review of HP890 from headfi
QUOTE
Dear Headfellows,
Over the last year Grado headphones have received many positive comments on both Headwize and Head-Fi. I admit that this made me quite curious. These phones are very difficult to get in Europe and I was therefore very happy when a few months ago Headroom's Tyll Hertsens offered to send me a few samples. Soon thereafter I got a nicely packed box that contained both a SR60 and a SR225. For various reasons though I never tested these phones extensively right after arrival.
More recently I also got my first load of the newest models headphones from Philips, the HP890 and the HP910. These headphones got very positive reviews in several German HiFi-magazines and also made me very curious. I decided to test these phones for a review and thought this to be a good opportunity to listen also a little bit more carefully to the Grado's.
For reference purposes I also had a HD600 and a (modified, driven at 120 Ohm) DT931 at my disposal.
To verify my own conclusions I later also asked Harald Graupner to listen to all phones. I compared his comments to my written notes and they were surprisingly similar. This report can therefore be read as a review by the two of us.
All headphones were given a decent break-in of at least 48 hours before testing. The reference headphones are the personal copies of Harald (HD600) and me (DT931) and have a long history of regular use.
GRADO SR60
The first impressions of both Grado's weren't very favourable. I really don't mind that the Grado boxes look rather cheap as they are very effective in protecting their contents but the phones themselves also look and feel cheap. Sorry, but it has to be said. Flimsy plastic, a very simple headband covered with a plastic leather-imitation, and earpads that don't look very inviting. The earcups are rotating and rotating and rota.....
First sonic impressions also weren't very positive. Even although I knew that these phones improve considerably during break-in I wasn't very charmed. I guess that's the major reason why it took me so long to do more extensive listening.
The SR60 came with the comfy-pads and I had no troubles wearing these phones. Even after break-in I still wasn't charmed by their sound though. These headphones have a rather pronounced treble and thereby high-pitched instruments female voices are placed quite upfront whereas low-pitched bass instruments are placed at a large distant. As a result the soundstage is not very natural. The bass also sounds rather muddy. The major complaint, however, was that the drivers were mismatched by 1.5 dB (measured with my sound level meter at 1 kHz) The left driver was clearly louder than the right one. Impedances of both drivers were equal within 1%. Not a good sign as far as quality control is concerned.
Nonetheless, considering a regular list price in the US of $69,- I guess these cans can be considered a nice buy. In Europe Grado's are way more expensive (nearly twice the US-price) which seems rather exaggerated given the quality of the mechanical construction.
I admit that I didn't listen very much to the SR60. One of the reasons is that the other phones simply sounded much better.
GRADO SR225
As far as looks and construction are concerned the two Grado phones are very similar. The major difference is, that the SR225 has different drivers inside and comes with the doughnut-shaped earpads. Apparently these pads do not muffle sound as much as the comfy pads but they are also less comfortable. Actually, I found their fit rather irritating. I also must admit though, that I'm very spoiled with my own regular system (DT931) which has very large velvet earpads.
The SR225 has a rather pronounced treble and a somewhat recessed bass. Tonally all instruments and voices seem to be tuned a little bit higher than on the other headphones. Both Harry and I felt that the sound was uncolored and fast but also rather aggressive. They're not for comfortable listening (both sonically and for fit) but for people that want to hear all the inner details.
The US list-price is $195,-. Sonically this price seems to be justified but from a mechanical point it's rather expensive.
PHILIPS HP890
When I got my first boxes with Philips headphones I thought WOOWW!! These boxes looked great. Very thick and sturdy cardboard and a window that can be closed with a cardboard flap that shows its contents. It's so much better than all those cheap Grado, Beyerdynamic, AKG and Sennheiser boxes. The only boxes that feel better are those of HD600, CD3000 and the like. However, these phones cost considerably more than the $100,- of the HP890.
More joy came up when I started to unpack this phone. The finishing was exquisite. Big blue-velvet earpads, a beautiful self-adjusting headband and a high quality one-sided cord that is connected to the phone by a small 3.5 mm stereo-plug. Most amazingly; all parts seem to be mechanically connected by little screws. No cheap snap-in locks!
As a little extra there's also a nice looking headphone stand added to each HP890.
All in all, mighty impressive, showing love for the smallest detail.
