The Next Step: Burson HA-160DS

burson_ha160ds_11

Perhaps it’s the fact that I have no need of a pre-amp. Perhaps it’s the smaller footprint. Perhaps it’s the price tag — almost $400 less than the D version. But I think it’s ultimately the sound of the DS that makes me enjoy it better than the bigger brother that is the HA-160D.

The Burson HA-160DS is a result of a request from Burson’s Hong Kong distributor who asked for a more streamlined version of the HA-160D. Many headphone users listen exclusively to headphones, hence voiding the need for a pre amp. I suppose the guys at Burson did some math and figured that they can offer a streamlined version of the HA-160D for quite a price reduction. Lose the pre amp out, the stepped attenuator, the multiple analog inputs, and as long as the amplifier and the DAC section remain identical to the $1250 HA-160D, a lot of people would find the DS version a better proposition. So there you have it, the HA-160DS, with the same amplifier and DAC section of the HA-160D, but at almost $400 less. Nice.

BURSON HA-160D AND HA-160DS COMPARISON

I have both the HA-160D and the HA-160DS side by side. The only thing that stands out to me is that the HA-160D is built using significantly thicker panels than the HA-160D (I’ll post some photos for you to see). The HA-160DS however is still the same thick panels and bold looks Burson box, far better than the average headphone amplifiers you see on the market. So, I probably wouldn’t make a big deal out of the DS’ slimmer panel.

Instead, let’s go back to that short bit on the opening paragraph where I said something about the DS’ sound being more preferable to my ears than the D. Two things, one being a slight change in treble response and two being the coherence factor. The DS has a 2 centimeters less forward upper mid but also a three centimeters more forward low treble. Yes, not exactly the best measurement unit to use for describing sound, but the idea I want to communicate here is that the differences are slight, but they are there and is clearly audible. Now I realize that this slight difference in treble response is a yes-no thing, some may prefer one version and some the other version, and so it’s quite relative.

The innards of the HA-160DS. Notice the thinner aluminum panel compared to the HA-160D and the HA-160. Still very solid enclosure though.

Burson always make very handsome looking amps.

 

MAKING A BIG DEAL OUT OF THE TRIVIAL

Not the part about coherence though. The HA-160D is equipped with the more expensive Burson Stepped Attenuator, and while tones are better defined, better articulated, and better separated, they don’t seem to blend as well as the tones from the HA-160DS, equipped with the lesser $20 ALPS Blue potentiometer. On less revealing headphones like the Alessandro MS-Pro and the Sennheiser HD580, it’s not really something you can pick up easily, but with the Sennheiser HD800 it’s quite noticeable. And since the circuitry are identical on both amplifiers, I do think that the difference comes from the use of the ALPS Blue pot on the DS.

You may not think that volume controls make that much of a difference in ultimate sound signature, but given the fact that the volume control is the first thing the input signal sees before going to be amplified by the amplifier section, it would affect the purity of the signal somewhat. The original Burson boxes have been famous for using the high quality Burson stepped attenuator (stepped attenuator being the widely used way for high quality audio volume control, though there are other more exotic methods), but this time the HA-160DS is fitted with a rather standard ALPS blue velvet potentiometer. Now, a lot of quality actually comes with the ALPS blue pot, seeing that the $2,300 Zana Deux amplifier comes with the ALPS Blue, and so is some other $2,000+ amplifiers I’ve tested. The ALPS Blue is a standard quality volume control for people who doesn’t want to spend $300-$600 for a stepped attenuator when building their amplifiers. I’ve listened to many amplifiers with the ALPS blue volume control, from $200 to $2,000 amplifiers, DIY or commercial products and I really have no complain with the ALPS blue. However, you just won’t get the kind of articulation and black background that you get with quality stepped attenuators such as the Burson’s attenuator, and that fact is getting into the sound of the HA-160DS.

Which is why, for some strange reason, the HA-160DS strikes me as a more relaxed version of the HA-160D. And though it loses some articulation and separation, it still score very good on the technicalities scale. The part that I love is that the HA-160DS has gained a significant improvement in the coherence of the sound which makes a big deal in the way the overall music is presented, at least to my ears. It is significantly a sweeter sounding amp to my ears, and while losing a little of the famous Burson punch and pace, the slightly relaxed sound makes it a better player with many different music. On the other hand, the HA-160D, still remains the better amplifier for fast aggressive Rock music, delivering the energy and the pace better than the HA-160DS. Notes are a little bit more punchy on the HA-160D and so it’s still my #1 amplifier for Incubus. Then when I want things a little more relaxed, I can plug the headphone to the HA-160DS. I’m so lucky I have both amps side by side. But keep in mind though, both Bursons are still clearly a fast-forward-energetic amplifier, so don’t start having weird ideas just because I say that the DS is more relaxed.

