The Philips SHP9000 is an open design that is comparable in size to our popular high-end models, the AKG K701 and HD650. It uses an all-inclusive ear-sized earmuff design, while the Philips SHP starts at 8500 with a built-in speaker unit. The design of the bevel can theoretically point better to the human ear, which is also very important for the internal structure design of the entire earphone.
(Philips Philips SHP9000 headset)
The SHP9000 is worn in the form of a fixed headstock and a top-top elastic band. This is similar to some of AKG's earphones. The SHP9000's elastic band is relatively small, and its earphones are made of a smoother and more breathable nylon. Cloth material, better breathability than AKG K701, inward pressure is also smaller, more comfortable.
(removable wire jack)
In the previous evaluation, we tried to buy the Philips SHP8900 with a try attitude, and its overall performance at the price of 300-400 yuan is very impressive. Later, we purchased the Philips SHP9000, and inadvertently dug a big pit in the topic of this headset amp. In this test, we used the Philips SHP9000, which took more than 150 hours of downtime. From our use after 150 hours, its performance is satisfactory and should be completely opened. At the same time, we will also use AKG K701 (impedance 62 ohms, more than 350 hours of downtime) and Sennheiser HD650 (impedance 300 ohms, about 300 hours of downtime) as a comparison object.
We use the music state MD11 decoder as the evaluation sound source, Monitor 02 US as a low-cost comparison reference source, using Lehman, HiFidiy Panda, Solo, one to six cottage microphone amplifier for classification and comparison. Due to too many headphone amplifiers, earphones and audio products, it is impossible to complete the performance description of all combinations in an article, so this article has key points and trade-offs. In the future articles, we will try our best to meet your requirements and complete more complete content. Let's start with HiFiDiy.net's Panda Amp, which is a fair platform for three headsets and one of our more satisfying platforms.
(Musiland Le State MD11 External Stereo Decoder)
Left: AKG K701 headphones, right: Sennheiser HD650 headphones
Performance under HiFiDiy.net Panda Headphone Amplifier
(HIFIDIY Panda Headphone Amplifier - Front Panel)
High-frequency performance: Sennheiser HD650's resolution and transient performance in high-frequency parts are better than SHP9000, which is slightly weaker in terms of listening to strings such as violin, guitar, and harp. Some, but the SHP9000 sound is still more slack, more natural, in the violin high position high-pitched area performance is more full and soft and calm, HD650 is somewhat restrained. Compared with SHP9000, AKG's K701 is slightly brighter than SHP9000. The high-frequency part is slightly better than SHP9000, but it is different from HD650. The whole high-frequency area of ​​K701 is slightly brighter. The single point of string high-frequency overtone details, the HD650 does have a certain advantage SHP9000 is weak, which is easier to feel in small dynamic string solo music, and in the performance of slightly larger dynamic symphony, pop music, etc. Each has an advantage. We believe that the overall high-frequency levels of SHP9000, K701 and HD650 are of a high level and are the same level of performance.
Mid-range performance: The mid-range of the SHP9000 is relatively unsatisfactory. If the driving force of the amp or the sound source is not good, it will be somewhat weak, and the slight depression is too dull. To sum up, the SHP9000's intermediate frequency is ideal under the headphone amplifiers used in several Class A outputs. In terms of vocal performance, it is full of performance, sound stretch, with good resolution and image. At this time, if the three headphones are compared, we think that the SHP9000 is the most recommended. The sound of Sennheiser HD650 is obviously tight. The performance of vocals is not as good as that of high frequency. The vocals appear to be dry. The AKG K701 is still a relatively light sound of AKG. It is slightly cold and thin. .
