Sennheiser HD 555 to HD 595 Mod
mikebeauchamp.com
mikebeauchamp.com
Sennheiser likes to reuse parts across their headphones lineup. They have several current models that look similar despite tiny internal differences but have substantially difference frequency response due to those tiny changes.
This is always going to anger the people who think the cost of objects should be based solely on the cost of materials. I find that especially ironic for a a website where most of us work on software products where the cost of running and distributing the software is vanishingly small and produces margins these hardware companies could only dream of.
So it is not about looking the same with different internals .. it basically is the same just without the dampening.
It’s hard to make electronics that are identical. It’s easier to make them such that they fit within buckets of tolerances.
Without proper testing, it’s hard to know for certain
But I'm willing to bet that at the lower end it's not worth the end. These aren't studio grade.
Though it's also common to segment products that don't have defects/differences by intentionally hobbling them, or even just using different labels when there's no actual difference.
- AMD K6-2+ with 128K of L2 cache can be converted to a K6-3+ with 512K. The CPU has a heatspreader that can be carefully removed revealing a series of zero-ohm resistors, moving it to the right location unlocks the cache. The CPU is still bound by binning as to whether or not it can be overclocked well.
- AMD Athlon XP could be overclocked with the "pencil mod", using a pencil to draw a conductive trace between two pads on top of the CPU, no delidding required.
There definitely was a period where AMD was shipping three-core Phenom IIs with a functional fourth core (demand was higher for the three-core SKUs than their actual defect rate appeared to allow), but I don’t know how plentiful fully-functional one’s actually were. And it was never guaranteed.
"By the power of graphite!", I upgraded my cheaper CPU to a more expensive one.
Skeletor failed to show, however.
This was a soft mod, but I think there was also a hardware mod involving only a pencil.
iirc, the CPUs come off the same manufacturing line--but the ones they sold as 3.2ghz vs 3.4ghz were based on stability tests. It was the same chip, just that some came out the oven better than others. So they would cap it and slap a label on it, which is why overclocking is feasible but inconsistent.
> It was the same chip, just that some came out the oven better than others.
Not the part about selling.
I got my i9-9900k this way, they binned it for 5.1GHz and it had been working 24h non stop for a few years (it is still working fine, but I no longer have a need for it to run).
If you're into matched pair speakers, what about for surround systems? Do you have to have a matched 4 set or a matched 6 set?
Hopefully someone more knowledgeable in 3d sound will happen along.
Edit: Should also mention that we get a lot more leeway in general when it comes to film sound since we also have visual cues regarding the sound's location and movement.
So, in response to replacing drivers, 'it depends' is probably closer to the truth. It may well be that bass drivers are less problematic than say midrange when pairing.
It does depend, we don't always need or want that perfect stereo image but it makes mixing easier to have it available.
> Quite a few people speculated in my Original thread that the more expensive HD595 headphones must also be using a more expensive driver. However, Head-fi member MCC posted the smoking gun; a picture of the original Sennheiser replacement driver labelled “HD 555 / HD 595”.
So, unless they're fucking over their 595 customers who need a repair: the drivers aren't binned.
> Quite a few people speculated in my Original thread that the more expensive HD595 headphones must also be using a more expensive driver. However, Head-fi member MCC posted the smoking gun; a picture of the original Sennheiser replacement driver labelled “HD 555 / HD 595”.
I use it for abbreviations all the time.
What’s with the downvotes? Sorry for being one of the only commentators in this thread to have actually tried it, and for saying what happened. There is one other actually, who also says the sound got worse
My point is you should try randomly at least couple of headphones that some other person removed the foam on one of them without you even knowing. Then you could apply some simple test like the binomial, and claim/reject one of them gives you headaches.
Quality of sound has a abjective part (a speaker too loud would sound broken to every one), and a heavy subjective part (a speaker with too much bass would sound great to some, bad to others). If someone say "this headphones sound bad" it means almost nothing.
