Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

klogg4 t1_j1mmdyb wrote

Reply to comment by MashMayoru in I am not an audiophile, so I wonder if I'm in the wrong here. by PraviPero

Lucky guy. I have easily heard flaws in all planars I have heard (1266 TC and LCD-2 included). Was a bit harder time with Focals but still.

−5

MashMayoru t1_j1mn0x7 wrote

Honestly for the flagships it takes like at least an hour to get used to it even having heard and daily drive TOTLs all day everyday.

Hearing them at a canjam or similar situation hardly count as having heard them tbh.

1266 at least the most glaring flaw is 13khz peak, with a 7db EQ down it's fairly close to flawless, albeit that has changed due to x9000.

But they're all good enough where once you get used to it, and without other flagships as comparison, it sound good enough to be considered flawless.

Imo ab1266+EQ, sr009s, x9000, LCD 5, are all good enough that feasibly I wouldn't be able to imagine how much better it can get without other flagships comparisons.

1

KruelKris t1_j1n17a0 wrote

The amount of money some of these set ups cost. I would expect to know that I am hearing something special from the get go. Not have to spend an hour convincing myself.

6

MashMayoru t1_j1ndyun wrote

You sure convinced your self that your hearing is better than it really is lul

0

klogg4 t1_j1mo70z wrote

The hugest flaw of almost every planar and most high-end headphones in general I have heard is 1 khz peak, and 1266 TC has rather huge one. Why should I get used to shouty phones that give me fatigue very quickly? 1 khz peak doesn't give me any more information that I already hear, nor it makes sound more natural, but it absolutely gives me fatigue. It's a huge flaw to me.

−5

MashMayoru t1_j1mpymf wrote

Sounds like nocebo to me, coming from the hd650 to focal clear to lcd5 and Myriad of other flagships I never really found them particularly fatiguing, or rather it was easy to get used to them, in return making mid-hifi cans sound muddy in comparison.

Even hd650 has a 1k peak but it's just 2-3 DB lower.

5

klogg4 t1_j1mrrlo wrote

No, it doesn't. Actually the only mid-fi headphone I have tried that has shouty 1 khz was Yamaha MT8, other mid-fi phones had pretty linear mids, or had problems in other places rather than 1 khz. It really is only an issue with hi-end headphones, Audeze in particular. Haven't tried TOTL Sonys though.

Talking about HD650/600/6xx and others from this series - this is the only headphone in the world that doesn't give me any ear fatigue at sane levels of volume. The most comfortable sound signature in the world. They really may feel dull compared to other headphones, mid-fi included, but it is worth getting used to that sound sig, because balance between details and fatigue is perfect.

−2

MashMayoru t1_j1msmwi wrote

Sensitive ears per se, having being used to hifi and flagships for a long time it's shocking to me I ever thought the hd650 sounded good when I put them on nowadays.

Lcd4 was the most "it sounds better the louder you go" headphone for me, and i couldn't stop turning it up...

It's not like I blast music at 100db+ for more than 30min to an hour at a time often anyways, and lower volume listening or regular web browsing is far from fatiguing to me.

6

klogg4 t1_j1mvelh wrote

>having being used to hifi and flagships for a long time it's shocking to me I ever thought the hd650 sounded good when I put them on nowadays.

You could get that feeling simply by using AKG K612 Pro, and they're cheaper than HD650.

Headphones flaws have nothing to do with listeners impression. If you highly enjoy phones with extremely colored sound, it doesn't mean they don't have flaws, it means you tolerate those if you experience more exciting sound. And you can't compare HD650 to hi-end in that regard simply because most of the hi-end is basically about the system of flaws and perks for providing excitement in various genres and productions (and Abyss does that approach in the most extreme way), while HD650 is designed with conception of having the least flaws possible (and their only real flaw is the lack of subbass). Of course HD650 isn't an exciting headphone - flawless acoustics is never exciting.

Back then I believed that you may have a more exciting sound that doesn't sound disgusting on numerous tracks. Not anymore, I have tried enough hi-end to prove myself wrong.

1

MashMayoru t1_j1ney8z wrote

The most obvious measurement to how good a headphone is, is obviously enjoyment, the other not so obvious measurement is how "realistic" it sounds.

I think it's safe to say that anyone with ears can tell me a guitar sounds more real on any of the flagships I mentioned vs hd650, for a multitude of reasons from detail to tonality to resonance to decay.

If you recorded a guitar heard it live, then heard it played back it's easy to say which one sounds more real.

It's the difference between a synth piano vs Steinway grand, if you choose that the Steinway doesn't sound like what "piano" is supposed to sound to you, and it's colored, then so be it. Don't mind the Craftsmanship and careful tuning put into modern grands.

If Sennheiser truly believed hd650 was the least flawed possible then there would be no point for their hd800, he1, Orpheus.

3

klogg4 t1_j1oox34 wrote

I know what you're trying to say because highly praised headphones (including mid-fi) often play percussive sounds sharper and with more attack than HD6** series does, thus the initial feel of realism is higher. That's why I said about AKG K612 because they have the same characteristic - you would call them more realistic because they're overall closer to what you love to hear in TOTL than HD650 is.

Because, let me repeat that once again, - you can't really compare HD6xx to anything else because they have different approach to the sound comparing to the most other headphones (the only real contender is Shure SRH1840 I believe). It's not about their price, they really have different tuning. The tuning that lets you raise high shelf after 6 khz for "less muddiness" and be with it because of how linear is the treble. It's about balance. They have the least flaws not because they hit a lot of things right but because there're not many things that they do wrong. It's a coincidence that the only area where this approach pays off heavily is the vocals, and the others are just "meh" until you get used (after higher-end headphones as well).

