Sennheiser HD 490 Pro Headphone Review

[ZolaIII]

Joint stereo, mono mix down, pseudo stereo... Mp3 and pretty much everyone did not even knowing about it. It's even worse regarding bad mixes with separated on only one chenel instrument or even worse vocals when listening on devices with full physical separation as headphones/earphones especially IEM's/closed back's OE. Ocean of good music ruined this way and downmixing and then widening it at least helps it become listenable. All harm done by well paid "professionals" and that's our legacy (ruined).

 

[ZolaIII]

I did not write that you should measure speakers in stereo. I wrote "I don't agree that listening is less important." You should never buy speakers that you can't listen to in your own room. All rooms are different and the only measurement that matters is the one in your room with both speakers and room combined.

What good is that to anyone? You charge angle by a little bit in a same room and phase changes and how they sum with it and it sounds very different. Key word is room correction (and treatment to extent) and how much you would be able to do with lots of effort is determined by objective measurements and a bit of luck that you don't get a 180° or close to it phase canceling all out of sudden somewhere in highs which is very, very hard to fix (with positioning). It doesn't even have to be severe, even less so one with cuple of dB sum difference is more than enough. I hope you now understand why mono listening to speaker in objective attempt by a subject at least have a little more sense to it (then stereo).

 

[DanTheMan]

I never get any sensation of imaging forward of my face. So we must be different in this regard. My comments are about instrument separation around my ear.

I cannot get a frontal image even when building my own homemade HRTF corrected binaural convolution reverbs. I can get a vaguely frontal image, but definitely nothing pinpoint. Now using Apple’s head tracking I can get a pinpoint frontal image, but the overall tonal balance is a mess with no bass/midbass.

 

[BDWoody]

Why would anyone have different reviewing methods.

Take a break. This is silliness.

 

[DanTheMan]

Have you tried using crossfeed?

Yeah. It’s just ‘less stereo’ for me and doesn’t do anything at all for frontal image. I actually bought Apple Earbuds to get a frontal image, but the tonality becomes so bad I NEVER use it. Ha ha. I’ve tried 3 different crossfeeds. They all resulted in the same ‘more monoesque’ sound To my dismay.

This Mr. 47 is obviously trolling and needs removed in my opinion as to avoid clutter. I think he’s derailed the conversation enough with uselessness. Although this one comment seems genuine.

 

[BDWoody]

This Mr. 47 is obviously trolling and needs removed in my opinion as to avoid clutter. I think he’s derailed the conversation enough with uselessness.

It's the truly committed trolls like this one, who feel a new member name is all they need to pick up where the last banned account left off.

He is no longer with us.

 

[IXOYE]

How long do we have to wait for the ZMF Bokeh review?

 

[amirm]

How long do we have to wait for the ZMF Bokeh review?

I hope to test it "soon" but right now, I am working through member sent gear that came in January!

 

[johny_2000]

and below HD650 vs HD490Pro Producer
View attachment 365216

There's nothing wrong with my statement that they have more sub-bass and less low-bass and mids compared to the HD650.
And that's exactly what I look for in any music playback source.

P.S. I still listen to them every day to help me make decisions.

 

[johny_2000]

This has no advantage over HD560s even though it is double the price.

Price is not a factor in the qualification of headphones.

 

[IAtaman]

thing is, life is too short to try out every headphone. I have a list of headphones I would buy given right opportunity, and that is only ever growing. This has no advantage over HD560s even though it is double the price.

They have a lot of "advantages" over HD400Pro, which is the proper comparison in my opinion - easy to swap, washable pads; 2 tuning options with included pads; included DAW plug-in; cable that can be connected to the right or left ear cup and has built-in coil to reduce microphonic effects. These are the ones I can think of. They might not matter to you and me, but then again these are not built for you and me. These are built to be used in professional or home studios.

I think it is important to understand these are not SUVs, these are trucks built for people who intend to use them as trucks.

 

[delta76]

Price is not a factor in the qualification of headphones.

seriously?

 

[delta76]

They have a lot of "advantages" over HD400Pro, which is the proper comparison in my opinion - easy to swap, washable pads; 2 tuning options with included pads; included DAW plug-in; cable that can be connected to the right or left ear cup and has built-in coil to reduce microphonic effects. These are the ones I can think of. They might not matter to you and me, but then again these are not built for you and me. These are built to be used in professional or home studios.

I think it is important to understand these are not SUVs, these are trucks built for people who intend to use them as trucks.

absolutely. Senn is not that stupid to produce a product that nobody wants to buy (even though HD490Pro is more 2x expensive than HD400Pro where I live). what I said - "this was in my watch list, no more I guess" was for me personally. My statement would be true for many more members as well, as most will think this headphone is somewhat disappointing - but again I speak for myself only.

