Recent comments in /f/headphones

therealPaulPlay OP t1_iybsq8z wrote

Welp I‘ve already bought them but let‘s see how they are. I just recently listened to Etymotic Er2se and the clarity is great, you can hear some extra instruments compared to the Chu and the soundstage is maybe 10cm wider but I want something more engaging and less clinical (er2se on tubes with 6db bass boost? (joke)

1

rhalf t1_iybprrx wrote

I don't think I missed a thing. You just want me to judge the guy. Nope.If he likes more bass, he needs headphones with more pressure capacity. You can praise the HD560s if you want, whatever. If you convince him to give them another chance and live with them anyway it's fine, if not - that's fine too.

I was describing them in the context of his message, which is related to headroom. Headroom doesn't care how the bass is tuned. It can be 6db below baseline, as long as there's headroom, it'll deliver. HD560's are the same kind of driver-earcup-earpad combination as other Senns and it doesn't have any more headroom. It's tuned differently, but the displacement just isn't there for bassheads.

Refer to distortion plots to see how HD560s is more stressed than HD660 for example. If you tune the bass up, you get less headroom - as simple as that. If someone is a heavy listener, then no amount of petty remarks towards them will change the fact that there is no replacement for displacement.

1

klogg4 t1_iybll6o wrote

The thing you're missing is that HD560s actually have very decent, pretty linear and low distortion bass down to 40hz. Saying that they do not focus on bass is pretty much ignorant because they're one of the best hi-fi targeted headphones in this regard (better than whole HD6** series, Hifimans and lots of other headphones). The problem here is not the headphones itself, it's the fact that topicstarter boosted bass in damn Sony XM4 with already boosted bass.

1

DepressMyCNS t1_iybl9e4 wrote

Haha I'll have to get myself a golden ear trophy for my decorations lol. Seriously though I understand the sentiment of saying "there's no difference", music is music after all, and both do sound fantastic, but after spending $2600 on headphones, dac/amp and $7000 on a hifi Dolby Atmos setup I wanted to make sure I was getting the most out of my equipment. Another reason I spent the time testing was because I was subscribed to 3 different streaming services at the time and wanted to save some money by switching to just one. I literally sat there and compared 5-10 second long segments of songs and listened to specific tonal qualities of the instruments and vocals, how long the resonances lasted, minute background details such as breaths being taken or fingers scraping against strings, keys clacking, noise floor etc. Extreme critical listening stuff your average person isn't checking for when just putting something on to jam to. I think that's the perfect setup honestly lossless at home lossy on the go. Luckily I live in an area with really good 5g coverage so I can just stream 16-bit or 24-bit lossless straight from Qobuz without buffering. Best of both worlds really.

Have you had a chance to listen or compare and 16 to 24 bit music? Surprisingly there's a difference there as well, it's much more subtle but it has a slight loudness boost and way better depth to the low end of tracks. The first 24 bit CD I bought was Post Malone's Beerbongs and Bentleys and I had to adjust my subwoofer from the added bass 😂. Also have you heard any DOLBY Atmos or 360 Audio content? It's not lossless but it adds a whole different feel to music as well having specific instruments sounding as if they're placed throughout the room not coming from the speakers, it's evolutionary stuff, I can't wait till they come up with a lossless spatial audio now that will be something!

2