Sennheiser HD 58X vs HD 6XX: which of the two "tells the truth"?

[Hugo9000]

Got a comparison between the 58X and 660S?

I feel nearly all headphones with same driver specs are literally the same, just repackaged and sold off to different audiences for different prices.. (which is why the 600 and 650 are virtually the same to me outside of driver revision or housing differences..).

I feel if someone could get a 10-20 sample size of each SKU, this belief of mine would be verified without any doubt.

I have both of these headphones, and wrote up a comparison, but I doubt that anyone cares. LOL At any rate, it's off-topic to this thread, so if anyone is interested, we could discuss those models in another thread.

But I just looked at the review by @solderdude and he does have a comparison graph for the 58X and 660:

HD 660S HD 58X

See his full review here:
https://diyaudioheaven.wordpress.com/headphones/measurements/brands-s-se/hd58x-jubilee-massdrop/

He also has another comparison graph in that review after making some modifications to the 58X.

 

[Tks]

Oh snap, that's solderdudes website? I've been there before, thought it was great.

 

[andreasmaaan]

Would the 6XX still be considered a good deal at the new price of $220?

It was $190 a day ago and they raised the price on it and the 58X by 12%

Still pretty good value at these prices IMO.

 

[GelbeMusik]

For me the 58x is shy on very upper hights, and presence, and in company the elevated upper bass / lower midrange renders it muffled. I think without an equalizer it wouldn't be as good as possible. A low bass boost is a viable option!

All of my audio runs through a PC. I use a system wide EQ, that has my special headphone setting available. I don't wanna miss it. From the data given, given serious comments on the importance of a linear frequency response, I don't expect too much of a difference. Namely nil, once the two are equalized to an appropriate target curve.

 

[carlo]

@GelbeMusik All ears are different, but I agree on the fact that 58X is not a treble sparkling headphone. On the pros side I have to say that the timbre is good and there is a fair amount of detail, even in the bass which is quite fast. The guy running Oluv's Gadget YouTube Channel posted a short video comparing 58X with and without stock outer foam, and another video comparing the sound first with outer, then inner foam off. Of course we're hearing his microphones' recording via internet and with our headphones so judgment can be quite tricky. My impression has been that removing the inner foam produces a different sound - could'n tell if better or not. The outer foam off without the mod described on diyaudioheaven seems not to produce any measurable change; from hearing that YouTube sample I maybe could figure out a very slight difference, but could easily be just an impression or a negligible move. It seems that removing the outer foam leaves the drivers unprotected, though.
I'd like the idea of an EQ to customize the sound of one or more headphones; I've been playing around with the 10 sliders EQ in Vox player on my iMac and changes are very audible ( I've tried with a different headphone, not 58X yet) though it seems to me a very rough and not accurate result.
I confess that I'm very curious but lazy at the same time and also feel a different attitude in evaluating the sound from actual listening to music.
Our brain, at the end, is the most effective equalizer.

 

[carlo]

Did anybody step into this video? It's about replacing the inner foam with a transparent curtain fabric. According to the guy there it should leave the bass and sub bass just stock-like while increasing treble by 1-2 dbs.

 

[Hugo9000]

Did anybody step into this video? It's about replacing the inner foam with a transparent curtain fabric. According to the guy there it should leave the bass and sub bass just stock-like while increasing treble by 1-2 dbs.

The video is by ASR member @pwjazz , he shared it here:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ds/upgrade-from-a-58x.9307/page-3#post-354927

(I haven't done any physical mods on my 58X, but I've tried a bit of EQ using Equalizer APO, so I can't comment on his video, I just thought I'd mention that he is a member here for anyone who might not be aware. And don't worry, @pwjazz , I'm not stalking you, I happened to remember seeing your post about your video recently haha!)

 

[solderdude]

differences between no front foam and with front foam (note the 1dB scale)

The measured differences could well fall under slightly different positioning of the headphone. At 4kHz there is about 1dB more output.
Of course the measurements above are without a Pinna which could make a difference.
It is also possible that the curtain fabric is less permeable for lower frequencies and thereby tilting the freq. response slightly more to the clearer side as well. I have seen a slight effect when removing the fine mesh in front of the K361 driver.

 

[carlo]

differences between no front foam and with front foam (note the 1dB scale)

View attachment 61787The measured differences could well fall under slightly different positioning of the headphone. At 4kHz there is about 1dB more output.
Of course the measurements above are without a Pinna which could make a difference.
It is also possible that the curtain fabric is less permeable for lower frequencies and thereby tilting the freq. response slightly more to the clearer side as well. I have seen a slight effect when removing the fine mesh in front of the K361 driver.

I heard a difference removing the front foam on my AKG 141 studio. Being fairly bright in the midrange doesn’t lead to a better sound, though a timbric modification I’d say is there. Being timbre determined by harmonics I would be curious to understand in which way a slight treble difference in FR - maybe too little to be heard as louder or softer sound in that particular region- could instead produce a perceived different tone lower to that region by harmonics’ distance. This could maybe explain - out of emotional statements which come into play- the subjective perceived changes which seem not justified by a FR comparison?

 

[GelbeMusik]

... comparing 58X with and without stock outer foam, ...
I confess that I'm very curious but lazy at the same time and also feel a different attitude in evaluating the sound from actual listening to music.
Our brain, at the end, is the most effective equalizer.

I only occasionally use the headphone, hence a comparable timbre and feel, as to say, as with my loudspeakers is essential. Actually I took all measurements available on the internet together, and found a curve that should make it fit. As already mentioned by somebody else, the Windows' Equalizer APO is a very good option to implement the equalization.

