• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Upgrading from my HD58x ? HD6xx or something else ?

JohnYang1997

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
1,352
Likes
637
#42
The comparison of gras hires head vs original 4128c from bk(which is almost identical to old gras head)
https://www.0db.co.kr/BOARD_0DB/498388
You can see huge difference. And the difference is mostly not what I hear to say at least. Also all the target response are done on old heads. Only new head used is bk 5128 by Harman. Which is another completely different design.
 

solderdude

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
2,473
Likes
3,937
Location
The Neverlands
#43
One can measure the response of a driver in 2 basic ways. (there are more ways of course)

Use a microphone in front of the driver with the same diameter and distance as the entry of the ear canal.
or...
Measure the driver through angle dependent complex band-filters (fake Pinna + 'standard' ear canal) and not exactly 'correct' for the modifications afterwards as the compensation for it is not obtained with that particular headphone but in reference lab conditions NOT being headphones.

Your choice to believe what method gives the best indication of how a driver performs.
Is the earcanal in the measurement rig exactly the same as that of all humans in shape, lining, length diameter ?
Is that fake earcanal compensated exactly ?
Is the fake Pinna the same in response as that of all humans ?
Is it exactly compensated for all headphones under all angles and driver diameters ?
Is the compensation based on specific lab conditions in an-echoic rooms at certain speaker distances ?

Like with anything in life .. choosing your references is paramount.
You made your choice I made mine.
Result ... different plots, different compensations based on different references.

One can debate this all day long how the 'Pinna + earcanal' is a more realistic 'load' than a flat surface and that such should lead to better 'perceived sound correlation' but in the end this all depends on how well the modifications are 'compensated' afterwards.
I say ... no modifications to sound is no compensation needed is closer to what the driver does.
It's the driver's response that needs to be compensated.
Ones own Pinna and earcanal influence is compensated for perfectly by the brain.

One can either agree or disagree with my, Tylls, Judes, Rtings, SBAF's (various), Sonarworks, RAA's or your choice of 'reference'.
 
Last edited:

JohnYang1997

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
1,352
Likes
637
#44
One can measure the response of a driver in 2 ways.

Use a microphone in front of the driver with the same diameter and distance as the entry of the ear canal.
or.
measure the driver through angle dependent band-filters (fake Pinna + 'standard' ear canal) and not exactly 'correct' for the modifications afterwards.

Your choice to believe what method gives the best indication of how a driver performs.
Is the earcanal in the measurement rig exactly the same as that of all humans in shape, lining, length diameter ?
Is that fake earcanal compensated exactly ?
Is the fake Pinna the same in response as that of all humans ?
Is it exactly compensated for all headphones under all angles and driver diameters ?

Like with anything in life .. choosing your references is paramount.
You made your choice I made mine.
Result ... different plots, different compensations based on different references.

One can debate this all day long how the 'Pinna + earcanal' is a more realisitic 'load' than a flat surface and that such should lead to better 'perceived sound correlation' but in the end this all depends on how well the modifications are 'compensated' afterwards.
I say ... no modifications to sound is no compensation needed is closer to what the driver does.
It's the driver's response that needs to be compensated.
Ones own Pinna and earcanal influence is compensated for perfectly by the brain.

One can either agree or disagree with my, Tylls, Judes, Rtings, SBAF's (various), Sonarworks, RAA's or your choice of 'reference'.
The old iec318(before consolidated all to iec60138), was just the way you described. But no one has done listening tests to calibrate it. Why the flat line at ear entrance reference point is flat? So no it's not.
Also as load of course it's more accurate to use pinna and canal emulator. You already know that when you measure planars (it's not where near how it sounds).

And then, that's the absolute reason why I use my ear(along with some other friends of mine) as instrument to identify peaks. I also use metal to identify midrange tonality. Just like using instruments.
If it's carefully designed and carefully executed it's going to be very accurate. Also as any other instrument, it's a learning process, also a training process.
 

solderdude

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
2,473
Likes
3,937
Location
The Neverlands
#45
as load of course it's more accurate to use pinna and canal emulator.
As said before, one can debate references and preferred methods all day long and never see eye to eye.
As a LOAD the pinna and canal emulator is more correct but will ONLY give correct 'compensation' when used in lab conditions in certain field measurements at specified distances and angles under which the sound enters.
This differs a LOT with different headphones. More so than with flat plates.
Both methods are inherently incorrect. Just one more than the other. That's where one makes a choice to 'trust' one method more over the other.
That ... and the price of admission.

