What was your first pair of high-end headphones?

I have the 6xx and Sundaras, friend. The former is why I was considering a tube amp. I've been bit by the bug and this is only the beginning!

 

Sennheiser HD598SE

 

Oh and I will add in addition to my wonderful HIFi Man HE400 set , I do own some Bose Quiet Comfort 35 Wireless phones and before you guys throw tomatoes at me .. they actually are quite decent for non audiophile cans. ! Lol good for listening at bedtime thru my phone or when out and about in noisy environs (not much of that lately tho).

 

HiFiMan Ananda.

 

Would be curious to get people views on a decent pair of sub 500 USD (EUR / GBP) CLOSED BACK cans such as:

Meze 99 classics
E-MU Teak
Beyer 1770
Neumann NDH20

Anybody using them / any others worth adding to the list....?

 

Since high end is subjective, I would consider my Sennheiser PX-100 as my first high end pair. It was around 2004-2005, everyone update their ipods every year and ipodlounge website convinced us that this model is a perfect upgrade to the white earbuds. Well, either PX-100 or Grado SR-60.

It wasn’t easy to get any of them in Indonesia back then. Finally I found a store that sell one. It is for sure, much better than the stock white earbuds.
After a couple of years one of the cables lost its connection to the driver. Fixed it. Then it happen again six months later. Fixed it again, but now the cable became awkwardly too short from the splitter to the driver. Plus the foam has deteriorated. I think I replaced the foam once and think whoa you can get a no name headphone for the price of Sennheiser replacement foam.

Finally I let this pair retired when I bought a pair of Sennheiser 435. I love 435 because I think that the red ring is so badass. Still have the 435 until today. It’s my pair of go anywhere headphone. It’s light, it’s durable, and I think it got more head time than my SR-007.

 

I had a pair of Sennheisers in college (late 80s/early 90s). Not sure what model, but they looked like this:

 

Headphones - Grado RS2e's, earphones - Campfire Andromeda. I've moved on to Sennheiser/Audeze from there which are still not expensive compared to TOTL cans. The Audeze's were the first pair that definitely felt like a luxury item. I go more for pro type of feeling gear, but I'll admit that I like the big leather cushions and glossy Shedua wood. I'm still surprised how good my HD600's and etymotic ER4XR's sound compared to much more expensive headphones/earphones - I would consider them hi-end.

 

I went from Koss Pro/4AA's to a pair of Koss Pro 4/AAA's in college. Both were very comfortable for short periods of time but after 45 minutes of so the weight of the headphones made it feel like they were slicing into my skull. I avoided over the ear headphones for years after that. In 2019 I bought a pair of AudioQuest Nighthawk Carbon's which I can wear for hour and hours. They are the most comfortable over the ear headphones I have ever worn regardless of price.

When AudioQuest stopped making them, I bough a second pair at half price.

 

If Sennheiser HD6xx is high-end, then these. Perfectly happy with them! More of a speakers guy anyway.

 

Sennheiser/Drop HD-6xx. Very likely the last headphones that I will buy.

 

My first exposure to high-end headphones came when I joined the SACD project at Philips Research (Netherlands) in the mid-90s (it would have been `97 by the time we had the first DSD recordings for evaluation). Although I had access to a fully floating, custom-designed listening room, we used headphones for some QA functions and quality evaluations. As we shared facilities with the perceptual coding group, we used their Stax Lambda Nova Signatures (pretty sure that was the model):

Stax Lambda Nova Signature electrostatic ear-speaker

I didn't have a need for headphones at home until I moved to the US 20 years ago, and bought some Sennheiser HD-600s and a Musical Fidelity X-Cans V2 to use while my wife and I looked for a house (which took a year!). I bought the 600s because they were a constant with all the recording engineers I was interacting with (and I recall a review that was something along the lines of 90% of Stax sound-quality for 10% of the price -- don't quote me on that though! ). After joining Sony in 2001, I was given a set of MDR-CD3000 closed back headphones for my SACD work.

Product Review

They are a very nice headphone, comfortable and easy to listen to for extended periods. They have some elements of the legendary Sony R10 in them, so make a nice contrast when I need a closed back headphone. My only complaint is the noise that the fake leather earpads make, so you need to sit very still when using them.

Both the 600s and the CD3000s have done much sterling service over the years, and I still use them for non-critical listening.