AND IT ALL BOILS DOWN TO

Okay, honestly speaking, that was obviously making too big of a deal out of small things. I realized that I just spent five paragraphs talking about minute differences between the two Burson amps that in reality have identical DAC and amplifier sections (three paragraphs on how a different potentiometer changes the sound). But it’s a review after all, and I need to write something just to make it look legit. In reality, there is nothing else to take note about the new HA-160DS except for the fact that it’s $400 cheaper than the HA-160D. And it all boils down to a $400 difference on what is essentially the same sound.

Awesome, right? 😉

The smaller footprint makes for a better computer companion. Add in a laptop and a headphone (with stand) and you’re on to some good looking, high fidelity, headphone listening.

 

GEAR USED FOR REVIEW

Sennheiser HD800, Beyerdynamic T1, Alessandro MS-Pro, Sennheiser HD580, Superlux HD661, Onkyo ND-S1, Macbook Air.

Rate this review

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

86 Comments

  • Reply November 5, 2011

    Donunus

    What headphone jack of the 160D were you using for the comparison? The two jacks on that thing sounds different already within itself. If it is more relaxed than the high gain jack then its a good thing since the low gain jack on the 160D is where its at soundwise IMO.

    • Reply November 5, 2011

      Donunus

      Or to rephrase that a little, does the new DS sound more like the high or low gain jack of the big 160D?

    • Reply November 7, 2011

      Anonymous

      Good point there, Donunus. I was using it with the high gain jack on the HA-160D since the gain level of the DS is the same (within some 1%) as the high gain on the HA-160D. 

      Also on the low gain-high gain differences on the HA-160D. The HA-160DS falls roughly in the middle of the two in terms of how relaxed the sound is. It’s still a different sound though (again, making big things out of small differences here). The HA-160DS is more relaxed but still livelier than the HA-160D on low gain. Also the difference in coherence factor still applies, even on the low gain HA-160D. 

      Let me know if you have any other questions, and thanks for asking this one. 

    • Reply November 7, 2011

      Anonymous

      Good point there, Donunus. I was using it with the high gain jack on the HA-160D since the gain level of the DS is the same (within some 1%) as the high gain on the HA-160D. 

      Also on the low gain-high gain differences on the HA-160D. The HA-160DS falls roughly in the middle of the two in terms of how relaxed the sound is. It’s still a different sound though (again, making big things out of small differences here). The HA-160DS is more relaxed but still livelier than the HA-160D on low gain. Also the difference in coherence factor still applies, even on the low gain HA-160D. 

      Let me know if you have any other questions, and thanks for asking this one. 

      • Reply November 7, 2011

        Donunus

        Wow thats great! I loved the low gain jack on the 160D but felt it needed more volume for my hd600s with quiet CDs on that jack. Now i guess the DS gives the best of both worlds in volume and quality. For those that need a preamp though, the 160D is worth every penny because its got one heck of a nice sounding preamp!

      • Reply November 7, 2011

        Donunus

        Wow thats great! I loved the low gain jack on the 160D but felt it needed more volume for my hd600s with quiet CDs on that jack. Now i guess the DS gives the best of both worlds in volume and quality. For those that need a preamp though, the 160D is worth every penny because its got one heck of a nice sounding preamp!

  • Reply November 5, 2011

    Anonymous

    Hi,
    Seeing as you tried the 160DS with the ms pro, would you be able to elaborate on this partnership? Is this a unit you would recommend for us ms pro users? I wouldn’t want to be getting any more treble out of this phone as I occasionally find it a little aggressive up there.
    Thanks

    • Reply November 7, 2011

      Anonymous

      Hi Shackb, 
      The partnership is very enjoyable with the MS-Pro. I don’t hear extra treble, and the bass is just right and punchy and tight. I was listening to John Mayer’s Continuum album which to me always feels a little closed in terms of recording soundstage, and the Burson HA-160DS and MS-Pro really brought the best out of that recording. 

