Bummer. Sorry you're losing the HiFiMan quality control derby again. But you're not alone. Still sucks.

The 99 Noir have black wood; the 99 Classics have brown wood.

The AKG K371 hug the Harman Curve, a sound signature that represents what "most people" sound good. Your mileage may vary. Pretty neutral with slightly elevated bass, but nowhere near as bassy as the Mezes. But they also don't have the bass bloat into the mids of the Mezes.

Good luck.

Many reasons.

One, speakers aren't very portable.

Two, headphones provide a much more affordable and accessible way to hear music through different tuning signatures.

Three, headphones offer intimacy in their detail that speakers can't match, especially when comparing price to price.

Four, closed-back headphones offer privacy not available with speakers.

Five, speakers often require expensive room treatment to sound their best. Headphones don't need that.

You are a man alone on an island with this opinion. :)

Best closed-backs I've heard are Focal Stellia, which cost $3,000. About the only closed-back I've heard that can compete with open-backs in the same price range. Magnificent headphones.

The AKG K371 are a very, very good entry-level closed-back for around $125. Blow away the incredibly overrated Audio-Technica ATH-M40x and M50x in the same price range.

Meze 99 Classics are a lot of fun for $310. Impeccable build quality, comfortable, beautiful. But they are bassy as hell, with flabby bass that bleeds into the mids. Good, smooth treble, though. The 99 Classics are an example of a can that has a hideous-looking frequency response curve but still sound fun.

Focal Elegia are a very good deal at $325 from Adorama. Not worth the $900 sticker price because of the always-sketch Focal build quality and metallic and incredibly weird midrange tuning that almost demands EQ. But their imaging is damn near holographic, and the bass, while not always present, really punches and slams when called upon.

I have not heard the Audeze LCD-XC, but people rave about them. I have owned the LCD-2C and own the LCD-X 2021, and both of those are fantastic headphones. So, I bet the hype surrounding LCD-XC is real.

I owned the Dan Clark Audio Aeon 2 Noire, which are around $800-900 new. Overrated. Blunted transients, lacking detail or dynamics, especially with the felt filters needed to mute the treble peak. Too much clamping force if you have a big head, too, and the Nitinol headband will not bend. Just get an HD 6XX for about $600 less if you're interested in that sound signature unless you MUST have a closed-back.

These "bin store" memes were funny for a few minutes. Now they're older than grandpa's buckskin rubber.

Yep, probably the best among the Bluetooth DAC/amp dongles, when you factor in the size, all the features and the price.

True.

I owned the original hip-dac and the Qudelix 5K. The Qudelix is a marvelous little device, stuffed with cool features like onboard parametric EQ in such a tiny form factor.

But its wonky multifunction buttons suck compared to the simple ergonomics of the hip-dac, and music sounded much more organic and alive with the hip-dac due to the Burr-Brown DAC chip and bass boost button.

Baffling for tuning, especially if these are closed backs. A lot of sound bouncing around those closed cups that must be controlled.

Bingo. The HD 6XX is all about exquisite timbre and mids. Yes, HiFiMan has more air and sparkle, at the expense of a more thin, metallic timbre.

Fair enough. But you made the sweeping generalization that all lossless streaming services use the same files. They do not.

And your "Tidal excepted" retort was lame because it's not like Tidal is some puny upstart in the lossless streaming space. Just admit you were wrong, just like I'm admitting that Qobuz, Deezer, Amazon and Apple pretty much use the same files, so my initial response was wrong -- Tidal excepted, of course. :)

Saying "Tidal aside" is like making a sweeping generalization about the pickup truck market and saying, "Toyota aside ... "

Doesn't really work, man. Tidal is not like the others. It's not pure lossless.

But yes, once you remove Tidal, the files largely are the same. Then it comes down to which UX, algorithm, additional features you prefer.

Not true. Tidal uses MQA encoding on many of its files, even if non-MQA versions are available. Qobuz does not. Apple Music does not.

MQA isn't true lossless, either. https://goldensound.audio/2021/11/29/tidal-hifi-is-not-lossless/

Qobuz is better than both, although its playlist algorithm isn't as good and its userbase-generated playlists are far more sparse.

So, if you want the best sound quality and don't listen to a lot of obscure bands or genre, Qobuz is the pick. If music discovery and social sharing are most important to you, Spotify still is the king. Otherwise, Apple Music is pretty damn good.

I don't like Tidal because it shoves MQA in our face, which isn't true lossless and is largely marketing snake oil. Qobuz only uses MQA when no other source file is available from the record company.

Yep. The Edition XS is more clinical than enjoyable. Still a super headphone for $500 if you seek clarity and soundstage more than energy.

