The graphs don't tell the whole story, they never do. I've seen plenty of headphones with extremely similar FR graphs that sound very different from each other.
 
Granted that isn't what happened here, clearly these are made and tuned by the same company. But... know what other company makes headphones with almost all identical FR graphs? Etymotic. Even Rin says she can't hear the difference between the ER4 and HF series. Does that mean differences don't exist? Nope not at all. There are most certainly differences. The question then becomes are the differences worth the price jump?
 
That is ultimately up to the person and their wallet. The RE400 and RE600 were strikingly similar. The RE600 seemed like a more refined version of the RE400 with a TRRS execution.
 
For me... the price jump just isn't worth it. The RE400 gives me everything the RE600 has to offer for my needs. 

Quote:

inks said:

Honestly, after seeing RE600s graph, it seems like such a ripoff, might as well get a RE400. I had already suspected little change [same housing/same driver], but this is even less than RE272 to RE262 which were also quite close. RE600 has less treble than RE400, oh boy...

Click to expand...

 
 
That is sounding like a manufacturer taking the express bus to covering different price points.

Quote:

kyuuketsuki said:

Granted that isn't what happened here, clearly these are made and tuned by the same company. But... know what other company makes headphones with almost all identical FR graphs? Etymotic. Even Rin says he can't hear the difference between the ER4 and HF series. Does that mean differences don't exist? Nope not at all. There are most certainly differences. The question then becomes are the differences worth the price jump?

Click to expand...

I don't understand. Why would a difference that you can't hear be worth a price jump?

You'd still want to audition if possible, no?

Hey Inks, I know this is getting ahead of things but if Rin gets a set of RE-600 to measure, would he try them balanced too?

Quote:

higbvuyb said:

I don't understand. Why would a difference that you can't hear be worth a price jump?

Click to expand...

 
I made it rather clear... RIN said he couldn't hear the differences between the HF and ER4. That doesn't mean that others can't or that others wouldn't see the value in buying the ER4. The same can be said with the RE-400 and RE-600. 

Quote:

kyuuketsuki said:

 
I made it rather clear... RIN said he couldn't hear the differences between the HF and ER4. That doesn't mean that others can't or that others wouldn't see the value in buying the ER4. The same can be said with the RE-400 and RE-600. 

Click to expand...

Recall your original statement, that a graph doesn't tell the 'whole story'. Who said that an FR graph tells the whole story? It's simply that most of the difference between headphones is represented by differences in frequency response if you can interpret them correctly. Why is this example relevant? What is 'refined'? How do you determine that an earphone is 'more refined'?
 
 

vwinter said:

You'd still want to audition if possible, no?

Click to expand...

Nobody said that they would not audition the RE-600 if they could. Unfortunately one poster above did not realise that there is no value in trying to mock an opinion that nobody is actually holding.

Quote:

higbvuyb said:

Recall your original statement, that a graph doesn't tell the 'whole story'. Who said that an FR graph tells the whole story? It's simply that most of the difference between headphones is represented by differences in frequency response if you can interpret them correctly. Why is this example relevant? What is 'refined'? How do you determine that an earphone is 'more refined'?

Click to expand...

 
I was referring people who considered the closeness in graphs between the 400s and the 600s to mean that there are no differences or that the RE-600, and is thus a rip-off at $400. Which is why I brought up the ER4 vs HF series of Etymotic.
 
As for what I mean by refined is that the bass, to me, seemed more articulate and controlled on the RE-600s. Also the treble seemed to have better extension and to me, it presented certain notes and instruments better to my ears, like the violin. I could tell they were cut from the same cloth, so to speak, but that the RE-600 had a bit more clarity and control overall. The sound signature while being almost identical, the RE-600 seemed to genuinely have the better sound. This was especially true when paired with the HM901. Granted this is only my brief impressions, I only listened to the RE-600s for about 10-15 minutes, where as I listened to the RE-400s for probably close to 15 hours now, since I own them.
 
Edit: and I'm not mocking anyone's opinion. I'm stating that, while FR graphs are a great tool, they aren't always indicative of how good a headphone is. I never even had a mocking tone to my posts. I brought up Rin, and what he said about the HF vs ER because it is relevant. Some people will hear a significant difference others won't. 

