[jamesjames]

The Composer is a very good headphone with classical music. But the HD800S just has a slightly more refined treble response. On other kinds of music you don't notice it as much. @chesebert likes the mid range on the HD800S better, and most classical music is mixed to be pretty mid centric. I suppose this is in part to do with the hearing due age of the average classical mucic listener. I find the Composer and HD800S both have a great mid range but they are a bit different. I can certainly understand why chesebert likes the HD800S better for mids but personally I can't pick a winner. But I do think on classical music the way the mid range is rendered on the HD800S could be the reason I prefer it for classical. I also think that because most classical music is so mid centric focused, the bass qualities of the Composer are as important. Since I listen to a lot of older recordings that are analog transfers to digital, there are almost by definition more mid range focused (I don't think when young audiophiles say something sounds analogue they actually mean that, it's more that they mean it doesn't sound like it has digital artifacts or is smooth and organic sounding, but analog recordings for all kinds of reasons are much less extended at the top and bottom than modern recordings).But let's face it unless there is a lot of tympani there isn't as much need for a deep downlow sub bass kind of headphone in classical music.

For symphony in particular the width and depth of the HD800S soundstage makes it the only headphone that I can truly say symphony sounds ok. I really don't think headphones are particularly good for symphonic music, I will always prefer a good two channel setup. I don't know if it is still true but in europe lots of small classical recording labels used the HD800 for mixing and mastering. When sennheiser first launched the HD800S part of the rational of continuing the HD800 was to service the pro market. But I digress...

Thanks for that - helpful. I take your general point re mids (and lows!) - and interesting observation re the 800 and pro market. I'm particularly interested in your thoughts re HD800(S)/Composer as I could almost be persuaded with some recordings that it might be the ADX5000 that's the real competition. Until recently I was convinced the Senn was simply more refined, more natural - but the ADX is very good, I think. It might well be as enjoyable as the HD800S with symphonic music - it's remarkably articulate through the lower frequencies - which has come as something of a surprise. I hope to track down the Composer soon, and hear what it has to offer ...

 

[chesebert]

The Composer is a very good headphone with classical music. But the HD800S just has a slightly more refined treble response. On other kinds of music you don't notice it as much. @chesebert likes the mid range on the HD800S better, and most classical music is mixed to be pretty mid centric. I suppose this is in part to do with the hearing due age of the average classical mucic listener. I find the Composer and HD800S both have a great mid range but they are a bit different. I can certainly understand why chesebert likes the HD800S better for mids but personally I can't pick a winner. But I do think on classical music the way the mid range is rendered on the HD800S could be the reason I prefer it for classical. I also think that because most classical music is so mid centric focused, the bass qualities of the Composer are not as important. Since I listen to a lot of older recordings that are analog transfers to digital, they are almost by definition more mid range focused (I don't think when young audiophiles say something sounds analogue they actually mean that, it's more that they mean it doesn't sound like it has digital artifacts or is smooth and organic sounding, but analog recordings for all kinds of reasons are much less extended at the top and bottom than modern recordings).But let's face it unless there is a lot of tympani there isn't as much need for a deep downlow sub bass kind of headphone in classical music.

For symphony in particular the width and depth of the HD800S soundstage makes it the only headphone that I can truly say symphony sounds ok. I really don't think headphones are not particularly good for symphonic music, I will always prefer a good two channel setup. I don't know if it is still true but in europe lots of small classical recording labels used the HD800 for mixing and mastering. When sennheiser first launched the HD800S part of the rational of continuing the HD800 was to service the pro market. But I digress...

You are right Composer has better bass extension. 800S sounds pretty full and somewhat punchy up to about 40hz and then it drop off quite a bit after that so you won’t feel much rumbling of subbass with 800S (you feel a little just not at the level of planar, Composer or even Utopia 2022). Composer goes much lower and you can feel much more of the subbass.

Honestly with all the shilling in that other thread I went into my audition fully expecting Composer to be POS but it turned out to be pretty good. Not the best dynamic as claimed but definitely competitive with 800S.