      • Reply November 7, 2011

        Anonymous

        thanks Mike, great to hear. I haven’t listened to that CD in ages, gonna go chuck it on now 🙂

        • Reply November 7, 2011

          Anonymous

          You’re welcome 🙂

        • Reply November 7, 2011

          Anonymous

          You’re welcome 🙂

      • Reply November 7, 2011

        Anonymous

        thanks Mike, great to hear. I haven’t listened to that CD in ages, gonna go chuck it on now 🙂

    • Reply November 7, 2011

      Anonymous

      Hi Shackb, 
      The partnership is very enjoyable with the MS-Pro. I don’t hear extra treble, and the bass is just right and punchy and tight. I was listening to John Mayer’s Continuum album which to me always feels a little closed in terms of recording soundstage, and the Burson HA-160DS and MS-Pro really brought the best out of that recording. 

  • Reply November 5, 2011

    Lieven V

    Don’t forget to sign up for the contest guys, you could win a 160DS just like this one!

    • Reply November 7, 2011

      Anonymous

      Yes, win a HA-160DS just like this one. 

    • Reply November 7, 2011

      Anonymous

      Yes, win a HA-160DS just like this one. 

  • Reply November 6, 2011

    Phil Reece

    Mike, I caught a typo:
    “…the HA-160D is built using significantly thicker panels than the HA-160D.”

    I think you meant “HA-160DS” for the latter, but I’m not 100% sure.

    • Reply November 7, 2011

      Anonymous

      You are right there Phil. I must be the master of typos. 

      Thanks!

    • Reply November 7, 2011

      Anonymous

      You are right there Phil. I must be the master of typos. 

      Thanks!

  • Reply November 6, 2011

    Pavel B. Mishurov

    Thanks, interesting!

    But, Mike, can you give an advice? I’ve got Dr.DAC2 DX (PCM1798 DAC+AMP) and Senn. HD600. I wanna kinda move on. Is it just Burson 160 AMP for my Dr.DAC or sell doctor and get 160DS?

    • Reply November 7, 2011

      Anonymous

      Hi Pavel, 
      Although I reviewed the Dr. DAC 2 DX a while ago, I think the DAC performance would be roughly comparable to the Burson HA-160D/DS. The PCM1798 based DAC on the Dr. DAC tend to be a little more spacious, better ambiance, and a little more laid back than the PCM1793 based DAC on this Burson. 

      The upgrade you get will be on the amplifier section, where the Burson amp is significantly better than the amp on the Dr. DAC 2 DX. 

      But don’t take those comments as absolutes since I haven’t listened to the Dr. DAC 2 DX for a long time. 

    • Reply November 7, 2011

      Anonymous

      Hi Pavel, 
      Although I reviewed the Dr. DAC 2 DX a while ago, I think the DAC performance would be roughly comparable to the Burson HA-160D/DS. The PCM1798 based DAC on the Dr. DAC tend to be a little more spacious, better ambiance, and a little more laid back than the PCM1793 based DAC on this Burson. 

      The upgrade you get will be on the amplifier section, where the Burson amp is significantly better than the amp on the Dr. DAC 2 DX. 

      But don’t take those comments as absolutes since I haven’t listened to the Dr. DAC 2 DX for a long time. 

  • Reply November 6, 2011

    Pavel B. Mishurov

    Thanks, interesting!

    But, Mike, can you give an advice? I’ve got Dr.DAC2 DX (PCM1798 DAC+AMP) and Senn. HD600. I wanna kinda move on. Is it just Burson 160 AMP for my Dr.DAC or sell doctor and get 160DS?

  • Reply November 7, 2011

    Tash

    Hi Mike,

    Another very helpful review!  I’ve hankered after a Burson amp/dac for a while and this could be the one for me!

    How would you compare the 160DS to the combination of an HRT MSII+ (original version) and Matrix M-stage please?  I’m considering getting the Beyer T5P (I need a closed set of cans) and am wondering which might have the better synergy with these?

    Thanks v much,

    Tim

  • Reply November 7, 2011

    Tash

    Hi Mike,

    Another very helpful review!  I’ve hankered after a Burson amp/dac for a while and this could be the one for me!

    How would you compare the 160DS to the combination of an HRT MSII+ (original version) and Matrix M-stage please?  I’m considering getting the Beyer T5P (I need a closed set of cans) and am wondering which might have the better synergy with these?

