Sennheiser HD560s Owner's Thread.

[Robbo99999]

I'm trying to resist the temptation.

Ha, well you've already got one pair, and they'll probably last years & years of use with just needing pads replaced, but I got another one because I'm curious about unit to unit variation and also just to be ultra-sure that I've got a spare if they do suddenly stop making them....wouldn't have bought another pair at any higher price, but too good a price to pass up the opportunity!

Also 32% off here in Norway. I just ordered my first pair, could be my headphones for all types of home use due to comfort.

Nice, I hope you enjoy them! It's a cracking deal and I'm pleased to see they're offering this deal in more countries than just the UK. Do you have other headphones that you can compare them against, do you know if you like the Harman Curve, are you going to EQ them? Generally, this headphone is good enough to be used without EQ but that could depend on unit to unit variation or whether or not you like the Harman Curve - they're quite close to the Harman Curve. Although I'd recommend EQ to get the best out of them, as with almost all headphones.

 

[Phoney]

Ha, well you've already got one pair, and they'll probably last years & years of use with just needing pads replaced, but I got another one because I'm curious about unit to unit variation and also just to be ultra-sure that I've got a spare if they do suddenly stop making them....wouldn't have bought another pair at any higher price, but too good a price to pass up the opportunity!

Nice, I hope you enjoy them! It's a cracking deal and I'm pleased to see they're offering this deal in more countries than just the UK. Do you have other headphones that you can compare them against, do you know if you like the Harman Curve, are you going to EQ them? Generally, this headphone is good enough to be used without EQ but that could depend on unit to unit variation or whether or not you like the Harman Curve - they're quite close to the Harman Curve. Although I'd recommend EQ to get the best out of them, as with almost all headphones.

With open backs I allways use harman, and just put 1.5db extra at 100-300hz and 1db less at 1000-2000hz. Then adjust bass depending on headphone. Do you do the full harman bass with these or do you prefer 1-2db less due to distortion? I tried them yesterday with harman eq and my preferred adjustments, I did like the result with just about any music that I put on. Didn't blow me away but it seemed solid all around. Will have to try it for a while before I can really judge the sound. Comfort was the main reason for this order, the good sound was just a big bonus. I have all my gear in my signature, AH-D7200, Arya, RT and now this.

Also unrelated question, when using a low shelf filter at like 30hz, does it matter if it extends beyond the 0 line below 20hz after applying preamp setting? I've heard that most music don't even have any tones below 20hz. Taking this into consideration, it will almost never clip if I'm technically boosting 15hz and such above the preamp, as long as 20hz+ is below? And if I ever put on music with tones below 20hz, the tiny boost will not do much harm? Just asking since even 0.3db less preamp will mean that the headphone is slightly easier to drive. I know it's very marginal, but anything could help.

 

[Robbo99999]

With open backs I allways use harman, and just put 1.5db extra at 100-300hz and 1db less at 1000-2000hz. Then adjust bass depending on headphone. Do you do the full harman bass with these or do you prefer 1-2db less due to distortion? I tried them yesterday with harman eq and my preferred adjustments, I did like the result with just about any music that I put on. Didn't blow me away but it seemed solid all around. Will have to try it for a while before I can really judge the sound. Comfort was the main reason for this order, the good sound was just a big bonus. I have all my gear in my signature, AH-D7200, Arya, RT and now this.

Also unrelated question, when using a low shelf filter at like 30hz, does it matter if it extends beyond the 0 line below 20hz after applying preamp setting? I've heard that most music don't even have any tones below 20hz. Taking this into consideration, it will almost never clip if I'm technically boosting 15hz and such above the preamp, as long as 20hz+ is below? And if I ever put on music with tones below 20hz, the tiny boost will not do much harm? Just asking since even 0.3db less preamp will mean that the headphone is slightly easier to drive. I know it's very marginal, but anything could help.

I've found that I like to add +1dB Low Shelf at 105Hz vs Oratory's published EQ's for these. I also tweaked Band 4,5,9 & 10 (see the following pic so you know which filters I'm talking about), most of them are his user customisation filters that are designed to be tweaked to get your best sound, I think tweaking those can also help to counteract the element of unit to unit variation that can occur with any headphones as well as potentially tailoring the target curve to something that might be more accurate for you (as we all have anatomy differences that would influence what our ideal Target Curve would be).

I tweaked them by listening to my favourite "audio tweaking" tracks whilst watching a spectrum analyser so I could link imperfect sound characteristics I'm hearing in the music vs the frequency range at which they occur so I could identify which filter(s) to target for tweaking - so I did that for vocals in the kind of 1-3kHz (Band 4 & 5) range as well as the "s" sound in vocals to get that bang on which is Band 9 in the pic above, which also happens to be where some of the crisper drum percussion comes in too. But overall order of tweaking the sound was: first I got the bass right, Band 2, then I went after Band 4 (a little bit of Band 5), then Band 9 and Band 10 around the same time. Only small changes in the range of a dB or two or less was required for me on all of those filters as those filters are very broad (covering a wide frequency range), so small changes in Gain (dB) can make significantly audible changes to the sound.

EDIT: I didn't answer your question about negative preamp required. I think it's possible to overdo the amount of negative preamp required, as for a lot of music (most) you don't need to use the full negative preamp to cover all the EQ boosts as peak levels in the music are not always close to full scale (0 dBFS) in the boosted areas. See if you can find an automatic clipping meter and use that after initially setting a negative preamp to cover like 50%-75% of your overall boost. Watch the clipping meter to see how far off you are on your most bass heavy tracks (assuming you have max EQ boost in the bass), and then you'll be able to fine tune a negative preamp that will be enough to cover 95% of your music and then for the other 5% of your tracks you've got the automatic clipping meter there to lower your preamp in realtime to catch any further clipping.