 

[S Crowther]

The Composer is a very good headphone with classical music. But the HD800S just has a slightly more refined treble response. On other kinds of music you don't notice it as much. @chesebert likes the mid range on the HD800S better, and most classical music is mixed to be pretty mid centric. I suppose this is in part to do with the hearing due age of the average classical mucic listener. I find the Composer and HD800S both have a great mid range but they are a bit different. I can certainly understand why chesebert likes the HD800S better for mids but personally I can't pick a winner. But I do think on classical music the way the mid range is rendered on the HD800S could be the reason I prefer it for classical. I also think that because most classical music is so mid centric focused, the bass qualities of the Composer are not as important. Since I listen to a lot of older recordings that are analog transfers to digital, they are almost by definition more mid range focused (I don't think when young audiophiles say something sounds analogue they actually mean that, it's more that they mean it doesn't sound like it has digital artifacts or is smooth and organic sounding, but analog recordings for all kinds of reasons are much less extended at the top and bottom than modern recordings).But let's face it unless there is a lot of tympani there isn't as much need for a deep downlow sub bass kind of headphone in classical music.

For symphony in particular the width and depth of the HD800S soundstage makes it the only headphone that I can truly say symphony sounds ok. I really don't think headphones are not particularly good for symphonic music, I will always prefer a good two channel setup. I don't know if it is still true but in europe lots of small classical recording labels used the HD800 for mixing and mastering. When sennheiser first launched the HD800S part of the rational of continuing the HD800 was to service the pro market. But I digress...

I must be odd.
I only listen to classical music. I much prefer it over headphones rather than speakers because a) the equivalent quality speaker set up would be far more expensive and far more bulky requiring a large room and b) the sound level would annoy the rest of the household and the neighbours.
My headphone set up is about USD18,000. I guess a matching speaker set up could be ten times that.

For years I used the HD800S and the HE1000SE but having bought the Composer a couple of months ago the HD800S remains in its box and I have sold the HE1000SE. The Composer just sounds more realistic to me.

The only thing I do not like about the HD800S is the exaggerated sound stage. Everything sounds like it was recorded in a barn.
On the other hand I use cross feed with the Composer as otherwise the sound sits between my ears.

As I say I must be odd.

 

[jamesjames]

I must be odd.
I only listen to classical music. I much prefer it over headphones rather than speakers because a) the equivalent quality speaker set up would be far more expensive and far more bulky requiring a large room and b) the sound level would annoy the rest of the household and the neighbours.
My headphone set up is about USD18,000. I guess a matching speaker set up could be ten times that.

For years I used the HD800S and the HE1000SE but having bought the Composer a couple of months ago the HD800S remains in its box and I have sold the HE1000SE. The Composer just sounds more realistic to me.

The only thing I do not like about the HD800S is the exaggerated sound stage. Everything sounds like it was recorded in a barn.
On the other hand I use cross feed with the Composer as otherwise the sound sits between my ears.

As I say I must be odd.

Well, for what it's worth, I don't see anything odd in what you write! I too prefer phones to loudspeakers - and that's after spending quite a bit of time with good loudspeaker systems (for monitoring and pleasure). I think you're right to point out that it's quite feasible with phones to achieve very high fidelity domestically - and very difficult (and expensive) with loudspeakers. I would go so far as to add that I've not heard any loudspeakers sound as convincing as my preferred phones (like you, I listen to classical music). I sometimes think it's difficult to find venues and performers that can match the best recordings on good phones.

I'm not quite with you re the HD800S - not a barn, surely? - but I can see where you're coming from. I also find crossfeed quite important. The fact is music is generally recorded on the basis the audience will hear some of both channels in both ears - phones simply don't present information that way. With classical music I find crossfeed elevates all headphone listening quite significantly. I've written more about this on the relevant thread in Computer Audio.

So, not odd at all, I think.

