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 120

post #1786 of 2301

that's a big statement , as the eq-5 were selling for 200-250$

 

i used to own a pair of eq-5 and i really liked them , although they were a little 'hot' in the highs - which was hat led me to sell them

 

i will try tomorrow RE-400 , i am intrigued even more to see how these sound

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nulliverse View Post

I use the RE-400 on a daily 20 mile cycle commute, through towns, villages and windswept country roads. I find it isolates better than any other dynamic I've used, and is as good as some BAs. They're also very comfortable.

I've been comparing them to the eq-5 recently, and far prefer the re-400, in all respects.
post #1787 of 2301
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigon_ridge View Post

I guess the ER4 is just exceptionally isolating, then. Glad you like your RE-400, and glad to see a fellow cyclist head-fier! etysmile.gif

Yes, people do speak highly of the ER4s isolation. Happy listening / cycling!
Quote:
Originally Posted by proedros View Post

that's a big statement , as the eq-5 were selling for 200-250$

i used to own a pair of eq-5 and i really liked them , although they were a little 'hot' in the highs - which was hat led me to sell them

i will try tomorrow RE-400 , i am intrigued even more to see how these sound

It's personal preference, of course, but I can't think of one thing I prefer with the eq-5. The re-400 make them sound positively 2D and dry.
post #1788 of 2301
KAgreed the RE 400's sound like BA's. Having replaced my TDK BA 200's with them. Prior to those I had Tpeos H100 hybrids. The 400's isolate the best and are the most comfortable. They are a lot like an improved and extended BA 200. The TDK had a hint more low bass but the bass on 400's is more detailed and more balanced and I give it a hint of boost to get it just right. The highs are substantially better especially after doing a filter tweak. What really arts them apart is their PRAT and dynnamics. This plus their subtely warm, sweet neutrality makes them a lot more fun to listen too. Their was a hint of brightness on some albums before the filter mod...but now they are wonderful. Working on 600's now...need to hear them and save up some extra. But if Fang can do this at $100 I am looking forward to something with less compromise

Happy listening
post #1789 of 2301
Nulliverse you are also correct on soundstaging...these are the most 3d and the most layered as well. They are a hint more forward but not annoyingly so. Images are more solid and have a better sense of height as well. They are remarkable and they show off every tweak I do in front of them.

HAPPY LISTENING!
post #1790 of 2301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nulliverse View Post

I've been comparing them to the eq-5 recently, and far prefer the re-400, in all respects.

 

+1 to that. I liked the sound of the eq-5 but could never get a good fit. And while I liked the sound, I didn't love it. Easily slipped into sibilance, and other harshness in the highs. I think the RE-400 draws on a lot of the positive qualities of the eq-5, while making an overall far more listenable experience. Ordered my RE-600s yesterday, eagerly awaiting them!

post #1791 of 2301
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgwtriode View Post

KAgreed the RE 400's sound like BA's. Having replaced my TDK BA 200's with them. Prior to those I had Tpeos H100 hybrids. The 400's isolate the best and are the most comfortable. They are a lot like an improved and extended BA 200. The TDK had a hint more low bass but the bass on 400's is more detailed and more balanced and I give it a hint of boost to get it just right. The highs are substantially better especially after doing a filter tweak. What really arts them apart is their PRAT and dynnamics. This plus their subtely warm, sweet neutrality makes them a lot more fun to listen too. Their was a hint of brightness on some albums before the filter mod...but now they are wonderful. Working on 600's now...need to hear them and save up some extra. But if Fang can do this at $100 I am looking forward to something with less compromise

Happy listening

 

I agree completely with the bold. The PRAT and dynamics are easily the best I've heard at the pricepoint, and amongst the best I've heard at the pricepoint above it. I don't think that they extend better than the BA-200's, however. I love the BA-200's highs - they're articulate and very smooth - even if less forward. As a whole, I still prefer the RE-400 by a bit, particularly for EDM, where the BA-200 sounds lacklustre and unremarkable. Again, I put that down to the RE-400s superior punch, depth of soundstage and associated dynamics. The BA-200 still wins me over for blues and 70's rock though!

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jgwtriode View Post

Nulliverse you are also correct on soundstaging...these are the most 3d and the most layered as well. They are a hint more forward but not annoyingly so. Images are more solid and have a better sense of height as well. They are remarkable and they show off every tweak I do in front of them.