If you want soundstage and clarity, go for the Edition XS. If you want sub-bass and note weight, go for the Dan Clarks.

Not really. Dan Clark Aeon Open X are $429 at Drop. Audeze LCD-X can be purchased new on Black Friday for $450 and used for $450-500 year-round.

Well aware. I own Audeze planars, which have far better bass both stock and with EQ than HiFiMan.

BINGO. The Edition XS has nice clarity, detail and soundstage. But the note weight is so thin compared to listening to an Audeze LCD-2C or LCD-X 2021 or any Dan Clark Audio planar under $1,000.

I hear a difference between Spotify high-quality (320 kbps) and Qobuz. Small, but noticeable -- and worth it to me.

The biggest difference is in detail and separation. I hear the placement of the instruments with better clarity with Qobuz high-res files and the sound doesn't disintegrate into mush as often in complex passages.

Again, this is not a "part the Red Sea" difference. But I notice. And I prefer Qobuz.

Tidal uses MQA, which is pure snake oil and marketing rubbish. Qobuz files come straight from the masters, with MQA only if the record company offers no other high-res streaming file. Maybe that makes a difference -- who knows?

I'm sure some will disagree. Fine -- you don't have my ears or brain. I hear the difference, so I don't care what you think.

Ah, my apologies. I thought you dove in by buying all four at once.

It would sound like shit. Driver and baffling designs for open- and closed-back headphones are different. So is the tuning.

They're not interchangeable.

As one wise poster in here said, put your hands over the cups of your open-back headphones. Sounds like shit, right? That's what it would sound like if you covered the grills.

P.S.: Your calculus of impedance is way off. High impedance makes a can tougher to drive, not easier. But sensitivity also plays just as important a role. The lower the impedance, the easier to drive. The higher the sensitivity, the easier to drive. Check both stats before determining if your source can drive a headphone without an amp.

I owned the 560s. They sounded like shit and lacked volume from a phone. They really need an amp -- even a portable one -- to sing.

If you're a newb, why are you buying four headphones at once? You'll never know what kind of sound signature you prefer when you're bouncing four headphones with different sonic qualities on and off your head.

Start with one. See if it fits what you seek. If not, sell or return it and move to another. Once you've found your preferred signature, then it's time to branch out with a second or third pair with different sonic qualities that may suit different types of music better.

Start in the shallow end, dude. You'll be frustrated -- and maybe broke -- by starting off the high dive.

And yeah, this may sound dickish, but ... you can do better for the money than those four cans you selected. Considerably better.

Let us know what kind of music you like. Let us know what kind of sound you prefer? Lots of bass? Midrange? Airy treble? Want a ton of detail or a relaxed sound? Then we can give you recommendations.

You do not need to spend thousands in ANY area of headphones -- cans and source gear -- to get anything to sound decent.

My JDS Labs Atom+ DAC/amp stack was $220 new and has 1 watt of clean, uncolored power at 32 ohms, almost four times the 250mw your amp provides.

Understand this fact about audiophile gear: The connection between cost and quality is not proportional AT ALL. There is a SERIOUS amount of diminishing returns once you surpass the $1,000 level for cans and gear.

Sure, a $4,000 headphone will sound better than a $400 headphone. But 10 times better? No f*cking way.

Exactly. Anyone who says the Momentum 3 have a "slight bass lift" must masturbate at the altar of Beats nightly. The M3's have punchy, elevated, bloated bass -- without a doubt.

The OP is used to "excited," consumer-oriented sound signatures you get with wireless over-ear cans from Sony, Bose, Beats, Sennheiser and others. It's V-shaped, with booming, bloated bass, scooped-out mids and hot, crispy, sibilant treble.

That elevated bass creates the sensation of punchy dynamics, while the hot treble creates the sensation of "clarity" or "air." Neither is accurate, but it's a parlor trick of tuning that manufacturers of consumer-oriented headphones use, and the marketplace apparently loves it.

I sound critical of this sound signature. Yeah, it's not my preferred profile. I'm more of a "neutral with some Cajun spice lightly sprinkled on" kind of listener. But there's nothing wrong with a V-shaped signature if that's what you like.

Of the headphones I listed, I think the Audeze LCD-2C, the Focal Elex and the Meze 109 Pro are closest to the "dynamic, musical" signature you seek rather than pure neutrality or a microscope into all the tones of the song.

Those three headphones still all sound much better than a Sennheiser M3 because the mids actually are present and not muddied by the bass or deep-fried by the treble. But their sonic DNA shares strands with consumer-oriented headphones, while cans like the Diana TC and 800S do not.