By aspect — in detail
Soundstage
Strong consensus · 11 srcThe headline strength and a near-universal point of praise: wide, open and spacious, and consistently called notably wider than the HD6XX/HD600 — a big reason gamers and positional-audio listeners reach for it. A small minority finds the forward-projected stage slightly unnatural.
“pretty dang wide and spacious”
Crinacle, In-Ear Fidelity
“stage is much more well filled in across the front”
Resolve, Headphones.com
Measured
Angled drivers and roomy, deep cups; DIY-Audio-Heaven notes the stereo image is 'substantially wider' than the HD 6xx series 'but not reaching HD 800S territory.'
Tonality
Moderate · 12 srcBroadly read as neutral / reference — close to the Harman target and the core of its appeal — with a definite tilt toward the bright side of neutral. A real minority hears it less as 'neutral' than as bright-and-lean, which feeds directly into the treble debate below.
“The HD 560S has a neutral sound signature with good bass extension.”
DIY-Audio-Heaven (Solderdude)
“Overall, I find the HD560S to have a very agreeable tuning, with excellent bass extension, and just a little bit of extra intensity in the upper mids and lower treble.”
Resolve, Headphones.com
Measured
Tracks a neutral/Harman-style target closely through the mids; ASR reports 'very close compliance with our target response' from the bass through the mids, with a presence/lower-treble lift on top producing the bright tilt.
The defining HD 560S debate. There's broad agreement on the fact — a measured ~4–6 kHz (plus ~8 kHz) lower-treble lift — but a sharp split on the result: one camp hears it as intense, sharp and fatiguing (the potential dealbreaker), the other as bright but well-behaved and never sibilant. The split tracks the unit revision, the seal/clamp, and the source gear.
Measured
Multiple rigs (ASR, Headphones.com on GRAS 43AG, Sonarworks, DIY-Audio-Heaven) show an elevated ~4–6 kHz region plus a ~8 kHz peak. DIY-Audio-Heaven notes the ~2022 revision has about 2 dB less treble, and Headphones.com found the peak's level shifts with clamp pressure on the fixture.
⚠ vs. listeners — The camps aren't disputing a fact — 'sharp/fatiguing' and 'bright but benign' are opposite valences placed on the same measured lower-treble lift, and how intense it reads genuinely changes with the unit revision, how the pads seal, and the source.
Where it splits
Intense, sharp and fatiguing — a real dealbreaker for the treble-sensitive.54%
“The potential dealbreaker here is in the treble response.”
Crinacle, In-Ear Fidelity
Bright but well-behaved — present and clear, not harsh or sibilant.46%
“Yes, they are a bit bright but not annoyingly so at all.”
amirm, Audio Science Review
Consistently called accurate and natural — several measurement sources note it tracks the Harman target nearly perfectly, with vocals and acoustic instruments a strength. The one caveat is a slightly forward upper-mid 'presence' that a few hear as etched or edgy (the same lift that drives the treble debate).
“the HD560S nails the frequency response, following the Harman target nearly perfectly”
Resolve, Headphones.com
“The mids are dynamic and very open and clean.”
DIY-Audio-Heaven (Solderdude)
Agreement on the extension, a split on the quantity. Sources broadly praise genuinely deep sub-bass reach — several call it better than the HD6XX — but the level is lean and polite, tuned for neutrality rather than impact, so bass-lovers find it thin while neutral fans find it 'enough.' ASR also flags rising distortion in the lows that limits how much you can EQ them up.
“the HD560S still has excellent bass extension all the way down to the limits of human hearing”
Resolve, Headphones.com
“it does lack deep bass energy although not as much as some of the other Sennheiser headphones”
amirm, Audio Science Review
Measured
FR extends low and rolls off only gently below ~25 Hz (DIY-Audio-Heaven); mid-bass is near neutral, not elevated. ASR measures low-frequency distortion that rises with level, capping EQ headroom.
A quiet strength: most hear it as fast, lively and immediate — more so than the HD6XX/HD5XX — though the lean bass means it reads tight and well-controlled rather than punchy or slammy.
“The HD 560S is more dynamic/lively than the HD 6xx and HD 5xx series.”
DIY-Audio-Heaven (Solderdude)
“is more punchy than the slammy type but can still rumble”
Head-Fi (showcase review)
Generally rated good for the price and a plus for gaming/positional audio, with clean left-right placement — but not quite HD6XX-level definition, and one notable dissent that instruments blend together and vocals sit permanently front-and-centre.
“Another thing I really like is the stereo imaging and left-right balance the HD 560S gives you.”
Headfonia
“Vocals are up front and centre all the time and instruments tend to blend together despite the wide stage they are placed in.”
Crinacle, In-Ear Fidelity
Resolving and transparent for its price — a clear step up from older 500-series — but not on the level of the HD6X0, and unlike the HD6XX it's widely said not to 'scale' meaningfully with higher-end source gear. A few underwhelmed owners traded weak sources (laptop/motherboard jacks).
“A hefty improvement from the HD599 but not quite to the level of the HD6X0.”
Crinacle, In-Ear Fidelity
“in no way does the HD560S scale with higher end source equipment the way the HD6XX does”
Resolve, Headphones.com
Net positive and a frequent highlight — light (~240 g) with large, roomy cups and soft velour, fine for hours. The recurring caveat is a firm clamp out of the box that several call vice-like at first; it eases over a couple of weeks, and the cups have limited swivel, which glasses-wearers and larger heads notice. A few also find ventilation warm.
“Comfort is absolutely no issue with plush pad covers and soft foam”
SoundGuys
“The pressure on the side of your head is a bit higher than with most headphones however.”
Headfonia
Measured
≈240 g without cable; large oval velour pads; clamp measured ~2.5–3 N, medium-high (DIY-Audio-Heaven).
A consistent mild knock: all-plastic and widely said to feel cheap for the price. The flip side, noted nearly as often, is that it's very light and the 500-series has a reputation for longevity — cheap-feeling, not fragile. A couple of listeners find it solidly assembled with no creak.
“the unit has a very plastic (dare I say cheaper) feeling to it”
Headfonia
“they offer extremely good performance for the price at the tradeoff of build materials being a little cheaper”
SoundGuys
Isolation
Strong consensus · 6 srcOpen-back by design: essentially no passive isolation and it leaks freely both ways. Expected for the type, not a flaw — but it rules out commutes and shared rooms, and makes it a quiet-room headphone.
“it doesn't really block out any noise around you at all”
SoundGuys
“I use it as my daily work headphones since it barely reduces sound as an open back.”
Leading-Leading6319 (r/headphones)
Almost everyone agrees it's a lot of headphone for ~$150–200; the genuine, decision-relevant split is relative, not absolute — whether it 'redefines the price bracket' as the new budget default, or the (often cheaper, used) HD6XX/HD600 remains the better buy. The answer is a preference call between the 560S's stage and bass extension and the HD6XX's warmth and smoother treble.
Where it splits
Redefines the budget bracket — a new default recommendation.65%
“this headphone is an excellent choice in this price segment”
DIY-Audio-Heaven (Solderdude)
The HD6XX/HD600 still holds the value crown.35%
“The Sennheiser HD560S does not replace the HD6XX for the best value headphone in 2020, but rather it improves on certain aspects (bass and soundstage) at the cost of others (treble and detail scaling).”
Resolve, Headphones.com