    Thanks v much,

    Tim

    • Reply November 11, 2011

      Mike

      I’d also love to hear Mike’s response to this question.  How would you compare the HRT MSII+ to the DAC in the 160DS?

      Thanks.

      • Reply November 17, 2011

        Mike

        Hey Mike – would it be possible to get a reply?  Thanks.

        • Reply November 17, 2011

          Lieven V

          I’ll try to get him to reply 😉

  • Reply November 7, 2011

    jendol

    good review as always. how is the dac section compared to dacport lx?

  • Reply November 7, 2011

    jendol

    good review as always. how is the dac section compared to dacport lx?

    • Reply November 9, 2011

      Anonymous

      The DAC is quite comparable in performance. The DACport is more laidback, more spacious and less grainy. The Burson is fuller sounding, warmer, and more forward.

      • Reply November 10, 2011

        coolbreeze

        Hi Mike,

        If the 160DS’ DAC is roughly on the same level as DACPort’s (or DACPort LX), does the DACmini’s better than this one’s?
        In other words, say if I’m looking for a DAC upgrade from DACPort, what would you suggest?
        Stage DAC?

        Thanks.

  • Reply November 10, 2011

    Alex

    Hi Mike,

    On a similar note to a comment below how would you compare the 160ds to the DACmini cx since they’re both Dac/amp combos. Also which of those two amps works best with the lcd – 2; and the hd 800?

  • Reply November 10, 2011

    Joe

    mike..it’s interesting that you mentioned in this and the previous burson review that they’re warm..whereas from my brief experience with both, i think the dacmini was warmer.. the burson did have better prat, bass attack, and articulation..but think it’s slightly more on the bright side..very slight though.. i felt like there’s a little bit of emphasis in the lower treble/upper mid..

    anyway, do you have any plan to contact schiit and review their bifrost?? it’ll be interesting to see how good it is, considering their excellent amps and mike moffat’s experience..

    • Reply November 10, 2011

      Lieven V

      Hi Joe, we’re getting the Bitfrost in the beginning of next month. Mike will review that one

      • Reply November 10, 2011

        Anonymous

        Lieven’s right. Very excited about the Bitfrost.

        • Reply November 10, 2011

          coolbreeze

          Hi Mike,

          I think what you actually mean is Bifrost, not Bitfrost (w/o ‘t’), cmiiw though ^^
          The upgradable concept is a unique one, huh?

          • Reply November 11, 2011

            Anonymous

            Bifrost? First is Audirvana and now Bifrost. Lol thanks for the correction though.

        • Reply November 17, 2011

          Activebass

          Hey Mike,

          would it be possible to make the HD598 one of the headphones you test the Bifrost with? 😉 And then suggest to Schiit that they sell the Aasgar + Bifrost as a discounted combo…

          • Reply November 17, 2011

            Lieven V

            It’s going to be another month or so before we get the bitfrost…

    • Reply November 10, 2011

      Anonymous

      Joe,
      I have got to agree with you on the way you describe the Burson, the PRaT, Bass, Articulation, and the upper mid emphasis. The DACmini though, I don’t think it was warmer. Are you sure it was the DACmini you listened to, cause there is no way I can be wrong. Lol. Just kidding, Joe. 😉

  • Reply November 13, 2011

    eugenius

    The lack of a preamp out on this gadget is Apple level of callousness. 😀

    • Reply November 14, 2011

      Anonymous

      Well the HA-160D with the multiple inputs is supposed to be the preamp model. 🙂

      • Reply November 20, 2011

        eugenius

        The 24 position attenuator is unusable for power amplifiers with high gain, so this model would have been better for speakers. They could have let the superior model have a preamp. A preamp out is just a variable output, not an actual preamp.

        I’m grateful in a way, they avoided selling me one again. 🙂

  • Reply December 9, 2011

    Antoine Girault

    Hello Mike,for a hd650 ,do you prefer the burson HA-160DS or the CEntrance dacmini?Thanks,Antoine(i listen jazz and jazzrock).

