# Could the Oehlbach cable be as good as Cardas, Equinox?



## Patrickhat2001

Could the Oehlbach cable for Sennheiser HD580/600/650s be as good as other well respected (copper) aftermarket cables such as the Cardas and Equinox? A few Head-Fi members own the Oehlbach cable, but, unfortunately few of them seem to have experience with other aftermarket cables. Does anyone have an idea as to how the Oehlbach cable stacks up to the Cardas and Equinox--if not in terms of actual sound then at least in the materials used--like the gauge and quality of the wire used in the cable?


----------



## Iron_Dreamer

I did not find the Equinox cable to be a major upgrade, at least not to the extent that the Zu cable is. Based on that experience. I would venture to think that the Meier cable could compete with the other copper cables, but not against the silvers. Of course give two otherwise extremely similar cables, one copper, one silver, I've always preferred the silver FWIW.


----------



## pabbi1

I have Oehlbachs and Moon Blue Dragon, and prefer the Moon just for extra instrument separation and detail, but the Oehlbach has a little more pronounced bass. I have also posted pics of stock, oehlback and Moon Blue Dragon 

here:

 No experience on Cardas or Equinox...


----------



## stryker

I have owned the Equinox and Cardas. I just got the Oehlbach two days ago so I am wating for it to burn in a bit. However, I can say right now that for $55 it is *definitely* a bargain compared to the other cables out there and the build quality is just fine. It's not as fancy looking as the others but it is well made. I think that for the majority of people with mid-fi sources, this is the cable I would recommend. I'm not sure I can justify $200 for a cable. The money I save can buy a nice pair of Grover interconnects, another cable to obsess over getting.


----------



## fewtch

I assume by mid-fi you mean "budget hi-fi" rather than "consumer grade" (the latter of which probably wouldn't be worth upgrading the cable for anyway).


----------



## sacd lover

I received my Oehlbach yesterday. Its far from burnt in, but already I am pleased, as its clearly better sounding than the stock cable. The bass is definitely stronger and the oehlbach cable also seems less edgy than the stock cable. Compared to my now well burnt in diamondback; I still like the diamondback better. The diamonback has a better midrange and currently sounds more open. If the sound opens up once the oehlbach breaks in that will close the gap. However, I dont think the oehlbach is going to be as good as the diamondback in my system; the midrange and rich tone of the diamondback are more to my preferance.


----------



## asdfeproiu9

Will the Oehlbach's reduce (or completely lift) the 'veil' of the stock HD650's?


----------



## sacd lover

I dont hear a veil on the 650 even with the stock cable; or atleast what I considered to be the veil on the 580/600. I can say the 650 is more refined sounding with better bass using the oehlbach. I think its a good cable and well worth the money.


----------



## funnytimes

Quote:


 _Originally posted by asdfeproiu9 _
*Will the Oehlbach's reduce (or completely lift) the 'veil' of the stock HD650's? * 
 

Thank you for making my day. This is the funniest post I have ever seen.


----------



## Alex Altorfer

Yes the Oehlbach cable is very much worth it. Distinctly better than the stock cable. No, there ain't no veil. The HD 580s ain't got no veil in my setup. I assume the HD 650s wouldn't have either.

 Cheers,
 Alex





 TEAM "WHAT VEIL?"


----------



## asdfeproiu9

Okay, whatever floats your boat. After my switch from the W1000's, the HD650's definitely seem to be covered by something. That's why I'm wondering whether to upgrade the cable now, later, or even which cable. In fact, I'm not even 100% sure I'm going to keep these headphones.

 The characteristic sound of the HD650 seems to be almost a polar opposite to the W1000's. Also, it appears to be more of a step sideways rather than a step forward. I suppose I have to give these headphones some more time though.


----------



## zeplin

even if the Mier/Oehlbach cable is close to the other more exspensive upgrades, (which from all accounts it seems to be) it is one of the best deals a person can ask for as far as tweaking your system and getting that last 5% to really shine. 

 asdfeproiu9,
 my impression of the W1000's compared to the HD650 is that what you hear with the W1000 is a slightly exaggerated sound that often times too bright, especially with acoustical instruments. the highs are simply not realistic and therefore make the Senns sound "less exciting." but, imo, this means that the Senns are actually closer to reality, but still with that warm, rich characteristic Sennheiser sound. the 650's also are almost completely free from that nasty thing called reverb where the driver housing along with other elements affect the separation and decay of the musical notes, especially the extremely fast, hard hitting notes wherein the W1000's simply mush them all together. again, imo, the W1000's and CD3000 (i see them roughly in the same family...not exactly alike, but similar in a lot of ways) have that nasal-like over-exaggerated-bright sound that i personally really disslike. i say you're making the right move in giving the Senn650's a good month to see wether you end up liking the that type of sound. if you don't end up liking them, at least you'll be able to say you tried in addition to having good judgement when comparing and contrasting other phones to it.

 for an example...
 at first, i hated my "stale" ety's with a passion. they were good but also lacked a lot. after about a month of an open minded appraoch (not forcing myself to like them), they grew on me like no other headphone has ever done. now, i hold them as high as and equal to my beloved HD650's!

 anyways, i just thought i'd help you draw from another person's experience in going from one sound characteristic to its opposite. it's a big move to make, but if you end up liking it more in the end, it is surely worth it.