Flat plates because they lack a Pinna, setups with a Pinna and ear canal that use a single and far from perfect 'single averaged) compensation that differs from headphone to headphone as well.
 

JohnYang1997

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
1,352
Likes
637
#46
As said before, one can debate references and preferred methods all day long and never see eye to eye.
As a LOAD the pinna and canal emulator is more correct but will ONLY give correct 'compensation' when used in lab conditions in certain field measurements at specified distances and angles under which the sound enters.
This differs a LOT with different headphones. More so than with flat plates.
Both methods are inherently incorrect. Just one more than the other. That's where one makes a choice to 'trust' one method more over the other.
That ... and the price of admission.

Flat plates because they lack a Pinna, setups with a Pinna and ear canal that use a single and far from perfect 'single averaged) compensation that differs from headphone to headphone as well.
All you need to do above this is to do listening tests. And that's where harman is doing wrong. Too much to say. I hope you understand. And I do understand all you are saying. Thanks for your time.
 

solderdude

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
2,473
Likes
3,937
Location
The Neverlands
#47
As mentioned I measure the driver response, make a general EQ, listen to it, compare it to known references that sound good to me, maybe adjust the filtering when the comparative listening tests warrant a deviation from the measurements.
I have done the same with the HD58X. I don't rely fully on my measurements but use them (and other measurements) as guiding/starting points only and to confirm what changes are made in tonal balance and other basic responses as far as I can measure it within its limits.

The problem here is ... chances are my early HD58X may NOT be the same as the ones in the later drops and invalidate my mods for the later versions. So.. I only recommend my mods for those that joined the first drop. The effect the mods will have on later HD58X will be the same (reduction of midbass and treble) but the end result may not be as expected and may sound different but less 'correct'.

I don't listen to test tones nor narrow noise bands. I use music I am well familiar with and aim for 'simple' corrections be them acoustical and/or electrical. I believe ears are fallible as measurement equipment but work great for enjoying and evaluating music and thus only use my ears for that purpose.

Harman is having their method which has benefits and downsides.
Here too its all about choices or references and measurement methods.

In the end its the consumer that ultimately decides which EQ method (when used and how it is done) fits their personal taste/hearing best.
You offer your options, others offer theirs. In some cases they are more similar in other cases the solutions and effects differ more.
Just like people do.
 
Last edited:

thms

Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2019
Messages
33
Likes
11
#48
The problem here is ... chances are my early HD58X may NOT be the same as the ones in the later drops and invalidate my mods for the later versions. So.. I only recommend my mods for those that joined the first drop. The effect the mods will have on later HD58X will be the same (reduction of midbass and treble) but the end result may not be as expected and may sound different but less 'correct'.
I have done the K240 foam mod on the HD58x, noticed the bass difference. BUT I have serial 025572 so I am not sure if it's the same as the original drop. Anyway, now I have the HD650, I am about to un-mod it in a week or two.

Received my HD650 today. Pads are still in good shape. Differences are minimal: less bass (about the same as HD58x with the mod).
BUT there is more details (especially in upper mids/treble), as well as less harsh.

All in all, the difference is minimal (to me), I would be mad if I had a bought a new HD650 for 350€
BUT, for 150€ (or 200 for 6xx), it's really worth it, especially if it matches your music tastes.

Ho, also, I do not listen to classical often, but I feel like this pair will make me discover classical.
 

Attachments

thms

Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2019
Messages
33
Likes
11
#49
My point was if you're going to upgrade, try something that's quite a bit different, rather than something that is so similar. It's also worth listening to planars; the good ones have phenomenally low distortion and linear response, especially in the bass.
-> That is what I am now thinking. But, as I was not expecting something different, I am very happy with the purchase I made.

As for planars, what are the HD650 of planars ?
 

MRC01

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2019
Messages
465
Likes
340
#50
By that, do you mean what are midrange good performing planar headphones?
My info may be out of date since I found the ones I like a few years ago and have been happy since. I also still have my old HD580s which gives you an idea of what I like. To my ears, the LCD-2 Fazor is like an HD-580 with flatter, deeper, tighter bass and more natural midrange voicing.
Suggestion: check the InnerFidelity wall of fame; it still comes from Tyll's reviews, not the new management.
 