HAPPY LISTENING!

 

Agreed. The soundstage is my favorite aspect - it's not nearly the widest or deepest I've heard - but is fantastically well proportioned. Height and depth relative to width are nigh on perfect. It makes for a very engaging and immersive experience!

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by brhfl 

 

+1 to that. I liked the sound of the eq-5 but could never get a good fit. And while I liked the sound, I didn't love it. Easily slipped into sibilance, and other harshness in the highs. I think the RE-400 draws on a lot of the positive qualities of the eq-5, while making an overall far more listenable experience. Ordered my RE-600s yesterday, eagerly awaiting them!

 

Very interested to hear you RE-600 impressions! Unlike you, I get a perfect fit with the EQ-5, but still find them lacking in depth / dynamics compared to the RE-400. I'm actually really trying to appreciate them for what they are, rather than compare them critically, but find myself pulling them out half way through an album and reaching for the Hifimans.

 

 

Although I've not yet had a chance to compare the RE-400 to the 7550, I have found them to be on par with the CK10 in terms of soundstage and dynamics. The only IEMs I currently own that beat them in this regard (by quite a large amount, understandably), are the AUD-8X (8 driver custom) and 1plus2. Not bad for a $99 IEM!

 

I'd hate for people take this out of context, so will again highlight that this is with regards to soundstage proportions and dynamics only. I do not feel, however, that the RE-400 has any glaring weaknesses. The S2 are more exciting at both ends, but noticeably less cohesive overall. Most of the TWFKs out-sparkle it with ease, yet are simply less well rounded and listenable.  

 

It's hard not to love the RE-400. In due course I'll be selling off 90% of my gear to ease the wallets 1plus2>uber>HDP R10 protests. The RE-400 will almost certainly be in the remaining 10% however! 

post #1792 of 2301

Pretty sure Nulliverse & I are brothers from another mother.. considering we've (unknowingly) owned a lot of the same phones.. and hear things in a frighteningly similar manner.  I've owned the e-Q5 and RE-400 as well.. and Nulliverse comparison between them is spot. freaking. on.

 

BTW, Nulliverse.. I just bought the Uber Bifrost yesterday (and I did not know you had it on your buy list).. no joke.. our kindred gear chasing continues.. LMAO.. 

post #1793 of 2301
Nulliverse enjoyed all your comments and looking forward to your comparisons with the 600's. Have part time teaching coming up with school year starting...so soon as I can come up with some extra funds will be getting a pair. So I will continue to enjoy the 400's. I agree that the BA 200's are smoother and seem to have a slightly more even upper frequency presentation. On brighter recordings they do have some advantages, but adding a thin double knit polyester layer between the foam and the external fabric of the 400's really tamed those differences.

The 400 now sounds kind of in between the BA 200 and the stock 400 with that change. It is more relaxed with a nicer sense of bloom and air and...well it's almost like the resonance hid a bit of both and now it is not only clearer but also easier to listen too. If anything images are a bit more solid. Not sure why but they are a touch more present. That sense of ease takes nothing away from the pace or dynamics or liveliness of their presentation.

I probably wasn't clear on my extended comment about the 400 being like an extended 200. On my phone I have to wrestle with it locking up on the internet so I have to type comments quickly and then send. So some of my reply's are lacking in coherence.

Anyway the TDK does go a bit lower, but with my foam sleeved double flange, the seal I get with these seems to punch up the bass more and a bit of bass boost from my Neco really helps. That boost wasn't quite right with the BA 200 so I would leave it off generally. On the RE 400 it's well nigh perfect and allows the impression to give me everything the 200's did in the bass but more detail a better balance and a better integration with the lower mids.

The new Bifrost sounds interesting! Knowing Flysweep's tastes from previous conversations it must be quite amazing if he has also gotten one.

Anyway I look forward in anticipation of reading your ongoing comments and having enough over the next couple of month's to get some 600's and then either purchase or build a good balanced amp to really exploit their potential.