 

[Phoney]

I've found that I like to add +1dB Low Shelf at 105Hz vs Oratory's published EQ's for these. I also tweaked Band 4,5,9 & 10 (see the following pic so you know which filters I'm talking about), most of them are his user customisation filters that are designed to be tweaked to get your best sound, I think tweaking those can also help to counteract the element of unit to unit variation that can occur with any headphones as well as potentially tailoring the target curve to something that might be more accurate for you (as we all have anatomy differences that would influence what our ideal Target Curve would be).
View attachment 190378
I tweaked them by listening to my favourite "audio tweaking" tracks whilst watching a spectrum analyser so I could link imperfect sound characteristics I'm hearing in the music vs the frequency range at which they occur so I could identify which filter(s) to target for tweaking - so I did that for vocals in the kind of 1-3kHz (Band 4 & 5) range as well as the "s" sound in vocals to get that bang on which is Band 9 in the pic above, which also happens to be where some of the crisper drum percussion comes in too. But overall order of tweaking the sound was: first I got the bass right, Band 2, then I went after Band 4 (a little bit of Band 5), then Band 9 and Band 10 around the same time. Only small changes in the range of a dB or two or less was required for me on all of those filters as those filters are very broad (covering a wide frequency range), so small changes in Gain (dB) can make significantly audible changes to the sound.

EDIT: I didn't answer your question about negative preamp required. I think it's possible to overdo the amount of negative preamp required, as for a lot of music (most) you don't need to use the full negative preamp to cover all the EQ boosts as peak levels in the music are not always close to full scale (0 dBFS) in the boosted areas. See if you can find an automatic clipping meter and use that after initially setting a negative preamp to cover like 50%-75% of your overall boost. Watch the clipping meter to see how far off you are on your most bass heavy tracks (assuming you have max EQ boost in the bass), and then you'll be able to fine tune a negative preamp that will be enough to cover 95% of your music and then for the other 5% of your tracks you've got the automatic clipping meter there to lower your preamp in realtime to catch any further clipping.

Thanks for the information. Does the HD560S handle a 6,5db bass boost fairly well? I usually try to mess around with every band, and that has helped me over time to understand what the different frequencies does. And yeah, the Q-Factor definetly matters a lot and is something to keep in mind. I tend to allways prefer 1-2db extra in the lower mids, the harman curve puts lower mids really low. I also tend to never keep the full mids boost that harman introduces, I find it slightly shouty due to sensitive hearing. Other than that, it just depends on the headphone. Some headphones doesn't handle large boosts in some frequencies well, so sometimes you have to go a bit easy on the boosting. My Denon AH-D7200 was supposed to boost higher mids/treble by around 6,5db to match harman, but they just sounded metallic at that point. Didn't mind keeping some of that dark signature with those though, because I just use them for the good bass experience. But definetly goes to show how important it can be to have the headphones not deviate too much from harman, even if you want to eq. Especially if they are not Planars, from what I've heard, Planars responds very well to eq. Headphones that are close to harman nearly guarantees that you will be able to eq them to match your taste without running into issues that will limit you in any way. I also use test tracks, like jazz tracks from Manu Katché and Brian Broomberg for testing the hi-hat and cymbal frequencies.

 

[Robbo99999]

Thanks for the information. Does the HD560S handle a 6,5db bass boost fairly well? I usually try to mess around with every band, and that has helped me over time to understand what the different frequencies does. And yeah, the Q-Factor definetly matters a lot and is something to keep in mind. I tend to allways prefer 1-2db extra in the lower mids, the harman curve puts lower mids really low. I also tend to never keep the full mids boost that harman introduces, I find it slightly shouty due to sensitive hearing. Other than that, it just depends on the headphone. Some headphones doesn't handle large boosts in some frequencies well, so sometimes you have to go a bit easy on the boosting. My Denon AH-D7200 was supposed to boost higher mids/treble by around 6,5db to match harman, but they just sounded metallic at that point. Didn't mind keeping some of that dark signature with those though, because I just use them for the good bass experience. But definetly goes to show how important it can be to have the headphones not deviate too much from harman, even if you want to eq. Especially if they are not Planars, from what I've heard, Planars responds very well to eq. Headphones that are close to harman nearly guarantees that you will be able to eq them to match your taste without running into issues that will limit you in any way. I also use test tracks, like jazz tracks from Manu Katché and Brian Broomberg for testing the hi-hat and cymbal frequencies.

Yes, I've found that the HD560s handles a +6.5dB bass boost very well, in fact it's the clearest most detailed bass I've experienced in headphones apart from my planar HE4XX (talking after EQ of course).......it's about on par with the HE4XX in bass detail/clarity, so there should generally be no worries with providing a large bass boost to the HD560s. Oratory's measurements of one of my HD560s I sent him shows very low distortion across the board, and also in the bass, better than many planar headphones even if you compare against Amir's measurements, so here are the Oratory distortion measurements of the HD560s I sent him:

and here's a post in this thread where I talk in more detail about comparing distortion with other headphones, towards the end of this post:

Sennheiser HD560s Owner's Thread.

Setup: E30 + L30 I've bought and returned 6 !!! of them because of channel imbalance. Left driver was in all 6 cases more sensible around 8k-13k making the sound image tilt to the left by 5-10% I've done mono tests, reverse test, reverse stereo image + reverse hp to rule out my ears being...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Amir's HD560s didn't measure quite so well in the distortion department, I'm not sure why.


