KRK KNS-6400 Review - Impressive $99 Giant Killer - Page 4

I got another pair of the 8400's the other day at Guitar Center. I was worried they'd be just like the old pair from late summer of 2010. I risked it since they don't accept returns. Katun and some of his comments made me want to give them another chance. They were always good, but the 6400 impressed me more out of the box than the first 8400. I actually planned on getting another 8400 anyway since I always liked it.

Please take all my comments with a grain of salt for now because this is based on under 3 hours of listening so far. I haven't done any side by side comparisons yet.

The new 8400 I got in seemed to have a lot better bass. This was immediately noticeable. I don't know yet how much it compares to the 6400 in quantity YET. My first 8400 was nearly bass light, but not this pair at all.

To my ears the KRK KNS-8400 seems to have a LOT more treble than the 6400. I believe Katun felt the 6400 did, so it's best to hear for yourself. It could be a combination of my cables, sources and Headroom Micro Amp.

Very brightly recorded and harsh music is still bothersome, but it's not the headphones fault I think. I will burn the 8400 in for a few days. I described my first pairs treble as like icicles stabbing me in my ears. This pair is NOT like that even remotely.

I imagine after burn-in the treble will smooth out a little.

On my old 8400 the soundstage was not that good at all. This pair was a noticeable improvement over the first pair. Night and day difference. The 6400's soundstage was WAY better than that of my first 8400 easily.

The 8400 seems to be noticeably more clear than the 6400. I still think the 6400 is not that far behind in this area AT ALL.

What's super surprising about this 8400 is that it has TONS of detail. Possibly the most detailed headphone I've ever heard. It might even make the DT-880 look bad in comparison when it comes to detail. I'm going to compare the 6400 vs 8400 for a few minutes and see if I can hear some detail that's not heard in the 6400. They'd have to be very very tiny details that would not easily be heard. I know for sure the 8400 can pick up recording hiss and background detail a little bit better.

One thing I need to compare is how good and accurate the soundstages are. Not when it comes to size, but just how it presents it. So far I'm pretty impressed with it's soundstage and imaging. It's up there with the K601 when it comes to being able to pick out where all the instruments are coming from. I'm pretty positive it has the HD-598 beat in this area.

The differences between my two pairs is not HUGE, but enough to make me like them a lot more. The treble is still a bit bothersome right now, but only fatiguing with treble heavy music. I'm sure it will smooth out. I need to try various amps and see the results. If you love a lot of treble, the 8400 won't disappoint you!

The 6400 to me with my amp seems more natural and balanced. I figure some won't agree with me at all. I think Katun said he felt the 8400 was more natural sounding. I'll see if my opinion changes when I do some comparisons. The mids definitely seem more forward on the 6400, which is what I like.

Since I like my headphones to be great for female vocals I will compare them both for this and see which one I prefer. Maybe it will still be the 6400. The 6400 is just so much fun to listen to and I love it's mids and the treble doesn't even remotely bother me, but it does a tad on the 8400 (so far, no burn in yet). Again, I'll check my sources, amps and cables and see if the treble is being made worse somehow with them. Maybe I'm just super sensitive to treble, but I don't think so. It's not that bad really at all. The treble is barely an issue.

Going to do some more comparisons with my DJ100 now that it seems "fixed" with burn-in. Maybe I'll finally have a headphone that tops the DJ100 as a favorite.

BTW the amount of treble reminds me of the K702. Both were capable of bothering me a bit. If you're tried the K702 and have zero problems with the treble, then the 8400 will be just fine. I think though that the 8400's treble is much easier on the ears compared to the K702.

On some songs I think the recording is just garbage and made brighter than it should be at the studio. Sometimes it's hard to know for sure if it's the recording or the headphones fault!

EDIT: I'll add a big note to the top of my old review of the 8400. The differences are not massive, but enough for me to be even more impressed. I definitely like the new 8400 more than my first..no doubt! I don't know for sure if my old pair was a lemon. It could be just an early pair that didn't sound at it's best. Sometimes different pairs of the same headphone can vary. I always have this happen. Maybe KRK made some changes to the headphone after the first few months of release. I doubt it. Sometimes amp synergy can have a lot to do with how a headphone sounds. I remember trying the first 8400 on different amps to see if it's sound changed much. I used an Asgard for my first 8400 I believe. I no longer have that amp to try out.