I hate the sound of every guitar with single coil pickups, even the most expensive Fender Tele/Strato, but a lot of guitarist love their sound. I cannot claim "the single coil sounds worse" as if it was an objective thing that everyone should agree to, because what I really mean is "I don't like single coils".
On reddit, i've written some carefully researched little posts and gotten 1-2 downvotes so i'll downvote myself and see what happens.. sometimes it's a trickle of more downvotes, sometimes i get the upvotes i think it deserved.
At the root of it, products are all designed to be as cheap as possible to produce while meeting the product requirements. Beats are positioned as a "premium fashion" product, not a audiophile sound product, and when you are selling that type of product look and feel is very important to get right to justify the high price. The price of a product has very little to do with the actual cost in such a market, where high prices convey status and drive the desire to purchase the product to show they are more well off than those that can't afford it.
On the product design side, the design isn't even that egregious. Most of the weight is the headphone slider mechanism, where metal is a better choice as metal riding on plastic is going to be more durable and feel better than plastic on plastic unless materials and design are very carefully considered. The other two parts are just light cosmetic parts that absolutely were designed to be accents that looked good, and give that premium look (at extra cost, they could have just painted plastic metallic for less). It isn't like they took a couple pieces of pot metal and glued them inside the earcups to make them heavier, both parts have a function even if one is primarily cosmetic.
They are likely still making a good profit on the $200.00 "cheaper" pair - just goes to show what a rip-off the $350.00"premium" level of equipment is. Sennheiser should be embarrassed. I hope buyers take notice and send their money elsewhere.
This term demonstrates a lack of understanding of market dynamics.
As a company you aim for a certain profit when developing and later manufacturing and selling a product. The market has multiple segments and ideally you re-use design and manufacturing processes for multiple segments. Simply speaking, you can basically sell a single tier for $250 or differentiate by different means into a $150 tier and a $350 premium tier. In the end, people with higher quality demands will pay a significant, dis-proportionate premium. So, you can tap into that, which means the premium tier essentially cross-subsidizes the cheap tier. Everybody angry at this practice needs to understand that they couldn't just sell the premium tier for $150. They'd need to sell it for $250, or whatever the weighted mean is. Worse, they'd likely sell fewer items in total, so $280 or some such is more likely to reach the same total profit.
Really, it's not about being evil, it's about economy.
Also known as "rip-off".
See:
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/marketsegmentation.asp
Another example is selling books for cheaper in countries with lower incomes. Yet another example is countries charging more for access to national parks to people from richer countries than poorer countries. And another example is using coupons to get discounts, or student discounts, etc.
It is not a perfect mechanism, and sometimes the subsidies are not from and to the populations that would make it "fair", but on a population wide level, it works pretty well.
This is no different then offering coupons to more ‘cost sensitive’ buyers
Large numbers of people look at a VW and think to themselves: "this is a nice car, but what I really want is to pay a whole lot more for it".
(I have a SEAT, which is for people who think the reverse. VAG, so same engine, transmission, gearbox, software, etc. as VW, Audi, Skoda).
Consumers generally don't want to sympathize with companies and I don't think it's healthy if too many people did either. It's a tug of war to find a balance.
The core of this issue to me is about feeling lied to through vague implications. The product number is higher, the physical appearance of the headphones look better, it cost more, so therefore they must have put more effort into it to justify the price so the sound quality must also be better.
I’m sure most customers in this case would not feel like this was worth the price difference.
It would be as if Apple sold you one computer for $1,000, but the exact same computer in a different case for $2,000, with the only difference being they put a bunch of malware on the first one so it runs slower.
That's not "re-use design and manufacturing processes for multiple segments", it's intentionally breaking half the product line to sell at a lower price.
Sure, you can call it like that if you will. You are free not to buy any products from a company doing this if you don't like it.
As I explained above, they could stop doing that, but then the product would cost more. That may be nice for somebody who wants the premium product version for $280 instead of $350. But I'm sure there are people around who are fine with the simpler ("broken") one if that means they only need to pay $150. And since there are, there is obviously a demand, so it's obviously not all bad what the company is doing.