Happy Listening!
post #1794 of 2301
I heard both the RE400 and EQ-5 in a shop and my winner was EQ-5. To my ears it sounded smoother with a more rounded & liquid tone. The RE400 has better PRAT but I like the soft presentation of the EQ-5 better. I never had a problem with the EQ-5's highs but I tame the range between 500HZ and 2,5 khz, which is kind of boosted, with EQ.
post #1795 of 2301
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlySweep View Post

Pretty sure Nulliverse & I are brothers from another mother.. considering we've (unknowingly) owned a lot of the same phones.. and hear things in a frighteningly similar manner.  I've owned the e-Q5 and RE-400 as well.. and Nulliverse comparison between them is spot. freaking. on.

 

BTW, Nulliverse.. I just bought the Uber Bifrost yesterday (and I did not know you had it on your buy list).. no joke.. our kindred gear chasing continues.. LMAO.. 

 

 

"Put Flysweep to ignore, he has too much to answer for" No offense brethren, just passing on the message from my grief stricken wallet... wink_face.gif

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jgwtriode View Post

Nulliverse enjoyed all your comments and looking forward to your comparisons with the 600's. Have part time teaching coming up with school year starting...so soon as I can come up with some extra funds will be getting a pair. So I will continue to enjoy the 400's. I agree that the BA 200's are smoother and seem to have a slightly more even upper frequency presentation. On brighter recordings they do have some advantages, but adding a thin double knit polyester layer between the foam and the external fabric of the 400's really tamed those differences.

The 400 now sounds kind of in between the BA 200 and the stock 400 with that change. It is more relaxed with a nicer sense of bloom and air and...well it's almost like the resonance hid a bit of both and now it is not only clearer but also easier to listen too. If anything images are a bit more solid. Not sure why but they are a touch more present. That sense of ease takes nothing away from the pace or dynamics or liveliness of their presentation.

I probably wasn't clear on my extended comment about the 400 being like an extended 200. On my phone I have to wrestle with it locking up on the internet so I have to type comments quickly and then send. So some of my reply's are lacking in coherence.

Anyway the TDK does go a bit lower, but with my foam sleeved double flange, the seal I get with these seems to punch up the bass more and a bit of bass boost from my Neco really helps. That boost wasn't quite right with the BA 200 so I would leave it off generally. On the RE 400 it's well nigh perfect and allows the impression to give me everything the 200's did in the bass but more detail a better balance and a better integration with the lower mids.

The new Bifrost sounds interesting! Knowing Flysweep's tastes from previous conversations it must be quite amazing if he has also gotten one.

Anyway I look forward in anticipation of reading your ongoing comments and having enough over the next couple of month's to get some 600's and then either purchase or build a good balanced amp to really exploit their potential.

Happy Listening!

 

 

Likewise, jgwtriode. I'm increasingly intrigued by this reversible mod - will no doubt give it a go when I get the chance. I'm with you re: RE-400 vs BA-200 bass, and prefer the Hifimans lows, regardless of tips. They may not extend quite as low, but punch harder and are conveyed with more detail. They do appear to integrate better with the lower mids, which adds to the RE-400s excellent sense of cohesion.  

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zachgraz View Post

I heard both the RE400 and EQ-5 in a shop and my winner was EQ-5. To my ears it sounded smoother with a more rounded & liquid tone. The RE400 has better PRAT but I like the soft presentation of the EQ-5 better. I never had a problem with the EQ-5's highs but I tame the range between 500HZ and 2,5 khz, which is kind of boosted, with EQ.

 

 

EQ-5... Liquid? Interesting how people can hear things so differently. To me, the EQ-5 are the antithesis of liquid. They sound parched... utterly arid. The only thing I've heard that is drier, is the ASG-1 (prior to revision). Granted, they've a good sense of balance, to go with airy soundstage, but those desert-sand mids leave me thirsting for RE-400 cacti...

 

Out of interest, how do you find the EQ-5 without EQ? Listening to them both side by side, I can't imagine how someone could find Otofons smoother. Not that I find the EQ-5 particularly peaky, mind you. That's really not my quam with them. 

post #1796 of 2301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nulliverse View Post

EQ-5... Liquid? Interesting how people can hear things so differently. To me, the EQ-5 are the antithesis of liquid. They sound parched... utterly arid. The only thing I've heard that is drier, is the ASG-1 (prior to revision). Granted, they've a good sense of balance, to go with airy soundstage, but those desert-sand mids leave me thirsting for RE-400 cacti...