 

[piglet]

Here is another $20,000+ chain feeding the HD800S. It really does scale.



The only other headphones I know to scale consistently like this are the Susvara.

I hadn't seen that video before but it is very interesting thank you.

There is one thing he says which I don't really agree with and that is he repeats the idea the 800S cans are really only good for classical and jazz. I think this is so untrue.

I use them for nearly everything. I think that there is only one thing that they won't do and that is immerse your head in bass, as is required, if you like for some forms of EDM. I'll mention that there are quite a few forms of EDM and many are very good with the 800S cans but it's the really bass centred stuff that personally I don't think the 800S cans are great at.

Everything else, they are brilliant. I listen to a lot of electrónica and the 800S cans are just superb for this, better than anything else I have tried. I also think they are wonderful with prog rock, in truth I don't listen to a lot of prog rock myself, but occasionally I do and I have never heard cans that do a better job. I listen to a lot of experimental music, the kind of thing that when I play it to someone they will say "that's not music". They are superb for that. The only genre that I can think of that they are not very good with is specifically the bass centred EDM and I think that is because they don't energise the chamber each side of the ears with bass like some other cans do, so you don't get that head-in-the-bass experience so much.

I do listen to jazz and classical (actually contemporary classical as it is known) and yes, of course they are great with that, but I think they are equally great with the other genres I've mentioned.

 

[piglet]

I only listen to classical music. I much prefer it over headphones rather than speakers because a) the equivalent quality speaker set up would be far more expensive and far more bulky requiring a large room and b) the sound level would annoy the rest of the household and the neighbours.

I do all my attentive listening with headphones and I've been like that for a lot of years. I got into headphone usage at the beginning of the 90s when I had a pair of Sennheiser HD540 Reference Gold cans, now considered a classic actually. I was living in a small flat in London and if I played music on my full Hi Fi system then my neighbours would be listening as well. I love listening to music late at night so the headphones became a natural thing for me to use.

I'm very much in the habit of listening with headphones and now I live in a detached house with no concern about neighbours, but I still like to use headphones.

An advantage with cans over speakers is that you can easily have different cans and these give you different presentations whereas with speakers it is very cumbersome to have more than one pair.

I have a pair of Grado SR325x cans which I absolutely love, I bought them on a whim actually at the beginning of March this year but really they have taken me aback by how good they are. I'm thinking of getting a pair of Grados from the top of the range perhaps in the coming weeks.

The HD800S cans are still very much a firm favourite of mine and I couldn't see me ever not using them in the future. However, as I say, being able to have different cans to use is another advantage over speakers.

 

[piglet]

I will just randomly mention something great about the HD800S cans while I am, in truth, distracting myself from doing something more productive. The great thing is the weight. They are so light compared with some of the other very expensive cans out there. I find very low weight in cans to be very beneficial. It is so nice just to wear something light.

The planar-type cans are often pretty hefty. I notice the Focal Utopias are also very hefty, I've never heard them so maybe it is worth it, I don't know.

I'd love to see light weight valued a bit more in reviews of headphones. I haven't weighed my HD800S cans but I see it quoted that they are 330 grammes without cable. I think that is pretty good actually. I see the Focal Utopias are 490 grammes without cable, which is really a lot. I am sort of considering a little the possibility of getting some Meze Audio isodynamics, the Elites are 420 grammes which is light I think given that they are isodynamics, but still, a lot.

In the not-too-distant future I am planning on getting some high-end Grado headphones. I love the SR325x cans I bought a while ago. One thing that helps in my consideration is that even the most expensive ones are pretty light. Still not as light as the HD800S cans!

Let us have more lightweight cans please.

 

[piglet]

I also find crossfeed quite important. The fact is music is generally recorded on the basis the audience will hear some of both channels in both ears - phones simply don't present information that way.

Yes, I absolutely agree with you. I think crossfeed really is often very useful however frequently I see it dismissed by reviewers etc as being something for, maybe early stereo recordings and things like that.