  • Reply December 17, 2011

    Orion

    Hey Mike,

    You mention that the DS is a bit less punchy than the D and I’ve read another review that says it is lacking in bass a bit compared to the D. On a scale of one to 10, what would you give each of these amps in terms of bass, for comparison sake? I’m really drawn to this amp and considering purchasing one, but bass is of extreme importance to me. I would be using Denon D5000’s with the amp. They are naturally a very bassy headphone, but I still find they could do with even more bass boost for my liking. Any amps you could mention in this price range that would work well with the Denon’s to produce good bass, as well as being good in most other areas? Or do you think the D or DS would be adequate enough for me? The type of music I listen to mainly is rock / metal, but also everything in between including ambient etc.

    Thanks.

    • Reply December 17, 2011

      Mike

      It’s not lacking bass in the sense that the quantity is less, but more on the punch. This is a bit different than bass boost, which usually adds bass quantity more than anything else. The Burson is neutral and is not bass-heavy.
      Anyway the difference is very slight, like I said in the review.

      I think the Burson is good for rock and metal, what I’m not so sure is if the D5000s have a fast enough pace for metal.

      • Reply December 17, 2011

        Orion

        Thanks for the extremely quick reply Mike!

        So considering both versions are overall neutral, it wouldn’t be worth me paying the extra $ for the D over the DS? I have no need for the pre-amp and also like the fact the DS doesn’t use a stepped attenuator, but after reading this review:

         http://soundnews.ro/2011/12/07/burson-ha-160ds-review-%E2%80%93-english-version/

        and seeing that in the cons section it says “Less extended bass, weaker punch”, I thought it would be better for me to get the D version so I wouldn’t be missing anything in terms of bass.

        The D5000’s are just going to have to do their best for me regarding the pace for metal because I like them too much to swap them for anything else!

        Do any high endish amps come with a bass boost function or are they all aiming for neutrality? I ask because I really enjoy the bass boost on the Fiio E10, but I feel I want something a bit more expensive than the E10 to do the D5000’s a bit more justice, but losing the bass boost feature is going to be hard for me. I guess I should probably just try and get used to a more neutral sound that comes with higher end amps?

  • Reply December 19, 2011

    Arten

    Mike,

    Which one do you recommend for someone who likes mid and warm sound?
    I use HD650 anyway.
    This Burson 160DS, Graham slee Solo Ultra Linear, Woo Audio 6, Apex Butte or Headamp GS-1?
    Also, can this 160DS paired with other DAC as amp only unit?

    Thanks.

    • Reply December 21, 2011

      Mike

      Hi Arten,
      Sorry for missing your question. Mid and warm: Graham Slee Solo SRG II.

      Briefly:
      HA160DS: Warm, neutral, impactful, forward, punchy, fast pace.
      Graham Slee Solo SRG II: Mellow, relaxed, full sweet mids, smooth.
      Graham Slee Solo Ultra Linear: Mellow, relaxed, more treble presence, more linear and less mid-centric. The treble however is not as smooth as the SRGII.
      Apex Butte: Excellent clarity, soundstage, imaging, full mids but very clear, fast pace.
      GS1: No experience but the G-Lite has a good performance top-down, good bass, but quite dry an emotionless.

      • Reply December 23, 2011

        Arten

        Thanks Mike for the answer.

        I think it is clear enough that you recommend Graham Slee Solo SRG II.
        But when i’m reading through your other amp reviews, i found that CEC HD53 N also has the criteria i’m looking for.

        So how do you compare this  CEC to 160 DS and SRG II?
        I know that CEC’s price is in different bracket than the other two.
        But your explanation really got me sold.

        Thanks

        • Reply December 23, 2011

          Mike

          Arten,
          The Graham Slee Solo II is very good and highly underrated. But the CEC really blew me away when I listened to it.
          Cheers.

  • Reply December 21, 2011

    Arten

    Mike,

    Can you please help me? 😀

    • Reply December 21, 2011

      Mike

      Answered below. 🙂

  • Reply February 20, 2012

    Ethan

    Hi Mike,
    What different you heard between the HA-160DS with HE-500 and with HD650?

    • Reply February 20, 2012

      Mike

      Sorry? The HE-500 is a different headphone than the HD650.

  • Reply February 27, 2012

    Chris Allen

    Mike could you add the header and footer pics to the ‘Downloads’ section, I love them so much!