About your point you mention of the Harman Curve putting the lower mids really low, I think you're talking about the dip/trough around 200Hz. The function of that dip is that it reduces muddiness in headphones, increases general clarity. You'll find that if that area is boosted too much then it will make the headphone too muddy. You don't want it too low though because it would cut off the bass from the rest of the music, and perhaps make the headphone sound too thin - but I've not experimented much in reducing that area beyond what is there in Harman.


You say you generally mess around with each band in the Oratory EQ. I'd be wary of taking that approach because the sharper filters (higher Q) are there to remove peaks & dips that are characteristic flaws of that headphone - to smooth out the frequency response locally to the adjacent frequencies. If you want to tune the headphone to your liking then the wider (lower Q) customisation filters that I mentioned in my previous post would be the ones to change areas of tonality within the frequency response. However, I did add one sharp filter of my own creation to one of my HD560s though, and that was at around 8kHz, I think I put in like a -2 to -3dB Q6 filter to remove a peak of harshness I was experiencing - so that was a change I made to smooth out the frequency response of my unit that wasn't captured in the Oratory EQ.


You make a good point about your idea that if a headphone is close to Harman then you're more likely to be able to tune it to your own perfection with greater ease & success. To support your point, in fact I've found that my 3 units of K702 have a quite large unit to unit variation, and I wasn't able to perfectly tune them using the Oratory EQ and then tweaking the user customisation filters - I improved them by tweaking the customisation to my liking but I couldn't reach the same level of perfection as that achieved by my HD560s that I tuned in the same way. I know it's not really a technical limitation of the potential of the K702, as Oratory has measured one of my K702's and using his measurements of that particular unit I am able to get a very good EQ and an extremely good result - but my point being that using the published Oratory EQ and then tuning the customisation filters by ear is not easy and with not optimal results on a headphone that has high unit to unit variation and finds itself a long way off the Harman Curve.....which supports your theory about the importance of a headphone being close to Harman to allow for successful tuning. One extra point though, if there's not a high degree of unit to unit variation and if the frequency response doesn't have lots of complicated sharp peaks & dips then it could be EQ'd with success by using Oratory EQ and then tweaking the customisation filters, as the Oratory EQ would be a reliable and close to Harman basis on which to do your own further tweaking. So unit to unit variation and the overall smoothness of the frequency response are probably the most important points in being able to get a successful EQ after starting off with an Oratory EQ as the basis (& of course sometimes the Oratory EQ can be the end point too if nothing sounds like it needs changing).

About choosing the right tracks for audio tweaking. My opinion & experience is that you want to choose a variety of tracks that cover the main bases, and some of those tracks need to be very busy and have "everything going on" with the latter especially enabling you to tune overall tonality as you have representatives from all frequency ranges being used to their maximum. I tend to use various Massive Attack tracks to tune bass level, and songs like Unfinished Sympathy are great for tuning vocals because that female vocal is very prominent and can sound harsh if there's too much energy in the 1-3kHz range, so I've found that tuning the vocals just below the point of harshness on that track is a good balance. Massive Attack are also good for tuning the 7kHz and above range because they seperate the music out quite definitively often purposefully counterbalancing the treble & the bass, and I think the "s" sound frequency area is quite a feature in this counterbalancing they do which is around 7kHz, and also where some of the crisper/brighter drum percussion elements come in to counteract that bass. I also think that generally they are high quality sound engineered/produced tracks. I also like using some tracks from Aurora to tweak the vocals, and also bass level, there's some similar elements between Aurora and Massive Attack in how the tracks are balanced and laid out I think. One last good point I want to make for Massive Attack as audio tweaking tracks is that they seperate the music out so well that you can also see that very clearly in Spectrum Analysers as you listen to the music, so it makes it easier to link imperfection in the various sounds you're hearing vs where they're happening in the frequency range - so you know which EQ filters to target.....it's seperated out enough so that you can identify what's going on. For an overall tonality check I think the track Supermassive Black Hole from the band Muse is a good check, as that is super busy including all elements and can sound like a real mess on a system that's not setup correctly, yet when setup correctly you can really distinguish what's going on.....plus you'll be able to tell instantly if overall tonality is off on that track.......and I think that's another high quality recording even though it's extremely busy & loud.

 

[Phoney]

Yes, I've found that the HD560s handles a +6.5dB bass boost very well, in fact it's the clearest most detailed bass I've experienced in headphones apart from my planar HE4XX (talking after EQ of course).......it's about on par with the HE4XX in bass detail/clarity, so there should generally be no worries with providing a large bass boost to the HD560s. Oratory's measurements of one of my HD560s I sent him shows very low distortion across the board, and also in the bass, better than many planar headphones even if you compare against Amir's measurements, so here are the Oratory distortion measurements of the HD560s I sent him:

and here's a post in this thread where I talk in more detail about comparing distortion with other headphones, towards the end of this post:

Sennheiser HD560s Owner's Thread.

Setup: E30 + L30 I've bought and returned 6 !!! of them because of channel imbalance. Left driver was in all 6 cases more sensible around 8k-13k making the sound image tilt to the left by 5-10% I've done mono tests, reverse test, reverse stereo image + reverse hp to rule out my ears being...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Amir's HD560s didn't measure quite so well in the distortion department, I'm not sure why.