The "superstereo" effect of headphones where the channels are 100% divided is often damaging to the original intention of the music and this includes the very latest recordings. Often rhythmic effects are created between elements in the music and the producer will position these elements to obtain the best rhythmic outcome. If you go and divide the channels such that one goes to one ear and the other to the other ear, you change this relationship greatly so what you are listening to is really different from the original intention. Often I find without crossfeed that different rhythmic elements become, actually, more vivid, bouncing, if you like, from one ear to the other, in fact absurdly overstated and just wrong.

 

[Whazzzup]

ill take absurd for 500$,alex

 

[jamesjames]

Yes, I absolutely agree with you. I think crossfeed really is often very useful however frequently I see it dismissed by reviewers etc as being something for, maybe early stereo recordings and things like that.

The "superstereo" effect of headphones where the channels are 100% divided is often damaging to the original intention of the music and this includes the very latest recordings. Often rhythmic effects are created between elements in the music and the producer will position these elements to obtain the best rhythmic outcome. If you go and divide the channels such that one goes to one ear and the other to the other ear, you change this relationship greatly so what you are listening to is really different from the original intention. Often I find without crossfeed that different rhythmic elements become, actually, more vivid, bouncing, if you like, from one ear to the other, in fact absurdly overstated and just wrong.

I think that's spot on! I've never understood why it's so frequently dismissed out of hand (and, as you say, seemingly on the basis that it's only relevant to old recordings). I've tried to describe in more detail how I feel crossfeed improves listening on the relevant thread on Computer Audio. I've also described my recent experience with some high-resolution binaural recordings available at NativeDSD. I compared the binaural recording and the standard stereo recording with and without crossfeed. I then compared the standard stereo recording through my Sennheiser/Neumann near-field monitor system. I found the whole thing very interesting - and while it suggests to me binaural recordings (where available) now allow a superior listening experience, crossfeed seems to me to hold up very well - certainly superior to standard stereo without crossfeed - important as there aren't many binaural recordings. That said, I've recently been listening to some binaural remasters from high-resolution multichannel recordings available at the Spirit of Turtle Records (Bert van der Wolf) - and they're very good indeed.

 

[greggf]

I think that's spot on! I've never understood why it's so frequently dismissed out of hand (and, as you say, seemingly on the basis that it's only relevant to old recordings). I've tried to describe in more detail how I feel crossfeed improves listening on the relevant thread on Computer Audio. I've also described my recent experience with some high-resolution binaural recordings available at NativeDSD. I compared the binaural recording and the standard stereo recording with and without crossfeed. I then compared the standard stereo recording through my Sennheiser/Neumann near-field monitor system. I found the whole thing very interesting - and while it suggests to me binaural recordings (where available) now allow a superior listening experience, crossfeed seems to me to hold up very well - certainly much superior to standard stereo without crossfeed. This is important, obviously, as there aren't binaural recordings of most music. That said, I've recently been listening to some binaural remasters from high-resolution multichannel recordings available at the Spirit of Turtle Records (Bert van der Wolf) - and they're very good indeed.

I have no experience with crossfeed myself, but I've read that it can cause nausea/motion sickness in some people. I think the story is that it depends upon the implementation. But that's possibly why it's dismissed out of hand. Same with radical eq-ing and noise cancelling headphones. Icky for some.

 

[piglet]

I think that's spot on! I've never understood why it's so frequently dismissed out of hand (and, as you say, seemingly on the basis that it's only relevant to old recordings). I've tried to describe in more detail how I feel crossfeed improves listening on the relevant thread on Computer Audio. I've also described my recent experience with some high-resolution binaural recordings available at NativeDSD. I compared the binaural recording and the standard stereo recording with and without crossfeed. I then compared the standard stereo recording through my Sennheiser/Neumann near-field monitor system. I found the whole thing very interesting - and while it suggests to me binaural recordings (where available) now allow a superior listening experience, crossfeed seems to me to hold up very well - certainly much superior to standard stereo without crossfeed. This is important, obviously, as there aren't binaural recordings of most music. That said, I've recently been listening to some binaural remasters from high-resolution multichannel recordings available at the Spirit of Turtle Records (Bert van der Wolf) - and they're very good indeed.

