Sennheiser HD 480 Pro

[scott_arm]

These headphones are really interesting to me. Seem pretty good out of the box, but also probably good for eq. As a side note, I know the headphones.com crew went and got their hrtfs ... done ... in the UK, and found that you can have very different in-ear response between different people, but what frequency range are we talking about? Is it generally 2 KHz and up that the outer ear affects? Just wondering in that review which part of the frequency response is affected by the HRTF compensation and which part is not?

 

[listener650]

what frequency range are we talking about? Is it generally 2 KHz and up that the outer ear affects? Just wondering in that review which part of the frequency response is affected by the HRTF compensation and which part is not?

I would say above 1 kHz is where outer ear effects start to cause divergence between listeners solely due to HpTF (Headphone-to-ear Transfer Function) and HRTF, but it must also be said (especially with closed back headphones), the size/width of the head will also change the behavior across listeners below 500 Hz due to differences in seal/front volume size!

 

[Soria Moria]

I really hope Sennheiser will make a low latency wireless «gaming» headset in the future with the comfort and fit of these headphones

 

[solderdude]

I would say above 1 kHz is where outer ear effects start to cause divergence between listeners solely due to HpTF (Headphone-to-ear Transfer Function) and HRTF, but it must also be said (especially with closed back headphones), the size/width of the head will also change the behavior across listeners below 500 Hz due to differences in seal/front volume size!

Yes, basically every headphone measurement is indicative at best regardless of how expensive the test fixture is.
What test fixtures can be good at is conform to standard(s) it has been designed for.
Unfortunately .... real world heads tend to not conform to those standards nor to specific targets.

 

[Mocie]

For the love of all that's holy...get off your egotistic and consumerist high horse and have some humility for the discipline of science.

I would say what Listener, GS and Resolve have been up to with personalised measurements and understanding why targets sound right/wrong is one of the more scientific talking points in the last decade across online audio spaces, I'm not sure how you could imply that head sizes or ear shapes don't impact headphone sound. Listener saying "I'm going to be measuring these on my head" is just shortcutting the spiel they've been explaining for months now so five minutes isn't spent every video re-explaining preferences and how FR actually plays out for them on-ear.

Unfortunately .... real world heads tend to not conform to those standards nor to specific targets.

Pretty much this.

 

[Klonatans]

And still I would rather prefer to see a measurement performed on the BK5128 "head" without applying someone's HRTF.

 

[Jeromeof]

I think what @listener650 and the other guys on the HP.com team are doing is incredible useful to spread the concept that the response of a headphone is very different on everyone's head. It should be a concept that should be welcomed on ASR IMO, but only when used with 'standard' measurements. In fact I do wish there were more variations shown but I guess with a new headphone having it measured on multiple human heads and on multiple rigs before the video is published is a logistical nightmare.

I feel ultimately the more measurements on different standard rigs and on different users heads together provide a much clearer picture for the range of FR one might expect for a given headphone before you purchase it and I think that has the be the ultimate goal of a good review - give someone enough objective information ( clearly stated ) that they can make a much more informed opinion.

I do think that closed back's especially ( I guess that closed volume of air ) can be widely different on different heads and Oratory has a very good slide show - of the delta of multiple measurements on multiple standard equipment and on multiple heads:

 

[jean-benoit]

Thanks for sharing. I think Amir would like this one, actually.

to be a bit more positive here, i found your review really helpful.

big fan of the HD 490 with mixing pads (and bass boost eq).
seems like the HD 480 will be a good companion.

i have to say, the thing that impresses me the most with these sennheisers, is the comfort.
it's just perfect, for my head at least.

 

[listener650]

Yes, basically every headphone measurement is indicative at best regardless of how expensive the test fixture is.
What test fixtures can be good at is conform to standard(s) it has been designed for.
Unfortunately .... real world heads tend to not conform to those standards nor to specific targets.

A bracing, yet sensible summary of the issue!

Listener saying "I'm going to be measuring these on my head" is just shortcutting the spiel they've been explaining for months now so five minutes isn't spent every video re-explaining preferences and how FR actually plays out for them on-ear.

Indeed. Once the other two reviewers finish the listening tests I've written for them we will have dedicated content about all of the things we did and how we're going to be displaying this data going forward, which should mean our spiel shortcutting introduces less confusion in the future.