----------



## Ross

I got my Oehlbach cable earlier in the week, as well as my new Senn 650s. I also have two pairs of Senn 600s and two Cardas cables (a 10ft and 20ft).

 The 650s, the Oehlbach cable and the standard cable (on a pair of 600s) were all left to run in continuously for 3 days from a tuner at high volume.

 I have been listening to the various headphones and cables critically during the last day.

 The result is that the Oehlbach cable is not a giant killer. In fact, I'm not even sure it's a midget killer. First of all, against the Cardas cable, the Cardas clearly blows it into the weeds. The Cardas has extended highs and lows, a natural midrange, and a liquid and sweet sound. By comparison the Oehlbach cable sounds dull and flat, with clearly limited high frequencies; the sound is a little grainy compared to the Cardas, and doesn't have the sweetness or liquidity of the Cardas. In fact the difference between two sets of 600s with one using the Cardas and the other using the Oehlbach cable was bigger than the difference between the 600s and 650s. I would take the 600s/Cardas over the 650/Oehlbach any day. (Fortunately I own both!)

 The more interesting comparison was between the 650 stock cable and the Oehlbach cable. Here I don't think it was such a clear-cut distinction. The Oehlbach clearly has a fuller, more substantial sound, but it loses a little in the highs compared to the stock cable and the sound feels as if it is compressed or restricted in some way. My feeling is that some may prefer the stock cable (at least on the 650s) compared to the Oehlbach, and I think I am probably one of those people.

 The conclusion was that the Oehlbach was a bit of a disappointment (especially after I thought so highly of the mini to mini interconnect which Jan ships with the Porta Corda), but it's not very expensive so worth an experiment. I haven't heard the Zu or other cables (apart from the red and blue Clous, which I don't rate) so the Cardas reaffirms its position for me as the best Sennheiser cable.


----------



## Sean H

Thanks for the impressions, Ross. I appreciate your honest opinion however I would see where the sound of the Oehlbach is after about 150-200 hours, it may open up more. 72 hours of signal is a fair amount of time for a cables dielectric to become conditioned but I've seen many cables take far more hours to break in and this may or may not be the case with the Oehlbach. Double the amount of break in the cable has seen or more and report back again if you have a minute, we'd appreciate it. Thanks.


----------



## zeplin

ross,
 very interesting! if anything, your impressions further prove that the differences between the two headphones alone (600/650) are pretty noticable and for the most part, are worth the upgrade. for those that think the HD580/600 are lacking that little bit of sound you wish to have, the 650's are the definite answer. also ross, if you think the cardas help extend the highs and lows, just wait until you hear what the Zu's can do with the 650's. the highs sparkle so much that you wonder how how the 650's manage to extend the highs without them sounding sibilant or harsh! the Zu cable also further texturizes the bass notes like no other. when you get the chance to try out the Zu's, don't let that chance pass you up...unless you would like to save your wallet some grief...they are very pricey, but well worth it, IMHO.


----------



## ipodstudio

Without any real experience, I decided to go against the grain and ordered a new Cardas cable to accompany my HD650s. I'll use it for a few months and then "possibly" order the Zu, just to see the diff. for myself. I'm concerned that the sources I'll be using with this setup won't really do it justice just yet.


----------



## Ross

Quote:


 I appreciate your honest opinion however I would see where the sound of the Oehlbach is after about 150-200 hours, it may open up more. 72 hours of signal is a fair amount of time for a cables dielectric to become conditioned but I've seen many cables take far more hours to break in and this may or may not be the case with the Oehlbach. 
 

 My experience is that cables tend to be 80-95% broken in within 48 hours of continuous use, and 98% broken in after 72 hours (these figures are not of course exact), which is why I considered it appropriate to review them after this period. I have never encountered any cables that took longer than this to run in, although I have listened to many, many cables over the years constructed of many different kinds of materials. Certainly, there will be some marginal further improvement with time, but I think you should be able to hear everything you need to know about a cable after 72 hours.

  Quote:


 if anything, your impressions further prove that the differences between the two headphones alone (600/650) are pretty noticable and for the most part, are worth the upgrade. 
 

