Sub $200 Massdrop Headphone Showndown: HD6XX vs K7XX vs T-X0 vs. HE-4XX

[assyn]

I only read the first half and after dropped it, but here few word.

Build quality impressions : He said that AKG is full plastic and bad while Sennheiser is so good and gave 6 and 9 points. The truth is that Sennheiser also almost fully plastic and creaking. I have both of them and there are basically no difference in quality.
Sound impressions also strange, he saying HD650 having good quality bass, while that is not true, Sennheiser only having midbass hump but basically no subbass and extension. At treble section he said AKG had only slightly more highs while its not true, the AKG actually having much more treble, even too much. He also said the 6xx having recessed vocals and midrange...WTFOMFG....the 6xx and all Sennhesiser 6 line's strongest part is the midrange and vocal presentation. And these are just a few example....

[rice guru]

2 minutes ago, assyn said:

I only read the first half and after dropped it, but here few word.

Build quality impressions : He said that AKG is full plasctic and bad while Sennheiser is so good and gave 6 and 9 points. The truth is that Sennhesier also almost fully plastic and creaking. I have both of them and there are basically no difference in quality.
Sound impressions also strange, he saying HD650 having more subbass, than AKG, while its not true, Sennheiser only having midbass hump but basically no subbass, while the AKG dont have midbass hump but having more present subbass. At treble section he said AKG had only slightly more highs while its not true, the AKG actually having much more treble, even too much. He also said the 6xx having recessed vocals and midrange...WTFOMFG....the 6xx and all Sennhesiser 6 line's strongest part is the midrange and vocal presentation. And these are just a few example....

different ears for different people . but yeah that sennheiser comment I don't really aggree with either I don't think the 7xx from what I remember have more treble I say they have about equal to the 6xx. but I didn't really give it that much time when trying it.

[kokakolia]

I find it fascinating how the Sennheiser HD6xx gets all the recommendations from everyone for everybody when they are quote " very bad at pop, rap, and EDM ". I'm sorry, but that's like most of what most people listen to. I'm not talking about strictly "EDM" or strictly "pop". But most music that isn't Classical or Jazz is centered around forward vocals with a danceable beat. So if a headphone can't do "pop" or "EDM" in an enjoyable fashion, it may as well be a paperweight. I really don't care how objectively good they sound. 

 

That's precisely the reason why I HATE the Philips SHP9500 for making my music sound thin and dull. Also, just imagine people rushing to buy the Sennheiser HD6xx only to be deeply disappointed with the sound signature which doesn't jive with 90% of their musical collection. 

 

/rant

[rice guru]

4 hours ago, kokakolia said:

I find it fascinating how the Sennheiser HD6xx gets all the recommendations from everyone for everybody when they are quote " very bad at pop, rap, and EDM ". I'm sorry, but that's like most of what most people listen to. I'm not talking about strictly "EDM" or strictly "pop". But most music that isn't Classical or Jazz is centered around forward vocals with a danceable beat. So if a headphone can't do "pop" or "EDM" in an enjoyable fashion, it may as well be a paperweight. I really don't care how objectively good they sound. 

 

That's precisely the reason why I HATE the Philips SHP9500 for making my music sound thin and dull. Also, just imagine people rushing to buy the Sennheiser HD6xx only to be deeply disappointed with the sound signature which doesn't jive with 90% of their musical collection. 

 

/rant

I mean you right  the 6 series aren't great at that cause they are very neutral to flat open back headphones with the exception of the 58x or the 669 as it has enough bass and great mids to be enjoyable for hip hop especially for boom bap and 90's hip hop. But the rest aren't  great pairing to that type of music you want something v or w shaped or Harman neutral with a big bump on the bass. People who reccomend that headphone for those types of music I don't think have heard the headphone but just see YouTubers recc them and because of that they recc them themselves without looking further and seeing stuff like sound signatures and music pairings.

[PriitM]

Having read the comprehensive first post, I could chime in on what parameters actually matter when it comes to telling them apart:

 

Driver physical size: Bigger is better for bass re-pro, but is a trade off on stiffness. Less stiff, more prone to distort.   

Type of sound cloth used in the pads: Thinner materials with more perforation restrict less and thicker more. Simple as that. IMHO the biggest source of difference besides open vs closed enclosures.  

Any physical obstruction in front of the diaphragm: engineers best helper to attenuate frequency response. Most often an obstruction in front of the central area on the diaphragm to lower high range dB level. 