Again, if you don't like it, don't buy it. (Oh, and in this particular case, you can just buy the cheap one and do the mod. Be happy that you saved $200 instead of ranting that this is wrong in the first place. The more you rant, the harder they will make it for next time.)
Obviously? I'm not searching for a personal shopping solution in this thread; I would hope it's obvious that I'm not going to buy this pair of headphones.
>The more you rant, the harder they will make it for next time.
I think, and this one might just be a wild and crazy idea, next time they can not deliberately break their product line to sell at a lower cost.
My hope when I buy a product is that the company is selling me the best product they can at a particular price point. I don't mind the company making a profit. In fact, I want them to! I just don't appreciate the expectation that I need to break apart every product to determine if they are intentionally sabatouging their product line.
The Macintosh Performa is a family of personal computers designed, manufactured and sold by Apple Computer, Inc. from 1992 to 1997. The Performa brand re-used models from Apple's Quadra, Centris, LC, Classic, and Power Macintosh families with model numbers that denoted included software packages or hard drive sizes. Whereas non-Performa Macintosh computers were sold by Apple Authorized Resellers, the Performa was sold through big-box stores and mass-market retailers such as Good Guys, Circuit City, and Sears.
How many times have I heard, "you know, since you're a cool dude, I can knock off X% for you"? Every. Single. Time.
Message #33 in this thread: https://www.strat-talk.com/threads/why-guitar-center-salesme...
it should be stressed that this is only true if we add the assumption that they must make the same amount of money, which isn't part of the thought exercise
thus, "need to" should be "want to, because they want more money"
Nope. That's part of the misconception here. It suffices that they are being sold for less profit than the target profit margins of the company. And that's very likely the case, given the situation with the premium-tier offering. Every reasonable company cancels projects not bringing in enough profits, since shareholders want to see a return on investment. Non-zero profit is not enough.
> You talk as if "the markets" and "the economy" are some naturally occuring phenomena that are matter of fact and non-negotiable.
I'd indeed claim that market mechanisms can be treated like natural laws, just like gravity or natural selection. You can steer them with taxes or other incentives, just like you can steer how gravity or natural selection impact you. But the mechanisms themselves work no matter if you like them or not, or if you find them "evil" or not.
And I say this as a lefty who is in favor of radical inheritance tax and such. It's important to understand the thing you try to regulate.
I see very little reason in cancelling profitable projects. Also, framing my comment as a "misconception" is kinda indisgenious. This is a philosophical disagreement, hard to frame my point of view as objectively wrong.
Happens all the time everywhere. Money wants to maximize profits. If company A brings you 2% return and company B 5%, then the money will gravitate towards company B. It's not that company A doesn't have profitable projects, perhaps all of their projects are profitable. But just less so than company B, on weighted average. And that's not bad. A reasonable society prefers to use its resources optimally. That's where market mechanisms and society objectives align, and that's why we are embracing a market-based economy. (There are other factors than profits of course, and that's where government regulation comes in. But all else equal, the above example of companies A and B holds and illustrates my point.)
I encourage you to try a management role in a for-profit business and after a few years we can chat again.
> Also, framing my comment as a "misconception" is kinda indisgenious.
Sorry, I didn't mean to offend. I just see this line of arguments now and then and it seems to me that there is some fundamental knowledge of the involved mechanisms lacking.
Instead of justifying the status quo, I think we would all benefit if we retired the concept of an economy that incentivizes companies to act evil in order to succeed in it.
Edit: 'evil' is a loaded word. I'm generally referring to profit being the only measure of success. I for one would like to see other KPIs enforced by government institutions, such as 'environmental impact' or 'human benefit'.
Edit: want I wanted to say is, that prices are arbitrary. They are a number on a label. As a customer you pick what suits you best. If you think Sennheiser or Apple is overpriced, buy something else. It is their decision to set a price, as it is your decision what to buy. You are also not an "evil" customer, if you don't buy their headphones.
