Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › HiFiman HE-500 (HE as in High End) Proving to be an enjoyable experience in listening. .
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

HiFiman HE-500 (HE as in High End) Proving to be an enjoyable experience in listening. . - Page 650

post #9736 of 14081
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonido View Post
 

When my initial impressions post on the Quickemo HE-500 mentioned a 15-20% increase in soundstage, after careful listening to tracks that test soundstage, it's more like double the soundstage to be honest.

 

 

Those are some large percentages and differences in the world of audio.  I missed the like to the Quickemo can you provide it?  Thanks.

post #9737 of 14081

Hi All,

 

You should search about Phasemation EPA-007.

 

King Regards

post #9738 of 14081
Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post

Those are some large percentages and differences in the world of audio.  I missed the like to the Quickemo can you provide it?  Thanks.
He means the Bottlehead Quickie fed into the Emotiva miniX
post #9739 of 14081
I wish we could see a more long term usage and comparisons before an opinion is posted. In my opinion a sound signature from a given combination of gears takes at least a month or more (based on a few hours' listening per day) to sink in to do justice to the equipment in question. I have seen preferences go from North to South in matter of weeks on many subjective topics like sound, taste etc.. Posting online prematurely often hinders accepting corrections to previously posted opinions.
Edited by VTV - 12/7/13 at 8:34am
post #9740 of 14081
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTV View Post

I wish we could see a more long term usage and comparisons before an opinion is posted. In my opinion a sound signature from a given combination of gears takes at least a month or more (based on a few hours' listening per day) to sink in to do justice to the equipment in question. I have seen preferences go from North to South in matter of weeks on many subjective topics like sound, taste etc.. Posting online prematurely often hinders accepting corrections to previously posted opinions.

Agreed. We'll see how the sound changes. The biggest thing likely to happen is just my ears adjusting to the better sound and it wouldn't sound as grand anymore. Still if that were the case, comparing to the sound with just the Emotiva should prove a significant difference if there is really a difference. I even admit being hesitant and skeptical to believe there could be such a difference. I plan on listening more and then comparing after a longer period of listening. Still I'm hoping to get other people's impressions. For $99 more, it's not that big of a commitment.
post #9741 of 14081

Just got the Hegel HD20 DAC that I am borrowing from a store where I live. I use it with a WA6-SE and the HE-500, and damn.. Sounds pretty sick now, this setup is great, although I don't think I'll be buying the Hegel H20 though, can't afford it atm :P


Edited by Xtri - 12/7/13 at 12:28pm
post #9742 of 14081

Is it possible to build a resistor right into the cable for an HE-500 going straight into an 80W + 80W @ 8 ohms speaker amp?

post #9743 of 14081

Sure.  I'd work out the value with an external resistor before hacking into the cable, though...

post #9744 of 14081

After many more days, including a whole weekend of listening to the Quickie + Emotiva with the HE-500, I think I have a better understanding of the soundstaging. I don't know what the universal definition of soundstage width vs. depth is, but for this discussion, I'm defining width as the up/down + front/back plane (yz plane), and depth as the axis from ear to ear (x-axis). Refer to the image below and imagine the headphones upright for reference:

 

I found the Emotiva with HE-500 pairing to have always had great width (yz plane), but it wasn't that great in the depth (x-axis). The instruments never felt it was coming from too far away. With the Quickie, I found the benefit to mainly come from soundstage depth. The width, which already been great, is about the same, but the depth really becomes something else. When I mentioned the doubling of soundstage in one of my earlier posts, I meant it as doubling of the soundstage depth. You really start to hear the subtleties of distance sounds, and with the added transparency, I think that's what really gives this sense of much better depth. As far as percentages, it's really hard to quantify exact percentages when it comes to soundstage for me. To me, since the I found the Emotiva pairing to have a relatively shallow (lacking of depth) soundstage, it's especially hard to put a percentage on this. It's like saying I doubled my money, when all I had was a dollar to begin with. Percentages rely entirely on the base value, and since the base soundstage depth on the Emotiva + HE-500 wasn't great to me, it makes any percentage statements a bad definition to go by. It could truly be quintupling the soundstage depth for all I know. All I can say it helps the depth immensely. It goes from from one of the more two dimensional headphones I've heard to one of the best in depth and three dimensionality. Another thing that probably skews the sense of the weakness in depth with Emotiva alone is the ratio of width to depth. Like I said, I found the width great, and when compared to the depth, it makes it sound more two dimensional. Think of a flat box shape.

 

Keep in mind this comparison has been between the Quickie with Emotiva vs. the Emotiva alone. If you have a different amp, it's quite possible you don't suffer the shallow soundstaging I find with the Emotiva alone. YMMV.

 

One other thing to note is if you asked me to give one word to describe the soundstaging of the Quickie + Emotiva, it would be coherent. What this means is that I find the ratio of width to depth, and the level of separation of instruments to be very well synced, and on a very natural and realistic level. Two weeks ago, my friend brought his HD800 over during the Thanksgiving holiday, and I tried it out extensively, paired with the Bottlehead Crack. I've heard all kinds of things about the soundstage of the HD800, but frankly, I wasn't all too impressed. From memory, I recall it to be spacious indeed, but it lacked the level of coherency what I'm hearing with the Quickie + Emotiva + HE-500. Especially with livelier genres, I found the HD800 to be lifeless at times, and the soundstage to have a sense of artificiality, where it stretched out the separation of instruments more so that what is natural, leaving pockets of empty space in between instruments that did not need to be there. This is akin to placing your 2-channel speakers too far apart in respect with where you're listening from. I think the perfect sense of spacing would be where all instruments have their own space and are not competing for space with one another, but at the same time borders one another leaving no unneeded space in between. Maybe it's the pairing with the Crack, but the HD800 definitely pales in comparison to what I'm hearing from the HE-500 in terms of soundstage coherency in my opinion.