The HP890 is a very big headphone. In size it's very similar to the Sony CD3000 but it's an open system. Inside the drivers are slightly angled (similar to that of many Sony headphones, probably to improve soundstage. Its size made me a little bit mistrusting. The larger the phone, the larger the surfaces, the stronger mechanical resonances and the lower the comfort level.
To start with, however, comfort level was extremely high. The pads are not equally thick at the circumference (like they are with most other headphones) but ergonomically shaped. Thus pressure is optimally divided and you can wear these phones for hours and hours. These phones are big but that's only a problem if you take a look at the mirror.
Sonically these phones are a real hit. Out of the box they seemed a bit harsh and muddy at the low end but after a decent break-in they really started to shine. Tonally very close to the HD600 but with a slightly stronger treble these headphones were pure joy. The bass wasn't as clear and tight as that of the DT931 and that of the HP910 (to be discussed later) but could well stand against that of the HD600! Harry and I (and Harry's girlfriend Barbara) had the impression that it would be very difficult to tell the differences between HD600 and HP890 if we wouldn't have had the opportunity of a direct A-B comparison. The HD600 goes a little bit deeper and is slightly warmer (more recessed hights) but differences were surprisingly small. The HP890 shows a slight edge of hollowness (similar to the HD590) but is a phone that all the three of us enjoyed tremendously.
Philips HP910
The box of the HP910 is very similar to that of the HP890, just not as big. Not only is the headphone itself smaller but it also doesn't come with a headphone stand. It's a pity and difficult to understand as this phone represents the top-of-the-line of Philips.
At unpacking this phone we had the same joy as with the HP890. Very well build, high quality materials and fine finishing. Again a one-sided cord (not removable!) and no snap-in but small screws. My only complaint is the rather futuristic looking of this phone but I guess people younger than I will love it. I admit to be rather conservative in my tastes.
The HP910 has a padding very similar to that of the HP890 and comfort is equally high. Pure joy for hours of listening.
Tonally the HP910 is brighter than the HP890 and very close to the DT931 (at 120 Ohm). Also its bass is tighter and faster than that of the HP890 and of the HD600. The DT931 is a little bit more airy, the HP910 is a little bit more upfront and sometimes a little bit sibilant. Its soundstage is also a little bit more 1-dimensional (also compared to the HP890 with its angled drivers). Harry and I still preferred the (modified!) DT931 but the margin was small. If you want to put the headphones in order of brightness:
HD600 .. HP890 .. HP910 .. DT931 .. SR225.
The differences between the first four headphones are rather small. The distance between DT931 and SR225 is more pronounced.
RESUME.
While testing these headphones Harry and I were met with a number of surprises.
A negative surprise was the rather poor build quality and low comfort level of the Grado headphones. Given the many positive reviews on Headwize and Head-Fi we had high expectations of these phones but were rather disappointed. The SR225 is a nice headphone if you like an aggressive sound but it simply wasn't up to our tastes. Harry will try to sell it on Headwize or Head-Fi. We also want to get rid of the SR60 but it can't be sold because of the driver mismatch. If someone needs some spare parts for his own headphone he can contact me. The phone is for free, you only have to pay shipment costs (note that the comfy pads will be sold together with the SR225 though).
Positive surprises came from both Philip headphones. Excellent build-quality, very nice sound and low prices make these phones to real bargains. We preferred the HP910 but other people might prefer the warmer sounding HP890. Both are highly recommended though. Actually, Harry labeled both headphones as "BEST BUY"
Note:
All phones were tested with a CORDA HA-1 headamp at zero Ohm output impedance (except for the DT931 at 120 Ohm). At 120 Ohms all phones started to sound less bright and warmer. Especially the SR225 seems to benefit from an increased output impedance (in our opinion) but also the HP910 might fit your taste better. Its bass gets a little bit loose though.
The HP890 and HD600 do not benefit at all from an increased output impedance. They both became rather muddy.
A few weeks ago I had a conversation with one of the chief designers of Sennheiser. He told me that the HD600 has been explicitly designed to work at a low output impedance. These phones need a high damping factor to absorb the kinetic energy of the moving membrane when the signal changes. The membranes of most other headphones (like the DT931) are not dampened by the electromotoric force but by the air column right behind the membrane. Thereby these headphones are less affected by the output impedance of the headphone jacket. however, the disadvantage of air-damping is, that non-linearities are introduced at higher volumes. The HD600 explicitly needs a low-output impedance headphone jack as found on dedicated headphone amps in order to sound optimal.