MRC01

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2019
Messages
465
Likes
340
#51
Last edited:

thms

Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2019
Messages
33
Likes
11
#52
By that, do you mean what are midrange good performing planar headphones?
My info may be out of date since I found the ones I like a few years ago and have been happy since. I also still have my old HD580s which gives you an idea of what I like. To my ears, the LCD-2 Fazor is like an HD-580 with flatter, deeper, tighter bass and more natural midrange voicing.
Suggestion: check the InnerFidelity wall of fame; it still comes from Tyll's reviews, not the new management.
Too expensive :(
I meant best value :p
 

GGroch

Senior Member
Patreon Donor
Joined
Apr 7, 2018
Messages
412
Likes
512
Location
Denver, Colorado
#53
Too expensive :(
I meant best value :p
In my view this would certainly be the less expensive Hifiman Planars....best bang for buck.

Massdrop (now Drop?) HE4xx is now an active drop at $180

The HE560 (long my favorite headphone) is sometimes below $300 new...(there are several versions, avoid the V2 which has a tiny headband unless you have a tiny head)

And, the Sundara, which replaced the HE560 in their line is currently on sale for $350 down from $500.
 

bravomail

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2018
Messages
331
Likes
126
#54
Goo topic, guys. Keep going. I'm almost ready to jump Monoprice M1060 closed, but I think they are heavy, as all planars will be due to magnets. Hifiman is treble happy, I don't like treble. I heard mostly good things about HD6xx, except they are not good for gaming. I own AKG K7xx from Massdrop - they r very good, amazeballs. :) I also own Audiotechnica M40x, and I do agree they r fun V-shaped, but not there in audiophile world. AKG K553 though - closed and reference, fun, clean, expensive looking (got 'em for 90 with MSRP 300).
 

GGroch

Senior Member
Patreon Donor
Joined
Apr 7, 2018
Messages
412
Likes
512
Location
Denver, Colorado
#55
Hifiman is treble happy, I don't like treble.
Ha. Well if you pick the wrong model with the wrong pads they are treble happy. Check the measurements on SBAF. Scroll down to the HE-560s are not treble happy with stock pads and are downright rolled of with some pads. That is a nice thing about Hifiman...there is a lot of pad rolling going on.

BTW....SBAF has a useful measurements links page here. (I do not think you need to sign up to see it). They have not measured the M1060C, but the M1060 has a treble spike.

I owned the M1060 open briefly, and was not a fan. I do think they are, along with the M1060C, a very good value planar to be considered.
 
Last edited:

MZKM

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2018
Messages
331
Likes
241
Location
Land O’ Lakes, Florida
#56
but the M1060 has a treble spike.
Hmm, InnerFidelty measured them, and their’s don’t show a spike, but rather a dips, one at 4kHz for one ear and another at 5kHz for the other, but they do show the largely increased THD in that region as well as issues with the impedance/phase.

I do wonder if the measurements are the 1st or 2nd gen model.

I own the 2nd gen (got them for $200 and couldn’t resist the deal), and while I do hear major issues when doing sine waves at those frequencies, including wildly changing responses when changing positioning, I don’t hear anything wrong when content is playing.
 

shanecoughlan

Member
Patreon Donor
Joined
May 13, 2019
Messages
63
Likes
58
Location
Japan
#58
If you like your headphones then you should enjoy them. You made an excellent choice.

As noted above, getting a DAC like the Topping NX4DSD may help build out your experience. If you really must invest, that’s probably where to put the money.
 

Tircuit

Member
Patreon Donor
Joined
Jul 11, 2018
Messages
53
Likes
34
#59
Monoprice 565C
Wirecutter rated top audiophile and they are very good. Not as heavy as the 1060

Blow away my Senns, sound about as good as my HE-400i pair. Sound a bit better than modded Fostex TxxRP and are way more comfy and easy to drive.
 

thms

Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2019
Messages
33
Likes
11
#60
Thanks you alll but I think I was a little bit in buying spree.
Now my ears adjusted to HD650 and HD58x, I no longer feel the need to get something.

Sometimes, I use my M50s again and I'm so glad my hears are/feel now "trained" a bit more !


By the way, I ended up removing the foam mod on the HD58x because I like subbass.
It's kind of what makes me keep 58x. (plus a bit more lively than 650)
 
Top Bottom