 I'm not sure I actually said that. In fact, I don't really think the 650 is worth the upgrade unless you have lots of money you're trying to spend, or - like me - you have this anal compulsion to own everything. The 650 is noticeably different to the 600, but it is a small difference, and it is largely a non-musical difference: i.e. it sounds a little more substantial, a bit better defined spatially, a slightly more prominent midrange, but these are marginal changes, and they don't make the music any more enjoyable (just as, in my opinion, the 600 did not represent a _musical_ improvement over the 580s; I can happily sit back and listen to my 580s instead of the 600s without feeling that I am missing anything ... but I digress.) What I really meant to imply was that the difference between the 600 and 650 was so small that the difference between two cables was more noticeable. That said, my 650s probably still have some more running in to do (headphones and speakers tend to take months to run in properly, unlike cables).

  Quote:


 just wait until you hear what the Zu's can do with the 650's. 
 

 I'd be interested to hear the Zu's, but I have never liked cables with silver content. I find they have just the kind of treble extension you describe, but in an artificial way which I don't generally find attractive. Silver content cables (even when it is a small amount of silver) also tend to drain colour from the sound, in my experience. Now, I haven't heard the Zu's, so they may be different, but I have yet to hear a silver or silver/copper cable that doesn't fall into this pattern. For that reason I won't be buying the Zu's, but would love to hear them.


----------



## fewtch

Quote:


 _Originally posted by Ross _
*The result is that the Oehlbach cable is not a giant killer. In fact, I'm not even sure it's a midget killer. First of all, against the Cardas cable, the Cardas clearly blows it into the weeds. The Cardas has extended highs and lows, a natural midrange, and a liquid and sweet sound. By comparison the Oehlbach cable sounds dull and flat, with clearly limited high frequencies; the sound is a little grainy compared to the Cardas, and doesn't have the sweetness or liquidity of the Cardas. In fact the difference between two sets of 600s with one using the Cardas and the other using the Oehlbach cable was bigger than the difference between the 600s and 650s. I would take the 600s/Cardas over the 650/Oehlbach any day. (Fortunately I own both!)* 
 

It's interesting in that your opinion differs from the majority who found the Oehlbach to be a _major_ improvement over the stock cable (at least with the HD600s), and not drastically far off from the pricier Senn cables. 

 Of course, I should say that the very fact that different people have such wildly differing experience with cables in general only reinforces my skepticism and belief that cables are 99.999% snake oil -- maybe 100%. In other words you hear what you pay for (the cost determines the perceived SQ gain), or maybe people just hear what they want to hear.


----------



## Ross

Quote:


 In other words you hear what you pay for (the cost determines the perceived SQ gain), or maybe people just hear what they want to hear. 
 

 If that were the case, I would rate the Oehlbach cable over the stock cable (which I don't), and I would also rate the Clou cables as better than the Oehlbach and close to the Cardas (which I don't). I've also replaced most of my expensive Kimber Select, Nirvana and Magnan interconnects with cheap Chord Chrysalis and Cobra because they sound better to me in ways that I value, even though they cost a fraction of the price of my other cables. So much for the theory that you hear what you pay for.


----------



## fewtch

Quote:


 _Originally posted by Ross _
*If that were the case, I would rate the Oehlbach cable over the stock cable (which I don't), and I would also rate the Clou cables as better than the Oehlbach and close to the Cardas (which I don't). I've also replaced most of my expensive Kimber Select, Nirvana and Magnan interconnects with cheap Chord Chrysalis and Cobra because they sound better to me in ways that I value, even though they cost a fraction of the price of my other cables. So much for the theory that you hear what you pay for. * 
 

The theory is not debunked by a single person's opinion, but I appreciate your input on the matter.

 Given that the Oehlbach is technically better than the stock cable in all ways (OFC, better construction, thicker, better shielding, one piece plug, etc), what's your explanation of the impression you got that it's no better (or even worse) sounding than the stock cable?

 Edit -- actually, don't bother... voodoo can't be explained by rationality or science.


----------



## ooheadsoo

Well fewtch, think of it as republicans and democrats. Same facts, but WHOA different interpretations. I hear the difference with cables, but I don't feel it's worth paying for with my current income. It would be major bang for buck in other areas of my life. A cable or a bottlehead tube preamp? A headphone cable and an IC or sacdmod my cd player? No question which ones I'd go for...But if I had mucho moola, hey, I'd get both!


----------



## Ross

Quote:


 Given that the Oehlbach is technically better than the stock cable in all ways (OFC, better construction, thicker, better shielding, one piece plug, etc), what's your explanation of the impression you got that it's no better (or even worse) sounding than the stock cable? 
 

