Sennheiser HD600 Review (Headphone)

[Robbo99999]

Hi Rob! I just finished a few minutes to an hour of referencing with them (nearly finished track, just wanted to check the mix/master and vocals), and yes, it was much more than OK.

I'll just move my answer to here, my well EQd LCD-2 Classic is a much better, much nearer to "big studio monitors in a great room" experience, however, by having very little subs and a good emphasis on the whole mid-range, the HD 600 just sort of dialed down all "distractions" and I did two or three very subtle EQ moves, first in the lower-mids (where they are a bit fuller than my "correct" Audeze preset), then in the higher mids towards highs of the vocals.

It's a bit like if Auratones had a perfect open sound, just rolling subs out. And something else the LCD-2 doesn't have is this absolute immediacy. Maybe because the drivers feel closer to the ears, or just a material, dynamic driver difference. That meant to me evaluating dynamics and mix-placement was a breeze, not in space because they don't present remotely as spacious as the LCD-2, but they make super easy judging what is in the first plane, and by how much (again, like Auratones but not that band-limited).

As another plus, my tuning of the LCD-2 seems quite close to their sound through the whole mid-range (tending towards Harman but adjusted to preference and to my linearized Neumann 2.1 system), but by being a lush full-range all of this instant feedback on the mid-range of a mix or master is indeed toned down. I don't think I would be able to "judge" every EQ move, compressor, saturation choice with HD 600s, but openly ignoring those weaker sides and using my other monitoring systems for that, and focusing on what I "instantly" get as insights when I put them on, made me feel they will do the job, and will definitely speed up my proccess.

All that without applying any form of EQing, which presents another advantage for the moments I work outside of my studio... So far only the Truthear Pure, 7Hz Zero 2 and the HD 600 (of everything I own, IEM or not) seem to be entirely competent and provide me with objective insight out of the box, with their original tuning. My room and 2.1 monitoring system with the Audeze are significantly better for an overall picture, but all the other parts provide me invaluable perspective into various listening situations, and the HD 600 is really a staple for a reason among audio engineers.

Pairing them with (and not against) good planars seems to be a great decision. Since their subs are so tame, but not non-existent, and possibly a carry a touch of bleed from lows into the mids (considering the driver's performance), it's very easy to judge the overall effect on the mids of a master when something in the subs change, whereas the Audeze (and the Sundara too for that matter) still present great mids even with "too much" going on in the lows. These are not going back xD

That's good that the HD600 was able to help you with the mixes. When I used my HD600 for music listening, albeit I really don't use it anymore, I really did like the mids in that headphone and my best enjoyment of this headphone was to apply zero EQ except for a Low Shelf Filter at 75Hz, Q0.71, +3dB - so literally that is just a subtle bass boost extension (not to Harman even though I like Harman), but for the HD600 I just really liked using it stock apart from applying that subtle bass extension. Perhaps doing the same sort of subtle enhancement to the bass could help your use of the HD600 to judge your mixes. I remember it just really fitting into the overall HD600 character by doing that really quite subtle bass boost. I remember feeling that this worked better than EQ'ing this headphone to Harman through the whole frequency range, I felt it kept the HD600 character in the mids whilst just adding subtle bass extension, so not really upsetting the balance of the headphone.

 

[KosherButcher]

That's good that the HD600 was able to help you with the mixes. When I used my HD600 for music listening, albeit I really don't use it anymore, I really did like the mids in that headphone and my best enjoyment of this headphone was to apply zero EQ except for a High Shelf Filter at 75Hz, Q0.71, +3dB - so literally that is just a subtle bass boost extension (not to Harman even though I like Harman), but for the HD600 I just really liked using it stock apart from applying that subtle bass extension. Perhaps doing the same sort of subtle enhancement to the bass could help your use of the HD600 to judge your mixes. I remember it just really fitting into the overall HD600 character by doing that really quite subtle bass boost. I remember feeling that this worked better than EQ'ing this headphone to Harman through the whole frequency range, I felt it kept the HD600 character in the mids whilst just adding subtle bass extension, so not really upsetting the balance of the headphone.

High shelf or low shelf...?

 

[Robbo99999]

High shelf or low shelf...?

Ha, sorry, yes Low Shelf! (yep, so a small bass boost) (I'll edit my original post so that people don't get confused).

 

[totti1965]

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Sennheiser HD600 headphone. I purchased this sample new after I visited major labels around year 2000 and noticing this was a reference headphone they used. I handed it to my son Karman who has been using it for years and replacing the worn out pads. He was visiting us (we are all vaccinated) and brought it with him. I had shown him how to make measurements and what you see below are his.

Other than showing some wear, you can't tell the HD600 from HD650:

View attachment 128745

The measurements you are about to see are made using a standardized Gras 45C. Other measurements made using different fixtures and protocols will vary from mine. I confirm the approximate accuracy of the measurements using Equalization and listening tests. Ultimately headphone measurements are less exact than speakers with large variations in bass and treble as a minimum. As such, you better take a high level view of headphone measurements. Anything else is not supported by the state of measurement system for headphones.

Sennheiser HD600 Measurements
Let's start with our usual frequency response measurements:

View attachment 128746

This is basically the same as HD650 given the vagaries of headphone measurements, fit, pad wear, etc.:

View attachment 128747

Distortion is higher but this could just be wear and tear:

View attachment 128748

View attachment 128749

Here is Group Delay which again is similar to the HD650:

View attachment 128750

Sensitivity is essentially the same. Variation is due to slightly different reference point:

View attachment 128751

Sennheiser HD600 Listening Tests
I only made a brief evaluation of the HD600 with and without equalization I made for HD650. I could not tell a difference between the two in the confines of slow switching time between the two headphones. As with HD650, I was yet again impressed by how good this headphone sounds. Equalization made an improvement but the headphone was very listenable without it.

Conclusions
I don't know what is supposed to be different between HD600 and HD650. Based on both objective and subjective testing, these two headphones perform the same.

To the extent the HD600 is available and costs less than HD650, it would make just as good a purchase.

-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

The HD 600 is now available at Amazon.com with a 44% Discount!
Buy it, add the PEQdB diamond Correction curve from Sharur with your parametric equalizer and you
will have the most accurate headphone sound you can imagine!

O.K. The Massdrop Sennheiser HD58X Jubilee (a HD600 with 170 Ohms and a better power efficiency
than the HD 600) was still much cheaper, but seems to be not longer available.

The HD 600 is THE legend!

Proud of ownership…….