About your point you mention of the Harman Curve putting the lower mids really low, I think you're talking about the dip/trough around 200Hz. The function of that dip is that it reduces muddiness in headphones, increases general clarity. You'll find that if that area is boosted too much then it will make the headphone too muddy. You don't want it too low though because it would cut off the bass from the rest of the music, and perhaps make the headphone sound too thin - but I've not experimented much in reducing that area beyond what is there in Harman.


You say you generally mess around with each band in the Oratory EQ. I'd be wary of taking that approach because the sharper filters (higher Q) are there to remove peaks & dips that are characteristic flaws of that headphone - to smooth out the frequency response locally to the adjacent frequencies. If you want to tune the headphone to your liking then the wider (lower Q) customisation filters that I mentioned in my previous post would be the ones to change areas of tonality within the frequency response. However, I did add one sharp filter of my own creation to one of my HD560s though, and that was at around 8kHz, I think I put in like a -2 to -3dB Q6 filter to remove a peak of harshness I was experiencing - so that was a change I made to smooth out the frequency response of my unit that wasn't captured in the Oratory EQ.


You make a good point about your idea that if a headphone is close to Harman then you're more likely to be able to tune it to your own perfection with greater ease & success. To support your point, in fact I've found that my 3 units of K702 have a quite large unit to unit variation, and I wasn't able to perfectly tune them using the Oratory EQ and then tweaking the user customisation filters - I improved them by tweaking the customisation to my liking but I couldn't reach the same level of perfection as that achieved by my HD560s that I tuned in the same way. I know it's not really a technical limitation of the potential of the K702, as Oratory has measured one of my K702's and using his measurements of that particular unit I am able to get a very good EQ and an extremely good result - but my point being that using the published Oratory EQ and then tuning the customisation filters by ear is not easy and with not optimal results on a headphone that has high unit to unit variation and finds itself a long way off the Harman Curve.....which supports your theory about the importance of a headphone being close to Harman to allow for successful tuning. One extra point though, if there's not a high degree of unit to unit variation and if the frequency response doesn't have lots of complicated sharp peaks & dips then it could be EQ'd with success by using Oratory EQ and then tweaking the customisation filters, as the Oratory EQ would be a reliable and close to Harman basis on which to do your own further tweaking. So unit to unit variation and the overall smoothness of the frequency response are probably the most important points in being able to get a successful EQ after starting off with an Oratory EQ as the basis (& of course sometimes the Oratory EQ can be the end point too if nothing sounds like it needs changing).

About choosing the right tracks for audio tweaking. My opinion & experience is that you want to choose a variety of tracks that cover the main bases, and some of those tracks need to be very busy and have "everything going on" with the latter especially enabling you to tune overall tonality as you have representatives from all frequency ranges being used to their maximum. I tend to use various Massive Attack tracks to tune bass level, and songs like Unfinished Sympathy are great for tuning vocals because that female vocal is very prominent and can sound harsh if there's too much energy in the 1-3kHz range, so I've found that tuning the vocals just below the point of harshness on that track is a good balance. Massive Attack are also good for tuning the 7kHz and above range because they seperate the music out quite definitively often purposefully counterbalancing the treble & the bass, and I think the "s" sound frequency area is quite a feature in this counterbalancing they do which is around 7kHz, and also where some of the crisper/brighter drum percussion elements come in to counteract that bass. I also think that generally they are high quality sound engineered/produced tracks. I also like using some tracks from Aurora to tweak the vocals, and also bass level, there's some similar elements between Aurora and Massive Attack in how the tracks are balanced and laid out I think. One last good point I want to make for Massive Attack as audio tweaking tracks is that they seperate the music out so well that you can also see that very clearly in Spectrum Analysers as you listen to the music, so it makes it easier to link imperfection in the various sounds you're hearing vs where they're happening in the frequency range - so you know which EQ filters to target.....it's seperated out enough so that you can identify what's going on. For an overall tonality check I think the track Supermassive Black Hole from the band Muse is a good check, as that is super busy including all elements and can sound like a real mess on a system that's not setup correctly, yet when setup correctly you can really distinguish what's going on.....plus you'll be able to tell instantly if overall tonality is off on that track.......and I think that's another high quality recording even though it's extremely busy & loud.

Interesting what you mentioned about the sharp filters, I didn't think of it that way. Good point, I'll leave them be if they look like they're there to fix a flaw. I have tested lower mids by putting it too low or too high and noticed the result with a track that was adviced by Oratory to test mudiness with. Oratory himself prefers around 1,5db more in the lower mids than what harman does, and I found that to be the sweetspot for me too with just about any headphone. Highly subjective ofcourse.

When it comes to the point about headphones that are close to target, again if you prefer something close to harman then this could be an advantage. If you like your headphones bright or dark, then getting a headphone which is bright or dark naturally is probably better. From what I have read about EQ and experienced myself then making huge boosts can vary in results. Unit to unit variation is definetly a thing, but lets say you make a 6-7db or more boost somewhere and it actually makes the unit you're using hit the target curve, it could still sound a bit weird with some headphones. Now I'm not an expert, but some headphones do respond better to eq than others and if your headphone doesn't respond all that well to eq, it will probably only be a problem if you want to make some more larger changes. My AH-D7200 is definetly still a bit shy on the treble even with the 3-4db boost, and probably need more boosting to sound completely balanced. It's not that it sounds bright when boosted even more, the treble just sounds a bit artificial then. I've seen other AH-D7200 owners say the same thing, that you have to find the sweetspot because the full treble boost required for a balanced sound doesn't actually give the best results. I could probably try to lower all the other frequencies to compensate, but then again, I kind of like the slightly darker signature on those. Closed backs usually sounds a bit more fatigueing to me in the higher frequencies when using harman anyways, and I'm a bit sensitive to that.

