Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Hifiman HE-400i and HE-560: From CES to Pre-Launch
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Hifiman HE-400i and HE-560: From CES to Pre-Launch - Page 110

post #1636 of 3089
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greed View Post
 

 

I stopped reading after you said the HE-500 and HE-6 have similar tonality... :rolleyes:

To a dynamics-only owner, HE4/400/5/5LE/500/6 all have similar tonalities; heck, bundle in all the Audezes too.

 

To a non-audiophile, most headphones over $200 have similar tonalities.

 

Sometimes we take being able to tell apart very minute differences for granted, truth is most people don't (maybe because they don't have a solid method of comparison, or have suboptimal listening environments, or simply don't care for small differences).

post #1637 of 3089
They definitely had differences in tonality I respected both enough to not compare them in my rant. Most obvious of the two was the bass. The 500s tonalities were enough to keep it musical and refined the 6 didn't skimp in the tonal attributes and just did them right.
post #1638 of 3089
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoctaCosmos View Post

They definitely had differences in tonality I respected both enough to not compare them in my rant. Most obvious of the two was the bass. The 500s tonalities were enough to keep it musical and refined the 6 didn't skimp in the tonal attributes and just did them right.

If you look into some measurements of the two cans on the interwebs, you will immediately notice that HE6's base is scarily linear, while HE500 has a slight hump (almost like dynamic cans but not as aggressive of a curvature).

 

Other than that, the major differences should be in the upper treble region, where HE500 rolls off while HE6 remains extended; and in the upper mids region, where HE500 drops more than HE6.

 

I only briefly auditioned HE6 a long time ago...vaguely recall it felt very neutral with a tad more treble than I preferred.

post #1639 of 3089
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoctaCosmos View Post

They definitely had differences in tonality I respected both enough to not compare them in my rant. Most obvious of the two was the bass. The 500s tonalities were enough to keep it musical and refined the 6 didn't skimp in the tonal attributes and just did them right.
Maybe I misinterpreted, though it seems like the comparison of these 2 headphones was done in a store, on a very short term basis. From my understanding, this is far from optimal in terms of an accurate assessment. Perhaps the differences would be further revealed with more in-depth listening. Although demoing in a store surely is better than buying a headphone based on reviews only (insert return policy here) which is what many of us have little choice but to do.
Edited by Zuckfun - 2/11/14 at 7:36pm
post #1640 of 3089
Quote:
Originally Posted by jerg View Post
 

To a dynamics-only owner, HE4/400/5/5LE/500/6 all have similar tonalities; heck, bundle in all the Audezes too.

 

To a non-audiophile, most headphones over $200 have similar tonalities.

 

Sometimes we take being able to tell apart very minute differences for granted, truth is most people don't (maybe because they don't have a solid method of comparison, or have suboptimal listening environments, or simply don't care for small differences).

 

Very true. I can understand lack of experience. Personally, tone is one of the easier things to pick up on, even with an audition with a few well known tracks. If the comments were made from an in-store audition with unfamiliar gear and music, well nothing should have been said IMO. 

post #1641 of 3089
I listened to the ef6 and Burson soloists and every track was on my demo cd that I know well. I gave every headphone a good 30bminutes. I can only compare tracks from how one headphone presents it to another as I've never heard them live in a recording studio. What would you guys say about my post had I not mentioned tonality?
post #1642 of 3089
I don't think i focus much on FR itself because if anything is to peaky I simply find it to be a flaw as it usually sticks out like a sore thumb to me. However there are things that represent tonality that don't show up in FR graphs like bass. The 500 seemed to have its own domain that usually seemed less textured and almost boomy compared to the 6s tight bass that was part of the rest of the spectrum.
post #1643 of 3089

I havent heard the he6 or the lcd3 but I do have a question...

 

why do I see lcd2's and 3's and recently the xc's and x's in the FS thread a lot more than the he6 and he500?:blink:.. could just be a coincidence.