 

[IAtaman]

absolutely. Senn is not that stupid to produce a product that nobody wants to buy (even though HD490Pro is more 2x expensive than HD400Pro where I live). what I said - "this was in my watch list, no more I guess" was for me personally. My statement would be true for many more members as well, as most will think this headphone is somewhat disappointing - but again I speak for myself only.

Yeah, agreed, if you already have a pair or two of good headphones, these do not offer much beyond some potentially better comfort, durability and quality of life features for non-professionals. Then again, you already have a pair or two of good headphones, you can say that for almost every headphone.

 

[taotone]

I don't generally have a use for open back headphones, I prefer the Harman tuning in the bass, but prefer this tuning in the upper-mids lower treble where Harman is too much for me. Overall this is a lot better than Harman for my preferences.

With a reasonable degree of EQ possible and good comfort these are pretty good for open backs. HD6XX series are very uncomfortable for me with the very high clamp pressure on my head. These look much better.

 

[IdleTalk]

"Impedance is middle of the road but rises in bass to over 200 ohm (where you need most power)"

No, please. An impedance peak is where least power is needed.

The frequency response is a response in SPL against AC in varying frequency and constant voltage.
Since the input voltage is constant, current becomes lower where impedance gets higher, resulting less power consumption.

And it is quite shocking that no one (except @thewas in comment #4) has questioned about the channel imbalance with producing pads, which is not seen with mixing pads. What was the culprit? The drivers? pads? or placement? This should be easy to find out if the reviewer tried swapping L/R of producing pads. I hope to see some scientific reasoning like such than procrustean job.

 

[staticV3]

"Impedance is middle of the road but rises in bass to over 200 ohm (where you need most power)"

No, please. An impedance peak is where least power is needed.

The "where you need most power" part was referring to bass, not the impedance peak.

 

[IdleTalk]

The "where you need most power" part was referring to bass, not the impedance peak.

1. Bass is where the impedance peak is located.

2. I already pointed out the basically same error in another review: "The T1 is stated to have 600 ohm impedance which is already high. Turns out that the real impedance can be much worse:"

Beyerdynamic T1 Review (V2 headphone)

More proof that price nor origin matter in this industry. Said it before. I'll say it again, theyre shooting in the dark hoping something sticks. That's exactly what beyerdynamics did in the recent years. 1990 and amiron are very great example. T8ie and Xelento too. If you look back there are...

audiosciencereview.com

3. The fact that most music contents have more energy in bass can't be an excuse because that "more energy" is already given in bass range of input signal and a "flat" headphone should merely transduce that more electric energy to more kinetic energy, in same efficiency. If there wasn't any impedance peak, there shouldn't be any frequency range where more/less power is needed to output same SPL. FR should be flat against dB/mw and dB/V. Because there is an impedance peak in this case, less energy is needed there to output same level of sound pressure. FR should be flat against dB/V but not flat against dB/mw. Efficiency in dB/mw rises at the impedance peak, not sinks.

Even such a grammatical defense cannot justify the error in science but produce another one.

 

[AdamG]

1. Bass is where the impedance peak is located.

2. I already pointed out the basically same error in another review: "The T1 is stated to have 600 ohm impedance which is already high. Turns out that the real impedance can be much worse:"

Beyerdynamic T1 Review (V2 headphone)

More proof that price nor origin matter in this industry. Said it before. I'll say it again, theyre shooting in the dark hoping something sticks. That's exactly what beyerdynamics did in the recent years. 1990 and amiron are very great example. T8ie and Xelento too. If you look back there are...

audiosciencereview.com

3. The fact that most music contents have more energy in bass can't be an excuse because that "more energy" is already given in bass range of input signal and a "flat" headphone should merely transduce that more electric energy to more kinetic energy, in same efficiency. If there wasn't any impedance peak, there shouldn't be any frequency range where more/less power is needed to output same SPL. FR should be flat against dB/mw and dB/V. Because there is an impedance peak in this case, less energy is needed there to output same level of sound pressure. FR should be flat against dB/V but not flat against dB/mw. Efficiency in dB/mw rises at the impedance peak, not sinks.

Even such a grammatical defense cannot justify the error in science but produce another one.

Let’s try and be a little nicer to our fellow ASR members. The member you are responding to is only trying to help and we all do this out of the generosity of spirit and willingness to help others. Keep this in mind as you type up your response. Your post is very aggressive and angry. We don’t want that kind of energy here.

 

[IdleTalk]

Let’s try and be a little nicer to our fellow ASR members. The member you are responding to is only trying to help and we all do this out of the generosity of spirit and willingness to help others. Keep this in mind as you type up your response. Your post is very aggressive and angry. We don’t want that kind of energy here.

My apologies. I'll try to put my energy into something constructive.