 

Im excluding electrical parameters like power handling and impedance, since they are more to do with matching to the source than playing any critical role on the final dB on the eardrums.  

 

Based on these 3 parameters, we can make a much better guess on the actual performance of sound re-pro. Or eliminate the need to use terms like airy, muddy, open, etc.   

 

User comfort is another matter which is very subjective. Most of which come down to well designed weight distribution. Most of us (headphone jerks) use them for hours. Therefore its very important that any of the 2 contact points (headband and cup cushions) would not have more concentrated pressure than the others.  

 

I know I will get flack in boiling this down to a few things, but the reality is: there are a too many variables besides these ones. Excluding individual hearing, there are variables in source and transmission. File compression, DAC quality, connection issues, pre-amp issues...  

 

 

 

   

[rice guru]

6 minutes ago, PriitM said:

Having read the comprehensive first post, I could chime in on what parameters actually matter when it comes to telling them apart:

 

Driver physical size: Bigger is better for bass re-pro, but is a trade off on stiffness. Less stiff, more prone to distort.   

Type of sound cloth used in the pads: Thinner materials with more perforation restrict less and thicker more. Simple as that. IMHO the biggest source of difference besides open vs closed enclosures.  

Any physical obstruction in front of the diaphragm: engineers best helper to attenuate frequency response. Most often an obstruction in front of the central area on the diaphragm to lower high range dB level. 

 

Im excluding electrical parameters like power handling and impedance, since they are more to do with matching to the source than playing any critical role on the final dB on the eardrums.  

 

Based on these 3 parameters, we can make a much better guess on the actual performance of sound re-pro. Or eliminate the need to use terms like airy, muddy, open, etc.   

 

User comfort is another matter which is very subjective. Most of which come down to well designed weight distribution. Most of us (headphone jerks) use them for hours. Therefore its very important that any of the 2 contact points (headband and cup cushions) would not have more concentrated pressure than the others.  

 

I know I will get flack in boiling this down to a few things, but the reality is: there are a too many variables besides these ones. Excluding individual hearing, there are variables in source and transmission. File compression, DAC quality, connection issues, pre-amp issues...  

 

 

 

   

I say the driver type, soundstage , and imaging are big factors to consider. The 4xx being the only planar had the most unique experience out of them as it presents and overall different sound and presentation.

[kokakolia]

24 minutes ago, rice guru said:

I say the driver type, soundstage , and imaging are big factors to consider. The 4xx being the only planar had the most unique experience out of them as it presents and overall different sound and presentation.

I borrowed a friend's HiFiman HE400 for a week, and I think it's worth every dollar and cent. Mind you, you paid $350 at the time. The different sound and presentation justifies the higher price. Planar Magnetic headphones just have that addicting fast snappy bass. A dynamic driver will always sound like a dynamic driver. So a good $100 pair of dynalic driver headphones will share a lot of similarites with the Sennheiser HD6xx. And that kinda gives you buyers remorse when you realize that you're just as content with much cheaper headphones which are easier to drive and more portable. 

[PriitM]

19 minutes ago, rice guru said:

I say the driver type, soundstage , and imaging are big factors to consider. The 4xx being the only planar had the most unique experience out of them as it presents and overall different sound and presentation.

I do agree upon driver type as well, but I consider it to be too much a difference for an apples to apples comparison. Round dynamic drivers and planars work on different principals and thus have different limiting factors. I have taken into account the common aspects all headphones use and based my argument on them. This way I can limit myself on using words like sound stage, imaging, unique experience, presentation etc. All heavily influenced by individual setup and ears.     

[kokakolia]

1 hour ago, PriitM said:

I do agree upon driver type as well, but I consider it to be too much a difference for an apples to apples comparison. Round dynamic drivers and planars work on different principals and thus have different limiting factors. I have taken into account the common aspects all headphones use and based my argument on them. This way I can limit myself on using words like sound stage, imaging, unique experience, presentation etc. All heavily influenced by individual setup and ears.     

IMHO, the driver type shouldn’t be an argument to avoid comparing the HiFiman with the Sennheiser. Apples to Apples is an overused phrase. I mean just look at sports. In racing you have FWD, RWD and AWD cars competing with each other. In golf you have right-handed and left-handed competitors. The technique is different but the objective remains the same. I consider the headphones in the review comparable because they serve the same function and form factor. 