Cheers,
Jan
From : Jan Meier
Added on February 11, 2007, 10:14 amanother also from headfi
QUOTE
Philips 890 (and 910, kind of)
As some of you know, Tuberoller sent me his Philips HP890 and 910 so that I could provide my impressions on the two headphones. I finally had a chance to give them both a good listen, and here are my thoughts. I apologize that this "review" isn't as thorough as some of my past reviews, but work and time constraints reduced the amount of time I had to write this up (and no pictures).
INITIAL UNPACKING IMPRESSIONS
I was actually quite impressed with both the packaging and built of these headphones. The packaging was easily the best "cardboard box" packaging I've ever seen for a pair of headphones. I won't go into their design and construction, since that has been done quite well and quite extensively here on Head-Fi; suffice it to say that both headphones are well-built and appear to be quite sturdy.
One thing that amazes me: the HP910 are supposed to be Philips' "top of the line" headphones. They are advertised as such, and they cost more than the 890. However, to me, the 890 are clearly constructed better and, as I'll explain below, are both more comfortable and much better sounding than the 910. The 890 also come with a pretty nice headphone stand.
HP890 vs HP910
I'll say right off the bat that I much preferred the HP890 to the 910, and thus I will spend much of this "review" talking about the 890. However, before comparing the HP890 to other heapdhones, I wanted to compare the 890 and 910 to each other.
In terms of comfort, the 910 are a bit more comfortable on the top of the head, while the 890 are more comfortable everywhere else. The 890 are more comfortable, overall, to me, and actually feel a bit like AKG K501 with bigger, softer pads (and they're a bit heavier).
In terms of sound, the 910 are what I would call a dry and bright headphone. They are quite cold in their presentation, due to a recessed midrange and emphasized treble. The bass is has fairly good extension, and is actually pretty tight for a headphone in this price range. However, overall, the 910 have a sound that is a bit unbalanced, even "hollow" sounding. Soundstage is decent but not great. Come to think of it, the 910 are a little bit like the Sony MDR-V6/7506, except that the Sony headphones are closed. The V6/7506 have more of a "closed" sound, but a better overall balance, despite their recessed midrange.
The 890 are almost at the other extreme. They are definitely warmer than the 910, with a much more pronounced midrange and an upper/mid bass that is a bit looser. The treble isn't spectacular -- it's a bit recessed -- but IMO it's much less recessed than the 910 is bright. In other words, the 910 errs on the bright side, while the 890 errs on the recessed side, but less so. The bass on the 890 extends a bit more than the 910, and is a bit more flat, but is definitely not as tight. The soundstage on the 890 is quite good (better than on the 910). While both the 890 and 910 are "open" headphones, the 890 definitely attenuate more external sound.
Interesting note: while listening to the 890, I kept thinking "Sony 1700" -- the 890 and the 1700 are *very* similar in their presentation. However, I actually preferred the 890 to the 1700 due to its better treble (I found the 1700 to have extremely poor treble).
Summary: I would say that the 910 are colder but more precise, while the 890 are warmer but a bit loose in the bass. Overall, I clearly preferred the errors of the 890, simply because they 910 was quite fatiquing to listen to for extended periods. To be honest, unless you really prefer a "brighter" sound, I can't see why anyone would buy the 910 over the 890. The 890 are more comfortable, seem to be built better, come with better accessories, and I personally prefer their sound to that of the 910. The only "advantage" the 910 have, IMO, is that the bass on the 910 is a bit tighter. However, I would much prefer a bit of boominess in the bass if it means getting much better midrange and treble that isn't so painful.
COMPARISONS WITH OTHER HEADPHONES
I compared the HP890 to several other heapdhones, both amped and unamped: using an amp, I compared them to the Senn HD600 and Sony MDR-V6/7506. Off a portable CDP, I compared them to the V6/7506 and Koss KSC-35. (I couldn't compare them to the HD600 because I didn't have an adapter to use the Clou cables with a mini headphone jack.) For the comparisons I listened to a variety of music, including classical, jazz, acoustic guitar/vocal, electronica, rap, and rock.
