Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Hifiman IEM's: RE-400 and RE-600
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Hifiman IEM's: RE-400 and RE-600 - Page 89

post #1321 of 2523
Quote:
Originally Posted by proedros View Post

so many people fighting here on scientific inteoretations


we just wanna hear the opinion of people who have HEARD  RE-400 and RE-600


let me repeat again the crucial verb here...


HEARD RE-400 and RE-600

Having heard both, I personally prefer the RE-600 using my balanced amp and lossless files. For lower bitrate MP3, perhaps the RE-400 might be the better choice as the slightly brighter highs might help compensate for the highs lost in the lossy codecs compressed files. I also found the build quality be be more refined in the 600.
post #1322 of 2523

Considering all of the comparisons of the RE-400's to much more expensive IEM's, would it be accurate to state that if one is looking for balance and accuracy, the 400's offer a higher performance to cost ratio than just about any other IEM out there, regardless of cost?

post #1323 of 2523
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiFlight View Post


Having heard both, I personally prefer the RE-600 using my balanced amp and lossless files. For lower bitrate MP3, perhaps the RE-400 might be the better choice as the slightly brighter highs might help compensate for the highs lost in the lossy codecs compressed files. I also found the build quality be be more refined in the 600.

I already find the build quality in the RE-400 to be purdy good. I like the cable housing, as it has a nice feel, and really deals with microphonics well. Will the kevlar on the RE-600 protect me from flying bullets? :o

post #1324 of 2523
Quote:
Originally Posted by lwien View Post

Considering all of the comparisons of the RE-400's to much more expensive IEM's, would it be accurate to state that if one is looking for balance and accuracy, the 400's offer a higher performance to cost ratio than just about any other IEM out there, regardless of cost?

Let me just put it this way, I find the "accuracy monster" that is the ER4S not truly as accurate as the RE-400, due to the 4S's super lean and flighty sound and its slightly rolled-off-ness on both ends. The ER4S can sometimes sound prickly in the highest trebles. The fans in the ER4 thread will deny that the 4S is actually rolled off in the treble compared to the RE400, but I hear otherwise, having owned both; and their graphs even confirm it. The ER4S handles the lowest lows very poorly. On the RE-400, I actually hear sounds I never heard from the 4S, not because they weren't there; but because they were rendered horribly inaccurately... anything that "rumbles" the 4S cannot reproduce. The ER4S is slightly too energy between 1.2kHz-2.5kHz. Finally, when considering accuracy, one also must take into account accurate soundstage. The RE-400 wins in that regard, easily. I personally can't listen to the ER4S without EQ, as I like to listen to music slightly loud, but the 4S's treble won't allow that. All in all, the RE-400 imo is much more accurate and balanced.

post #1325 of 2523

Here's an interesting review I never saw before:  http://stereodesk.com/collections/re-400-impressions

post #1326 of 2523
Quote:
Originally Posted by lwien View Post

Here's an interesting review I never saw before:  http://stereodesk.com/collections/re-400-impressions

Wow nice find. I haven't read that one, either. The guys seems to think very highly of the $99 iem... just as I do. beerchug.gif

post #1327 of 2523
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigon_ridge View Post

Wow nice find. I haven't read that one, either. The guys seems to think very highly of the $99 iem... just as I do. beerchug.gif

 

Yup.   A review that wasn't based on graphs...................just the music.

post #1328 of 2523
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pianist View Post

 

I was serious, but obviously I was just speculating, since I haven't heard the GR07 and graphs only tell a part of the story. Regarding the dip in the treble above 10 kHz, I am pretty sure that measuring equipment can't provide reliable frequency response measurements of headphones in that part of the spectrum. The overall level of the upper, as well as highs in general looks very neutral on the GR07 IMO. There are no spikes in the treble that I can see on that graph. If you want to see what spikes look like, take a look at Sony EX1000 measurements - those are nasty spikes and GR07 has none. Regarding the 300 Hz square wave response, GR07's has a great shape - the proper, emphasized leading edge, transitioning pretty quickly into a fairly clean, almost completely horizontal line, indicating a very neutral tonal balance. I agree about the impulse response being better on RE-400, but GR07's ringing is so low in amplitude that it should hardly be audible, if at all. Compare it's impulse response to that of Sennheiser HD650, for example. Regarding 30 Hz square wave response shape, GR07's has good shape to it - it is only slightly more curved than that of RE-400 and still indicates a very nicely extended and tight bass response. Most dynamic headphones can't beat GR07 on the 30 Hz square wave and the majority have a pathetic one compared to that of GR07 - either completely collapsed, out of phase, bent the other way (indication of boomy, exaggerated bass). BTW, UE600 ($100 MSRP) is a really well measuring IEM that also has a similar square wave response to that of RE-400 and does have a very well extended, tight bass response in actual listening (I owned two pairs of them). RE-400 does sound better than UE600 though, especially in the treble.

I see a massive one at 16 or 17kHz... are we looking at the same graphs? This is the one I'm looking at: http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/VSonicGR07.pdf

 

You may be right that the higher frequencies are not well detected, but I definitely heard its treble spikes when I owned them. The ER4S also has a similar spike in approximately the same region, which I also hear. It makes maracas sound rather unpleasant when going slightly above normal listening volume.

post #1329 of 2523
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigon_ridge View Post

I see a massive one at 16 or 17kHz... are we looking at the same graphs? This is the one I'm looking at: http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/VSonicGR07.pdf

 

You may be right that the higher frequencies are not well detected, but I definitely heard its treble spikes when I owned them. The ER4S also has a similar spike in approximately the same region, which I also hear. It makes maracas sound rather unpleasant when going slightly above normal listening volume.

