I’m not amused that the HD600 is telling me I have an asymmetrical head. 
Anyway, time to flip the headband cushion pad. 
I can’t remember if I’ve posted in here or not. I am currently using a Vali 1 with my Senn 600 and it’s really something. I’ve always described the sound from this combo as if you’re in a dingy club, and you can physically walk through the crowd and see/hear the performers on stage. It’s like you’re physically there in 3D. Pretty incredible and honestly my favorite combo.
My HD600 had the Dekoni Elite Fenestrated Sheepskin installed since March this year. Last month, I decided to try the regular Elite Sheepskin version (B-stock). Initially, the plan was to install it in the HD58X or in the HD650 but the added warmth was way too much to my taste.
Also thought if I should give it a go in the (already dark) HD660S. Nahhh… The HD600 was the only obvious choice left:
To my surprise, my ears got closer to the drivers with these pads than the fenestrated version – even after 6 months break-in. Therefore, the distant sounding was not much perceived here than it was on the fenestrated set. Definitely more comfortable though.
Still have to try the ZMF option at some point but I’m very happy with the two Elite Sheepskin offerings from Dekoni so far.
6 Likes
I took some measurements on my EARS rig to see how much my 4 year old (lightly used) HD600 pads have degraded over time. I also took some measurements on the ZMF Suede and perforated leather pads.
Comparing old to new, it appears the upper mids and treble are around 1-3 dB lower on the old pads. The dip appears to be fairly even. So I’m thinking a treble shelf at around 2k would go a long way towards making your old pads sound new again. I’ll try experimenting with that later.
Of the two ZMFs, it looks like the Suede measures closer to stock. Although I still prefer the sound of the perf leather, which is what I settled on for the 6XX. I’ll spend some more time later trying the suede on the 600.
Measurements are unsmoothed and miniDSP’s “HEQ” (basically Harman) compensation was applied. Rather than averaging, I went with the median measurement for each pad. All measurements were done on the left side.
5 Likes
Great stuff! Given manufacturing variance, must be nice to know what your own pair is doing. But for those like me, without a measurement rig, here’s a second example:
This is Crinacle’s result for the right earcup of the same HD 600 with fresh and worn pads in place. Interesting that the amount of difference between his graphs for left and right earcups is not all that different than between his graphs of fresh and worn. And in both cases the variance only happens above 1 kHz, just as Marc shows.
1 Like
Here are the Sennheiser HD 600 measurements done on the B&K 5128:
Compensated
Raw
Keep in mind, the target here isn’t comparable to the Harman Target, even though it uses the same preferred slope.
4 Likes
I’ve had the 600 since 2015. I ran it with my Ragnarok 1 - eventually on XLR. I though it was good, but a little dry and occasionally ascetic in the mid treble. Then a friend lent me his BHC - generic build. Wow. I tried his Bryston BHA-1, and later a Violetric V-281. The 281 was best, but the stock BHC, my stupidly over built BHCs, and recently a XDU00 26 - all better than the 3 SS.
Same holds true for a borrowed HD-800, Pretty sure both were designed partially or wholly on tubes. On SS, the harmonics are leached out, and the 600 goes from 3 blob soundstage to a hard left, mid left, big tall center, mid right, far right - 3-7 instruments really show it off.
5 Likes
Just posting the GRAS measurements of the current review unit for those interested. Here I’m using the KEMAR DF + 10dB slope.
Here’s the B&K 5128 info as well.
3 Likes
It’s interesting that the 5128 curve doesn’t seem to show the subjectively audible midbass bloat in the stock HD600s.
To a certain extent it does (it’s more noticeable if you look at the compensated result). It would also be more noticeable with an 8dB tilt. But the key reason is that these new targets use a slope instead of a shelf for the bass. So rather than a specific bass boost to mimic a subwoofer, these targets have a more gradual slope up into the bass. We’re using this instead of a shelf because it was demonstrated to be preferred by listeners in a study in 2013. But a shelf is also fine as well IMO - like what Crin does. He effectively uses both slope and bass boost, so you could have an 8dB, brighter tilt, but then add a bass shelf.
Thanks for the response and I see it now!
By the way, I saw your (Andrew’s) great recent video on the HD 600, in which you mention the set’s bass issues.
I do find that even a small bass shelf EQ takes away some of the texturing in the mids. This is unacceptable, since the great vocals are the whole point of this pair for me. Is this the harmonic distortion you mentioned?
The best tweaks for the bass extension for me been through (1) the custom cans ring mod; and (2) proper impedance matching with the amp, which in my case means OTL (bottlehead crack).
1 Like
If it’s boosting the bass to the point of distortion, it doesn’t matter if it’s with EQ or otherwise. Distortion is proportional with SPL. What I suggest if you want to EQ is boost it by no more than like 4 or 5dB, and try doing so with a peak filter rather than a shelf filter, since that could also be elevating the mid or upper bass.
1 Like
Yes–thanks for the nudge! I had given up on EQ for these, but a 2.5db 1bw boost at 30 hz worked nicely for me. (I only needed a little adjustment because of the Custom Cans mod on mine.)
With regard to EQ vs other means of boosting bass, I just wanted to clarify that there is some evidence that mechanical alterations sometimes get different distortion responses than EQ at the same SPL.
It certainly “sounds” that way, but here I’m thinking of measurements that Jurgen Kraus made for the Custom Cans mod. (The CC mod is a ring inserted on the back of the driver, and which in turn holds different tuning filters placed inside the ring.) He found that, at the same SPL, the CC mod lowered the THD for mids/highs. Unfortunately, again at the same SPL, it had the potential to have higher THD for the lows, unless the filters with the least dampening were used. Subjectively, these sound best, so that’s a non-issue for me, but worth mentioning this downside.
This is not to argue that mechanical tweaks are better than EQ, only to point out that they can be different. I found it to be just plain easier to get rid of the mid-bass hump with the CC mod, which was my main gripe, and then it was a bonus that the mids/highs sounded slightly cleaner and the subbass was elevated.
(Caveats on the CC mod: I didn’t do a ton of back&forth, and in any event the more meaningful tweak was just replacing my old pads. Also, I don’t recommend the “full” CC mod which includes getting rid of the tuning filter on the HD600. This was a sonic disaster and really hard to reverse.)
Well yes because distortion is related to level. When you EQ you’re affecting level. In theory with mechanical or acoustic alterations you could affect something else, like the Q of driver resonance frequency. So it wouldn’t surprise me if certain mods result like that.
1 Like
Yes cannot reverse the CC - not liking it at all
If you didn’t tear the foam, it’s not easy but can be replaced.
I think that CC’s rear foam removal instruction must really be for the HD650/6xx, because it is straight nasty on the HD600.
1 Like
I tried but I cant get it back in plus they were lightly glued and thats done now
Going to put a bigger but equally thin piece over the top of the plastic thing and lightly glue down the ends at 2 spots and go fro there
I had my 600’s with the CC mod tested - in and out, and the bass was barely changed but it had a big rise around 3k. I tried all sorts of mods with it - vents, fabric, etc. Wish I never tried it.
1 Like
I have been quite pleased with how the HD600 sounds with my DNA Starlett.
I recently noticed that CeeTee from Nitsch Audio is now offering a very limited number of JAR modified HD 600’s each month for around $875.