 First, I haven't said that it is no better. I said that it _was_ better in some ways - it clearly has a more substantial sound with a fuller midrange - and these differences could be accounted for by the different cable construction. But subjectively I thought that these improvements were outweighed by the restricted dynamics and high frequencies. I also said that many people _would_ prefer the Oehlbach cable All of this is consistent with a differently constructed cable. 

 Second, I offer no explanation for differences between cables. I am not an engineer, a physicist or a materials scientist. I hear a difference and I report it - explaining it is someone else's job.

 Third, for if you think that cables don't make any difference, why are you wasting your time in a cable thread?

 Finally, cables do make a big difference. As I said earlier, the difference between the cables was bigger than the difference between the headphones. If you can't hear any difference, then that's great, just save your money. But please don't tell me what I am or am not hearing, or that it is somehow more "rational" or "scientific" to ignore the evidence of your ears and brain in favour of your own particular prejudice that prevents you from hearing clearly audible differences.


----------



## fiddler

I've found the Equinox to be a pretty huge improvement over the stock cables on my HD600. I tried the Clou cables, and didn't like them at all, way too bright. I even preferred the stock cables to these. I later found out, after I had sold them, that Clou uses silver-plated copper, which explains the brightness. I think it's generally agreed that silver-plated copper often ends up sounding bright, or at least brighter. I found the same thing with my DH Labs BL-1 IC's, and they also use silver-plated copper. Similar sonic signature. Basically, in my experience, with cables you can narrow it down to two things, proper materials and proper construction.


----------



## Patrickhat2001

Fewtch,

 I welcome your skepticism (never a bad thing) but I wonder what your beliefs are when it comes to cables. Would you say that their is no difference in the sound between silver and copper cables? Do you believe the gauge of the wire used in the cable can effect the sound (up to a point, of course)? 

 I'm sorry to challenge you but I'm curious as to what, exactly, you are skeptical about when it comes to cables. Any sound engineer or experienced audiophile will tell you that the metal used in the wire of the cable (and in the connectors) will effect the sound. The same goes the gauge of the wire (again, up to a point). But whether those changes are positive or negative, well, of course, that's up to the listener.


----------



## fewtch

Quote:


 _Originally posted by Patrickhat2001 _
*Fewtch,

 I welcome your skepticism (never a bad thing) but I wonder what your beliefs are when it comes to cables. Would you say that their is no difference in the sound between silver and copper cables? Do you believe the gauge of the wire used in the cable can effect the sound (up to a point, of course)?* 
 

Rarely, and in very few cases.
  Quote:


 *
 I'm sorry to challenge you but I'm curious as to what, exactly, you are skeptical about when it comes to cables.* 
 

Mostly the claim that they make major, substantial sonic differences that are worth paying mucho dinero to get. Also, the fact that everyone hears something different (at least until they discuss it, at which case agreements emerge) indicates to me that the placebo effect is strongly operative here.
  Quote:


 *
 Any sound engineer or experienced audiophile will tell you that the metal used in the wire of the cable (and in the connectors) will effect the sound.
* 
 

False.


----------



## ooheadsoo

Oh come now, what if the cable were made of a tube of water? Made of plastic? Sound the same? There have to be some ground rules. Conducting electricity would be a good place to start...At the very least, anyone with a strong position on this issue has the obligation to have at least listened for themselves. You may think the difference is negligible, or it may even be detrimental. If you don't hear a difference, then you don't hear a difference. At the very least, be informed.

 As I often have said, even if it is placebo effect, _placebo effect works._


----------



## fewtch

Quote:


 _Originally posted by ooheadsoo _
*Oh come now, what if the cable were made of a tube of water? Made of plastic? Sound the same? There have to be some ground rules. Conducting electricity would be a good place to start...* 
 

Thing is, that's probably about where it ends as well.
  Quote:


 *As I often have said, even if it is placebo effect, placebo effect works. * 
 

So you'd pay $500 or something for what amounts to a bottle of sugar pills?


----------



## ooheadsoo

I wouldn't, but some people would. If $500 will cure "cancer" but all it really is, is a bottle of good ol' sugar pills, and I had cancer...I'd buy it! Good thing I don't have cancer...


