Jump to content

Sennheiser HD 800 Redux


The Monkey

Recommended Posts

I don't. 

 

I mean, I am sure that they have certain goals, and that its kind of obvious that they have a specific sound signature in mind listening to the HD414, HD580/600, and HD800 but they run the very real risk of creating competition within their own brand if they make too many headphones that sound the same. The flagships don't even sound the same - you can just tell they are all on the same path...

 

Grado and Beyer regularly get ridiculed for having 2 significantly similar sounding cans at different price points. 

 

There is also the target demographic - why make a headphone that sounds like a flagship when all the kids want is more bass with their bass?

 

There is nothing good to say about this beyond demonstrating supreme engineering knoweldge - after which point they know they wont be able to make any money. 

 

PS: we put a subwoofer in your subwoofer so your bass can have more bass. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think "great at its price point" means sounds the same, or sounds like a flagship. It means they have certain goals and a certain budget, and within those parameters, they make the best thing they can that will appeal to the targeted market. That is to say, they are not purposefully hamstringing designs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think "great at its price point" means sounds the same, or sounds like a flagship. It means they have certain goals and a certain budget, and within those parameters, they make the best thing they can that will appeal to the targeted market. That is to say, they are not purposefully hamstringing designs.

 

I was responding to Tyll. 

Didnt see you posted until after mine was up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's also the Beats problem.

 

If a manufacturer like beats gets a significant hold of market share, it's only natural to put out some models at different price points with a similar sound to try to grab some of that market.

 

The beats is an extreme example, but any large manufacturer really should have a finger on what the opposition is about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 And I just got some crazy custom made (amorphous) iron from Lundahl which is part of the next project.

 

 

$$$ stuff.

I've always wondered how the difference would sound.

Let us know what you think.

 

 

I think I wish I had never tried it as there is no going back now. Amazing stuff. Piercingly clear and liquid.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

sceptical i must admit but i want to believe. what are you measuring to verify the difference in sound that you're hearing?

 

I know the audio world is full of nonsense, but this is not one of those places.

post-1055-0-76733400-1418319609.png

 

Above is a basic comparison of various cores.

 

post-1055-0-00086800-1418319633_thumb.pn

 

This is a comparison of the same Cinemag transformers, one with hi nickel core, the other with pinstriped nickel and M6 steel.

 

What you should notice is that for both, at low signal levels, the nickel has considerably lower distortion. However, as the signal level increases and the core reaches saturation, the steel becomes better. This is why nickel generally makes less sense in a single ended transformer where the DC leads to early saturation -- basically, by the time the core is large enough to accommodate the DC, it is so big that its permeability is reduced to the level of steel. But in an application with little to no DC, the better core can be utilized.

 

Much more is available in Chapter 11 of The Handbook for Sound Engineers, Third Edition by Bill Whitlock. Available from http://www.jensen-transformers.com/application-notes/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know the audio world is full of nonsense, but this is not one of those places.

attachicon.gifcore_comparison2.png

 

Above is a basic comparison of various cores.

 

attachicon.gifcore_comparison.png

 

This is a comparison of the same Cinemag transformers, one with hi nickel core, the other with pinstriped nickel and M6 steel.

 

What you should notice is that for both, at low signal levels, the nickel has considerably lower distortion. However, as the signal level increases and the core reaches saturation, the steel becomes better. This is why nickel generally makes less sense in a single ended transformer where the DC leads to early saturation -- basically, by the time the core is large enough to accommodate the DC, it is so big that its permeability is reduced to the level of steel. But in an application with little to no DC, the better core can be utilized.

 

Much more is available in Chapter 11 of The Handbook for Sound Engineers, Third Edition by Bill Whitlock. Available from http://www.jensen-transformers.com/application-notes/

interesting. thanks for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People have wound transformers with "exotic" wire before. 

 

I remain skeptical to any claims that the differences from winding material cause a larger difference than the differences from using the same materials (cores, bobbins, wire) in a slightly different way. 

 

In other words:

Mucho cost for (basically) no change 

VS

(maybe not even a) small difference in labor cost for likely change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.