In fact I do wish there were more variations shown but I guess with a new headphone having it measured on multiple human heads and on multiple rigs before the video is published is a logistical nightmare.

I do as well, but yes its a logistical battle considering the 5128 I technically have access to is across the country so any shipping effort to get there and back would take more than a week. That said, I think I'll try for the next one to have some EEP data measured on my clone fixture so there can be a comparison point between my ear and a "standard" fixture.

Realistically I think next time I can also just put up a quick graph of the headphone's DRP data on my rig compared to a Harman target that's relevant to my rig (likely Harman 2013 or 2015) to please the people here. I guess I'm just too far into the weeds on the idiosyncrasies/problems with these fixtures to really see such a measurement as useful. With the HD 480 Pro in particular, I just get so so much more SPL in the pressure band on the rig (and you can see a perfect example of this in your image from Konstantin, the green line in the second/right measurement) than on my actual head that I felt showing rig data would be a meaningful contributor to confusion that I didn't have time in the video to unpack.

to be a bit more positive here, i found your review really helpful.

Thanks! Yeah the comfort on these is exceptional.

 

[Oldson]

would like to see a comparison of FR between these and HDB630.
the 630 is the only set in my collection that i dont eq, which is ironic as the eq in the app is probably the best for all the NC headphones i have tried.
would like a wired headset that sounds very similar while isolating really well (without the need for eq), the 480pro may be it.

 

[Dazerdoreal]

A bracing, yet sensible summary of the issue!

Maybe you could invite @solderdude to one of your Youtube shows (if he wants to, of course). Do you know his website? For sure he has lots of interesting things to tell about modding as an alternative or extension to EQing.

 

[pdfield34]

would like to see a comparison of FR between these and HDB630.
the 630 is the only set in my collection that i dont eq, which is ironic as the eq in the app is probably the best for all the NC headphones i have tried.
would like a wired headset that sounds very similar while isolating really well (without the need for eq), the 480pro may be it.

Listener has something in the thread on headphones.com - link to thread below the youtube video.

 

[Oldson]

Listener has something in the thread on headphones.com - link to thread below the youtube video.

just had a look.
very interesting, will try get a demo.
thanks for the heads up

 

[spamilton]

I really hope Sennheiser will make a low latency wireless «gaming» headset in the future with the comfort and fit of these headphones

Once Bluetooth 6.0 becomes the norm, hopefully latency issues should be a thing of the past. The Sennheiser dongle does have a low latency/gaming mode, but apparently you have to enable it every time which is annoying especially if you want to put the dongle in the rear of your case. For now, I'm just using a Logitech headset which uses 2.4 GHz.

 

[listener650]

Resolve's video is up! Seems its a rare case where we actually agree pretty completely.

 

[Selkirks]

Resolve's video is up! Seems its a rare case where we actually agree pretty completely.

I usually don't agree with Resolve but I also prefer the HD 480 Pro to the Dan Clark Audio Noire X. Great value.

 

[Quinton595]

HD 620S is for the consumer
HD 480 PRO is for the professional/studio

The only model they share is the HD 560S/HD 400 PRO and (I suspect) the HD471 and HD 200 PRO

They are separated divisions within Sennheiser.

B... But.... But moar number moar better. How can 480 be better than 620? The 620 is 200 better! /s

 

[Oldson]

B... But.... But moar number moar better. How can 480 be better than 620? The 620 is 200 better! /s

it dont work like that.
even "more money" does not mean "better".

 

[Somafunk]

Mixphones review channel like it, and give a shout out to Amir

 

[listener650]

Mixphones review channel like it, and give a shout out to Amir

I want to like these guys so badly but the entire part where Paul talks about the Impulse response/ETC is utter nonsense, which then leads to a bunch of incorrect postulating about the reason why HD 480 Pro's bass isn't satisfying... which is especially disappointing, because you'd assume the guys who are in the pro audio industry would understand how an excess of sub/mid-bass vs. upper bass/lower midrange would affect the perception of transients

The disconnect observed between IR and ETC is simply because the ETC is showing when all acoustic energy arrives, regardless of polarity (which means it's not caring about the waveform’s positive/negative wiggles, which are shown in the IR, obviously).

IR is, as everyone here I'm sure knows, not really worth looking at because its just the same information as a frequency response magnitude plot, displayed less intuitively.

Welp, this is a good example why.