A few years back, I got involved with Warwick Acoustics in the UK, and helped develop/promote their Sonoma Model One and Warwick Aperio headphones. These are both high-resolution electrostatic headphone systems (including amplification and DAC). I have a Model One system that I use for critical headphone listening, and think it compares with other headphone systems in the $10k-$15k price range (headphone + amp + DAC). Through events like the CanJams I was able to listen to a wide variety of top headphones from Sennheiser, Audeze, HiFiMAN, MrSpeakers/Dan Clark, Stax, Abyss, Focal, ZMF, etc. with a wide variety of amps and DACs. There is an amazing selection of products available these days.

I was able to spend a little time with the Sennheiser Orpheus and HiFiMAN Shangri-La at the CanJams. The Orpheus is excellent, and certainly wins on build and wow factor due to the motorized tubes/controls (no idea how they would hold up over time). I was not impressed with the Shangri-La at all, and found its massive amplifier to be pig ugly. I never had these two alongside the Aperio to do a comparison, but I did do a Model One vs. Aperio shootout over an evening, and the Aperio is really something special, and half the price of the Orpheus or Shangri-La.

The Sonoma Model One Headphone System – Reviews | TONEAudio MAGAZINE

Warwick Acoustics APERIO electrostatic headphone system

In terms of highs/lows when it came to show demos, I always enjoyed the Stax 009 and HeadAmp Blue Hawaii combination (with whatever DAC they were using at the time), and, at a lower price point, was very impressed with ZMF (especially as it is a small family operation). Biggest disappointments were Abyss, Audeze LCD-n and Focal Utopia. As I have written here a few times, TWO dealers could not help me get a comfortable fit with the Abyss 1266. It sounded like it had potential, but I was too afraid to move my head in case they fell off (and I didn't want to break a $5k headphone). I don't get the popularity of Audeze (and I'm sure some readers will be miffed at me for that). They are so heavy and uncomfortable that I could never have them on long enough to gauge sound-quality (I tried LCD-4, LCD-X, etc.). The Focal Utopia is actually a very nice headphone to listen to, but its Rolex-like construction means weight, and the bar across the top of your head gets painful after an extended period, I find -- this is why I like light phones like the HD-800s, etc.

Regarding 'endgame', I think it depends on what you mean. If the meaning is a headphone that will never be beaten, no, I don't believe that. Advances are continuing to be made in headphones, amps and DACs, so I think the state-of-the-art will continue to advance. If the meaning is a headphone that you can keep for a considerable time because any alternative (within its price range) would just be a sideways step, then, yes. @Ham Sandwich has written many times here about how improvements to amps and DACs can improve the quality of a headphone like the HD-600/HD-650/HD-6XX. So, until you have exhausted all the potential (and pricey) amp/DAC combinations, those headphones could be considered endgame. Then you make the jump up to the next level, and so on.

 

I just noticed that Audio Advisor has the NightHawk/NightOwl ultra-suede pads in stock now. That's the first I've seen the ultra-suede pads available since the headphones were discontinued. I just ordered a pair for me. If you prefer the ultra-suede pads to the leather pads now would be a good time to get an extra pair.
AudioQuest Earpads for NightHawk and NightOwl Carbon HPs-Audio Advisor

 

Apple AirPods Max. They're basically perfect.

 

Not in hand (or on head) yet, but I've settled on the Audeze LCD-X and am pulling the trigger this week. I expect them to last 5+ years before I decide it's time to "upgrade." It'll be great if they take me closer to 10 years.

 

I like the Audeze headphones, but I actually agree about their sonic weirdness. The Audeze headphones aren't neutral. They have a midrange dip and wonkieness that is part of the Audeze house sound. Anyone looking for a pure neutral reference headphone isn't going to find an Audeze headphone to be the best choice. It is possible to get an Audeze headphone to sound more neutral with careful audiophile choice of amp and DAC and source. But a more true neutral sounding headphone will be able to get synergy with a wider variety of amps and DACs and source.

An audio engineer would do better bringing a more neutral sounding headphone with them to different gigs and jobs where they don't have compete control over what the amp and DAC will be.

With the Audeze headphones a slight change in the sonics of the amp and DAC can have a big change in how the headphones sound compared to neutral. While a more neutral sounding headphone will be able to much better weather changes in amp and DAC and source while still presenting a neutral sound.