You don't get what's evil because you're reacting to the environment you know, but you don't have to. Imagine a better environment where your options are not limited to "expensive headphones" or "less expensive headphones".
We're not living in a dream world. The conditions you set have consequences in how people behave. Not just individuals, but also companies.
What is “evil” to these posters is always “profit above the value of goods provided”. It doesn’t matter whatsoever that the (subjective) material and emotional situation of every happy sennheiser buyer, employee, and investor is better than before.
Sure. That's true though to different degrees for everybody participating in a market-based economy. You can call all of us "evil", but then the term loses most of its meaning.
E.g. I could easily build exactly the same circuit multiple times, once for x Euros once for 10x Euros and once for 100x Euros just by picking the best components out of a heap and having them go to the 10x or 100x models.
Visually this would look exactly the same, but in terms of tolerances there would be a huge difference. Same can be true for mechanical parts.
I am not saying corporations are not greedy, I'd just say without measurement we can just assume it is the same without knowing.
In any case, for less than the 595's original MSRP, these days you can get an HD 6XX that very perceptibly outdoes both 5-series models in frequency response. Yours is more of a 2013 complaint than a 2023 one, I think.
Hell to the nah.
Sennheiser is the last decent manufacturer of headphones. Everything else is literal garbage (especially headsets, which prove that there's some law of physics by which if you add a microphone to a pair of headphones the entire thing will fall apart in around a year).
I just hope they stay in business. Logitech's gotten way more of my money over the years as I've bought replacement after replacement headset once they invariably break down, as well as proprietary lithium batteries that literally last a fraction as long as the rechargeable AAAs in my Sennheisers (which haven't even ran out once in over a year of using them ~15 hours per day)!
Are you just not familiar with many headphone manufacturers? I had Sennheisers years ago and they were fine, but since then I've had headphones from Sony, AudioTechnica, and Shure (just to name a few) which I've much preferred to the Sennheisers I had.
Therefore, the $350.00 'rip off' may not in fact be a rip-off. In fact, with the quantity of them they sell, they may barely cover the R&D costs.
IEMs are a bit easier to be competitive at, not having to worry about acoustic effects of ear/head shape, ergonomics/comfort is much simpler with IEMs, etc.
But clearly good headphones are still working on a massive margin.
For me, it already has: more choice, better quality, unmatched comfort - and that's fully leaving aside the costs.
My favorite brands are SIVGA and LINSOUL.
Personally I own Moondrop Aria IEMs for on the road, and for home Shure 840a cans with 1540 pads to kill the extreme treble. My cans before that were Audio Technica M40x with felt mod + new pads.
I’m excited to see if chi-fi will be able to dethrone either of those bang-for-buck kings.
Seriously, EU should make some legislation against this kind of shady shit. It's confusing the consumer. If you don't want to make headphones anymore stop making them. Or license the "technology" but make them say "Sonova headphones with Sennheiser technology"
1. A competitor offers an alternative product at a better price. 2. Sennheiser produces these more efficiently than anyone. 3. All alternatives have similar margins. 4. No other manufacturer has a similar product.
Whatever the case may be, it will inform the rational comparison shopping process. This is a discretionary item. There's probably some economics name for this, but it's not insulin. Sennheiser isn't coercing anyone.
Same logic after reading and accepting the comments above.
I'm currently in the market for both in-ears and over-ears. Was looking into HD 25 model for over-ears. What other brands are worth looking into? KEF? Focal? Meze?
MX 150/100 if you want to have a mic, DT990 Pro if you want open-back and DT770 Pro for closed-back.
Worth mentioning that they're studio headphones, so if you like headphones with a lot of bass you might have to consider other models.
At home I use Sennheiser Game One, before they were rebranded to EPOS. I really, really love them so if you can find them second-hand, go for them. They're hooked up to a Sennheiser GSX 1000. I use this setup for almost three years now and I'm really happy.