In the performance of the symphony, the SHP9000 performance is still stable and powerful, and the sound is full, the sound field is wider, even wider than the K701 sound field, but it seems that the mid-low frequency sound is relatively soft, the depth of the SHP9000 is not as good as the HD650 and K701. The mid-range of the SHP9000 is still a loose and soft style, but there is still a good level in the big dynamics, and the performance of the big compilation band is the most ambitious. The HD650 sounds the tightest, relatively small scale, the K701 sound is more dry than the SHP9000, and the intermediate frequency is relatively cold. But overall, the three have their own characteristics, the SHP9000 is somewhat similar to the HD580's loose and powerful voice, but it is not so strong, and guarantees a high level of resolution. The HD650 is still a tight style, maintaining its own characteristics in terms of sound density and minute details. The K701 also has its own style in detail, the sound is looser than the HD650, but not as soft and thick as the SHP9000.
Low-frequency performance: On the Panda amp, the SHP9000 has the best control performance. Of course, the SHP9000 has the lowest relative impedance and is easy to control. At the same time, the SHP9000 has a lower sense of low frequency than the K701. The HD650 low-frequency sense is not too small, but under the Panda amp. Not fully played, plus the tight voice itself, it seems that the dynamic is not enough, the details are not as good as the SHP9000. These three headphones, in this combination, are not performing well in the face of extremely exaggerated big dynamics, such as the most exaggerated part of "Qian Jiangyue" and "The Rock". However, for the large-scale symphony and fast-paced drums, the dynamic performance of the drums has better control. The SHP9000 is the softest and has good resolution. Especially in the symphony, the performance of the bass part is quite soft but it can be leveled. Clearly, it has satisfactory resolution; while K701 is weak at this time, it is difficult to show the low-frequency details of the large-scale symphony, and the HD650 low-frequency is hard, obviously not the low frequency required in the correct symphony.
Performance under Lehman headphone amplifier
Lehman Lehmann Audio BCL Headphone Amplifier - with Solo SRGII
(Because we can't spoil the detailed evaluation content of Lehmann's amp, we don't make too much explanation here, just focus on the key points.)
High-frequency performance: SHP9000 performs quite well under Lehmann. The high-frequency bright and powerful and the Panda's A-type sound are obviously different. The high-frequency is younger and more impactful, but it still has good control under large dynamics. It doesn't match the Lehmann style that everyone has in mind. The high-frequency brightness of the SHP9000 is quite powerful in both the symphony and the string, and the string performance is gorgeous and fast. The HD650 is relatively soft compared to the SHP9000; the high-frequency details of the K701 still exist, and the strength is slightly worse. (In view of the inability to spoil the detailed evaluation of Lehman's amp, we will not explain too much here)
Mid-range performance: The mid-range of the SHP9000 is softer under Lehmann, but not as strong as the panda. The partial floppy style of the mid-range is quite different from that of the panda amp. It appears to be somewhat loose and slightly thin. This trend also occurs in On the AKG K701, the resolution of the K701 vocal part is slightly better than the SHP9000, but the sound is thinner. The HD650 has a large change in the intermediate frequency on Lehman, and the sound is slack and warm and full.
Low-frequency performance: SHP9000 has a low-frequency sense in Lehman. The low-frequency sense of HD650 is similar to that of IF. It has more sense in three headphones.
Performance under headphone amplifiers No. 5 and No. 6.
( No. 5 Headphone Amplifier - Front Panel )
(No. 6 headphone amplifier)
The No. 5 C and No. 6 C “cottage†headphone amplifiers use JLH single-ended pure A circuits, and their sound style is similar to that of HifiDiy's Panda amp style. Relatively speaking, the high-frequency class A amp style of the fifth amp is more intense than the panda amp, driving any of the three headphones, the high-frequency details are quite good. The fifth amp has a stronger driving force than the panda, and the HD650's high-frequency detail and overall dynamic performance are better. In the big dynamic, the fifth amp can withstand a large volume of output, relatively more powerful than the panda, the fifth amp push SHP9000 IF is also more full. The sixth amp style is similar to the fifth one, but the high frequency details are worse than the panda and the fifth, and the intermediate frequency is more intense than the fifth, but the overall driving force is smaller than the fifth amp, and the large dynamic performance is naturally inferior. On the 5th, the strength and density of the high frequency are not as good as the fifth.