I might post some more 6400 vs 8400 impressions when I compare them, but it'll just be a few short notes and not a review. I'll do it after some more burn-in of course. I really want to compare them to my DJ100 and hope the KRKs lose badly when it comes to sound..probably not likely

EDIT2:

I'm comparing the DJ100, 6400 and 8400 now. I "MIGHT" be totally wrong on the 8400 being more detailed. Maybe with my excitement I overdid it. We'll see soon. Clarity on the 8400 seems maybe a tad clear. We're talking like maybe 2-3% more clear. I'm absolutely 100% sure the mids are more forward on the 6400 and it's so nice for most music, especially pop and female vocals. For just plain listening to music and not for sure as a studio monitor, the 6400 might be more fun to listen to. I'll know soon. The shocker is that there is detail I can here on the 6400 but not the 8400 until I boost it's mids by 6db!! Want to know what it is? Rustling wind in the background that's ultra subtle. Yes, I'm a nerd I guess. To me, the DJ100 is holding up very, very well. I haven't found a single thing on the 8400 that my DJ100 can't pick up. NOTHING! DJ100 has more mid-bass too. I still get the impression of more bass impact on the 6400 compared to the 8400. I'll be testing them for quite awhile. Seems the 8400 feels more like a studio monitor and the 6400 more like one that's a bit more fun to listen to perhaps.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mp3gamefreak 

I know that I do not have a lot of post but I like lurking more for some reason. I was interested in these since your review which is great by the way. I have a question. You stated that many genres are compatible with the KRK KNS-6400. My question is would the Vocaloids genre fit with these? I've been searching the forums for many headphones relating to Vocaloids. I have the Meelectronics M6-BK so these would be my first or second headphones I would actually own. Well I listen to hip hop/rap, jpop, kpop, and anime op/ed so I wonder if these would be compatible as well. Thanks for listening to my reply or answering my question in later post(s).

Vocaloids genre? I will say that for for any asian pop music (especially female vocals), the 6400 would probably be a better match than the 8400. It has more forward and more engaging mids. I've been comparing the 6400 to the 8400 and DJ100 all night and think I may just prefer the 6400 overall and when it comes to Jpop. I've noticed some huge differences between both headphones, but the 6400 for me is easier to enjoy. For me with my favorite music it's a more engaging sound. The mids on the 8400 are more laid back and it all depends on preferences. At this point I think I do still prefer the 6400. If I had to listen to a headphone all day in a studio it might be the 8400. For the 6400 the 8400's pads are a must. They're just that good.

For Jpop though, the best under $200 is still the DJ100. At least with female vocals. So far I'm not convinced any of the KRKs are better for one of my favorites genres, but the DJ100 are not meant to be a studio monitor.

Both KRKs are VERY VERY good and you can't go wrong with either of them.

I clearly remember when I had the SRH-440 that the treble was a bit bothersome for me. The 6400's treble on the other hand almost never bothers me at all. I don't know for sure if the 6400 has less treble than the 440, but it's no problem for my ears.

The mids on the 8400 are quite laid back IMO, but the 6400's mids are much more musical and engaging (slightly forward). I love the bass on the 6400, but it doesn't have a ton of bass impact. I still 100% think the 6400 has more bass impact (slightly) but the 8400 has more bass extension.

People who love bass heavy headphones such as the DT-990, XB500, D1100 and others should avoid the KRKs. All the bass will be there, but it's just presented a little different. BOTH KRKs make my DJ100 look like a bass monster and it's most certainly not.

For your music, the 6400 should be perfect. I'm about 95% sure now I prefer the 6400 over the 8400, but if I listened to a ton of classical music or stuff that had a good soundstage in the recording, I'd probably go with the 8400 despite the less forward mids. As I always said, the 8400 seems better for use in a studio. The 6400 seems a little more fun to listen to. The 8400 seems a tiny bit more clear than the 6400. Level of detail varies between songs. On some songs the 6400 has more and others the 8400 has more. Strange.

I just wish the 8400's mids were a tad more forward sounding.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dissonant 

Is it darker than the SRH440s? I found those a tad too treble happy - kind of like an overexposed image - looks nice, but glaring.

 

Oh, and are the mids more on the dry side of neutral, or the musical side? I gather the dynamic range is pretty good, so no worries there, if the bass is tight enough - I am very sensitive to bass.