For in-ears I use Marshall Mode EQs, I'm on the third pair now and am also really happy. They've got a lot of bass but when I'm commuting I actually prefer it over "true" sound :)
As always with headphones, YMMV. I care about good sound but I'm not that much of an audiophile to care about exact frequency curves etc.
I'm partly having a go at them because I have a pair lying around that broke in less than a year. I usually go through a pair in a year (a year and a half) as I'm not very careful with the way I take care of my heaphones/in-ears. However, having said that, I think the EQs have a pretty mediocre build quality. For example, with the way I handled them, the cover of one in ear piece, fell of after a couple of months, and 6-8 months in the jack connector wires got a bit too much wear and tear and no longer connect properly. Also their EQ toggle made the treble (for the Electronic/DnB/Metal music I listen to) a bit too harsh.
Personally for earbuds/earphones I'd recommend anything which is as flat as possible and then you can boost up your preferred range. Alternatively you can go with a pair that has a measured profile (https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq), which you can use to normalizes the frequency response and tweak it after.
For example I went with the cheap AKG Type-C earbuds, which have very harsh mids towards treble (https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/samsung/akg-type-c), but because their sound profile is within the database linked above, I could use Wavelet on Android to compensate for it (and EasyEffects on the desktop) to have them be as neutral as possible, and then boost on top of that. For a ~$10'ish pair of earbuds I am quite impressed. I also had to chose them because I have a "modern" phone that decided that a Jack is so 20th century.
I guess it's a mix between nostalgia and me just liking how the songs I like sound on them. They're the first pair of in-ears I bought myself.
> I think the EQs have a pretty mediocre build quality
I'll agree with you on that. The first pair lasted a year and the second not much longer. Then I just went with whatever. Two years ago I wanted to try out "good" in-ears and bought a pair of Moondrop Starfields. They were okay, but a bit flat, the cable broke, bought a different cable, which I've stepped on. Then I remembered that I was a fan of the Mode EQs like 6 years ago and bought a pair out of curiosity, which was end of 2022. And I just really like how they sound, and that they're light, and that they fit well, and that they look good. I don't know...I just like them :D
Your explanation about measured profiles and Wavelet/EasyEffects sounds intriguing. I think I will try this approach with a different pair of headphones, I really wonder what you can get out of cheap in-ears. I tried to use EQs from time to time but I always end up tuning things for 30m without especially satisfying results. AutoEQ would help because it's automated :D Thanks!
The only downside is the cost. The non-X versions cost $140, the X-versions $220. Not sure if the $80 are worth it for me.
I'd suggest the SV021 if you want bass, or the SV003 if you prefer the flatness of studio headphones like the Beyers.
I use them with a Sony Walkman DAP: best money I've ever spent!
Good bass matters for some styles: the SV021 is better when I listen to say Моргенштерн
Hmm, I actually am considering buying bassy over-ears, because all the over-ears I have are pretty neutral/studio sounding. I game a lot of singleplayer story-games and sometimes I feel that a bit more bass would be enjoyable for explosions, gunshots etc.
Thanks for the recommendation, never heard of SIVGA :)
If you only have USB-C, pair them with a Moondrop DAC
when you listen to what now?
It's Russian rap - though for the last few years he's been moving more into RnB, which I don't like as much
Don't expect much in data support even from versions that claim to offer it, but they all deliver power just fine, and it's been getting on for a decade since I've had to screw around with finding the right cable to charge anything. Saves insertion cycles on the device connector socket, too.
Compatible replacement pillows exist but I’ve sampled some of them and they made the sound more muffled and bassy with less trebles in my opinion so I went back to the original pillows. Im not audiophile at all but could hear a difference when comparing them side to side (I have two identical pairs)
They also come with an exploded diagram on the box so you can take them apart if you wish.
And they’re extremely comfortable. I’m not a pro but I understand they’re made for sound engineers to be worn all day.
I'm very happy with DT-1770 pro by Bayerdynamic for closed. And *extremely* happy with Focal Clear for open back.