The Sennheisers being able to provide that much bass is fairly impressive! Not many open backs in this price range can provide that much bass without a lot of distortion, even with EQ. Especially in the sub bass region.

 

[Robbo99999]

Interesting what you mentioned about the sharp filters, I didn't think of it that way. Good point, I'll leave them be if they look like they're there to fix a flaw. I have tested lower mids by putting it too low or too high and noticed the result with a track that was adviced by Oratory to test mudiness with. Oratory himself prefers around 1,5db more in the lower mids than what harman does, and I found that to be the sweetspot for me too with just about any headphone. Highly subjective ofcourse.

When it comes to the point about headphones that are close to target, again if you prefer something close to harman then this could be an advantage. If you like your headphones bright or dark, then getting a headphone which is bright or dark naturally is probably better. From what I have read about EQ and experienced myself then making huge boosts can vary in results. Unit to unit variation is definetly a thing, but lets say you make a 6-7db or more boost somewhere and it actually makes the unit you're using hit the target curve, it could still sound a bit weird with some headphones. Now I'm not an expert, but some headphones do respond better to eq than others and if your headphone doesn't respond all that well to eq, it will probably only be a problem if you want to make some more larger changes. My AH-D7200 is definetly still a bit shy on the treble even with the 3-4db boost, and probably need more boosting to sound completely balanced. It's not that it sounds bright when boosted even more, the treble just sounds a bit artificial then. I've seen other AH-D7200 owners say the same thing, that you have to find the sweetspot because the full treble boost required for a balanced sound doesn't actually give the best results. I could probably try to lower all the other frequencies to compensate, but then again, I kind of like the slightly darker signature on those. Closed backs usually sounds a bit more fatigueing to me in the higher frequencies when using harman anyways, and I'm a bit sensitive to that.

The Sennheisers being able to provide that much bass is fairly impressive! Not many open backs in this price range can provide that much bass without a lot of distortion, even with EQ. Especially in the sub bass region.

Interesting re that 200Hz trough that we've been discussing, I might experiment with increasing that trough to see if there's an optimal point as I've not spent much time focussing on that area....however, I've had enough experience to know that too much gain there can mean muddiness.....as we both know & have said. What was the track that Oratory advised re muddiness test?

On your point where you talk about some headphones responding to EQ better than others, I really think that most of this differentiation is down to unit to unit variation - the headphones that have the least unit to unit variation will respond best to any EQ because the result (reality) will be that the headphone is closer to the Harman Target than a unit that has an unpredictable frequency response with a large unit to unit variation - as the published EQ (from Oratory or others) becomes less valid when the units vary further away from the units that were measured - and this really does tally with me owning 3 units of K702 & 2 units of HD560s. I think the secondary problem with large EQ boosts is distortion, and I know you mentioned large EQ boosts can be a problem, and this is where they can be a problem - however headphones with low distortion like the HD560s then the distortion problem is not evident and not a concern.......but I gotta say that I noticed that Amir identified distortion in his HD560s when at very loud volumes, but that really goes opposite to my experience and the measurements of my unit by Oratory that showed low distortion. Amirs distortion measurements of the HD560s weren't bad, but they weren't outstanding in the bass area, so maybe his unit was a bit bizarre......but no really the HD560s is the best bass experience in a headphone for me apart from the planar HE4XX I have and they're both very very close in that department. So I don't think people should be afraid of large bass boosts with the HD560s.....and it certainly doesn't need large boosts anywhere else, and even if it did the distortion everywhere else is super super low.

About your AH-D7200 that you're struggling to balance in the treble, it might have some peaks & troughs in the treble that make it hard to balance the overall tonality without certain areas becoming harsh. It might be worth listening to some sine sweeps to see if there are some crazy high peaks going on:

Online Tone Generator - generate pure tones of any frequency

www.szynalski.com

at which point you'd use some relatively sharp peak filters to reduce the peaks, and then you'd use a High Shelf Filter (Q 0.71) at maybe 10000 or 12000Hz to boost up the overall treble to the correct level to achieve best overall tonality of the headphone. *Might be best to listen to the same sweeps on some fairly anechoically flat speakers to see if you have some natural peaks in your hearing, because you wouldn't want to correct for those in your headphone. (I have a large peak in my natural hearing between 8-12kHz for some reason, so I don't correct for that in headphones).

EDIT: additional point to my second paragraph, if stock frequency response of a headphone has many sharp dips and troughs, then it won't respond well to EQ as some of those sharp dips might be the result of cancellations that can't really be effectively EQ'd up (though this is less common), but also you can't always guarantee the peak or trough will be in exactly the same place when you wear the headphone vs what is measured on the dummy head (GRAS), therefore violent & sharp EQ could then be applied at the wrong frequencies when you wear the headphone, therefore making the experience even worse.......so a smooth frequency response that is free from sharp dips & peaks is really the best base on which headphones can be sucessfully measured & then EQ'd from. So that's a big factor along with the unit to unit variation point.

 

[Phoney]

Interesting re that 200Hz trough that we've been discussing, I might experiment with increasing that trough to see if there's an optimal point as I've not spent much time focussing on that area....however, I've had enough experience to know that too much gain there can mean muddiness.....as we both know & have said. What was the track that Oratory advised re muddiness test?

