[conquerator2]

Dilemma solved then. Thank you gentlemen

 

[conquerator2]

I have but one more question,
 
Is the HE-560 midrange thin in any way? That's my only point of concern.
I like reasonably forward midrange, detailed. That it, it isn't in any way recessed.
People have been going on, saying the PM-1 has a more forward midrange, so does the HE-400i and so does every Audeze.
I find the K612 midrange great, almost too forward in the upper region [it is overall a bit more forward than the K701, K702 and K712s].
 
Maybe people are accustomed to a warmer midrange than I am? For reference, I love my midrange crisp and clear, detailed and dynamic.
I enjoy warm midrange as well, but in the long run I far prefer neutral signatures. My MA900 has a great warm, forward midrange and it is my portable, go-to headphone, but after some time I start missing my neutral midrange. I find warm mids overall too lush, romantic and decayish for lack of a better term. Great and musical for a while but irritating and bleh after some time.
I however crave for dynamic midrange, which sits between lean and lush 

 
In other words, at times I enjoy picking up individual instruments and prefer that to just listening to the music. Other times, I listen to my favorite tracks as a whole... I just love to do both and alternate when I feel like it, preferably with one single headphone 

 
 
Linearity across the spectrum, neutrality, whatever you want to call it... I think AKGs do that well and so did the HE-6, but 6s were a touch too bright, perhaps a touch too resolving and a touch too analytic 

 

[FredrikT92]

How is the impact/punch compared to Audeze?
Which is more... physical & fun?
For getting your rave spirit going

 

[Clemmaster]

@luke: compared to an Audeze, the HE-560 would appear thin. In my system, the Audeze is overly thick and the Hifiman just fine. It's a matter of preference and system matching.
In your case, if you like the AKG sound then you're in for a treat. The planar are fuller sounding, no question.

 

[conquerator2]

  @luke: compared to an Audeze, the HE-560 would appear thin. In my system, the Audeze is overly thick and the Hifiman just fine. It's a matter of preference and system matching.
In your case, if you like the AKG sound then you're in for a treat. The planar are fuller sounding, no question.

Thanks Clemm [never got to know your name actually

]
That's great to hear! I'd never ever consider AKG mids thin myself. Certain people must really love midrange presence. In that case Audeze would be perceived as thick to my ears and so would some other popular headphones...
Thanks again
Back to waiting 

 

[ThePianoMan]

Just got back from ChiUniFi and I have to say the HE-560 was one of the best cans there. It's a killer value proposition compared to other cans (competes well with LCD-3 and Sennheisers for example) comfy beyond expectation, and easy to get great sound out of. The "newest" models sound pretty much the same. Very neutral, very detailed, sound is perhaps on the lighter side, but still musical and engaging. Gorgeous kids, gorgeous highs, clean bass. I will say that they really deserve a great amp though. The Higiman amps and players made them sound great, but on one of the Audio-gds at the show they sound stellar. My personal preference was the 400i for value, and a slightly thicker sound (I tend to like high-power very slightly bright amps and DACs) but if be comfortable both listening and mastering/monitoring with a 560! In fact I may get one for my studio time...

 

[Clemmaster]

  Thanks Clemm [never got to know your name actually

]
That's great to hear! I'd never ever consider AKG mids thin myself. Certain people must really love midrange presence. In that case Audeze would be perceived as thick to my ears and so would some other popular headphones...
Thanks again
Back to waiting 

Clement is my name. Clem is the short version.
 
There's no thin or thick headphones/DACs/Amps per se. It's all relative to where you set your "realistic" reference (call it neutrality) for each piece of gear. This reference is set by your preference and experience.
 
I would never pair a Hifiman with a W4S DAC-2 or Mytek DAC, for instance: this would be insanely thin and bright for my tastes. Keeping the headphones, I would lean towards Audio-gd gears. That's the path I chose a long time ago.
I could have went the other way and be satisfied with a LCD-2 + DAC-2 pairing, too (I wouldn't be satisfied with the comfort, though. In retrospect, I'm glad I chose Hifiman 

).
 
You don't consider the AKG thin because you have a "warm and thick amp" to counter-balance the thinness. With experience, I can say that it is not really relative: the Matrix is the warmest amp I've owned to date 

.
I also used to own the M-Stage and K-701 before my planar journey. The M-Stage actually conditioned my choice of the HE-4 because it had a similar sound philosophy to the AKG, that already paired well with the Matrix. The pairing was successful.
Then, when I moved to the HE-500, I decided I wanted a "brighter" amp. The SA-31 it was. Is it a bright amp? No! It's still a warm amp in my book, but brighter than the M-Stage it is.
 
It's not complicated, it's just very expensive 

 

[conquerator2]

  Clement is my name. Clem is the short version.
 
There's no thin or thick headphones/DACs/Amps per se. It's all relative to where you set your "realistic" reference (call it neutrality) for each piece of gear. This reference is set by your preference and experience.
 