I occasionally also mix on them.
My current rig is a Schitt Jotenheim DAC/Amp driving Hickman Ananda’s. (Roughly $600 amp driving $900 headphones).
You're right, it's definitely an expensive hobby and you can spend a lot of money chasing that dragon so to speak. I was lucky in that I got something that sounded very good to me with my first set of purchases, but I was obsessed for a while with reading every detail about potential purchases.
My first setup was a "Zero" DAC/AMP off Ebay in 2008, paired with Grado SR-80s. The Zero amp was something some dude in like hong kong was building. The actual amp was nothing fancy, but it used an opamp that was super high end for a budget component way back in the day.
Personally I found wireless and active noise cancellation worthwhile tradeoffs to some audio quality because I end up wearing them when doing chores and on the plane and on calls when my kids are being loud.
However, I am Focal-curious. Some reviews have the FB noticeably better sound. And, right now, B&H is offering the FB at a $150 discount, dropping it below the BW.
I picked up a pair of Phonon SMB-02 a few weeks back and they’re the best studio headphones I’ve had in 20 years of DJing and producing. The space they reveal is amazing and feel close to studio monitors.
I use AirPods atm: you don’t have to fiddle with getting a proper seal, you can still hear what’s around you, the open back sound stage feels great in all headphones, there’s less pressure buildup, and it has good software integration. I’m never going back to cords again if I can help it
If this pricing model is enough to get you to not buy a product then you probably will have a hard time finding anything to buy if you have a clue how much things actually cost to manufacture. I often look at products and get pissed off when I see the price because I have a good idea what the actual manufacturing cost is.
The 595s were competitive at their price point. They reviewed extremely well. They are considered good value.
The 555s were excellent value, using the same driver.
Neither is a ripoff. They're both good to excellent value when looking at the market.
You’re not paying for the bill of material. You’re paying for the research, the engineering, the design and the brand.
In Apple's case, more money generally gives more hardware. LIDARs, GPS modules in GSM iPads, more cores or more co-processors, etc.
I'm very aware that I generally don't pay for the bill of materials, and it doesn't bother me, because I get a far superior experience for a longer time.
My newest toy is 3rd generation AirPods my wife got me for my birthday. Do they sound better than my highest end headphones, no. Are they "monitor-flat", again no. But, they are practical, sound enjoyable and useful. Also they do a great job at projecting voice (podcasts, calls, audiobooks) at my ears with utmost clarity even in noisy environments without being loud, fatiguing and uncomfortable, and you know what? This is great.
Also, it renders Atmos audio beautifully. I enjoy listening to them, and this is what matters for me on the go.
And, they're paired to an iPhone X, and it's going out of support this year. I'll again get the latest and the greatest in shortest time possible and forget about phones for ~8 years.
But he refuses to use what company gives to him. He ain't complaining, because he hears rest of us perfectly fine.
Btw all that hardware you listed, its in other phones too, for much less. My phone from last year has ie Lidar, that's not something fancy these days, and its pretty accurate for common stuff. I won't build shelves just by using it but otherwise measures OK.
I do notice that the cheapo company supplied headsets sound scratchy when others use them over personal AirPods.
Funny how we have exact opposite experiences.
Just a crazy thought, but perhaps the parent was trying to connect to a device not created by Apple?
I gave a couple of shots with some albums, with the AirPods, only. The way Apple puts it (scan your ears with FaceID camera to optimize things) makes a convincing performance of positioning music, but it's not better than a honest stereo album with a good pair of speakers.
Upmixing stereo to spatial is not very good, too. Just look for Dolby Atmos albums on Apple Music.
They’ve added more material (and cost) with the foam, and to make the product worse.
A cheaper iPhone isn’t usually a crippled high end model.
And specifically in Apple's case they do spend more money doing stuff like soldering ram to the motherboard so customers can't upgrade them.
The soldered disk on the other hand... fuck that
It’s one of those happy times when everyone is right.
Doesn't soldering RAM to the motherboard cost less?