>If Sennheiser truly believed hd650 was the least flawed possible then there would be no point for their hd800, he1, Orpheus.

You don't seem to understand what "flaw" is. And yes, HD800 is a more flawed phone than HD650. It's flawed for a purpose, like almost whole hi-end is.

−1

MashMayoru t1_j1pdzio wrote

Whatever u say man, I like my bass guitar sound like proper bass guitar not some muddy mess but if you insist the mud is the way to go then feel free ¯_(ツ)_/¯

1

klogg4 t1_j1phjtg wrote

Not a huge problem for guys who have access to r/oratory1990 ;)

1

DepressMyCNS t1_j1pmldx wrote

The k612 is a $200 headphone? You honestly think that sounds the same as a set costing several thousands? Man, I almost wish I had your ears, could save myself some money. I'll take having good ears and being able to tell what real quality is though. You seem to just want to justify your purchase and shit on others. Maybe it's time to put the keyboard away and go listen to some music!

1

klogg4 t1_j1pn1ym wrote

I wasn't saying that they sound the same, but I'm too tired to argue.

One question - why do you think it's me who justifies any purchases and not you? The term "justifying purchase" works both ways, that's why it's stupid by design and grown people don't use it in discussions.

Also, people who talk about ears right from the start are almost guaranteed to not have any. That's my personal experience.

0

DepressMyCNS t1_j1nafq1 wrote

As someone who's been in this game for a while. I trust the guy with multiple hifi sets including the Diana's. Don't sweat it arguing with this dude, he's obviously one of those people who like to justify their purchases as the end all be all anyone who disagrees is inferior.

0

MashMayoru t1_j1nfvpz wrote

Having heard over 80 sets and owned 30+ from 30$ to 6000$+ I'd say I know what I'm listening for, compared to 95% of people out there especially on reddit. ¯_(ツ)_/¯

It's not like I listened to hd650 or focal clear for years before I started getting into TOTLs or anything right.

1

DepressMyCNS t1_j1pll7y wrote

I'll keep my Senhiessser HD800s and hifi stereo. I'm sure this guy thinks that the 650s can be EQd to sound like the HD800s' though. 😂

Ive had a few dozen pairs of headphones as well before I found my ultimate setups, even then I rotate between them depending on the listening situation. I'm laughing so hard at this guy trying to argue and insult you, even taking the time to switch threads to keep arguing.

1

klogg4 t1_j1optys wrote

Imagine spending money on a lot of hi-end headphones instead of learning to use EQ ¯_(ツ)_/¯

Consumerism doesn't make you a great specialist in sound. Ignorance doesn't either.

0

MashMayoru t1_j1owcxn wrote

I wonder who's the one that's ignorant lul

Cheers to someone who's ignorant enough that thinks they can change engine pipes to make a civic into Bugatti lul

2

klogg4 t1_j1p3l1b wrote

You just proved my point by comparing headphones with cars :)

0

MashMayoru t1_j1pe3a9 wrote

Poor guy refuse to comprehend analogies, truly delusional.

2

blorg t1_j1owl7g wrote

This is a specific issue with Abyss, not planars in general. Hifiman don't have a peak there.

https://crinacle.com/graphs/headphones/graphtool/?share=IEF_Neutral_Target,AB-1266_Phi,Arya_Stealth

The Arya is probably already "high-end" but it's not there in their TOTL stuff either:

https://crinacle.com/graphs/headphones/graphtool/?share=IEF_Neutral_Target,Susvara,HE1000se

Nor do "high-end headphones in general".

https://crinacle.com/graphs/headphones/graphtool/?share=IEF_Neutral_Target,HD800S,Stealth

Audeze (planar) and Focal (dynamic drivers) can have a slight emphasis there, on some headphones, but it's not Abyss level, and it's typically not centered on 1kHz either, it's a bit higher or lower.

https://crinacle.com/graphs/headphones/graphtool/?share=IEF_Neutral_Target,LCD-X_(2021),Utopia_S3

I have two Audeze including the LCD-X and I do think EQ is a must, but it's more to do with the uneven and recessed upper mids than what's going on in the lower mids. I use a slightly tweaked Oratory1990 profile which does EQ down 760Hz but only by 1dB. There is maybe a slight honk that is reduced by EQing this out. But much larger issues in the upper mids where it is very muffled without EQ. Utopia the slight rise centered at ~1.2kHz really doesn't bother me. Both it and the Clear sound very similar tonally to the HD650/HD6XX, just better. HD6XX and Utopia are probably the two headphones I find most usable without EQ.

https://crinacle.com/graphs/headphones/graphtool/?share=IEF_Neutral_Target,Utopia_S3,HD650_S2_(2020)_(fresh_pads)

1

klogg4 t1_j1p6n25 wrote

I can say that I have heard too much 1 khz in Hifimans as well, some on the same level as Audeze, some - a bit less. One of the reasons is 2-3 khz dip, just like you said in your post (dips always make frequencies before and after it appear to be hotter), the other is evenly descending FR from 1 khz towards bass, which makes 1 khz being a peak.

I guess that open-backed Focals are more comfortable in terms of sound signature than other hi-fi headphones.

1

MashMayoru t1_j1mn7kj wrote

Going from hd650 to clear or utopia was also immensely hard to tell the flaws in them as well, even though nowadays my clear sound very tame...

1