A good measure of headphone neutrality is the HeadphoneDatabase measurements adjusted for the Oratory1990 Optimum HiFi target response. The midrange response of the Oratory target response is pretty much spot on with how I hear neutrality with headphones with typical headphone amps and source. When headphones deviate from that target response things can get wonky and more picky about amp and source sonic characteristics. There is more to subjective headphone sound than just frequency response measurements. Much more. The much more part is why I like Audeze headphones. But the frequency response can't be ignored when analyzing how close a headphone comes to neutrality.

I like the Audeze headphones because I've dialed in my system to have synergy with the Audeze headphones. If I deviate too far from that then things quickly begin to fall apart for that sonic synergy with the Audeze house sound. That synergy is a delicate balance. It is easy to lose it.

The reason I like the amps and DACs I like is largely due to how they have synergy with the Audeze headphone house sound. Amps and DACs that have a denser imaging in the midrange will have better synergy than amps and DAC that spread out the imaging and don't focus the midrange imaging towards the center.

I find there is a magic to me in the Audeze house sound. And I've been chasing that. For better or worse. If I can find a more neutral headphone that also has that sound I'd do better to chase that sound. It would be easier to find more amps and DACs that have synergy. But I haven't. So I'm still looking for synergy with the Audeze house sound even though it limits me in amps and DACs. I'm well aware of what's going on and what's limiting me in amp and DAC choices. I'm not deaf. Quite the opposite. But I'm listening for audiophile enjoyment, not audio engineering neutrality with different systems. I know how to listen around the colorations of the Audeze heaphones and other colored headphones when paired with transparent amps and source.

The HeadphoneDatabase has the Sonoma Model One headphones in the measurement database. Compare them to any of the Audeze headphones. The sonoma is more netural. The way the Audeze headphone differ is where the midrage wonkiness is with Audeze. If you are an audio engineer you will be much better off bringing a Sonoma system around with you to various gigs and jobs than bringing an Audeze headphone along with you. However, in my own home system I would still prefer listening to the best Audeze headphone I can get since I've got my amps and DAC optimized to have synergy with the Audeze house sound.

 

Thanks for the heads up! I must admit I am a leather freak- hee hee. My wife likes the suede so where I have 2 pair, we each have a spare set down the road. After all this time it is interesting they suddenly have a supply of these lying around. There are other AQ head phone users here, I am sure someone will your post and take advantage of this.

 

Koss Pro/4AA back in the early 80's. Then, one day back in the mid 80's I was wearing them while playing the drum kit, and something happened that caused me to snap! Unfortunately, the cans didn't survive. They were replaced by the Pro/4AA's that Koss was manufacturing for RadioShack back then.

Those RS cans were exactly the same as the ones I destr... err... I mean, the old Koss cans! They sounded great, and they were just as much of a head clamp as the old ones were. I used them on and off until around ten years ago, when they were finally replaced by the Beyer DT-880, 600 ohm cans.

Those old RS/Koss cans are still hiding around here someplace. I should find them, I'd be curious to see how they've held up after all these years.

You know, it's really too bad about those old Koss Pro/4AAs... but I'm feeling much better, now!

 

Superex

 

Firstly, your comments about 'sonic wonkiness' is the kind of thing that fills me with horror. The thought of trying to find a synergistic match among products with known colorations fills me with dread. It would be like having a table with uneven legs, and then trying to find homes with suitably matching floors! I get that 'listening for pleasure' is different to using an audio system as a tool, but, as with color-calibrated monitors, my preference is for total neutrality so that you can hear the sonic choices made by the artist/engineer/producer. If all parts of a system conform to a common goal, then interchanging is relatively easy/straightforward. If one part has a rising frequency response, for example, then it has to be compensated somehow elsewhere (unless one likes the result of the 'coloration' of course). That is one of the strengths of the Warwick systems, since they are end-to-end systems the synergy issue does not arise -- provided one likes the sound quality, of course.

Secondly, many thanks for the link to the Headphone Database. While there is a lot of useful data there, it would be nice if some of the additional info/data from his Reddit pages were also on the site. Firstly, and most importantly, a section on his measurement set-up would have been appreciated. He has the appropriate B&K, GRAS and Audio Precision equipment, but is he measuring inside some form of anechoic chamber and how does he decide which artificial ear/flat coupler to use and how many measurements are averaged (are headphones re-positioned each time?), and with what kind of smoothing? Although the Sonoma headphones measure well, I know from experience that measuring the Warwick headphones is extremely difficult due to the thinness/weight of the electrostatic panel -- the designer took issue with Tyll's measurements because his chamber was not quiet enough. If you have had the Sonoma headphones on your head with a good seal around your ears then just pushing on the earcups induces a crunching noise as the pressure of the trapped air deforms the electrostatic panel. This is why extraneous sound has to be eliminated under measurement conditions. Secondly, it would be nice if he could derive some sort of figure-of-merit from the deviation data (which he shows on his FAQ page for the headphones he has produced EQ curves for: index/list_of_presets - oratory1990 (reddit.com)). While in isolation it would not be an indication of absolute performance, it would help to find models which are closer to neutral than others. Time-domain and distortion measurements would also be instructive, because one may mistakenly think that all headphones will sound the same if the suggested EQ causes them to all measure within a fraction of a dB of his compensated target response (which would be a flat response from 20 Hz to 20+ kHz).