Yes the binaural recordings for headphones are usually interesting and fun to listen to. Those are necessarily recorded with that setup where there are two mics in the ears of a dummy head thing. So, they’ll always need to be recordings with two mics in a room, actually similar to how many classical and jazz performances were recorded in the 50s and early 60s however of course with the two mics in the unique binaural configuration. So while it would be possible to do wonderful binaural recordings it will always be something rather niche.

Something I’d like to see is albums produced in versions specifically for headphone usage, so there’d be the normal version and the headphone version. In the headphone version crossfeed will be applied to each component in the recording and I think there is a possibility of fabulous results.

Two things happen in crossfeed, one is that some of what is in one channel is fed to the other channel, the other thing is that what is fed to the other channel is delayed a little in time. This will mimic the sound source being at some distance in front of the listener, of course, because we use the time difference in a sound arriving at each ear to locate the position of the source.

Okay, if you were producing an album at a sound-desk with crossfeed capabilities built in you could take each component and position it using that time delay to adjust its fore and aft positioning. So, you could give each component a different location fore and aft as well as left to right. Obviously you would do this production wearing headphones, the HD800S, of course.

So I think it would be possible to produce really fabulous versions of albums specifically for headphones.

 

[jamesjames]

Yes the binaural recordings for headphones are usually interesting and fun to listen to. Those are necessarily recorded with that setup where there are two mics in the ears of a dummy head thing. So, they’ll always need to be recordings with two mics in a room, actually similar to how many classical and jazz performances were recorded in the 50s and early 60s however of course with the two mics in the unique binaural configuration. So while it would be possible to do wonderful binaural recordings it will always be something rather niche.

Something I’d like to see is albums produced in versions specifically for headphone usage, so there’d be the normal version and the headphone version. In the headphone version crossfeed will be applied to each component in the recording and I think there is a possibility of fabulous results.

Two things happen in crossfeed, one is that some of what is in one channel is fed to the other channel, the other thing is that what is fed to the other channel is delayed a little in time. This will mimic the sound source being at some distance in front of the listener, of course, because we use the time difference in a sound arriving at each ear to locate the position of the source.

Okay, if you were producing an album at a sound-desk with crossfeed capabilities built in you could take each component and position it using that time delay to adjust its fore and aft positioning. So, you could give each component a different location fore and aft as well as left to right. Obviously you would do this production wearing headphones, the HD800S, of course.

So I think it would be possible to produce really fabulous versions of albums specifically for headphones.

Yes, the HD800S of course! Cobra records (Tom Peeters - available NativeDSD) seems to be adopting just this approach - separate binaural and standard stereo recordings of each release (multichannel also). So, you might like to check them out if you're interested in the catalogue. They're superb, I think. I recently downloaded a recording of Mozart and Haydn Quartets and Quintets performed by the Cuarteto Quiroga and Veronika Hagen. The other recordings I have are also first rate.

 

[piglet]

Yes, the HD800S of course! Cobra records (Tom Peeters - available NativeDSD) seems to be adopting just this approach - separate binaural and standard stereo recordings of each release (multichannel also). So, you might like to check them out if you're interested in the catalogue. They're superb, I think. I recently downloaded a recording of Mozart and Haydn Quartets and Quintets performed by the Cuarteto Quiroga and Veronika Hagen. The other recordings I have are also first rate.

That is very interesting and I'm just looking over the NativeDSD website now.

 

[IXOYE]

I also find crossfeed quite important. The fact is music is generally recorded on the basis the audience will hear some of both channels in both ears - phones simply don't present information that way. With classical music I find crossfeed elevates all headphone listening quite significantly.

I can't listen to headphones without using Crossfeed since I started using that option with my RME, it allows me to listen for hours without any fattique.