AMPED COMPARISONS:
HP890 vs HD600
I said above that I found the 890 to be more comfortable overall than the 910. That being said, the 890 are still quite uncomfortable to me over the long haul. They put much of the weight of the headphone on the rubber band across the top of the head. The HD600, on the other hand, are lighter overall, and split the weight between the padded headband and the earpads. Some people feel that the HD600 "pinch" the head too much; after adjusting mine to reduce the pinch, I much prefer that the weight be split between the top of the head and the ears as the HD600 do, rather than all on the top of the head. But this is a matter of preference, and many people find the 890 to be extremely comfortable.
In terms of sound, I compared the two headphones using a Sony 333ES SACD player and Max 2001 amp. This is probably a decent test of "the best each can do" given the source and amp. The Senns had Clou Red cables.
In this setup, the treble of the HD600 is much, much clearer; the 890 is actually a bit veiled in the treble with a midrange that covers some of the detail. The HD600 has tighter, more extended bass, but the bass on the 890 is just a bit more "impactful" -- more visceral. Both headphones provide a very good soundstage; however, the HD600 has a bit more resolution. In other words, on both headphones the soundstage is quite large; however, with the HD600, you can easily pinpoint different instruments across the soundstage, while the HP890 have more of a left-right presentation (but it is still quite good for a headphone in its price range).
Overall, with a good source and amp, I would say that the 890 are decent headphones for rock/pop/rap lovers -- they have good midrange, good bass extension that is a bit boomy/visceral, and treble that is rolled off enough to counteract the excessive treble present in many such recordings. However, for classical, jazz, and acoustic music, they simply don't have the kind of detail and resolution that the HD600 have. For example, listening to acoustic guitar, the plucking of individual strings gets blended together/smoothed over compared to top-end headphones. If you have invested in a good system, the extra $100 - $125 ($95 vs. $210) is clearly worth it. In fact, given that the HD580 offer performance approaching the HD600 for $150, and the AKG K501 are only around $120, if you have a good source and amp, the 890 isn't really a good choice IMO.
HP890 vs. V6/7506
I then compared the 890 to the Sony V6/7506, again using the ES SACD player and Max 2001 amp. First, a note on comfort: I have "smaller" ears, it appears, and find the V6/7506 with Beyer pads to be more physically comfortable over long-term listening than the 890. Some will disagree, but I thought I'd give my opinion. Also, being closed, the V6/7506 block significantly more external noise.
In terms of sound, the V6/7506 have bass that is clearly flatter, tighter, and more extended. That's probably obvious, given that the V6/7506 have this advantage over almost every other headphone. They also have significantly more treble (in extension, level, and clarity). However, as has been pointed out many times before, the treble tends to be a bit analytical. The 890, on the other hand, has sigificantly more midrange, with a rolled-off treble and bass that is slightly loose. The 890 have an "open" soundstage, while the V6/7506 are typical closed headphones in this respect.
In fact, apart from both headphones having good bass extension, they are almost completely opposite of each other:
V6/7506
Treble: clear, a bit rough
Midrange: recessed, sharp, "artificial"
Bass: extended, flat, tight
Soundstage: narrow
HP890
Treble: recessed, overly smooth
Midrange: prominent, smooth, sometimes muddy
Bass: extended, fairly flat, a bit loose
Soundstage: wide
Overall, these factors really differentiate the two cans: the V6/7506 are very clear, with tight, accurate presentation that can come off as being too cold and analytical; the 890 are much warmer, with a more musical presentation, but one that can come off a bit muffled. For vocals and/or acoustic music, the V6 are practically unlistenable to me: they just don't have the midrange. The 890 are clearly better for these types of music. For electronic music, especially without vocals, the V6/7506 is clearly a better choice. The excellent bass response and better highs with a slightly recessed midrange are a perfect match. For classical and jazz, it depends on the styles you like. If you want deep bass extension and lots of detail, the V6 are a better bet. If you like a "warmer" sound and don't mind missing a bit of top-end, the 890 will probably make you happy. For rock, R&B, and pop, it again depends on what you're looking for, and it mostly depends on midrange and whether you want cold detail or warm musicality.
As a side note, the question of V6/7506 vs. 890 for gaming came up in another thread so I tried them both. The isolation and clarity of the V6/7506 led me to prefer them for computer gaming. On the other hand, if you have a sound card that is very bright/grainy, the 890s tonal balance may be a good choice for smoothing that harshness out.
