Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › The JVC HA-S500.. Appreciation, fan thread.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The JVC HA-S500.. Appreciation, fan thread. - Page 36

post #526 of 8092

http://www.head-fi.org/t/560806/sr60-mod-part-ii/1335#post_7673723

 

This is the real tutorial right? Try it out and tell us what we need :)

post #527 of 8092
Quote:
Originally Posted by nipit View Post

Looks like bobeau is giving the most adequate impressions. Please don't forget to write down your last impressions. And if you own tf10 & er-4p please compare to them, thank you.

More specific out of box impressions. Highs are nice,  sparkly airy without sibilance. Mids do seem slightly recessed but not as much as I remember the TF10 were. Bass is a liitle loose but not bad for out of box. I would compare more to the TF10 but it has been quite a while and my memory isn't what it used to be. I'll do a better write up on Monday after sufficient burn in.


Edited by Norml - 8/16/12 at 11:51am
post #528 of 8092
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobeau View Post

A small update as I've been burning in, probably about 40 hours now with 20 of those listening and 20 actual burning in at a couple notches above listening levels with DnB.

 

1) At open box I thought these were a little bass-shy and rather toppy.

 

2) A few hours of burn-in these changed in the other direction, somewhat muddy/bloated in the bass, and the mids were congested.  After this I started more aggressive burn-in

 

3) Along the way from #2 everything seemed to improve bit by bit.  For the most part I'm doing a sound check on these against some decently burned in FXD-80s and some relatively fresh GR07 MkIIs.  The bass has definitely been reduced a bit and tightened up and the mids are a bit more transparent.  

 

For the most part where things stand are these appear to be something I would classify as a slightly colored fun headphone.  They really reproduce the sub-bass well which is a treat for on-ear cans that don't isolate all that well.  I'm actually reminded a bit of the L3000s I had for 1.5 years, to really reach low like that.  And they're tight and textured here *almost* in the same ballpark as the GR07 but with more drive.  Mid-bass there's a bit of a hump.  I'm finding the mids to be somewhat recessed, like the FXD80s, but maybe not quite to the same degree.  Female vocals come out more upfront, but male vocals can be back in the mix a bit.  Guitars also can be a bit back.  They're not as toppy/sparkly as the FXD80s, but I don't notice a roll-off.  No weird peaks/valleys to my ears.  Basically where things can go from here to make them closer to a reference sound - the bass needs to be reigned in a bit more to be more neutral with the mids.  The mids could do with a touch more clarity - I guess overall it would be what people might call more 'speed'.  Detail retrieval is quite good but I'm on the fence if it's quite as good as the GR07, but they don't quite approach the scalpel-like precision (for a dynamic) of those.  It does seem better than the FXD80s which sound a bit smoothed out overall.  

 

These are pretty freakin' spectacular for the price and I really wonder how they compare against HD25-IIs or 1350s.  I wouldn't be surprised if they played ball.  More aggressive burn-in is in store, I'll report back at hour 100 probably sometime next week.

 

Appreciate bobeau here and all that are contributing to this thread.. 

 

I can now tell all you guys.  Now you know why.  It is over the hype phase now.   It will be just a matter of when you gonna try one. I feel it is our duty as headfiers  to promote the good in our hobby.  It just don't get more good than these. Happy listening to all that get one. It is easy with these. Have one on head and happiness ensues.  I look forward to everyone's updates and more and more fans. So far I do believe it is 100% happiness. That just don't happen in headphone land. 

post #529 of 8092
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norml View Post

More specific out of box impressions. Highs are nice,  sparkly airy without sibilance. Mids do seem slightly recessed but not as much as I remember the TF10 were. Bass is a liitle loose but not bad for out of box. I would compare more to the TF10 but it has been quite a while and my memory isn't what it used to be.


That is an interesting take on the sound. Open box I remember the sound was not as tight or as clean as they sound to me now.. We mention on the FXD thread how the Micro HD drivers in the FXD earphones almost have the speed of BAs and impeccable imagery. It is interesting that you mention they kinda sound like a TF10..

 

Burn in for certain.

post #530 of 8092
Thread Starter 

Believe me. My pair right now. The TF10 can't touch it.

post #531 of 8092
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dsnuts View Post


That is an interesting take on the sound. Open box I remember the sound was not as tight or as clean as they sound to me now.. We mention on the FXD thread how the Micro HD drivers in the FXD earphones almost have the speed of BAs and impeccable imagery. It is interesting that you mention they kinda sound like a TF10..

 

Burn in for certain.

Wasn't saying that they sounded like TF10's. Nipit asked for comparisons to the TF10 and ER4p. All I was comparing was the amount the mids were recessed on the s500 out of box to my memory of the TF10 mids. They really don't sound anything alike to me. 

post #532 of 8092

Thank you bobeau, for giving less hyped impressions. That's why I kept asking "if they really sound this good". I know you guys tend to get really hyped about new things, particularly new things that are promising. Someone on here mimicked my questions like it was foolish to ask...shame!

 

Anyway, I'm sure they really are pretty good. It's just kind of surprising to me considering it's JVC...don't get me wrong, they make quality products, but I've never thought their sound signature to be able to stand up to something like Sennheiser. I was the person who made the original Flats appreciation thread, but going back to them a while ago, I found that I actually hate the way they sound compared to my PX200's.

 

I also owned the JVC HA-M750, and those are more expensive than the HA-S500s. I didn't think particularly highly of them either, again even compared to my PX200's or the porta pros even.
 

