• 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!

Sennheiser HD 820 Review (headphone)

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
15,891
Likes
35,912
Location
The Neitherlands
Yet Pioneer did it 45 years ago and to my better knowledge nobody ever again.

Which one and are there current measurements that support this ?
 

phoenixsong

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 17, 2018
Messages
874
Likes
685
Without EQ it sounded really wonky to me. If somebody offered to give it to me on the conditions that I cannot sell it and must listen to it and it only (without EQ), I would not have accepted
 

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
15,891
Likes
35,912
Location
The Neitherlands
If pad bounce is related to pad compression, wouldn't it logically then proceed that, since pads often are unevenly compressed when mounted around our ears, the pad bounce effect is distributed across frequencies and nullified ?
Could it explain that Rtings, which measure FR on real humans at lower frequencies, or my own on head measurements, never really show that pad bounce, or at least not to the same extent ?

If it were nullified it would not be visible on HATS. Reduced yes, changes over time, certainly. Also the skin itself absorbs energy which then does not go in the pad. The surface of test rigs is usually hard plastic. My rig has closed cell foam with a similarish compression as skin on my skull but is not the same. I measure pad bounce there as well. So it exists but in practice may not be what any measurement rig tells you nor will seal also not be the same which also affects pad bounce. Very complex in reality. As Amir says.. headphone measurement is not an exact science. Not all wiggles and dips and peaks that are measured are actually there in all cases with all headphones.

Below the open K702. You can see pad bounce here as well just higher up in frequency and less visible in FR (but still visible). This is with different electrical damping factors and you can see this has no influence on the pad bounce.
gd-output-r.png
 
Last edited:

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
15,891
Likes
35,912
Location
The Neitherlands
The big question:- Will I notice much of an improvement (rather than a difference) compared to my ancient Superlux 681s?

Some will, some won't. There is a substantial difference in sound signature but $ 15.- to $ 2400.- difference in money it is not.
 

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
15,891
Likes
35,912
Location
The Neitherlands
I'd be interested to know as well. Haven't seen a recent Pioneer headphone with decent measurements yet

Zolall meant the Pioneer monitor 10-II but it measures anything but even remotely flat. It does get a lot of positive reviews but this can be said about a lot of headphones. Even the $ 10.- Sony miracle after EQ.
 

phoenixsong

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 17, 2018
Messages
874
Likes
685
Zolall meant the Pioneer monitor 10-II but it measures anything but even remotely flat. It does get a lot of positive reviews but this can be said about a lot of headphones. Even the $ 10.- Sony miracle after EQ.
Yup wouldn't regard it as a studio monitor from the frequency response alone according to Innerfidelity's old measurements. There's an unusual peak between 1-2kHz, where the majority of headphones and IEMs are really smooth. Its impulse response, distortion measurements and 300Hz square wave looks pretty bad too Pioneer Monitor 10II in box.xls (stereophile.com)

*Edit: Just noticed the severity of the downward slope in the FR
 

MayaTlab

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
924
Likes
1,512
If it were nullified it would not be visible on HATS. Reduced yes, changes over time, certainly. Also the skin itself absorbs energy which then does not go in the pad. The surface of test rigs is usually hard plastic. My rig has closed cell foam with a similarish compression as skin on my skull but is not the same. I measure pad bounce there as well. So it exists but in practice may not be what any measurement rig tells you nor will seal also not be the same which also affects pad bounce. Very complex in reality. As Amir says.. headphone measurement is not an exact science. Not all wiggles and dips and peaks that are measured are actually there in all cases with all headphones.

Good point.
To be honest below 1khz I now just prefer to use in-concha mics, I find it faster to get where I want with multiple headphones on y own head in relative terms (well that is unless the headphones are very sensitive to seal and movement *cough* AKG K371 *cough*). On open Sennheisers I have yet to notice anything that looks like the pad bounce effect - and in fact some of Oratory1990's presets seem to over-correct for it (HD560S) and invariably then measure poorly on my head with a noticeable bump where the pad bounce dip was (and sound accordingly problematic then).
I still haven't found a way to easily and convincingly break the 1khz barrier on my own head and I'm not expecting to find one any time soon.
 