The downside is a lack of flexibility, because you are now committed to a very specific RAM chip and you need to spend effort if you ever need to change that - rather than just plugging in one of a dozen modules.
The general strategy is to make everything with the same die, and then bin the output based on manufacturing quality, defects, etc.
Quite often, the manufacturing is too good, and therefore perfectly capable hardware is feature-limited in order to fill the lower end product lines.
But because they only sell the version with the super high margin and not the “crippled” cheaper kind, it’s somehow just fine?
Same with iPhones, those margins are huge, they could totally sell you a crippled cheaper version of the same hardware and still make money. They just choose to only sell things at the highest margins, because their UX and brand are so strong. How is “pricing everything super high” fine and “also sell a few cheaper options with lower end-user value” terrible greed? That’s totally upside down to me.
Useless comparison, bag here is only fashion statement, not something you use for technology.
And it's weird assumption they made any of them "first", they most likely designed both in parallel (design time != start of production time) and just put worse sounding version in cheaper one to not cannibalize the market.
I can argue that why do I have to pay 1000$ for a software, when the hobby tier is free, it is pretty much the same application.
What makes you think same people do not get angry about those ?
> You’re not paying for the bill of material. You’re paying for the research, the engineering, the design and the brand.
The annoyance is having to navigate what you pay for. I don't want to pay for the design and the brand, I want to pay for engineering and research
Luckily I didn’t damage them so no loss. I wish there was some more objective way I could measure. Though that’s difficult for obvious reasons. In fact, after getting covid I had tinnitus and everything felt muffled. An audiogram showed that I have above average hearing. But good luck telling my brain that. It’s constantly convinced that everything is muffled and there’s a ringing.
Basically, the foam mod is nonsense. I get why it was popular, especially in audiophile circles where snake oil is always at least on the menu and often just is the menu. (Green marker around the rim of a CD, anyone? It makes the bits sound warmer!) At least in the case of the foam mod there's a physically plausible mechanism, which puts it head and shoulders above most audiophile nonsense. But it still does not make a perceptible difference in practice.
See refrigerators. The units in the homes of the wealthy are way better than a $300 special at the big box store. But they are also still pretty much ordinary refrigerators.
I bought a pair nearly 20 years ago, and they have had plenty of use. About two years ago, I picked up Sennheiser-branded replacement padding for the headband and earcups. Feels like new. You can also get a replacement cable, as it plugs in to the earcups rather than being soldered.
It's a nice change from planned obsolescence.
Sennheiser has several models where the only difference appears to be a trivial piece of damping material, but the measured difference between the two is substantial. You also can’t get the exact foam piece yourself so mods aren’t possible.
I heard this rumor a long while ago (15+ years) while still in school. I did it to my headphones but learned that it pretty dramatically increased sound leakage. I'm not sure if was the exact same models of senns, but the trick has been around awhile.
If you could make a headphone that can do both and sound acceptable, it would probably much more expensive than just buying a two pairs, one open and one closed.
> How to do the mod
> The foam cushions are removed simply by pulling on them.
Lol.
I do find that the difference between a pair of 100 euro headphones and 400 euro headphones is quite obvious, though. Can you elaborate a bit?
I think over about 800, the difference is pretty much gone -- with the caveat that might not hold if you're buying a set with a specific freq response in mind (e.g Beyer Dynamics cans tend to boost low and treble a bit, which is good for mixing, or Grados which make acoustic music sound absolutely massive etc)..
Not many people are willing to install that much foam panelling, though.
Amps, however, obviously have an impact on the sound delivered — especially for high impedance headphones, or those that are otherwise difficult to drive (think some planar magnetically, etc). Again, though, anyone who thinks that relatively powerful amp A is significantly different to equivalently powerful amp B is almost certainly more interested in impressing other people with too much money than how kit actually sounds.
They’re all fairly low end though I guess.
[1] https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLnSJ7ZX2HMpsNMKj8IH...