  • Reply April 4, 2012

    Austin Morrow

    So, I’ve been listening to the Woo Audio WA6 for the past month and after getting intoxicated from it’s rich and very lush signature, I went back to the HA-160DS. I keep forgetting how awesome the Burson is, it was like breathing in new life and fresh air. The HA-160DS scales up the HD650 very, very well, and I’ve noticed that the HA-160DS does a lot of things I forgot to mention in the review. Even the WA6 has a massive soundstage, I think that the Burson’s soundstage is layered quite well and has a good amount of air between each layer. You may not agree, just wondering to see what you think of this.

    • Reply April 5, 2012

      Mike

      I think the WA6 feels more spacious but layering is quite flat in comparison to the Burson.

  • Reply April 20, 2012

    Victor Yu

    Hi Mike, what is the different between HA-160DS and the amp only HA-160? In terms of sound

    • Reply April 23, 2012

      Mike

      If I remember correctly, the HA-160DS is slightly brighter.

  • Reply April 27, 2012

    Vivek Kushwaha

    Hi mike
    How does the Amp section of DACmini compare to the 160D & 160DS?
    Headphone I’ll be using is the Senn HD650.
    Centrance sells a Premium Stability Power Supply which delivers 2.6A of current, compared to the supplied power supply is that higher or lower?
    What effect does a more powerful power supply have on the overall sound?
    Which among the above mentioned DAC/AMP have a more open sound & wider soundstage?

  • Reply May 1, 2012

    謝文翊

    Hi, 

    I wonder how HA-160DS does with He-500.
    Do you think they make a good pairing?
    Thanks

    • Reply May 1, 2012

      Mike

      I recommend the Graham Slee Solo SRGII better for the HE-500, but it doesn’t come with a DAC.

  • Reply May 2, 2012

    vivek kushwaha

    Hi mike
    How does the Amp section of DACmini compare to the 160D & 160DS?
    Headphone I’ll be using is the Senn HD650.
    Centrance sells a Premium Stability Power Supply which delivers 2.6A of current, compared to the supplied power supply is that higher or lower?
    What effect does a more powerful power supply have on the overall sound?
    Which among the above mentioned DAC/AMP have a more open sound & wider soundstage?

  • Reply May 31, 2012

    Apogee

    How much more bass impact is there on the HA160D then on the HA160DS with the LCD2. Is it very noticable. And is the D more detail than the DS to spend the extra money on. And what is the soundstage like between the two.

    • Reply June 4, 2012

      Mike

      Quite a small difference, as I said on the review, I’m talking about very small differences between two amps that practically are the same.

  • Reply June 1, 2012

    Apogee

    how noticeable the added bass slam on the HA160D com paired to the HA160DS. is the difference big enough to pay for the HA160D for the added bass impact and added detail.

  • Reply June 6, 2012

    Mike

    Yes, shouldn’t be a problem, Kieran.

  • Reply July 30, 2012

    Khloe85

    Hi Mike
    I want to buy a Burson Amp/Dac but cannot decide whether to go for the 160D or 160DS.
    Is the difference in sound massive b/w the Stepped Attenuator & potentiometer or should I save some money and go for the DS. I don’t have any use for a pre-amp.

    Burosn recently introduced the soloist amp and I’m guessing in the coming months there might be an amp/dac from the soloist range too so should i wait for it.

    I’ll be using Senn HD 650.

    • Reply July 30, 2012

      Mike

      If you don’t have any use for the pre-amp I’d go for the 160DS.

      • Reply July 31, 2012

        Khloe85

        Thanks Mike.
        So I wouldn’t be losing anything in terms of sound quality??

  • Reply July 30, 2012

    Khloe85

    Thanks Mike.
    So I wouldn’t be losing anything in terms of sound quality??

    • Reply August 1, 2012

      Mike

      A tiny bit, as I’ve said in the review

  • Reply September 30, 2012

    Brian J. Moore

    How will this amp pair with the Denon AH-D7000?

    • Reply October 2, 2012

      Mike

      Brian,
      I never tried it with the Denon D7000. However, I tried the newer Burson amp, the Soloist with the Audio Technica W5000 and W3000ANV and they were great.

  • Reply November 19, 2012

    fpsoft

    Will i reach an high volume level with my Sennheiser HD600? I listen at very high volume (my ears whistle for some hours after, i know the risks…). And with the HD800 (that i might buy one day)? Thank. you.

    • Reply November 19, 2012

      Mike

      Yes more than very loud levels.

  • Reply December 23, 2012

    fsgb80v7cbwe

    Excellent website…

    the time to read or visit the content or sites we have linked to below the…

Leave a Reply