 

going back in time... I thought the lcd2 was more natural sounding but overall and given the choice I would choose the he500 over the lcd2... I thought the lcd2 would be my end game... It bested the he500 in many areas but it had no wow factor to me and even though it had more bass was more boring. 

post #1644 of 3089

i suppose it's a matter of moving up the ladder in different aspects.

 

the way i heard most headphones before hearing audeze was that they were trying to accomplish the same goal but messed it up some how.

if you had three different headphones that were very good but each had one single. different problem with them and then you fixed each ones problem then all three of the headphones would sound basically the same.  detailed, expansive, tight, fast, separated and endless soundstage for dynamics to breath.

Audeze seems to not care to much about a headphone that fills in your mathematical hysterical tendencies to fix the problem headphones have and rather focused on pleasing your ears. hifiman seems more mathematically correct.

so someone newer to the hobby gets an audeze and wonders about these other refinements that other headphones have to offer.

then they might get an he-6 or 500 and like the more refined approach.  or someone might go from an he6 and then jump to an lcd3 and find it to be more soothing.  

i imagine the 500 to be a good mix between the he6 and lcd3.  not the lcd2 as the treble on the 2 seemed like a poorly engineered tweeter on a loudspeaker to me.

however as i've learned there's still another tier above the 3's and 6's and i'm guessing in the world of headphones that is the air of the electro's.

post #1645 of 3089
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greed View Post

I stopped reading after you said the HE-500 and HE-6 have similar tonality... rolleyes.gif
I went a bit further but stopped when I read neither are airy...
Only a stax owner could possibly ever say that (and that would be being very rude) and I can't think of any other headphone on the planet that could be more airy than hifimen (I'm not counting the K1000: those are near field speakers).
post #1646 of 3089
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clemmaster View Post


I went a bit further but stopped when I read neither are airy...
Only a stax owner could possibly ever say that (and that would be being very rude) and I can't think of any other headphone on the planet that could be more airy than hifimen (I'm not counting the K1000: those are near field speakers).


Yeah....the he500 i have is pretty airy tbh. Well there are 2 different but similar terms: airy and open...

post #1647 of 3089
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nimzerz View Post
 


Please comment on if we will be able to retro fit them on the older models :D


Still no response on this. PLS HIFIMAN. PLS DONT DISAPPOINT US! >:D

post #1648 of 3089
Quote:
Originally Posted by grizzlybeast View Post
 

I havent heard the he6 or the lcd3 but I do have a question...

 

why do I see lcd2's and 3's and recently the xc's and x's in the FS thread a lot more than the he6 and he500?:blink:.. could just be a coincidence.

 

going back in time... I thought the lcd2 was more natural sounding but overall and given the choice I would choose the he500 over the lcd2... I thought the lcd2 would be my end game... It bested the he500 in many areas but it had no wow factor to me and even though it had more bass was more boring. 

Hey man good point! People sell Hifimans like crazy it seems, I think though the reason is the differeances in the sound, from what I hear most of the Auzude's share a very simmilar sound, where as for me personally, the HE 400 was good in bass and low mids bad on the top end, the HE 4 on the other hand [out of my NFB10ES2 at That] is a real step ahead of the HE 400's sound, there seems to be some real differeances amoung the Hifiman House Sound, like comparing the HE 500 to the Senn HD 6xx and the HE 4 to the Beyer DT 880. Two different sound signitures, from the same company

 

Not a bad thing, as I love my HE 4 and I'd love to get an HE 6, but I don't think Auzede has... that much variance on there house sound. Hence is why once you get one Azude your most likely going to stick with em 

 

To that effect I really need to hear an LCD X and XC 

post #1649 of 3089
It sounds like to me that the LCD-X is the HE-6 to the LCD2/3's HE-500.
post #1650 of 3089
Personally I don't see any less HFM headphones being sold to Audeze. I mean search HE-400 or HE-500 and there are currently 10-12 listings maybe more didn't have time to search through all.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Hifiman HE-400i and HE-560: From CES to Pre-Launch