post #9745 of 14081
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonido View Post
  Pretty long post :-) (Click to show)

After many more days, including a whole weekend of listening to the Quickie + Emotiva with the HE-500, I think I have a better understanding of the soundstaging. I don't know what the universal definition of soundstage width vs. depth is, but for this discussion, I'm defining width as the up/down + front/back plane (yz plane), and depth as the axis from ear to ear (x-axis). Refer to the image below and imagine the headphones upright for reference:

 

I found the Emotiva with HE-500 pairing to have always had great width (yz plane), but it wasn't that great in the depth (x-axis). The instruments never felt it was coming from too far away. With the Quickie, I found the benefit to mainly come from soundstage depth. The width, which already been great, is about the same, but the depth really becomes something else. When I mentioned the doubling of soundstage in one of my earlier posts, I meant it as doubling of the soundstage depth. You really start to hear the subtleties of distance sounds, and with the added transparency, I think that's what really gives this sense of much better depth. As far as percentages, it's really hard to quantify exact percentages when it comes to soundstage for me. To me, since the I found the Emotiva pairing to have a relatively shallow (lacking of depth) soundstage, it's especially hard to put a percentage on this. It's like saying I doubled my money, when all I had was a dollar to begin with. Percentages rely entirely on the base value, and since the base soundstage depth on the Emotiva + HE-500 wasn't great to me, it makes any percentage statements a bad definition to go by. It could truly be quintupling the soundstage depth for all I know. All I can say it helps the depth immensely. It goes from from one of the more two dimensional headphones I've heard to one of the best in depth and three dimensionality. Another thing that probably skews the sense of the weakness in depth with Emotiva alone is the ratio of width to depth. Like I said, I found the width great, and when compared to the depth, it makes it sound more two dimensional. Think of a flat box shape.

 

Keep in mind this comparison has been between the Quickie with Emotiva vs. the Emotiva alone. If you have a different amp, it's quite possible you don't suffer the shallow soundstaging I find with the Emotiva alone. YMMV.

 

One other thing to note is if you asked me to give one word to describe the soundstaging of the Quickie + Emotiva, it would be coherent. What this means is that I find the ratio of width to depth, and the level of separation of instruments to be very well synced, and on a very natural and realistic level. Two weeks ago, my friend brought his HD800 over during the Thanksgiving holiday, and I tried it out extensively, paired with the Bottlehead Crack. I've heard all kinds of things about the soundstage of the HD800, but frankly, I wasn't all too impressed. From memory, I recall it to be spacious indeed, but it lacked the level of coherency what I'm hearing with the Quickie + Emotiva + HE-500. Especially with livelier genres, I found the HD800 to be lifeless at times, and the soundstage to have a sense of artificiality, where it stretched out the separation of instruments more so that what is natural, leaving pockets of empty space in between instruments that did not need to be there. This is akin to placing your 2-channel speakers too far apart in respect with where you're listening from. I think the perfect sense of spacing would be where all instruments have their own space and are not competing for space with one another, but at the same time borders one another leaving no unneeded space in between. Maybe it's the pairing with the Crack, but the HD800 definitely pales in comparison to what I'm hearing from the HE-500 in terms of soundstage coherency in my opinion.

You know what? I am ordering the Emotiva. God, how I hate paying double the price for something, but ohh well.. Here's my definition of soundstage, which I found to be more logical. There's two parts of it. There's the soundstage and then there's the headstage. Headstage is the actual perceived size of the stage in your head (this is fairly objective IMO), with depth being front to back, width being left to right and height being bottom to top.

Then, there's the soundstage, which I see as something more individual and complex. Within the headstage the soundstage kinda unfolds.

For example some 'phones are very airy and spread out. That doesn't necessarily correspond to a large headstage in my opinion, which the Stax lambdas are an example of. Then there's for example also the perceived size/grandness of the music, which tend to be a trait of higher end headphones. I find the imaging to be part of the soundstage as well. On the other hand soundstage and headstage seem to be correlated, as a wide headstage without much depth tend to result in a sound that seems spread out and the channels might seem pretty seperated (k701).

In other words, the headstage is the 'container' of the soundstage, yet the headstage will and can affect the soundstage.

 

I doubt your HE-500 setup can claim to have more depth than my Stax Sigma :p That 'phone has DEPTH and grandness to the sound.


Edited by davidsh - 12/10/13 at 2:44am
post #9746 of 14081

Emotiva ordered. It was $272.43, and if I am taxed, it'll be $370. Better be worth it, as that is twice the price you lucky bastards pay.

post #9747 of 14081
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidsh View Post
 

Emotiva ordered. It was $272.43, and if I am taxed, it'll be $370. Better be worth it, as that is twice the price you lucky bastards pay.


Even at $370, for me it will be still very worthy.  IMO, as I've said before that HE500/Emotiva is deadly combo.

post #9748 of 14081
Time will tell if it is that deadly, the competition is steep here (Stax). Well, for now my he-500 is put of function, but hopefully I'll have it up and running some time after Christmas.
post #9749 of 14081
Did you get the MiniX or the UPA-200?
post #9750 of 14081
Mini x for several reasons. The upa didn't work out
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › HiFiman HE-500 (HE as in High End) Proving to be an enjoyable experience in listening. .