I would never pair a Hifiman with a W4S DAC-2 or Mytek DAC, for instance: this would be insanely thin and bright for my tastes. Keeping the headphones, I would lean towards Audio-gd gears. That's the path I chose a long time ago.
I could have went the other way and be satisfied with a LCD-2 + DAC-2 pairing, too (I wouldn't be satisfied with the comfort, though. In retrospect, I'm glad I chose Hifiman 

).
 
You don't consider the AKG thin because you have a "warm and thick amp" to counter-balance the thinness. With experience, I can say that it is not really relative: the Matrix is the warmest amp I've owned to date 

.
I also used to own the M-Stage and K-701 before my planar journey. The M-Stage actually conditioned my choice of the HE-4 because it had a similar sound philosophy to the AKG, that already paired well with the Matrix. The pairing was successful.
Then, when I moved to the HE-500, I decided I wanted a "brighter" amp. The SA-31 it was. Is it a bright amp? No! It's still a warm amp in my book, but brighter than the M-Stage it is.
 
It's not complicated, it's just very expensive 

If Audio-GD is warm & thick [I have my doubt about the ESS9018 warmness... I wouldn't hesitate to call it neutral as it certainly reveals the imperfections in the treble, should a headphone have them... call it revealing] I never want to hear a truly neutral/bright amp/DAC with my neutral/reference headphones... the results would be Ultrasoneic 

. Never again!
 
As for the Mstage, the only truly warm opamp I've tried was the stock one [and possibly the OPA class-A biasing mod, which I did not do]. The rest of the opamps, while warm from bass to midrange, had a certain tizziness and sibilance in the treble to varying degrees... That was welcome with warm cans but unpleasant with reference headphones.
Compass2 is my new champ in synergy with reference gear. [also, burn-in certainly does something here.]

 

[tuna47]

I have lyr and bifrost uber sound great with 500 wondering any opinions on how it will sound with 560

 

[ThePianoMan]

Lyr should be great with the 560. The 560 has just the slightest tendency towards brightness (very slight) and it really opens up with good power so the lye should suit it well I'd think. The 400i performed well on the Schiit Vali if that's anything to go by.

 

[JustinBieber]

Lyr and 560 are actually the exact combo I'm using. They pair very well together and one of the things I'm noticing is how much of a difference tubes make for the first time. There is a noticeable change in sound quality going from an RCA 6BQ7A to a Matsu e88cc/stock JJ. Before with HD600 & HE500 I actually struggled to hear any differences.
 
560 + Lyr (RCA 6BQ7A): Upfront and forward with less soundstage width, quite a bright sound. Has more of a treble spike in 10kish area akin to the HE500. (no me gusta)
560 + Lyr (National Matsu e88cc): Less upfront, larger soundstage width, warmer treble in general than both. (my favorite)
560 + Lyr (JJ E88cc): Similar to the Nationals yet they sound a little closed in like the RCA. (second favorite)

 

[ThurstonX]

  Lyr and 560 are actually the exact combo I'm using. They pair very well together and one of the things I'm noticing is how much of a difference tubes make for the first time. There is a noticeable change in sound quality going from an RCA 6BQ7A to a Matsu e88cc/stock JJ. Before with HD600 & HE500 I actually struggled to hear any differences.
 
560 + Lyr (RCA 6BQ7A): Upfront and forward with less soundstage width, quite a bright sound. Has more of a treble spike in 10kish area akin to the HE500. (no me gusta)
560 + Lyr (National Matsu e88cc): Less upfront, larger soundstage width, warmer treble in general than both. (my favorite)
560 + Lyr (JJ E88cc): Similar to the Nationals yet they sound a little closed in like the RCA. (second favorite)

 
Luke... errrr, Justin, come over to the Dark Side 

 
 
That's great to hear re: the Lyr and the HE-560s.  Thanks for that post.

 

[ThePianoMan]

The Schiit stuff seems to have really good synergy with Planars and the Audeze and HiFiMan in particular had some simply stellar pairings. Honestly, the value proposition they both represent is incredible.

 

[lapoune]

Just received mine. Couple quick observations. The pads look MUCH better. The stitching is great now and they are back to different pads for each ear. The woodies had the exact same pad on each and it simply looked stupid. The inside is also different. The new ones use perforated leather instead of the fabric mesh on the old one. No complaints about the wood veneer. Overall it looks like a quality headphone. Even the yokes look better (on my teak version the yokes had visible molding seams)
 
Box and cable are also much better. The foam setup is different and the headphones rest on their sides instead of the cups being flat. The box also seems a bit smaller?
 
Take this one with a grain of salt (I've had them for an hour), but the sound so far is indeed a bit different. To me bass was immediately less present. I suspect this could be completely because of the earpads, since I have been wearing mine pretty much 10 hours per day since I got them and they look a bit thinner\squished already. I will listen some more after work and play around with the pads to see if its all in my head. Now people don't panic this was 1h of extremely unscientific testing.
 
Very curious to read the other people's impressions though...
 
Edit: Added some pictures
 
 

 

 

 

 

[Makiah S]

  +1 for darker/neutral version

POR QUE
 
+1 for a brighter and/ neutral verison