Thirdly, damn you for providing the link to the Headphone Database! Do you have any idea how many comparative combinations one can generate? It certainly throws up some interesting information. The HD-600 and HD-650 he measured essentially overlay each other up to about 7 kHz (they are tightly coupled up to 3 kHz). What happened to the HD-650's bass boost? The 600 and 650 certainly sounded different when the 650 first appeared. Is that still the case? Of course, in comparing the measurements one has to take the target response into account. As I am sure you are aware, there is still some disagreement about what exactly constitutes an ideal headphone target response. Harmon/Sean Olive have been at the forefront on this topic, but I know that the target for the Sonoma headphones was the designer's own speakers in a well-treated listening room. However, that creates more topic for discussion: performance/response of reference speakers, performance/response of room (T60, etc., etc.). The situation for loudspeakers is far easier. Of course, with the introduction of modern DSP it is possible to 'season to taste' though one has to be careful not to overdrive either the electronics or drivers when boosting frequency bands (use cut instead of boost wherever possible).

Sadly, after collaborating on the Warwick products, I put a team and a design together for a state-of-the-art headphone amp/DAC which would enable the user to EQ to taste (via simple tone controls all the way up to multi-band parametric EQ). Balance, volume and EQ were all going to be done in the digital domain using 64-bit fixed-point arithmetic. Unfortunately, our investor bailed before we could get the thing made.

Finally, I'll inject a little controversy. Assuming a wide bandwidth system, I do NOT agree with the notion of systems for specific music genres. I see comments like 'Grados are great for rock', etc. all the time. A system that can accurately reproduce the full audio spectrum is ideal for all music genres! One thing I learned very early on at CanJams is that far too many people want systems that are tilted up in the bass and the younger demographic wanted systems that had 'slam'. Again, when 'listening for pleasure' one can have what one likes, but it made me concerned about the gulf between reference design and expected (preferred) performance. On a neutral system, there is enough bass when playing Daft Punk, you do not need to add more! My fear is that there is a risk of a vicious circle being created. Youngsters like systems with more bass, so albums are released with more bass, which are then tilted up by the colored playback systems, and round and round we go.

 

I didn't intend to cause you distress or horror. But I do understand. It's the difference between doing audio as an audiophile hobby and doing audio as a professional job. As an audiophile hobbyist I can play around with gear to find special synergy with otherwise wonky gear. Can't do that as an audio professional doing audio engineering. A professional audio engineer needs neutrality that is consistent and predictable across different gear to do their job.

The Audeze headphones are wonky in the midrange. There is a midrange dip, but also a house sound tonality and presentation in the midrange that is also kinda wonky. But it's that flavor of wonky that I find compelling in its sound if you can get it to behave. With the right gear you can get synergy that makes it all sound more neutral and sound very neat and pleasurable. But it's not the kind of neutral I'd use to evaluate on-site recording or monitoring for audio. It's the kind of comfortable sound that I choose for pleasurable listening at home.

I've found synergy with the Audeze sound using Cavalli embedded hybrid amps (Liquid Fire, Liquid Crimson, Liquid Platinum). The Cavalli hybrids have a midrange density and a way of focusing the imaging of the midrange and bass towards the center (to fill in the gap that you typically get with headphones) that manages to compensate for the wonkyness of the Audeze sound. Those amps somehow manage to fill in the midrange so that I'm not bothered by, or really notice, the midrange dip that Audeze headphones have. The amps somehow manage to do that while also presenting the sound as more open and transparent and larger. The amps measure flat in frequency response from 20Hz to 20kHz (and beyond). So it's not an actual frequency response that does this. It's something else going on. It works. It can't be replicated with EQ.