----------



## fiddler

fewtch,
 I've seen it with my own eyes. I "blind" tested my girlfriend while I was experimenting with my own DIY cables. We both have well-trained ears, being serious music students and all. I had already done some listening for myself, and had come to some conclusions as to the differences between two particular interconnects. None of this was disclosed to my girlfriend. I told her "here, sit down, listen to this." then played her a part of a track. Then swapped cables, and repeated the procedure. She heard differences, and her impressions were strikingly similar to my own. Far too similar to be a mere coincidence. Mind you, she wasn't actually blind folded, but she's no audiophile... All these cables were just hacked together as test subjects, so they all looked pretty much the same. I'm not trying to convert you or anything, just sharing my experiences. If you can't tell the difference, then I guess you don't need to buy expensive cables. Simple as that. These differences are subtle-- they're not going to turn your Senns into Grados-- but to me anyway, these subtleties make the difference between a system that sounds great, and a system that sounds truly pleasurable . Again.. your mileage may vary!


----------



## ooheadsoo

Quote:


 _Originally posted by fewtch _
*Thing is, that's probably about where it ends as well.

* 
 

Well water conducts electricity. I don't think anyone would go so far as to say that a garden hose would make a good IC given "proper construction" and all that jazz.


----------



## ooheadsoo

Sorry fiddler, but technically, for these tests to be valid they need to be double blind, which is pretty dang hard to set up properly. That's why this forum is supposedly dbt free


----------



## fiddler

... and on the other hand, I think my test actually has more truth to it than a "properly" set up double-blind test, simply because if it's done "scientifically", it puts the test device (human hearing!) in a foreign, uncomfortable circumstance. Being living things and all, we can't function to the best of our ability when we're put in such a situation. In my test we were just sorta chillin', which puts our ears/brain in a far more normal state, and thus increasing the validity of the test. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Ever notice how your system sounds different in the morning compared to in the evening? Our ears are INCREDIBLY sensitive, but they're very moody as well.


----------



## fewtch

It seems I've gotten sucked into one of "these" discussions again 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




. This is not a good time for me to see someone slamming the Oelbach vs. the stock cable, right after I just ordered an Oehlback (but before receiving it), and it brought out my cable skepticism once again. There's no end to this sort of debate, so I'll shut up now and refrain from wasting everyone's time.


----------



## sacd lover

I am starting this one back up. I spent all evening listening to my senns switching between the Bayley Audio diamondback and the Oehlbach cable. I prefer the diamonbacks richer midrange but the oehlbach is a very good cable. I am finding it more neutral than the diamondback and it seems to mate best with my gilmore v2-se, but its still good with the ppx3. The diamondbacks more robust signature matches and mates noticeably better with my ppx3, so I dont use it with the gilmore amp. The only flaw with the oehlbach so far is that it still lacks a little treble extension and air. I do believe its beginning to open up, and once it does, I will probably never put the stock cable back on the senns. The oehlbach has a better bass and a smoother presentation than the stock cable already, IMO.


----------



## Sean H

Thanks, Earl. Keep us updated. These two cables greatly interest me and I want to hear how the Oehlbach shakes out.


----------



## donovansmith

The Oehlbach definately has a different sonic signature than the stock cable. I consider it quite an upgrade, especially given my tastes in music. Combined with the HD600 I have the best headphone I have heard so far for listening to industrial and rock the way I like to listen to them. Maybe the Zu or Moon Audio cables are better, but I'm not ready to plunk down $200 or more dollars to find out. If the Oehlbach restrict dynamics then I'm not hearing it, I find it more dynamic than the stock cable. I love what it does for vocals. They aren't the last word in treble extension or energy, but I wasn't expecting that anyway. And the bass, it's great. Very nice slam and extension. The soundstage and positioning is also better than the stock cable. I am very happy with this cable and really have no desire to upgrade to another cable.


----------



## Alex Altorfer

Quote:


 _Originally posted by donovansmith _
*The Oehlbach definately has a different sonic signature than the stock cable. I consider it quite an upgrade. If the Oehlbach restrict dynamics then I'm not hearing it, I find it more dynamic than the stock cable. I love what it does for vocals. They aren't the last word in treble extension or energy, but I wasn't expecting that anyway. And the bass, it's great. Very nice slam and extension. The soundstage and positioning is also better than the stock cable. I am very happy with this cable and really have no desire to upgrade to another cable. * 
 

I agree with you Donovan and I also feel the treble extension to be very satisfying with the Oehlbach. Of course, I haven't auditioned any U$200.00 cables and I have developed a preference for a darker or rolled off musical presentation (when I was a teen I loved boomy bass and screechy highs). I detect no restricted dynamics, which I also perceive as superior to that of the stock cable. I love what this cable does to vocals, smoothing them, making them more natural. The stock cable sounds grainy with vocals. The bass is even better now than when I first got this cable. It's now tighter and with greater definition, so some break in is detectable here.

