HiFiman HE-500 (HE as in High End) please post your impressions. . loan pair for UK pg. 28. - Page 164

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidsh 

I'd say the HE-500 is less aggresive. The HE-400 has some kind of treble spike giving it a metallic sound, but still not with much detail in the treble though... The HE-500 seems a tad more relaxed and natural in direct comparison. But no doubt which one is better :P

To be fair HE500 also has a treble peak. The difference is that HE400's treble peak is around 14kHz, while HE500's is around 10kHz. This causes HE500's treble to sound a bit more bright, and HE400's treble to sound a bit more tizzy (aka metallic as you say).

If you are looking for a Hifiman without any treble peak at all, HE5LE or HE6 are the ways to go.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jerg 

To be fair HE500 also has a treble peak. The difference is that HE400's treble peak is around 14kHz, while HE500's is around 10kHz. This causes HE500's treble to sound a bit more bright, and HE400's treble to sound a bit more tizzy (aka metallic as you say).

 

If you are looking for a Hifiman without any treble peak at all, HE5LE or HE6 are the ways to go.

Still, the HE-500 is more neutral in the treble region than the HE-400, and it is a fairly big upgrade to me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidsh 

Still, the HE-500 is more neutral in the treble region than the HE-400, and it is a fairly big upgrade to me.

It certainly SOUNDS more neutral to me too, however Headroom plots are about the worst measurements you can use for reference (even Tyll himself admits that they are terribly outdated in terms of compensation formulae relative to his own IF measurements).

Try these instead:

HE500

HE400

Just based on the measurements you can't claim one is more objectively neutral than the other in the treble. More specifically, HE500s have two chunks removed while HE400 has a broad chunk added to what would otherwise be the imaginary neutral flat treble, and with these colourations in mind, HE500s' treble end up sounding more true. That does make sense as dips in FR tend to be less intrusive than peaks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jerg 

 

It certainly SOUNDS more neutral to me too, however Headroom plots are about the worst measurements you can use for reference (even Tyll himself admits that they are terribly outdated in terms of compensation formulae relative to his own IF measurements).

 

Try these instead:

 

HE500

 

 

 

HE400

 

 

Just based on the measurements you can't claim one is more objectively neutral than the other in the treble. More specifically, HE500s have two chunks removed while HE400 has a broad chunk added to what would otherwise be the imaginary neutral flat treble, and with these colourations in mind, HE500s' treble end up sounding more true. That does make sense as dips in FR tend to be less intrusive than peaks.

Ahhh, thought I could trust those damn headroom graphs!

All the terible resonances (lack of better word) of the HE-400, compared to the HE-500, seems quite intimidating. This might also explain why I've found the HE-500 to be more detailed and correct.

Thank you for posting!

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidsh 

Ahhh, thought I could trust those damn headroom graphs!

All the terible resonances (lack of better word) of the HE-400, compared to the HE-500, seems quite intimidating. This might also explain why I've found the HE-500 to be more detailed and correct.

 

Thank you for posting!

The only reason why Tyll never bothered to "update" the compensation on Headroom plots (FR, square waves, etc) is because there is a HUGE archive of past measurements he had done for the site already before he refined his measurements, so it'd be a massive hassle.

Yeah HE400s are a bit dirty in the midrange indeed. Its midrange is still fairly resolving (just a tad under HE500) with great separation (on par with HE500) though. Bass on the other hand is a different story, HE400s are actually cleaner-sounding and a bit less loose in that department relative to HE500.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hifimanrookie 

really? the laidback i can understand..but soundstage? may i ask what amp ur using to compare the two? as the sounstage on the he500 is much better then on the hd650 and i listened to both on several amps. only on one the hd650 sounded better..that was on a bottlehead crack. to my ears anyway.

Several sub $1000 amp ranging from Bursons, Graham Slees, to the Portables and DIY like Gainclones, the DAC would be mostly DACmini or CLAS -dB. The HE500 definitely have a more open soundstage than HD650 by a quite margin, but i've always felt on HE500 that the center imaging quite lacking also the depth. That's also the case with LCD2 ( center imaging )

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fegefeuer 

 

That's true, it's the easiest way. 

I will. I haven't put the velour pads on yet but after reading some info here I think I should be okay to try it.

How do the mids of the famous HD650 compare with those of the HE-500? Do you hear more details with it? Is it better layered? Is the soundstage as wide? With the HD650 live recordings sounded exceptionally realistic in terms of soundstage and imaging.

Of course this is addressed to people who owned both cans.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Happy Camper 

The lack of a focused centerstage is a sign of underpower.

I don't understand what centerstage is? Can you explain or give me an example?