On your point where you talk about some headphones responding to EQ better than others, I really think that most of this differentiation is down to unit to unit variation - the headphones that have the least unit to unit variation will respond best to any EQ because the result (reality) will be that the headphone is closer to the Harman Target than a unit that has an unpredictable frequency response with a large unit to unit variation - as the published EQ (from Oratory or others) becomes less valid when the units vary further away from the units that were measured - and this really does tally with me owning 3 units of K702 & 2 units of HD560s. I think the secondary problem with large EQ boosts is distortion, and I know you mentioned large EQ boosts can be a problem, and this is where they can be a problem - however headphones with low distortion like the HD560s then the distortion problem is not evident and not a concern.......but I gotta say that I noticed that Amir identified distortion in his HD560s when at very loud volumes, but that really goes opposite to my experience and the measurements of my unit by Oratory that showed low distortion. Amirs distortion measurements of the HD560s weren't bad, but they weren't outstanding in the bass area, so maybe his unit was a bit bizarre......but no really the HD560s is the best bass experience in a headphone for me apart from the planar HE4XX I have and they're both very very close in that department. So I don't think people should be afraid of large bass boosts with the HD560s.....and it certainly doesn't need large boosts anywhere else, and even if it did the distortion everywhere else is super super low.

About your AH-D7200 that you're struggling to balance in the treble, it might have some peaks & troughs in the treble that make it hard to balance the overall tonality without certain areas becoming harsh. It might be worth listening to some sine sweeps to see if there are some crazy high peaks going on:

Online Tone Generator - generate pure tones of any frequency

www.szynalski.com

at which point you'd use some relatively sharp peak filters to reduce the peaks, and then you'd use a High Shelf Filter (Q 0.71) at maybe 10000 or 12000Hz to boost up the overall treble to the correct level to achieve best overall tonality of the headphone. *Might be best to listen to the same sweeps on some fairly anechoically flat speakers to see if you have some natural peaks in your hearing, because you wouldn't want to correct for those in your headphone. (I have a large peak in my natural hearing between 8-12kHz for some reason, so I don't correct for that in headphones).

EDIT: additional point to my second paragraph, if stock frequency response of a headphone has many sharp dips and troughs, then it won't respond well to EQ as some of those sharp dips might be the result of cancellations that can't really be effectively EQ'd up (though this is less common), but also you can't always guarantee the peak or trough will be in exactly the same place when you wear the headphone vs what is measured on the dummy head (GRAS), therefore violent & sharp EQ could then be applied at the wrong frequencies when you wear the headphone, therefore making the experience even worse.......so a smooth frequency response that is free from sharp dips & peaks is really the best base on which headphones can be sucessfully measured & then EQ'd from. So that's a big factor along with the unit to unit variation point.

https://www.reddit.com/r/headphones/comments/9u2s09
He posted a bunch of test tracks here for testing different things. He also said this about whether he makes his own personal changes to the harman EQ:

Oh absolutely!

I've found that I prefer about 1.5 dB more energy in the low-mids (100-300 Hz), and about 1 dB less energy in the upper mids (1-2 kHz) than prescribed by the Harman Target.

I'm also uncertain about the 3-5 kHz range - there's a certain excitement there but I sometimes tone it down just a tad, less than 1 dB.

Oh and I am definitely one of those persons that like a flat bass (0-3 dB boost as opposed to the 5-6 dB boost shown on the Harman Target).

And of course the region from 10 to 20 kHz differs, but that's expected. The Harman Target really makes no prediction about the range from 10-20 kHz anyways.

And from my own testing I will say that I agree on the 100-300hz part and the 1-2khz range aswell. I usually don't do any other changes with open backs, with closed backs I deviate a lot more from Harman in general as mentioned.

Thanks, I might try to experiment some more with the Denons after this information, but I like having some headphones with their own signature too. I actually like the dark signature with them so I never really bothered to try and fix it further or investigate any further if there could be a solution. Trying to fix headphones with EQ is kind of fun, but can be a bit addictive. I sometimes find myself focusing too much on looking for errors in the frequency response, rather than actually just enjoying the music and the headphones instead. It can improve your critical listening abilities but it can also drive you insane.

 

[Robbo99999]

https://www.reddit.com/r/headphones/comments/9u2s09
He posted a bunch of test tracks here for testing different things. He also said this about whether he makes his own personal changes to the harman EQ:


And from my own testing I will say that I agree on the 100-300hz part and the 1-2khz range aswell. I usually don't do any other changes with open backs, with closed backs I deviate a lot more from Harman in general as mentioned.

Thanks, I might try to experiment some more with the Denons after this information, but I like having some headphones with their own signature too. I actually like the dark signature with them so I never really bothered to try and fix it further or investigate any further if there could be a solution. Trying to fix headphones with EQ is kind of fun, but can be a bit addictive. I sometimes find myself focusing too much on looking for errors in the frequency response too much rather than actually just enjoying the music and the headphones instead. It can improve your critical listening abilities but it can also drive you insane.

Ha, yeah, it can certainly drive you insane! Well it's important to bear in mind that headphones & speakers are a tool in which to listen to music, and some people like to focus more on the tool rather than the music........and I have periods where I put more time & pleasure into optimising the tool rather than just listening to the music! But it's undeniable that listening to music on on a good system (be it headphones or speakers) is a pleasure that is not realised until you've done your best to choose the right gear & the right EQ/optimisation. I've got a scientific background, and just love finding out how things work and experimenting with anything to make it better, so I derive a lot of pleasure from reviews here on ASR on speakers & headphones as well as experiments on my own array of headphones and speaker system (note I only have one set of speakers but multiple headphones)....so the scientific/experimental side of what goes on here at ASR really resonates with me along with the elements of subjective/objective creativity side that comes with headphones that is part of listening experiments & EQ tweaking.