 Cheers,
 Alex


----------



## Ross

I gather your guys are comparing the Oehlbach cable to the stock 600 cable. My comparison of the Oehlbach was with the 650 cable, which is an improved version of the 600 cable. I would expect the Oehlbach cable to be an improvement on the 600 cable (I will have to test this as well when I get some time) but the position is less clear against the 650 cable. I should add that even after a solid week of continuous break in, my Oehlbach cable is still sounding grainy and with restricted high frequencies.


----------



## Sean H

Quote:


 _Originally posted by Ross _
*My comparison of the Oehlbach was with the 650 cable, which is an improved version of the 600 cable.* 
 

Improved physically that's for sure, but sonically it's arguable. It's been confirmed the new stock HD650 cable uses the same conductors and configuration as the HD600 stock cable. The only real differences here are the heavier outer jacket which is bulked up some, the larger area of plastic near the connector leads and then of course the cable is terminated with a 1/4" plug instead of a mini with a 1/4" adapter like in the HD600 cable. I can see where there might be a subtle improvement due to the direct termination of the 1/4" plug but other than that it's the same cable with more plastic on it.


----------



## Ross

Quote:


 Improved physically that's for sure, but sonically it's arguable. 
 

 I will compare them tonight and post the results.


----------



## sacd lover

Ross, I am comparing two hd 650's so I only have the "new" stock cable. I have three cables currently, the stock, oehlbach and bayley audio diamondback. I also have two outputs on my v2-se so I can compare the two 650's in identical setups at exactly the same volume. I leave them both plugged in and can switch almost instantly between two of them. However, I hear the biggest change when I listen to a several songs and then switch to another cable. Once I get used to one cables signature, the change is more noticeable when I switch the other cable in.The diamondback is my favorite, next the oehlbach, and then a distant third the stock cable. Its very easy to tell the differences between the cables in my setup.


----------



## sacd lover

Rather than start a new thread I thought I would just give a quick update. The oehlbach has settled down and is consistently displaying its character. The bass remains excellent. The sound clearly has less harshness than the stock cable. The treble never has completely opened up(and likely wont) but the upper frequency presentation is very coherent and smooth. The build quality is very good for such a pliable cable. I think the oehlbach is a winner and a good choice for anyone who wants a cost effective upgrade for their senns.


 As a comparison, I still prefer the Bayley Audio diamondback overall, but the diamondback is almost 2x as much, and the difference in actual enjoyment is small. I like to listen to either one. The diamondback is the cable to have if you want a warmer sound though. The diamondback is also a little more open sounding vs the oehlbach, despite its richness. The diamondback is a thicker more substantial cable, but it seems to be easy to manipulate in my setup, and the build quality is very good with this cable too. 

 If you dont mind spending more for a cable like the diamondback, you do get a more open and refined sounding cable. The diamondback will really shine in a system needing a little warmth. At times the difference between the two cables seems slight. However, in my system, the diamondback always sounds slightly more open or less closed in
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 vs the oehlbach; regardless of the source/ amp combination. So if thats a priority with you, keep that in mind.


----------



## Nigel

Ross,

 Any updates now the HD650's are burnt in a little more?

 I would be interested to read your thoughts on the HD650 v HD600, especially using the Cardas cable.

 Best wishes,

 Nigel


----------



## gpalmer

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *asdfeproiu9* 
_Okay, whatever floats your boat. After my switch from the W1000's, the HD650's definitely seem to be covered by something. That's why I'm wondering whether to upgrade the cable now, later, or even which cable. In fact, I'm not even 100% sure I'm going to keep these headphones.

 The characteristic sound of the HD650 seems to be almost a polar opposite to the W1000's. Also, it appears to be more of a step sideways rather than a step forward. I suppose I have to give these headphones some more time though._

 

Yup, there's a veil, get a Moon Audio Silver Dragon cable and drive it with a Gilmore Balanced or Blockhead and that veil goes away nicely...


----------



## fewtch

For whatever it's worth, I'm now agreeing with Ross... I don't like the Oehlbach and have gone back to the stock cable (which has much better depth imaging, to my ears). It seems that most people do prefer the Oehlbach over the stock cable tho, more power to 'em.


----------



## Ross

Quote:


 Any updates now the HD650's are burnt in a little more?

 I would be interested to read your thoughts on the HD650 v HD600, especially using the Cardas cable. 
 

Nigel, I was at first having difficulty distinguishing the 650s from the 600s, until one night, without even thinking about it, I was listening to an LP and realised that I was completely mesmerised, and that this was exactly the sound I've been looking for from headphones all these years. It was then that I realised that the 650s were fully burned in, and have since compared them to the 600s several times, both using the Cardas cable. The 600s remain a fine pair of headphones, but are noticeably thinner sounding, especially in the midrange. The 650s have a fuller sound, with a more realistic midrange, and also have a wonderful liquid quality - a clear upgrade over the 600s.