Performance under headphone amplifiers I, II, and III
( S brand 100 headphone amplifier )
( L brand 100M headphone amplifier )
( E brand F-type headphone amplifier )
These three "cottage" amps with the performance of the SHP9000 we have introduced in the forum related posts, here is a brief summary. Overall, the sound styles of the three headphone amplifiers are significantly different from those of the above three Class A amplifiers, mainly in the style of high frequency detail and the fullness of the intermediate frequency. The No. 1 amp pushes the SHP9000 quite, and the impact of the medium and high frequency is full, but the high frequency is still slightly biased when the dynamic is large, the vocal part is slightly cold, slightly burr, and the low frequency control is better. No. 2 amp, high frequency has a certain burr feeling, but the high frequency style is special, the sound is much thinner, the mid-frequency push SHP9000 is still not full enough, but the low-frequency control is relatively excellent, quite powerful, can put the low-frequency details of SHP9000 Play to a certain level. The third amp, the overall relative balance, the overall thrust is better than the first two, the high-frequency dynamic performance is better, the sound is powerful but not as exaggerated as the first one, but the high-frequency details are still somewhat rough. The low-frequency and large dynamic performance is the most outstanding among the three, and it is more suitable for the softer sound of the SHP9000.
Performance with sound card such as Monitor 02 US
We tried to match the amps No. 5, No. 3, Panda and Lehmann with Monitor 02 US. Overall, compared with the MD11 sound source, the whole sound dynamics have obvious gaps, and the high frequency details and density can also be heard. The difference in sound source is equally obvious for the overall sound, but the headphone amplifier is still much better than the direct push for headphones like the SHP9000. Due to the fact that there are too many arrangements for sound cards, earphones and amps, we have also made important points and trade-offs in this article today. In the future, we will provide more detailed explanations from the sound card matching.
to sum up
Based on the comparison of different headphone amplifiers and AKG K701 and Sennheiser HD650, we conclude with a summary of the performance of the Philips SHP9000. The Philips SHP9000 has a 32 ohm impedance and is easier to drive than the AKG K701 and Sennheiser HD650. When the ordinary sound card is pushed directly, its intermediate frequency performance is relatively unsatisfactory, and the high frequency state is more different from "feeding". In the direct push state, the SHP9000's low-frequency sense is significantly less, and the overall style is even similar to the AKG K701.
But with Lehman and Panda amp as an example, the Philips SHP9000 still shows a high level, its overall sound style is soft, the overall has a good resolution, and the high-frequency performance on the Lehman amp reaches a relatively better state. Excellent transient control, excellent resolution, slightly worse than the AKG K701 high-frequency resolution, but the overall feeling is even better than the HD650; on the Panda, the 5th A amp, the HD650 high-frequency subtle detail style The performance is very flattering, at this time the Philips SHP9000 is slightly inferior. If you use the first, second, third or Solo amp, the high frequency of the SHP9000 is obviously better than the HD650. Especially on the Solo, the high frequency performance of the HD650 is even somewhat dark and weak. The Philips SHP9000's sound is soft, dynamic, and relatively easy to control. The SHP9000 has a good resolution in low frequency for amp-driven, although the speed is slightly slower and somewhat loose, but the strength and resolution as well as the overall performance are satisfactory. Relatively speaking, the HD650 may be more difficult to drive, and the sound is tighter. (For details, see future evaluations, it is not that the HD650 is not good.) In terms of vocals and intermediate frequencies, soft sound sources such as Lehmann are not suitable for SHP9000. The loose sound, relatively speaking, only the Panda, No. 5 and No. 6 intermediate frequency is the most full, and the third is relatively good in the symphony, but the vocals still appear to be a little weaker.
Although the sound field performance of different headphone amplifiers is different, the Philips SHP9000 sound field is relatively wider. It is easy to catch up with AKG K701 when the symphony is compiled. The sound field width is slightly inferior to AKG K701, and the style of Sennheiser HD650 is narrow. It is significantly different from the former two. However, the AKG K701 and HD650 feel slightly better than the SHP9000.
YUEQING WEIMAI ELECTRONICS CO.,LTD , https://www.weimaiwafer.com