EDIT: on your EQ points you mention in this message, I think if you boost the bass to Harman levels then you're more likely to want the Harman level of 3-5kHz that Oratory reduces for his own personal listening. Oratory doesn't listen to Harman bass, he has it lower (linear/flat), so he probably doesn't need the added brightness of 3-5kHz to counteract that bass increase. Harman 2018 Curve has slightly more bass than totally neutral, probably to counteract the lack of tactile bass that you get in speakers but not in headphones.....and if you increase that bass then to balance it then it follows you'd want a bit more treble to counteract some of those masking effects of the increased bass - that's my theory!

 

[_thelaughingman]

The only critique I have with these headphones, is the lack of depth on the cups and they keep touching my ear lobes. I have to move the headband forward and reposition the cups each time I wear them.

 

[Robbo99999]

The only critique I have with these headphones, is the lack of depth on the cups and they keep touching my ear lobes. I have to move the headband forward and reposition the cups each time I wear them.

Some headphones have more space in the cups than the HD560s, but not that many I don't think. They're the most roomy earcups for my ears of all my headphones apart from the HD600, they're about on par with the K702 when using the previous thicker version of pad that used to come with the K702 (nowadays they seemed to have changed the pad spec of the K702 and they're thinner). My ears don't touch the HD560s if I position them right, which is quite easy for me to do, and is probably a good test that it's positioned optimally. I think people with big ears have to look hard for headphone models where the headphone doesn't touch the ears, probably not that many headphones that fit the bill (or ears!).

 

[Phoney]

Ha, yeah, it can certainly drive you insane! Well it's important to bear in mind that headphones & speakers are a tool in which to listen to music, and some people like to focus more on the tool rather than the music........and I have periods where I put more time & pleasure into optimising the tool rather than just listening to the music! But it's undeniable that listening to music on on a good system (be it headphones or speakers) is a pleasure that is not realised until you've done your best to choose the right gear & the right EQ/optimisation. I've got a scientific background, and just love finding out how things work and experimenting with anything to make it better, so I derive a lot of pleasure from reviews here on ASR on speakers & headphones as well as experiments on my own array of headphones and speaker system (note I only have one set of speakers but multiple headphones)....so the scientific/experimental side of what goes on here at ASR really resonates with me along with the elements of subjective/objective creativity side that comes with headphones that is part of listening experiments & EQ tweaking.

EDIT: on your EQ points you mention in this message, I think if you boost the bass to Harman levels then you're more likely to want the Harman level of 3-5kHz that Oratory reduces for his own personal listening. Oratory doesn't listen to Harman bass, he has it lower (linear/flat), so he probably doesn't need the added brightness of 3-5kHz to counteract that bass increase. Harman 2018 Curve has slightly more bass than totally neutral, probably to counteract the lack of tactile bass that you get in speakers but not in headphones.....and if you increase that bass then to balance it then it follows you'd want a bit more treble to counteract some of those masking effects of the increased bass - that's my theory!

Got my HD560S today, first impression is much better with these than with HE400SE. The staging of the Hifiman one may be a bit larger, but it sounds much thinner and I definetly prefer the bass of the Sennheisers after EQ. I like planar bass, but the HE400SE bass feels a bit too tight. Being able to get that sub bass rumble with HD560s as an open back of this price range is highly impressive! The upper bass and the rest of the mix is not bad either. Really good value with EQ, definetly something I'll be able to use for longer sessions and other stuff than music. A bit of clamping, but not way too much for me.

 

[Robbo99999]

Got my HD560S today, first impression is much better with these than with HE400SE. The staging of the Hifiman one may be a bit larger, but it sounds much thinner and I definetly prefer the bass of the Sennheisers after EQ. I like planar bass, but the HE400SE bass feels a bit too tight. Being able to get that sub bass rumble with HD560s as an open back of this price range is highly impressive! The upper bass and the rest of the mix is not bad either. Really good value with EQ, definetly something I'll be able to use for longer sessions and other stuff than music. A bit of clamping, but not way too much for me.

That's cool, I'm glad you're enjoying them, and you got them for the new low price on Amazon didn't you.....32% off you said in Norway......cracking deal! You like the bass after EQ'ing them too, yeah HD560s does bass really well.

 

[Phoney]

That's cool, I'm glad you're enjoying them, and you got them for the new low price on Amazon didn't you.....32% off you said in Norway......cracking deal! You like the bass after EQ'ing them too, yeah HD560s does bass really well.

Yes, 32% off! $166 dollars, but trust me, in Norway that's not bad. HE400SE costs $221 usd here, and HD560S usually costs $244 usd.

 

[Phoney]

Honestly I dont find the clamping force to bother me too much. Yes, I do realise that these are stiff and that they do clamp a fair bit but so far I was never annoyed by it during longer sessions. The pads are fairly comfortable, and it feels like this headphone fits pretty well on my head (which may be a factor to how people experience the clamping?).

 

[Robbo99999]

Honestly I dont find the clamping force to bother me too much. Yes, I do realise that these are stiff and that they do clamp a fair bit but so far I was never annoyed by it during longer sessions. The pads are fairly comfortable, and it feels like this headphone fits pretty well on my head (which may be a factor to how people experience the clamping).