 Fewtch, I understand the new Oehlbach cable will be available in a few months. Maybe you can sell yours and wait to try the new one.


----------



## fewtch

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Ross* 
_Fewtch, I understand the new Oehlbach cable will be available in a few months. Maybe you can sell yours and wait to try the new one._

 

Eh... it's a possibility, altho I'm really not unhappy with the sound of the stock cable (already sold the Oehlbach). People say it's a bit thin and I agree, but it's not an unpleasant sort of thinness... kind of airy and "romantic" sounding (for lack of a better term), and as I enjoy this sonic signature with most types of music I don't know if I'd want to pay anything to change it.


----------



## Steve999

Fewtch! You drank the Kool-Aid!!!

 AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHRG!!!!! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fewtch* 
_Eh... it's a possibility, altho I'm really not unhappy with the sound of the stock cable (already sold the Oehlbach). People say it's a bit thin and I agree, but it's not an unpleasant sort of thinness... kind of airy and "romantic" sounding (for lack of a better term), and as I enjoy this sonic signature with most types of music I don't know if I'd want to pay anything to change it._


----------



## fewtch

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Steve999* 
_Fewtch! You drank the Kool-Aid!!!

 AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHRG!!!!! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Hey... I thought I heard a difference (there were definitely differences in measurements between the two cables, although only at a very high impedance (putting the cable in a loop between soundcard line-in and line-out) and probably because of the Oehlbach's shielding).

 My mind is open to *possible* differences between cables... they're in the signal path, after all. I just didn't do any blind or double-blind testing...

 [size=xx-small]P.S. don't worry, the LSD has mostly worn off by now 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




[/size]


----------



## Steve999

LOL, well if you go to the barber shop too often, you're probably going to end up getting a hair cut. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fewtch* 
_[size=xx-small]P.S. don't worry, the LSD has mostly worn off by now 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




[/size]_


----------



## Nigel

Cheers Ross,

 I was kinda hoping you wouldn't say that about the HD650, coming from you there can be no greater endorsement. Are you still using the Chiara?

 Best, 

 Nigel


----------



## Ross

Nigel, yes I am still using the Chiarra as the main amp in my second system (though soon to be replaced with a Meier Prehead). 

 However, I have recently done a bit of an amp shootout with my Chiarra, Corda HA-1 Mk I, Headroom MOH (old version) as well as the Headline/Hicap (although the latter was only an unofficial entry, since it cannot be easily compared to the other amps, due to Naim connection difficulties). The result, to my surprise, was that the Headroom MOH came out on top, with the Corda HA-1 only slightly behind, and then the Chiarra a notch below that. I had been expecting the Chiarra to be the clear winner, especially after replacing the op amps with BB2604 and defeating the balance control. I was also surprised that the inexpensive Corda, which even Jan admits was not designed with ultimate sound quality in mind, sounded so good against the other amps, and almost as good as the much more expensive Headroom amp. I should add that all these amps are excellent, and I could happily live with any of them, and the Chiarra remains a favourite even though it did not appear to be a clear winner in this experiment. I will have to repeat the test some time to see if the results differ.


----------



## Nigel

Thanks Ross.

 I bet the members of this site would love to read a shoot out test between these amps.


----------



## boodi

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *zeplin* 
_ross,
 very interesting! if anything, your impressions further prove that the differences between the two headphones alone (600/650) are pretty noticable and for the most part, are worth the upgrade. for those that think the HD580/600 are lacking that little bit of sound you wish to have, the 650's are the definite answer. also ross, if you think the cardas help extend the highs and lows, just wait until you hear what the Zu's can do with the 650's. the highs sparkle so much that you wonder how how the 650's manage to extend the highs without them sounding sibilant or harsh! the Zu cable also further texturizes the bass notes like no other. when you get the chance to try out the Zu's, don't let that chance pass you up...unless you would like to save your wallet some grief...they are very pricey, but well worth it, IMHO._

 

was thinking myself to get the zu ..is it -or not- too much forwarding the midrange with the hd650 ?


----------



## Jan Meier

Dear Ross,

 "I was also surprised that the inexpensive Corda, which even Jan admits was not designed with ultimate sound quality in mind, sounded so good against the other amps"

 You will be surprised by your upcoming PREHEAD then!



 Jan


----------



## JaZZ

Hey Jan, I know what you mean!


----------



## Ross

Quote:


 You will be surprised by your upcoming PREHEAD then! 
 

I certainly hope so, Jan! I'm still getting the finances together for the Prehead ... soon. Once I've bought it, I will have a proper listening session of all my amps and post a full review of each.


----------



## PinkFloyd

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Ross* 
_Nigel, yes I am still using the Chiarra as the main amp in my second system (though soon to be replaced with a Meier Prehead). 