UNAMPED COMPARISONS
To compare the headphones with a weak source, I used a Panasonic SL-CT570 portable CD player (with freshly charged batteries and the AA battery pack attached).
HP890 vs. V6/7506
Actually, my comparison of these two headphones above (amped) held true unamped. This isn't too surprising since both the V6/7506 and the HP890 are fairly easy to drive. The V6/7506 are a bit easier to drive, and thus were able to achieve louder volumes out of the portable, but both were plenty loud without distorting. So you can use the conclusions above for these two headphones even if you won't be using an amp.
HP890 vs. KSC-35
This is a bit of a weird comparison, since the KSC-35 are the quintessential portable headphones, while the 890 are headphones that most people would never dream of using portably because of their HUGE size. However, both are headphones that can be driven well from a weak source, and both are often touted as great cans for the money ($30 for the KSC-35, $100 for the 890). The 890 aren't quite as efficient as the KSC-35, but are still able to be driven well by a portable CD player or MD player. So I thought it was worth a shot.
The 890 are a bit more recessed, with less detail. The 890 definitely have a warmer sound, but given that the KSC-35 are often described as being slightly warm, this is not necessarily better (i.e., they can come off as too warm). The KSC-35 have slightly clearer midrange and treble (which you might expect given much smaller drivers).
The 890 have a bit better bass extension -- while the KSC-35 have very good bass for their size, they simply don't extend as deep as the 890's much larger drivers. In addition, as with most small portable headphones, the upper bass on the KSC-35 can sound a bit emphasized when compared to the 890, which has a smoother transition from the bass to the mids. (On both models, the upper bass can be a bit muddy compared to some of the higher-end headphones; however, keep in mind what I'm comparing them too.) The soundstage is definitely wider on the 890, as well.
My opinions on the comfort of the KSC-35 are well-known (I like them a lot ). I would much rather listen to the KSC-35 for hours at a time, simply because of their comfort and light weight.
CONCLUSION
I hope the impressions above give you some insight into the overall sound of the Philips cans, as well as some comparitive perspective. I would say that if you don't have an amp, but want a full-size headphone, the HP-890 are fairly good for the money provided that you like their overall sound. They have a very distinct sound to my ears, and anyone purchasing them should consider that accordingly. Their strengths are their efficiency, soundstage, and (to most people) comfort. Their "pretty good" points are their bass (extended, but just a bit loose) and midrange (smooth but a bit emphasized, and can get muddy on some types of music). Their bad points are treble/detail, selectivity, and the fact that they are too warm and smooth on some types of music. They are definitely non-fatiguing (unless you're the type who gets fatigued from too much warmth ). They also match well with computer sound cards, which tend to have a harsh, bright sound.
I don't see the HP890 as being a strong contender for those people who have a good source and an amp: for those people, I think the HD580 are better them in every way for not too much more money. The AKG K501 are also significantly better in every way except for bass extension. From what I have read about the Senn 495, it also may be a better "amped" headphone (at half the price).
Overall, I would consider the 890 to be a decent entry into the mid-level class of headphones: those that give a taste of what very good headphones can sound like, but that ultimately don't reach the level of "recommended cans." While they have characteristics that set them apart from some of the lesser headphones out there, they also have a few flaws that separate them from the "big boys."
P.S. The obvious question that is sure to arise: "If I don't have an amp, and want a good full-size headphone for around $100, what are my alternatives?" I actually prefered the 890 to the Sony 1700 ($150) because of a better soundstage and slightly better treble. Comparing them from memory to the Grado SR60 ($70), I think you're really looking at two very different styles of sound. If you want something very smooth with good mids, the 890 would be a better choice. If you want something with impact and better detail, the SR60 (or the SR80 at $100) would be the way to go. The V6/7506 comparison above shows a similar difference. I haven't heard some of the other contenders in the $100 range: the Senn 497, Senn 280, etc., but these seem to be as recommended as the 890 are on Head-Fi, so they might be worth considering as well. If you're willing to spend a bit more, the Beyer DT250-80 are clearly better, with a warm tone but better detail. I'm sure others can recommend a few other $100 amp-not-necessary headphones that you should also consider.
From : MacDEF
This post has been edited by PcWork: Feb 11 2007, 10:15 AM 
Feb 10 2007, 01:12 PM
Quote
0.0280sec
0.60
6 queries
GZIP Disabled