Well I think graphs are a bit sterile.....Ears are different, we all hear different, then there's tips and fits etc. My only wish is that i can hear both & then make my mind up....But thats easier said than done in Melbourne.....

I absolutely love my re-400s. They just sound perfect to my ears.
Like any iem though, experimenting with tips can pay huge dividends.

After trialling my way through my goody bag of assorted tips - accumulated over years of itchy wallet syndrome - I have finally settled on this little mod:

1. Take the super large dual flanges tips that come with the re-400s.
2. Cut off the top flanges at its base.
3. Put these ex-top flanges on the re-400s and put in ears.

Those willing to try it, let me know what you think. Works a treat for me - perfect fit and sound combo.

maguire said:

Well I think graphs are a bit sterile.....Ears are different, we all hear different, then there's tips and fits etc. My only wish is that i can hear both & then make my mind up....But thats easier said than done in Melbourne.....

Click to expand...

Not only does everyone hear differently, one must also keep in mind that frequency response graphs only measure the amplitude of a swept sinewave. They do not imply anything in regard to tonality, timbre, etc. It is possible, in fact very likely, that two different headphones that "measure" identical frequency response curves will sound totally different when reproducing music.

Well graphs obviously are useful but to a point.... X2 Hiflight

Quote:

muzeick said:

I absolutely love my re-400s. They just sound perfect to my ears.
Like any iem though, experimenting with tips can pay huge dividends.

After trialling my way through my goody bag of assorted tips - accumulated over years of itchy wallet syndrome - I have finally settled on this little mod:

1. Take the super large dual flanges tips that come with the re-400s.
2. Cut off the top flanges at its base.
3. Put these ex-top flanges on the re-400s and put in ears.

Those willing to try it, let me know what you think. Works a treat for me - perfect fit and sound combo.

Click to expand...

Does it sound so different from the uncut dual flange, considering that much of the big flange goes over the housing anyway?

hiflight said:

Not only does everyone hear differently, one must also keep in mind that frequency response graphs only measure the amplitude of a swept sinewave. They do not imply anything in regard to tonality, timbre, etc. It is possible, in fact very likely, that two different headphones that "measure" identical frequency response curves will sound totally different when reproducing music.

Click to expand...

Tonality is FR dependent and so are timbre, though with timbre the distortion figure will play a role. Do you have any scientific backing for that claim? Cause all the research suggest that when FR are matched, the headphones are rated closely in blind subjective tests.

Can't believe Hifiman decided to have less treble than RE400, when it actually needed more. RE272 is surely missed....oh well

Quote:

inks said:

Tonality is FR dependent and so are timbre, though with timbre the distortion figure will play a role. Do you have any scientific backing for that claim? Cause all the research suggest that when FR are matched, the headphones are rated closely in blind subjective tests.

Can't believe Hifiman decided to have less treble than RE400, when it actually needed more. RE272 is surely missed....oh well

Click to expand...

 
Do you have any scientific proof that timbre is dependent on the FR.  Or is this another one of Inks' assumptions?  Seriously though, would you mind enlightening us on what frequencies are specifically impacted and how they impact timbre?  If not, you have as much information on the subject as he does. 
 
As for everyone hearing different.  There is plenty of scientific evidence out there.  The resonance peak of the ear is dependent on the length of the ear canal while the head-related transfer function is highly dependent on the shape of the outer ear and what that amplifies.  So yes, there is scientific evidence that everyone will perceive an IEM different because one of the goals is to reproduce the acoustics of the ear canal and outer ear...  Both of these vary from person to person. The fact that there are 3+ compensation curves for the 3 kHz spike alone should be enough to show that everyone hears different. How the heck can "flat" mean three things? 
 
Inks, there are a lot of things I will agree with you on, that are scientifically supported.  However, you always seem to make a few posts that have absolutely NO scientific backing, none whatsoever.  You know, that filter in that tip makes a huge difference for treble reproduction...  Oh man. 

quartertone said:

Does it sound so different from the uncut dual flange, considering that much of the big flange goes over the housing anyway?

Click to expand...

Not really any major difference in sound, except it fits in my ears a whole lot easier this way!