 However, I have recently done a bit of an amp shootout with my Chiarra, Corda HA-1 Mk I, Headroom MOH (old version) as well as the Headline/Hicap (although the latter was only an unofficial entry, since it cannot be easily compared to the other amps, due to Naim connection difficulties). The result, to my surprise, was that the Headroom MOH came out on top, with the Corda HA-1 only slightly behind, and then the Chiarra a notch below that. I had been expecting the Chiarra to be the clear winner, especially after replacing the op amps with BB2604 and defeating the balance control. I was also surprised that the inexpensive Corda, which even Jan admits was not designed with ultimate sound quality in mind, sounded so good against the other amps, and almost as good as the much more expensive Headroom amp. I should add that all these amps are excellent, and I could happily live with any of them, and the Chiarra remains a favourite even though it did not appear to be a clear winner in this experiment. I will have to repeat the test some time to see if the results differ._

 


 Hi Ross,

 The OPA 2604 is very chocolaty sounding in the Chiarra and I found the AD823AN made the Chiarra sound miles better. For the ultimate Chiarra experience try some OPA 627's on a browndog, replace the 2 x 470uF dubilier caps with ELNA Silmics and replace the 2 x 2.2UF caps with polyprop varieties.

 The difference with these components fitted is night and day and I'm pretty sure the Chiarra would see off the competition with these components in place 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 My original op amp review needs updated as I've tried tons more op amps since writing it http://www.rock-grotto.co.uk/opamp.htm I would honestly give the OPA 627 on browndog 10 / 10 and the OPA 2604 5 / 10 with the AD 823 going down to 8 / 10 in my updated review which I will upload over the next few days.

 Nigel has the OPA 627, ELNA Silmic 470UF and the 2.2uF polyprops in his Chiarra and it would be interesting to learn if he found the same major improvement these components brought about as I did.

 All the best.

 Mike.


----------



## greenhorn

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Ross* 
_...getting the finances together for the Prehead ..._

 

Ross: I had the Corda HA1... which I parted with only because I upgraded to the Prehead. 

 I hope you will enjoy the Prehead as much as I do!!!


----------



## PinkFloyd

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *greenhorn* 
_Ross: I had the Corda HA1... which I parted with only because I upgraded to the Prehead. 

 I hope you will enjoy the Prehead as much as I do!!! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	








_

 

Wait till he hears the Chiarra in full bloom, it'll make the prehead sound like a transistor radio 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 PM me Ross, I'll send you the recipe.


----------



## stryker

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *PinkFloyd* 
_Wait till he hears the Chiarra in full bloom, it'll make the prehead sound like a transistor radio 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			



_

 

Ouch.


----------



## Nigel

<<Nigel has the OPA 627, ELNA Silmic 470UF and the 2.2uF polyprops in his Chiarra and it would be interesting to learn if he found the same major improvement these components brought about as I did. PinkFloyd >>

 Yes, installing the OPA 627's & upgrading the caps brought worthwhile musical improvements. The OPA 627 raises the performance of the amp unquestionably. I believe Shaun Williams, the amp's manufacturer, highly rates this combination. Personally, I used to like the OPA 2604, maybe a bit too warm sounding but good value nevertheless, it always allowed enjoyment of the music but seemed to mask fine details. I forget the identities of all the opamps we tried but recall the OPA 2107 was very musically satisfying. I believe the OPA 627 is quite expensive as well but it does pay dividends with musical rewards. I've never heard the Prehead so can't pass comment but expect it to be a fine sounding product. I trust Ross & respect his opinions, if you read his posts on this and other sites he doesn't have any agendas, musical satisfaction is his goal he's not part of Team this or Team that, I also know he uses some of the finest source components built by man so if he says product A is better sounding than product B it probably is. But, I think I'm correct in stating, even with the finest sources, we are not talking about major differences & sometimes all this comparison can detract from enjoying the music. But it's great fun & certainly useful to potential purchasers of headphone amps. Having said that, I do have an agenda, I'm part of Team Chiarra & if our favourite is being tested against the world's finest we want her sounding her best. We want to win, so if you need any opamps Ross, we'll send you some down.

 Best wishes.


----------



## Ross

Thanks, Nigel - I'm not sure I can live up to all that, but I'll certainly try.

  Quote:


 But, I think I'm correct in stating, even with the finest sources, we are not talking about major differences & sometimes all this comparison can detract from enjoying the music. 
 

I agree completely - the differences we are talking about between all these amps are, in real terms, very tiny, and all are well-made, sound great, and are very enjoyable. 

 I might have to take you up on the offer of op amps, depending on what I can find locally.


----------

