeps. They just as well could use a sweep and smooth it substantially. You cannot EQ on this. Also it says nothing about the bass response which needs the most EQ. It will also say nothing about peaks in the upper mids lower treble because of the way the graph is obtained.
It is a very quick measurement b.t.w. and they only have to print it and put it in a box.

As you already said. It is useless and cannot be used to EQ on at all (target is their own).

Besides... even if you EQ to a measurement (based on a single trace) there is no guarantee it will be accurate on your head.

I know, I'm totally aware. But atleast i could identify some potensial peak/dip in the individual response and then test if correcting it makes things better. I'm not trying to equalize it exactly to the harman target, just close to it and then the rest by ear. That's what I allways do, and it works well for me. As for the first part, they are boasting about how much work they put into it, hence why I though "why not just measure it normally and send the real FR":

(Answer my question to you in my prior post & I might be able to help you.) If you can tell me or find out what rig that was measured on (the graph you showed) then if it's GRAS or B&K 5128 then we can convert it into a raw measurement, & then you'll be able to EQ it to a target curve of your choice. Better if it was done on GRAS. Otherwise just use Oratory's measurements and/or EQ's for the HD800s, and to be honest the unit to unit variation is supposed to be really quite low for top end Sennheisers like that, so we might be just wasting our time anyway - I'd just go off Oratory's measurements & EQ's for that headphone.

I don't know honestly. From what solderdude said maybe it's a waste of time. Not many companies send the unit to unit measurements anyways, I just wish more of them did and thought this was a missed opportunity from Sennheiser if they really measure each one like they say anyways. There's this target in the manual which is slightly different from my curve, but I think that's just a "neutral loudspeaker" target and not the curve of an average HD 800 S.

 

[solderdude]

The part about the effort made was only about creating a DF correction for the used fixture.
They then obtained the DF for the fixture and use that as a target for the plots.

The plots made using the narrowband noise or warble tone will 'remove' any peaks and dips and is 'smoothing' the plot.
The fact that the plot looks nothing like the plots made with sweeped tones on industry standard fixtures says enough about the practical usability.
It generates nice 'flat' plots which is what people like to see.

 

[Phoney]

The part about the effort made was only about creating a DF correction for the used fixture.
They then obtained the DF for the fixture and use that as a target for the plots.

The plots made using the narrowband noise or warble tone will 'remove' any peaks and dips and is 'smoothing' the plot.
The fact that the plot looks nothing like the plots made with sweeped tones on industry standard fixtures says enough about the practical usability.
It generates nice 'flat' plots which is what people like to see.

I understand. Oh well, I did get good results anyways, the rest is probably nitpicking. I still think it would be great to see companies supply individual responses for their expensive models. It would make me trust buying them even more. I believe Audeze does this in some form or another.

 

[solderdude]

OLLO does exactly this. Alas only an average of both channels where they just as easily could have plotted both channels in one plot.
Below an example (taken from the web)

 

[Robbo99999]

Something to keep in mind:

Lol, I like the drama/humour of the flowery/biblical surround & font, but those are his words! I like to take the Harman Target a bit more seriously/scientifically than the biblical floweriness of your pic!

 

[Robbo99999]

I know, I'm totally aware. But atleast i could identify some potensial peak/dip in the individual response and then test if correcting it makes things better. I'm not trying to equalize it exactly to the harman target, just close to it and then the rest by ear. That's what I allways do, and it works well for me. As for the first part, they are boasting about how much work they put into it, hence why I though "why not just measure it normally and send the real FR":

View attachment 287288



I don't know honestly. From what solderdude said maybe it's a waste of time. Not many companies send the unit to unit measurements anyways, I just wish more of them did and thought this was a missed opportunity from Sennheiser if they really measure each one like they say anyways. There's this target in the manual which is slightly different from my curve, but I think that's just a "neutral loudspeaker" target and not the curve of an average HD 800 S.

View attachment 287290
View attachment 287291

Hmm, ok, it's not usable then, if they're not using an industry standard fixture then we can't use their diffuse field compensated plots for anything. Seems a bit like pseudoscience for them to offer that graph, it's not usable to an official target like Harman nor a less official B&K 5128 target. Unless you for sure ask them they weren't using a GRAS or B&K 5128 to capture the data. But, you know, like I said in my earlier post, those high end Sennheiser should be super accurate in terms of low unit to unit variation, so therefore you don't need individual measurements - just use Oratory's measurements on his GRAS and/or also use his EQ's.