I think the clamping force is ok too, I've got a pretty large head, not oversized though as I'm not a 6ft+ giant, and the clamping force on these is a tad above average vs my other headphones - the Drop Hifiman HE4XX is the headphone that has the highest clamping force, I actually had to bend/work the steel headband of the HE4XX to relieve the pressure, before I did that it I'm fairly certain it was causing some pressure related tinnitus. Yeah, so the clamping force of the HD560s is slightly above average in my experience but not at the extremes.

 

[Phoney]

I think the clamping force is ok too, I've got a pretty large head, not oversized though as I'm not a 6ft+ giant, and the clamping force on these is a tad above average vs my other headphones - the Drop Hifiman HE4XX is the headphone that has the highest clamping force, I actually had to bend/work the steel headband of the HE4XX to relieve the pressure, before I did that it I'm fairly certain it was causing some pressure related tinnitus. Yeah, so the clamping force of the HD560s is slightly above average in my experience but not at the extremes.

I've got a pretty large head too, I had the Hifiman HE400SE and they were slightly too short for me, even at full length, causing discomfort. For me the comfort of HD560S is much better, and the sound is slightly better. HE400SE had a bit larger soundstage in my opinion, but they also sounded a bit thin. They had the planar bass which I tend to prefer, and did fine after boosting. But I still prefer the HD560S bass because it felt a bit more powerful, especially in the sub bass region. This may be due to the fact that they have a bit more bass out of the box, and therefore doesn't require as big of a boost as the HE400SE. Not every headphone performs fantastic in the bass region after a 7db bass boost to match harman. Oh and btw, I actually also preferred the 1db extra bass boost beyond harman on the HD560S, which didn't cause any problems either. I usually never boost beyond harman, and on some headphones like the Arya I even prefer less.

 

[Robbo99999]

I've got a pretty large head too, I had the Hifiman HE400SE and they were slightly too short for me, even at full length, causing discomfort. For me the comfort of HD560S is much better, and the sound is slightly better. HE400SE had a bit larger soundstage in my opinion, but they also sounded a bit thin. They had the planar bass which I tend to prefer, and did fine after boosting. But I still prefer the HD560S bass because it felt a bit more powerful, especially in the sub bass region. This may be due to the fact that they have a bit more bass out of the box, and therefore doesn't require as big of a boost as the HE400SE. Not every headphone performs fantastic in the bass region after a 7db bass boost to match harman. Oh and btw, I actually also preferred the 1db extra bass boost beyond harman on the HD560S, which didn't cause any problems either. I usually never boost beyond harman, and on some headphones like the Arya I even prefer less.

Within about 1 hr's time I'm gonna have 3 units of HD560s (lol). First unit I sent to Oratory to be measured, and I use more bass than his published EQ for that unit. Second unit that wasn't sent to Oratory, I tuned using Oratory EQ and his user customisation filters, at which point I added +1dB to the bass. Third unit is arriving this afternoon! I'm a bit mental re this unit to unit thing, I've got 3 units of K702 and soon to have 3 units of HD560s! It'll be interesting to see where I end up at after tuning the Oratory customisation filters on this 3rd unit of HD560s. But yes, I'm using more bass than the Oratory published EQ's on both of my two current units HD560s, and also on my 3 units of K702. Oratory lists "best case" bass so it's possible you need more if you don't get a perfect seal or just preference.

 

[Phoney]

Within about 1 hr's time I'm gonna have 3 units of HD560s (lol). First unit I sent to Oratory to be measured, and I use more bass than his published EQ for that unit. Second unit that wasn't sent to Oratory, I tuned using Oratory EQ and his user customisation filters, at which point I added +1dB to the bass. Third unit is arriving this afternoon! I'm a bit mental re this unit to unit thing, I've got 3 units of K702 and soon to have 3 units of HD560s! It'll be interesting to see where I end up at after tuning the Oratory customisation filters on this 3rd unit of HD560s. But yes, I'm using more bass than the Oratory published EQ's on both of my two current units HD560s, and also on my 3 units of K702.

The Fearless Flyers - Flyers Live at Madison Square Garden

Really enjoying this album with HD560S right now. Probably my favourite album with these headphones so far.

 

[luxonator]

I'm looking for some help/insights.

I just got my new Sennheiser HD560s headphones and found the treble be somewhat "sharp" and fatiguing, specially when compared to my older HD598.

I haven't done EQing before, for any headsets, and after reading some guides I tried the suggested settings for these headphones from oratory with the Equalizer APO + Peace.

Going back and forth ON/OFF on Peace I notice that the trebles are much more satisfactory with the EQ, but the overall sound quality is "worse"/less preferred for me.

For example when I'm playing some open world games where there is some ambient background sounds like gush of wind or waterfall, it is transformed into a quite low volume, almost like a static kinda hiss (sorry can't think of any better description and English is my 3rd language so please bear with me). Without the EQ the sound is more present and somewhat more noticeable. I feel like I'm immersed into the world and the sounds are around me vs on the EQ it gets pushed more into the background and far away from me.

I've tried adjusting the different sliders as per the instructions on the oratory's pdf but I'm unable to get this fixed to my liking.

Is there any way to to get the treble spikes to more tolerable without affecting the overall sound this much or is this just a byproduct of the sounds I'm describing being in the treble range the EQ is affecting the most?

Again, this is my first venture into EQ so please excuse me for my ignorance.

Note. I haven't listened to these that much yet and so I haven't had my brain "burn-in" yet. Is it possible that the harshness of the treble is just mostly due to being accustomed to the more softer sound on the HD598 and it will eventually go away / turn tolerable if I just keep listening to these long enough? I've keep switching back to the HD598 because it really feels like the treble on the 560s start to hurt my ears and the EQ is not to my liking.