So forgive me for being skeptical. I may purchase one of these if a year or so down the road they are still highly regarded.

post #533 of 8092
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norml View Post

Wasn't saying that they sounded like TF10's. Nipit asked for comparisons to the TF10 and ER4p. All I was comparing was the amount the mids were recessed on the s500 out of box to my memory of the TF10 mids. They really don't sound anything alike to me. 


mids. Sorry man I am half spaced out as I was having more than a few adult beverages last night. Got family in town. Can't drink like I used to but I am suffering from this. Lol!

post #534 of 8092

I am trying to figure out how are you any of you finding the mids recessed? Can we all hear that differently? I guess so because nowhere are the mids sounding recessed to my ears. The D2000 has recessed mids, but not the S500. I wonder if some of you think the mids are recessed because of such pronounced bass?

post #535 of 8092
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericp10 View Post

I am trying to figure out how are you any of you finding the mids recessed? Can we all hear that differently? I guess so because nowhere are the mids sounding recessed to my ears. The D2000 has recessed mids, but not the S500. I wonder if some of you think the mids are recessed because of such pronounced bass?

 

I don't think it's one of those things that hits you over the head.  Specifically when I say that I'm comparing against something I just listened to on the GR07 (which are supposed to be nearly ruler flat) and finding certain things sound a bit more distant in the mix.  If I spend alot of time on the S500 then switch to the GR07, the GR07 suddenly feel 'mid-centric'.

 

I do think that assessment is correct though, that it's mostly the bass at play here, prolly the sub-bass is boosted 3 db relative to the rest of the spectrum, and mid-bass like 5-6 db, though it does seem the highs have some sparkle in places but not to the same degree as the FXD80.  

 

Of course this could very well change with more burn-in.  I swore the bass was considerably more prominent/flabbly before I started the more punishing burn-in process.  


Edited by bobeau - 8/16/12 at 1:01pm
post #536 of 8092
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericp10 View Post

I wonder if some of you think the mids are recessed because of such pronounced bass?

Very possible. Also consider that many of the recently posted impressions are intial thoghts with very littlle time on the drivers and on the ears. Maybe recessed isn't the right description either. I'm coming from the fxt90 and in comparison to my very intial listening the mids don't sound as forward.

post #537 of 8092
Quote:
Originally Posted by swaffleman View Post

Thank you bobeau, for giving less hyped impressions. That's why I kept asking "if they really sound this good". I know you guys tend to get really hyped about new things, particularly new things that are promising. Someone on here mimicked my questions like it was foolish to ask...shame!

 

Anyway, I'm sure they really are pretty good. It's just kind of surprising to me considering it's JVC...don't get me wrong, they make quality products, but I've never thought their sound signature to be able to stand up to something like Sennheiser. I was the person who made the original Flats appreciation thread, but going back to them a while ago, I found that I actually hate the way they sound compared to my PX200's.

 

I also owned the JVC HA-M750, and those are more expensive than the HA-S500s. I didn't think particularly highly of them either, again even compared to my PX200's or the porta pros even.
 

So forgive me for being skeptical. I may purchase one of these if a year or so down the road they are still highly regarded.

Proof or it didn't happen.  I don't see anyone here making fun of you for asking this, it was just merely ignored. LoL Don't be so sensitive meng, if this indeed happen peps were merely just having some fun. Most likely your question was answered wayyy back on the thread.  

 

@bowei006 alls you need is a nice new (old if you can stand it haredface.gif) soft pair of socks and a pair of scissors then follow that tutorial above.  You are basically just wrapping the socks over the pleather pads, easy as cake.  

post #538 of 8092
Thread Starter 

Danny you get your velours yet?

post #539 of 8092

An update on my impressions, not much of a big update but...I did hear the highs go a bit more sparkly than it did on open box. At first it was just...at the right, not dull (but I'm used to sparkly signatures so even though I said dull, it did kind of sound dull to me), the mids hasn't changed much yet to me, the only thing that did was that it isn't as forward was it used to be in open box. The bass wasn't easy to hear at open box, but it was audible. The bass went a bit stronger now, it is still a bit flabby, but it did get a bit tighter. I do agree with the rest here that say the mids could use a bit more clarity, but that is because it is TOO smooth. THAT is the reason people are saying that, if people want it to be a bit clearer/sharp then that's fine, but that's actually what I like about these headphones. The a900x is one headphone that I remember being smooth (not as smooth as these) and not having clarity of the mids at the same time. The mids had a veil effect, THAT was my favorite part of the a900x, it had that weird sound that felt as though the singers' voices were liquid, butter, sand, etc. 

 

Out of box - mids were smooth as heck and a bit forward, the highs were balanced, the lows were a bit weak but also bloaty. 

 

34 hour burn-in - Mids were the same but a bit back now, highs are a bit more sparkly, lows are stronger but a bit tighter. 

 

At first I thought the imagery on the headphones changed, but it was just in my mind. 

 

Also, I keep thinking the mids sounded thin, but at the same time I feel it is actually pretty decently thick. It doesn't anywhere near thin as the ck10s or the a900xs, but I had heard it sounded thin sometimes, most likely because it isn't as thick as the ckm500s, lol.

 

also, just listened to real mccoy, come and get your love. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kctlBvsaFuE

 

I heard the original file I have on my pc, don't now if youtube is different since I don't hear it as much as I do on the original file. The male vocals do indeed sound a bit laid back, the guys are behind the females singing it, whoever has the ha-s500 please either confirm or deny these ears of mine. I am almost sure this is how they intended it to sound.


Edited by vlenbo - 8/16/12 at 1:58pm
post #540 of 8092

Something different now shows up....

 

 

Quote:
Latest Event: Isc New York Ny(Usps) 
Departure Scan - August 15, 2012 3:22:00 PM

 

Whatever the hell that means.....lol.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › The JVC HA-S500.. Appreciation, fan thread.