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
15,891
Likes
35,912
Location
The Neitherlands
Below 1khz in ear mics (that have good extension) would be best if the goal is to EQ the lows. You take seating, seal, your head etc. in consideration. Not recommended above 1kHz indeed.

With open headphones (aside from most planars) there is always a way for LF pressure to escape so pads play less of a role. For closed headphones the only way to dissipate larger air volume displacement in the earpad part is via the skin and pads.
The energy is partly absorbed and partly 'bounced back'.
See pads as a spring storing energy and when the energy is gone again it bounces it back delayed. The GD plot shows this well.
 

Jimbob54

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
11,066
Likes
14,697
Good review @amirm . I've never considered going near this headphone in the past largely due to price but also incredibly mixed reviews / comments around the web. Perhaps most are based on the performance without EQ which you say it needs (dont they all!). How different do they feel physically to the HD800S? @solderdude, can you fit the HD800 pads to these or are they different mounts?
 

SimoF

Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2021
Messages
32
Likes
31
Without EQ it sounded really wonky to me. If somebody offered to give it to me on the conditions that I cannot sell it and must listen to it and it only (without EQ), I would not have accepted

Agreed, stock they are atrocious, thin and lifeless, when I tried them It was like listening through a tin can. I don't know if sennheiser engineers have even tried them before the market launch
 

tifune

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 18, 2020
Messages
1,085
Likes
767
It sounds a LOT better than how it measures (in the lows), certainly with some corrective EQ, and kind of succeeded in making a closed version of the HD800(S) with improved treble but weren't able to get the f'ed up bass right. Still a good sounding closed headphone overall but there are closed alternatives here and there. Just not with the exact same positive traits of the HD800(S).

What are some alternative you can recommend? I've probably seen the Q dozens of times, "what is the closed back alternative to the HD800" and so far I haven't found a convincing answer. I see what you mean about the spatial quality - I don't hear it on the Stellia, which was surprising to me given the price point. Even "base-model" open backs like HD650 and K712pro sound better to me which is somewhat shocking given the enormous price disparity
 

Moonhead

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2021
Messages
311
Likes
377
Location
Denmark
What are some alternative you can recommend? I've probably seen the Q dozens of times, "what is the closed back alternative to the HD800" and so far I haven't found a convincing answer. I see what you mean about the spatial quality - I don't hear it on the Stellia, which was surprising to me given the price point. Even "base-model" open backs like HD650 and K712pro sound better to me which is somewhat shocking given the enormous price disparity

Open backs will always surpass closed back in sq and Will present The Sound more natural like speakers, imo.
 

mkawa

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Sep 17, 2019
Messages
788
Likes
695
how much sound leakage is there? it looks basically like an hd800s with glass bubbles on it which is an interesting but not heartening material..
 

phoenixsong

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 17, 2018
Messages
874
Likes
685
What are some alternative you can recommend? I've probably seen the Q dozens of times, "what is the closed back alternative to the HD800" and so far I haven't found a convincing answer. I see what you mean about the spatial quality - I don't hear it on the Stellia, which was surprising to me given the price point. Even "base-model" open backs like HD650 and K712pro sound better to me which is somewhat shocking given the enormous price disparity
K712pro is in a different league imo though- to me it's closer to a budget HD800S
*Edit: with regards to your mention of spatiality
 

tifune

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 18, 2020
Messages
1,085
Likes
767
Open backs will always surpass closed back in sq and Will present The Sound more natural like speakers, imo.

Agreed, I just find t very difficult to believe that if I were willing to spend $5k there's no closed back alternative that can approach the HD800S.

K712pro is in a different league imo though- to me it's closer to a budget HD800S
*Edit: with regards to your mention of spatiality

K712Pro seems to catch a lot of flack on forums, but I agree with you. I read numerous disparaging comments about "detail retrieval" and "cloudy mids" and while there may be some grain of objective truth to those criticisms I thoroughly enjoy listening through them.
 
Top Bottom