I also just recently got a Cavalli Liquid Gold X amp. It's all solid state. Has the Cavalli liquid or buttery house sound. It is similar to the sound of the Liquid Platinum but without the tubes. It's what I would consider an all solid state version of the Liquid Platinum to sound like, but with a better solid state implementation. It is cleaner and more separated than the Liquid Platinum, but still with a very similar Cavalli house sound. Just without the tubes. But without the tubes it does not have the additional midrange and bass density that the Liquid Platinum has or the way of focusing the imaging as much towards the center. The result is that I consider the Liquid Gold X to be the technically better amp but it is just different enough that it does not pair well with the Audeze headphones. It is similar to the Liquid Platinum sound, but different enough that it lost the synergy with the Audeze headphones. For example, male and female vocals will sometimes sound wrong or miss the magic I'm used to when I use the Liquid Gold X. But those same recordings will sound very pleasurable and I don't notice any issues when I use the Liquid Platinum or Liquid Fire. The hybrids manage to fill in the sound and make it so I don't notice or don't care about the sonic faults of the Audeze headphones. While the solid state Liquid Gold X has a very similar sound but makes the faults of the Audeze headphones more obvious and distracting.

The Cavalli Liquid Gold X works better with headphones that are more neutral. The amp doesn't cover up faults or wonkyness or fill in the midrange the way the Cavalli hybrids do.

My goal is to use the Liquid Gold X amp to build an enjoyable system with a more neutral headphone. So I'll have an enjoyable system I can use as a more neutral listening reference. I'm still going to aim for pleasurable listening neutrality. But something more neutral than the Audeze headphones. I still want to stay in the style of headphone sound of planar drivers. I'm planning on trying the HEDD Headphone. It's not a true planar, but it might be close enough. Reviews and measurements say it is closer to neutral. I'm willing to take a gamble and give it a try. I'm also considering the HiFiMan Arya. It's a planar dynamic. Reviews and measurements say it is closer to neutral. But also with a somewhat soft sound. The Liquid Gold X already has a somewhat buttery sound. I'm not sure if a buttery amp will pair well with a softer sounding planar. But I'm willing to give it a try if I don't like the HEDD. Or I could end up with a different headphone. Maybe even an Abyss. We'll see. This would all be easier if I would just buy a Sonoma M1. It's planar. It's neutral. That would be too easy. Or the RAAL Requisite earspeaker.

Liquid Platinum amp at Monorpice: Monolith by Monoprice Liquid Platinum Balanced Headphone Amplifier by Alex Cavalli - Monoprice.com
Measurements for the Liquid Platinum: Monoprice Cavalli Liquid Platinum technical measurements

Liquid Gold X amp at Monoprice: Monolith by Monoprice Liquid Gold Balanced Headphone Amplifier and DAC by Alex Cavalli - Monoprice.com
Measurements for the Liquid Gold X: Cavalli Liquid Gold X technical measurements

 

Audio Technica ATH-AD900. I also bought for them a Graham Slee headphone amp.

Was never that happy with them. Have since concluded headphones generally don't 'cut' it for me. Only ones that got close were Audeze LCD-3.

 

Quite a few years ago I was into music but not fussed about the gear too much. A work colleague loaned me his Sennheiser HD 280 Pro and I quickly ran out and bought a pair. At the time they were much better than anything else I’d heard. I used them for years, hauling them around in a backpack with no case and listening for hours every day, and still have them. They are indestructible.

Now I have some Dan Clark Audio Aeon 2 Open headphones that I really enjoy for late night listening and in the home office. Being enormous and red they are a good conversation starter on work video calls. I bought them after demonstrating various models at the local shop, of the ones I tried they sounded by far the best to me.

 

My first pair of high-end headphones was the Sennheiser Unipolar-2002 electrostatic set. It cost me 1 weeks pay as a summer temp!

For me it was a giant leap in sound quality and a gateway to the hunt for even better sound quality.

Best regards

 

My first good headphones were some Sennheisers in the 70s, but can’t recall the model number. Had them for years, then eventually they fell to bits.

Didn’t use headphones then for a long time and had a pair of Sony MDR-P10. Sold them when I got a pair of AKG K712 Pro which I had for a couple of years.

Last year, I decided to get a better pair and went to HiFi Lounge to audition a number as they have a huge selection of headphones. Tried Sennheiser, Stax and Focal. After extensive testing, decided on the Focal Elear as they suited me better.

I must admit that they are a superb pair of headphones and I enjoy them. However, I am also now tempted with the new Focal Celestee closed back headphones and looking forward to reading the reviews on them.