[rice guru]

26 minutes ago, kokakolia said:

IMHO, the driver type shouldn’t be an argument to avoid comparing the HiFiman with the Sennheiser. Apples to Apples is an overused phrase. I mean just look at sports. In racing you have FWD, RWD and AWD cars competing with each other. In golf you have right-handed and left-handed competitors. The technique is different but the objective remains the same. I consider the headphones in the review comparable because they serve the same function and form factor. 

Agreed ,I will compare a estat, a planar, and a dynamic regardless as long as it's the same form factor or back type . I try not to compare iems with headphones or closed and opens but when it comes to driver types at the end of the day they all do the same things with carrying degrees of success and should be compared. I don't see the difference between. Comparing a Beyer open back and Senn open back. Because both companies have house sounds where a planar and dynamic have unique sound tendencies that should very well be compared

 

[food158]

Inb4 mod locks responding to a year old thread.

On 11/17/2019 at 1:54 PM, assyn said:

I only read the first half and after dropped it, but here few word.

Build quality impressions : He said that AKG is full plastic and bad while Sennheiser is so good and gave 6 and 9 points. The truth is that Sennheiser also almost fully plastic and creaking. I have both of them and there are basically no difference in quality.
Sound impressions also strange, he saying HD650 having good quality bass, while that is not true, Sennheiser only having midbass hump but basically no subbass and extension. At treble section he said AKG had only slightly more highs while its not true, the AKG actually having much more treble, even too much. He also said the 6xx having recessed vocals and midrange...WTFOMFG....the 6xx and all Sennhesiser 6 line's strongest part is the midrange and vocal presentation. And these are just a few example....

No I fully agree that the AKG building, though both are plastic, is much worse. It also has elastics.

[rice guru]

3 hours ago, food158 said:

Inb4 mod locks responding to a year old thread.

No I fully agree that the AKG building, though both are plastic, is much worse. It also has elastics.

Honestly I personally prefer the akg build as its very light, almost no clamp and very comfy. But the 7xx doesn't sound as good as the other sub $200 main massdrop offers to my ears

 

[PriitM]

On 11/19/2019 at 5:57 PM, kokakolia said:

IMHO, the driver type shouldn’t be an argument to avoid comparing the HiFiman with the Sennheiser. Apples to Apples is an overused phrase. I mean just look at sports. In racing you have FWD, RWD and AWD cars competing with each other. In golf you have right-handed and left-handed competitors. The technique is different but the objective remains the same. I consider the headphones in the review comparable because they serve the same function and form factor. 

Object of the game is the same among all, to play back sound in the least amount of distortion. In that regard, all drivers bare comparison. But I did not talk about what makes them the same. I m talking about not using such terms as: open stage, clear, imaged etc. From a pragmatic point of view (deciding a value of a product), you cant measure open stage or good imaging or any of such terms. Therefore, its reasonable to know real factors that affect these "terms" as well. Would eliminate most of the confusion when deciding and knowing what is marketing wank and whats real experience.  

[kokakolia]

35 minutes ago, PriitM said:

Object of the game is the same among all, to play back sound in the least amount of distortion. In that regard, all drivers bare comparison. But I did not talk about what makes them the same. I m talking about not using such terms as: open stage, clear, imaged etc. From a pragmatic point of view (deciding a value of a product), you cant measure open stage or good imaging or any of such terms. Therefore, its reasonable to know real factors that affect these "terms" as well. Would eliminate most of the confusion when deciding and knowing what is marketing wank and whats real experience.  

Nothing beats the REAL experience! If you base your opinion only on external reviews then you'll believe a lot of things and end up disappointed with the actual product. 

[assyn]

On 11/18/2019 at 10:58 AM, kokakolia said:

I find it fascinating how the Sennheiser HD6xx gets all the recommendations from everyone for everybody when they are quote " very bad at pop, rap, and EDM ". I'm sorry, but that's like most of what most people listen to. I'm not talking about strictly "EDM" or strictly "pop". But most music that isn't Classical or Jazz is centered around forward vocals with a danceable beat. So if a headphone can't do "pop" or "EDM" in an enjoyable fashion, it may as well be a paperweight. I really don't care how objectively good they sound. 