 

Out of interest, how do you find the EQ-5 without EQ? Listening to them both side by side, I can't imagine how someone could find Otofons smoother. Not that I find the EQ-5 particularly peaky, mind you. That's really not my quam with them. 

 

'The antithesis of liquid' is how I would've summed up the EQ-5s as well, had I thought of it first ;)

 

I, too, am curious about zachgraz's impressions of EQ-5 w/o EQ. I never fiddled much with EQ on them because of fit issues. 

post #1797 of 2301

@Nulliverse and @brhfl

 

Interesting. Arid, dry ... I would have described the RE400 like that in comparision to the EQ-5. ;)
I found the EQ-5 a bit too mid-centered and peaky without EQ (500Hz-2,5kHz) . Without EQ they remind of the mid-forward Hifiman RE262.

The EQ-5s represent one of my all-time favourite IEMs in therms of sound signature. Still I am going to upgrade because I want more resolution and larger soundstage.


Edited by zachgraz - 7/29/13 at 12:37pm
post #1798 of 2301
Third Eye Blinds Jumper 2006 remastered sounds unbelievably good on my re 400s

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2
post #1799 of 2301
Quote:
Originally Posted by zachgraz View Post

@Nulliverse and @brhfl

 

Interesting. Arid, dry ... I would have described the RE400 like that in comparision to the EQ-5. ;)
I found the EQ-5 a bit too mid-centered and peaky without EQ (500Hz-2,5kHz) . Without EQ they remind of the mid-forward Hifiman RE262.

The EQ-5s represent one of my all-time favorite IEMs in therms of sound signature. Still I am going to upgrade because I want more resolution and larger soundstage.

 

Now that's I phone that I do find liquid. I can't say the EQ-5 remind me of them though. I remember the RE-262 as having great depth of soundstage and very forward, 'euphoinic' mids. I hear the EQ-5 as less romantic - much more balance.. It's sensible phone, in stark contrast to the RE-262s elegant indulgence. I find the RE-400 to be a very good compromise between balance, subtle mid focus, clarity and smoothness.

 

What are you thinking of upgrading to?

 

In reference to build issues I've seen mentioned intermittently throughout this thread, I'll mention that I've not yet experienced any problems. Part of the cable is the same as that of the RE-272, which actually split on me. Perhaps I was just unlucky... but am now quietly cautious nevertheless.  

post #1800 of 2301

Surprise! 

 

 

Some quick aesthetic notes.  The housings are indeed the same size (physically speaking).  However, the coloring and texture make the RE-600 feel smaller than the RE-400; they are the same size though.  The cabling on the 600 definitely feels a lot better than that on the RE-400.  Like many of you know, the headphone jack is terminated by a balanced jack; so unless your source supports this, you'll have to use the included adapter. 

 

Tips selection has improved since the original RE-400 was released as well.  You will still get the standard small dual flange (3 pairs), large dual flange (1 pair), and filter single flange (2 pairs), but also a set of single flange clear tips (S/M/L) as well as one pair of single flange black tips.  Comply Foam is also included (M/L) in the package. 

 

A generic, unmarked case is also included with the RE-600.  It looks similar to the MEElectronics case without any markings (but is sized like the one that comes with the A161P). 

 

The signature differences are actually quite small going from RE-400 to RE-600, but they are there.  The signature changes from a warm signature to a warm and sweet one.  Treble does get a little softer, but smoother.  The RE-600's treble seems a lot less edgy and sharp in contrast to the RE-400.  The RE-600 seems to extend a little further than the RE-400 though.  I think this might be more perception as the treble is less peaky as a whole.  Bass presence has increased a little bit while depth as as well.  Clarity actually sounds a little more clear and refined coming from the RE-400, the difference is minute, but there.  Vocals are the part that will make the biggest difference.  They are more lively as a whole.  They allow much better dynamics in the voice by being able to get more lush, but also provide more energy.  HiFiMan didn't move much from their standard signature (only heard the RE-0, RE-400, and RE-600), but the differences are there. 

 

Most of these differences are shown in the measurements that both Tyll and Rin did BTW.  But of course, the graph readers didn't read it like this.  The analysis of objective data is subjective at its core, remember that. 

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