 

As Pianist says: "Regarding the dip in the treble above 10 kHz, I am pretty sure that measuring equipment can't provide reliable frequency response measurements of headphones in that part of the spectrum."

 

I also believe the higher the frequency the more unreliable the data gets and should be taken with a grain of salt.

 

Here is info on how to interpret square wave data:

http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/headphone-measurements-explained-square-wave-response

 

Hope to see some CSD plots as that would complement the data on Innerfidelity.

 

Does anyone know the final release date of RE-600? I check the Hifiman website every day but still no info on them.

post #1330 of 2523
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigon_ridge View Post

anything that "rumbles" the 4S cannot reproduce.

 

ER4S is only 2 db down at 20 Hz and 1 db down at 30 Hz compared to 1 kHz. That's hardly a roll off.

post #1331 of 2523

I also found this interesting on page 2 regarding frequency response.

http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/headphone-measurements-explained-square-wave-response-page-2

 

Ideal response


Frequency response:
Flat to 2kHz, gentle slope to 5kHz, gentle peak at 10kHz.

 

RE-400 does resemble that "ideal" to some degree. Although I'm not sure who came up with this ideal response. I guess if a frequency response resembles that ideal one would get a good balance between bass, mids and treble. And I still miss some upper treble in RE-400. If it just had some more it would be perfect in my book as the mids would not stand out as much (regarding balance).

post #1332 of 2523
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigon_ridge View Post

I see a massive one at 16 or 17kHz... are we looking at the same graphs? This is the one I'm looking at: http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/VSonicGR07.pdf

 

You may be right that the higher frequencies are not well detected, but I definitely heard its treble spikes when I owned them. The ER4S also has a similar spike in approximately the same region, which I also hear. It makes maracas sound rather unpleasant when going slightly above normal listening volume.

 

Even if the spike is there, it is only in one channel and still about 5 db quieter than response at 1 kHz. The fact that it only shows up in one channel probably means that it is a fit issue. Our ears are more sensitive to 1 kHz than to 16-17 kHz. If you find 16-17 kHz unpleasant, then the sound at 1 kHz, which is 5 db louder and to which the ear is more sensitive should be even less pleasant.

post #1333 of 2523
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pianist View Post

 

ER4S is only 2 db down at 20 Hz and 1 db down at 30 Hz compared to 1 kHz. That's hardly a roll off.

True, but it still lacks body/reverberation which makes it sub-bass still relatively anemic and unrealistic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pianist View Post

 

Even if the spike is there, it is only in one channel and still about 5 db quieter than response at 1 kHz. The fact that it only shows up in one channel probably means that it is a fit issue. Our ears are more sensitive to 1 kHz than to 16-17 kHz. If you find 16-17 kHz unpleasant, then the sound at 1 kHz, which is 5 db louder and to which the ear is more sensitive should be even less pleasant.

Trust me, it's there. Do a sweep test to confirm. I'd rather a have a headphone whose treble is consistent bright or consistently subdued, as it's much easier to correct with EQ, rather that one that spikes or dips suddenly between the two extremes; and it really messes up timbre without EQ correction. Also, you can't compare the relative "pleasantness" of a 1kHz and a 16kHz frequencies based on loudness, as the human ear and brain don't even recognize the extreme highs as "music" or sound. It's more like a sensation, just like the lowest frequencies. Above 16kHz, with too much energy you feel a stinging sensation that some may interpret as "sparkliness." Too much of this and it may be felt as "tizzy" and painful. Imo the RE-400 could use a bit more energy (5 dB) above 14kHz, though honestly, too little in this region is more forgivable than too much.

post #1334 of 2523
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigon_ridge View Post

I see a massive one at 16 or 17kHz... are we looking at the same graphs? This is the one I'm looking at: http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/VSonicGR07.pdf

 

You may be right that the higher frequencies are not well detected, but I definitely heard its treble spikes when I owned them. The ER4S also has a similar spike in approximately the same region, which I also hear. It makes maracas sound rather unpleasant when going slightly above normal listening volume.

There's supposed to be a natural ear canal resonance in that region. If you're hearing an unpleasant treble spike at almost 10 decibels below the almost adjacent 10kHz level, can you hear the RE400's spike at an even lower frequency at less than 5 dB below 1kHz level? If not, there may be something abnormal going on with your hearing.

Have you tried this? Of course, I'd take this with a grain of salt because music has much less high-frequency energy than white noise does.

 

Anyway, it seems like the compensation curve the ER4S uses just doesn't suit you. Which is understandable, since everyone's hearing is a bit different. You'd be completely right in finding something else that specifically suits you better and you seem to have found it in the RE600. 

You just need to qualify your statements with the fact that it only applies to your own hearing lest someone who's never heard the ER4S/RE600/etc reads it and assumes it would also apply to them.

post #1335 of 2523
Quote:

Originally Posted by higbvuyb View Post

can you hear the RE400's spike at an even lower frequency at less than 5 dB below 1kHz level?

Which spike? The one at 6kHz? Yes, I can hear it. I don't think it's that severe at all.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by higbvuyb View Post

Anyway, it seems like the compensation curve the ER4S uses just doesn't suit you. Which is understandable, since everyone's hearing is a bit different. You'd be completely right in finding something else that specifically suits you better and you seem to have found it in the RE600. 

You just need to qualify your statements with the fact that it only applies to your own hearing lest someone who's never heard the ER4S/RE600/etc reads it and assumes it would also apply to them.

We're not talking about the 600. That's silly that you think I should have to state that they only apply to my own hearing, as many may hear the same. No one has ever qualified their sonic impressions at head-fi with "the following only applies to how I hear X, Y, Z." Of course everyone hears differently, that's a given.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Hifiman IEM's: RE-400 and RE-600