Once done, I think that physical alterations to the HP are out of question. And so is the anyways slight difference between the models in question here.

 

[solderdude]

I heard a difference removing the front foam on my AKG 141 studio. Being fairly bright in the midrange doesn’t lead to a better sound, though a timbric modification I’d say is there.

On the HD58X the foam does not change the driver-ear distance and is quite acoustically transparent.
In case of the K141 the driver-ear distance changes a little. As the pads are fairly thin by themselves this can account for some difference.
Also the foam might be less transparent. I have measured differences when using K240 foam (with netting on it).
The effect of the foam removal thus is is not the same.

 

[SchwizzelKick66]

I have both the 58x and 6xx. The biggest difference between the two is that the 6xx is a bit harder to drive. They are pretty similar really outside of that.

If you blindfolded me and asked me to pick which one I was listening to on songs I'm familiar with, I THINK I could get it right most of the time. If you did the same but played songs I was not familiar with (i.e. had not listened to before on both), I'm not sure I could get it right over half the time.

The 58x are a bit more energetic with more impactful bass but an overall thinner and slightly less detailed sound. The 6xx are super smooth and sound more full and detailed. Again the difference isn't huge. I'm glad I got the 6xx after owning the 58x, but in retrospect I could have been happy with just the 58x.

 

[KeithPhantom]

I have the HD 6XX and I can also tell you they are really close to complete neutrality. Their only issues are the 100-300 Hz +3 dB hump (can be solved by EQ), low bass output at <40Hz and their distortion at really low frequencies.

 

[Jimbob54]

I have the HD 6XX and I can also tell you they are really close to complete neutrality. Their only issues are the 100-300 Hz +3 dB hump (can be solved by EQ), low bass output at <40Hz and their distortion at really low frequencies.

What is your definition of neutral in this sense?

 

[KeithPhantom]

What is your definition of neutral in this sense?

You catched me or of my base with this one (I was half slept when I wrote this). I guess that they are closer to diffuse field (I don't know exactly what year). They are also really neutral when compensated with Solderdude's curve as well.

 

[Jimbob54]

You catched me or of my base with this one (I was half slept when I wrote this). I guess that they are closer to diffuse field (I don't know exactly what year). They are also really neutral when compensated with Solderdude's curve as well.

Phew - have too many people saying something is neutral when really they mean what they believe is neutral. So , someone coming from , lets say , bass heavy Beats or similar but not knowing they are bass heavy might describe Senns as "bass light" or "treble heavy" .

 

[KeithPhantom]

Phew - have too many people saying something is neutral when really they mean what they believe is neutral. So , someone coming from , lets say , bass heavy Beats or similar but not knowing they are bass heavy might describe Senns as "bass light" or "treble heavy" .

When I wrote that, I was struggling to finish typing that. I'm sorry for not presenting the complete information.

 

[majingotan]

I have the HD 6XX and I can also tell you they are really close to complete neutrality. Their only issues are the 100-300 Hz +3 dB hump (can be solved by EQ), low bass output at <40Hz and their distortion at really low frequencies.

HD6XX has a lot more mid-bass and upper bass frequencies than Focal Utopia which I consider reference in "subjective neutrality"

 

[KeithPhantom]

HD6XX has a lot more mid-bass and upper bass frequencies than Focal Utopia which I consider reference in "subjective neutrality"

Is +3 dB "a lot"? You might ask someone else and get different answers. It isn't a lot for me. The only issues I find with the Utopia are the peaky treble and the non-linear bass. Paying almost 20x to solve two issues (bass distortion mid-bass hump {the latter can be solved by EQ}), introduce a new one (peaky and resonant treble), and leave something unsolved (the bass response still rolled-off, but just a bit) isn't worth it in my opinion. I never said the HD 6XX were the closest thing on Earth to be neutral, but they are darn close to it and especially for the price. The Utopia are good and beat them in some fronts, but they are not that much closer to neutrality. If someone actually took the HD 6X0 family and solved all their problems, I would buy that headphone without even looking at the price.

 

[majingotan]

Is +3 dB "a lot"? You might ask someone else and get different answers. It isn't a lot for me. The only issues I find with the Utopia are the peaky treble and the non-linear bass. Paying almost 20x to solve two issues (bass distortion mid-bass hump {the latter can be solved by EQ}), introduce a new one (peaky and resonant treble), and leave something unsolved (the bass response still rolled-off, but just a bit) isn't worth it in my opinion. I never said the HD 6XX were the closest thing on Earth to be neutral, but they are darn close to it and especially for the price. The Utopia are good and beat them in some fronts, but they are not that much closer to neutrality. If someone actually took the HD 6X0 family and solved all their problems, I would buy that headphone without even looking at the price.

Just proves that our ears hear things differently. Utopia is definitely not peaky and resonant at all in the treble to my ears. I find the Utopia treble not to linger and resonate, just present more detail in a very swift way (just as swift if not swifter than the BA drivers on my CA Andromeda and reaching electrostatic traits) without ever sounding peaky. In terms of neutrality (no EQ involved and of course subjective perception), Utopia's balance in the bass-mids-treble pretty close to my Yamaha HS7/HS8S in terms of the amount of treble and sub-bass balance while HD800S is definitely tilted more to the upper mids (peakier vocals) and treble than both Utopia and my speakers

For price, I don't think any headphone priced lower than the the 6XX can beat it to my subjective preferences. Just that I lean toward best detail retrieval and 6XX certainly can't present details better than both Andromeda and Utopia and sadly even to my Yamaha HS7 speakers based on my perception