Double-blind / blind headphone testing where price and manufacturer / model are not revealed. Possibly additional methods; multiple tests in a long timespan, multiple people testing, different locations (studio, sports etc.) and so on.
The reviewers are allowed to use any and all digital measuring tools in addition to listening by ear.
A rigorous version of this would integrate above in rtings.com headphone testing method.
Thus a pair that might measure great might not sound good with your ears.
He got some professional testing equipment and he's building a proper testing environment for headphones and other stuff.
Additional details in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwPLhyUgm-g
disclaimer: i'm not affiliated with LTT in any way
Could you recommend a different one? I'd like to go and test that since my headphones broke last week and I've been too lazy to dive into the audiophile depths.
http://musicalmusings.themindofgame.com/2010/02/hd280-pro-bl...
This one DID noticeably improve the quality of sound / bass response.
“Any recommendations on Bluetooth earbuds that are sweat/waterproof, reliable, and well designed?”
https://www.reddit.com/r/BuyItForLife/comments/14a2hry/any_r...
Rocked the Zalman clip on mic and moved on to doing the 3.5mm detachable mod and used a V-Moda BoomPro.
Still a great setup today, especially for gaming. Sadly lacking in bass.
In Europe there is limit to the kW output of motorcycles someone with a learners permit can drive, so in a lot of cases the output of a more powerful bike is limited so they can learn on the same bike to what they will be driving.
To achieve this on some bikes you can restrict the air flow through the carburettor, which can be as simple as adding a piece of cardboard in the right place...
Motorcycles of a power not exceeding 35 kilowatts (47 hp) and with a power/weight ratio not exceeding 0.2 kilowatts per kilogram (0.12 hp/lb)
and not derived from a vehicle of more than double its power.The picture mentioned is in the article, just below what I quoted.
> However, Head-fi member MCC posted the smoking gun; a picture of the original Sennheiser replacement driver labelled “HD 555 / HD 595”.
These days I have dialed in my sweet spot to around £100 for headphones
I can't see 100 quid getting five times the headphone experience. Given these have lasted a decade, I don't see myself needing to replace the five times over during the rest of my life. I don't think my ears would be able to distinguish the difference, especially not from pc sound output.
Just to be clear, this is not what I'm claiming either, when I choose the £100 headphones. I don't think anyone would make that claim. I find them to be "better", and worth the premium, but absolutely not five times "better".
> I don't think my ears would be able to distinguish the difference, especially not from pc sound output.
That's all that really matters I guess.
You could try to find a way to test a "better" setup (source device + headphones) to see if you are missing out. But you could also absolutely just avoid doing that and just stay happy.
One of the issue of the hd600 is it makes you picky about sound, in the same way like pluging an old gibson onto a marshall amp, it's hard to get back to a cheaper alternative once you try the magic. Also the same friend that introduce me to the hd600 bought a hd650 as he lost the hd600 on tour but I was very disappointed by the sound of the hd650 which in my ear is nowhere as good as the hd600
And I do not like the HD650 either; it's just a worse headphone to my ear. Clearly colored to sound a certain way.
- merge the two products in one: the higher-end users would pay less (for the same quality), but the lower-end ones would pay more (for a slightly increased quality); lower-end clients (which make up the majority of the client base) would likely end up buying other products instead, since the product wouldn't meet the price point anymore
- make the products physically different: both higher-end and lower-end users would pay more, for the same quality
Artificial product differentiation is ugly, but it does have a purpose.
yes, the purpose is to maximally profit off the product line.
Consumers hate it. Companies that do it are costing them reputation, if consumers get the hint that they're being price discriminated against.
The HD800 are the best pair of headphones I have ever owned. Incredible soundstage and imaging. They are probably the best anyone could ever do with dynamic drivers. I have a lot of music that I save for these headphones, never wanting to play on the go via Bluetooth. My HD600 are still going strong (having been purchased in the early 90s), thanks to a quality product and availability of spare parts. Sennheiser are a fantastic company and I hope they keep making headphones.