 

That's precisely the reason why I HATE the Philips SHP9500 for making my music sound thin and dull. Also, just imagine people rushing to buy the Sennheiser HD6xx only to be deeply disappointed with the sound signature which doesn't jive with 90% of their musical collection. 

 

/rant

Actually the 6xx is pretty good for pop and rap, and average for EDM. They have colored sound and midbass hump, and that is going really well with pop and rap. 

[kokakolia]

9 hours ago, assyn said:

Actually the 6xx is pretty good for pop and rap, and average for EDM. They have colored sound and midbass hump, and that is going really well with pop and rap. 

That's the kind of feedback I love! Short and to the point. You don't use paragraphs to describe different parts of the frequency graph and lose me with too much info. You don't talk about pads for 25 minutes (like Zeos ). 

 

I'm not gonna lie, I actually enjoyed the Sennheiser HD 558 quite a bit. If the HD 6xx has any similarities, I wouldn't mind owning one. That said, I'm not convinced that open-back dynamic is the way to go. I'm not craving detail and soundstage, but rather warmth, bass and vocals. I like it SMOOTH. And so far, my NAD Viso HP 50 delivers on that front (but the ergonomics and comfort are lacking to be honest). 

[rice guru]

5 hours ago, kokakolia said:

That's the kind of feedback I love! Short and to the point. You don't use paragraphs to describe different parts of the frequency graph and lose me with too much info. You don't talk about pads for 25 minutes (like Zeos ). 

 

I'm not gonna lie, I actually enjoyed the Sennheiser HD 558 quite a bit. If the HD 6xx has any similarities, I wouldn't mind owning one. That said, I'm not convinced that open-back dynamic is the way to go. I'm not craving detail and soundstage, but rather warmth, bass and vocals. I like it SMOOTH. And so far, my NAD Viso HP 50 delivers on that front (but the ergonomics and comfort are lacking to be honest). 

the 6xx is rather flat to my ears. and the treble is nice and detailed though but lacks some low end warmth. if you like a very smooth warm midcentrick sound you might prefer the sound of the 58x over the 6xx 

[Daniel Z.]

On 11/18/2019 at 1:58 AM, kokakolia said:

I find it fascinating how the Sennheiser HD6xx gets all the recommendations from everyone for everybody when they are quote " very bad at pop, rap, and EDM ". I'm sorry, but that's like most of what most people listen to. I'm not talking about strictly "EDM" or strictly "pop". But most music that isn't Classical or Jazz is centered around forward vocals with a danceable beat. So if a headphone can't do "pop" or "EDM" in an enjoyable fashion, it may as well be a paperweight. I really don't care how objectively good they sound. 

 

That's precisely the reason why I HATE the Philips SHP9500 for making my music sound thin and dull. Also, just imagine people rushing to buy the Sennheiser HD6xx only to be deeply disappointed with the sound signature which doesn't jive with 90% of their musical collection. 

 

/rant

The 6xx is fine for rap. Rap is almost all I listen to, and it’s a great experience. It has high quality bass and clear vocals, so it’s great for Future or Thugger. It’s not quite as good for lyrical rappers, but it’s still solid for people like Kendrick.

[NinJake]

@kokakolia The 6xx is fairly flat as stated, it doesn't do anything wrong per se, it's just most people likely don't realize that their "old headphones" had such crazy EQ variations that listening to something flat may potentially seem "dull".

 

I can comfortably listen to anything and everything with my 6xx for hours on end, however there will be moments where I crave a more 'exciting' experience and throw on some closed-back headphones for some drum n bass. Open back is king for longer sessions as the breath-ability of closed-back can be non-existent.

[assyn]

On 12/16/2019 at 1:50 PM, rice guru said:

the 6xx is rather flat to my ears. and the treble is nice and detailed though but lacks some low end warmth. if you like a very smooth warm midcentrick sound you might prefer the sound of the 58x over the 6xx 

Actually the 58x is more or less a fun V character, the mids are slightly recessed. Also how the hell they lacks lowend warmth? The warm sound is basically the signature of the HD6xx/650, also one of their flaw that they have too much midbass hump.

[rice guru]

46 minutes ago, assyn said:

Actually the 58x is more or less a fun V character, the mids are slightly recessed. Also how the hell they lacks lowend warmth? The warm sound is basically the signature of the HD6xx/650, also one of their flaw that they have too much midbass hump.

I have never seen anyone describe the 58x as v shaped they are fun midcentric in nature with smooth highs like not v shaped at all