 

Also, I am interested in the build quality. Does it match up to the ZX700, which has an ABS body, similar to the HD25-I II?

 

Very interested in picking these up, especially, since I have been looking out for a slightly more musical SRH440 with superior soundstage and separation.

Mainly listen to mainstream Jazz (Diana Krall) and JPop.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Katun 

Well, kinda just got done with a nice listening session between these two.

As far as initial testing goes, from what I'm gathering the 6400:

 

- Has a thinner, lighter, less flavored sound

- Definitely has a more forward midrange

- Has very, and I mean very little bass

- Sounds slightly less natural, realistic

- A bit more fatiguing to listen to overall

 

Both are still quite different enough that it would strictly depend on preference.

But from what I'm experiencing, I'm still favoring the 8400 more so.

It's nice how we all prefer different sounding headphones and signatures. My opinion also is that for these you just pick what sound signature you prefer. Both are good. I actually now prefer the 6400 for my music. Of course I LOVE forward mids.

My 6400 has quite good bass and my pair actually has more bass impact than the new 8400. Very slight improvement, but the 8400 I have has more extended bass. It's bass impact is almost non-existent. Bass may improve if you have VERY good clamping force.

The clamping force on my pair is like a 7/10. My old HD-650 was like a 9.5

I just wrote up a short comparison of what i'm hearing. Not a full review, but might be useful for some. Have to cut and paste that next. You probably might not agree with much of it, but who knows!

Overall I think IMO the 8400 is worth the upgrade, but the 6400 is not much worse. Just have to figure out which one has the signature that matches your preferences the most.
 

Here are just a few comments after I listened to these headphones nearly all night. I listened to a ton of music. I even took notes since I'm a nerd I guess. It's a short comparison between the 8400 ($150) and the 6400 ($99).

BASS

The 6400 seems to have more bass impact than my 8400. The 8400 extends much lower though. My new 8400 has little bass impact, but the bass is all still there. The 6400 still doesn't have a ton of bass impact, but a little more than the 8400. It's not a huge difference. Drums sounds especially pathetic on the 8400. Try "W.M.A" from Pearl Jam on the 8400 to see what I mean. Despite little bass impact on the 8400, the bass on the 8400 sounds a bit better somehow. It's a lot more clear. I think the 6400 does have more mid-bass perhaps. In comparison they make my DJ100 look like an absolute bass monster and they're not even close to that! The bass on the KRKs is just presented a bit different than most headphones.

MUSICALITY

The 6400 is more engaging to me and just a lot more fun to listen to for my music. This is because the mids are more forward. The mids on the 8400 to me sound somewhat laid back. It's as if KRK wanted them to be less fatiguing for long durations. I prefer vocals on the 6400.

TREBLE

I haven't decided which is more treble happy. On paper the 8400 is and can be somewhat bothersome. On some music the treble is more fatiguing on the 6400 and on others it's the 8400. There may be some treble peak on the 8400 somewhere, so that could be why it varies. I believe the 8400 has more extended treble though overall. Could be there is a frequency on the 8400 that my ears are really sensitive to.

DETAIL

When it comes to detail the 6400 isn't far behind. On some music there is detail that can't be heard easily on the 8400 (I noticed this a TON and I was very surprised) but is there on the 6400. What's confusing is that on the 8400 with some other tracks there is clearly more detail. This is usually the case when the recording has a large soundstage. It varies between songs. On one song with the 8400 I could not hear a specific background detail until I boosted the mids by 3db, but it was so easy to hear on the 6400. It was..wind.

BIGGEST DIFFERENCE?

On the dozens of songs I listened to tonight, the biggest difference for me is that the 8400 has a better soundstage somehow. At times all the background details could be heard easier, especially echos in the recording. The size seems the same.

The absolute biggest difference is that the 8400 is a little more clear. On some songs it's impossible to tell the difference and on others it's super easy. It's the easiest to tell the difference on acoustic music with a large soundstage. We're talking like less than 3-5% more clear, if that. Again, on some (even lossless!) recordings you won't hear a difference.

The 6400 seems better for pop music, rock and female vocals. The 8400 seems to do a little better for classical, soundtracks and non bass heavy electronic music such as ambient. For my music, I prefer the 6400. Except for the bass, this comparison reminds me of the K601 vs the K702! The K601 is more like the 6400 and the K702 more like the 8400. As they say, the K702 is "technically" better, just like the 8400 is when compared to the 6400.