meyner
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2013
- Posts
- 259
- Likes
- 15
@(songmic) hey ur from south korea, do you know if there is a place where i can audt the TH900? (near seoul) or did you just buy that out of the country or ship it from japan
@(songmic) hey ur from south korea, do you know if there is a place where i can audt the TH900? (near seoul) or did you just buy that out of the country or ship it from japan
It's outstanding with the ECBA, as well. It's an awesome pairing.
Are you a Korean too?
sorry for the double post but i was wondering if anyone can give me an impression of the TH900 versus the W3000 ANV. My bet is that the TH900 is probabily better but by how much? Plus i am interested because i've heard the W3000 can be quite unique sounding compared to a lot of phones. Might be good to compare it to a similar closed wood phone
My impressions were that the TH-900 has smoother treble and a wider sound.
Someone else described the W3000ANV as having a unique presentation that sounds as if you are the microphone. I rarely relate to soundstage assessments, but I agree with this one completely.
The TH-900 is a bit faster and certainly less colored, and it's the better of the two when it comes to throwing a wide and well-defined sound field. The W3000 is relatively intimate.
If the TH-900 is naughty, the W3000ANV is flirtatious. I wouldn't let my mother listen to the TH-900. I blush sometimes when listening to female vocals on the W3K.
Does anyone own the he-500 and the th900 who thinks the he-500 are far more versatile and engaging in their presentation?
Is it something I'm not getting here for these allegedly easier to drive cans, or is this just the limit of closed cans and their internal resonance problems?
Does anyone own the he-500 and the th900 who thinks the he-500 are far more versatile and engaging in their presentation? It feels like they need tubes even more than the hd800 to smooth out the upper mids and treble. I've been running them off various solid state amps and not enjoying them as much as the hd800 and he500 off the same setups. Listening to the Attack on Titan OST is a really engulfing experience on both of those headphones, orchestral and rock elements are rendered smoothly while being upfront and engaging. Vocals are clear and take centre focus. Drums are taught and highly impactful and nicely textured. And this is on music that has an average dynamic range of just 8 according to the DR.org database. The Fostex th900 sounds in comparison sounds overly sibilant, instruments thinly rendered and electric guitars painful. The bass even sounds one-note and rather thin, though well extended. Vocals are withdrawn and the whole presentation feels cramped and lacking oomph and presence.
Is it something I'm not getting here for these allegedly easier to drive cans, or is this just the limit of closed cans and their internal resonance problems?
HE5LEs are an entirely different beast compared to HE500. They are as different in sound as HE500s are to LCD2.
HE500s with the right earpads (and I stress, right earpads) have the most forgiving liquid treble, almost too smooth. They are laid-back enough that classical / orchestral music still sounds expansive and not just a wall of sound, yet they are engaging enough that more intimate or energetic music still have a heck of a kick. Overall they are the epitome of jack of all trades, master of none except maybe for vocal music.
Does anyone own the he-500 and the th900 who thinks the he-500 are far more versatile and engaging in their presentation? It feels like they need tubes even more than the hd800 to smooth out the upper mids and treble. I've been running them off various solid state amps and not enjoying them as much as the hd800 and he500 off the same setups. Listening to the Attack on Titan OST is a really engulfing experience on both of those headphones, orchestral and rock elements are rendered smoothly while being upfront and engaging. Vocals are clear and take centre focus. Drums are taught and highly impactful and nicely textured. And this is on music that has an average dynamic range of just 8 according to the DR.org database. The Fostex th900 sounds in comparison sounds overly sibilant, instruments thinly rendered and electric guitars painful. The bass even sounds one-note and rather thin, though well extended. Vocals are withdrawn and the whole presentation feels cramped and lacking oomph and presence.
Is it something I'm not getting here for these allegedly easier to drive cans, or is this just the limit of closed cans and their internal resonance problems?
sorry for the double post but i was wondering if anyone can give me an impression of the TH900 versus the W3000 ANV. My bet is that the TH900 is probabily better but by how much? Plus i am interested because i've heard the W3000 can be quite unique sounding compared to a lot of phones. Might be good to compare it to a similar closed wood phone
The 5LEs aren't that different from the 500s in my experience (I switched the latter for the former).
They are more balanced with a more linear bass (less mid-bass presence) and don't have the upper mid bump that is sometimes bothersome with the 500s. They still are closer to the 500s than any other Hifiman planars (mid-range mainly).
The 500s probably have a more refined treble, but as you said, it is very forgiving and smooth when the 5LEs are more raw and engaging. The TH-600 have the best of both worlds.
As you said, the 500s excel at vocal reproduction. The 5LEs are an even better all-rounder in my setup (NFB-27+SA-31) because they also can do hard-rock/metal, which the 500s slightly fail at.
They don't have the wow effect that the 500s give with the right music (Paul Simon, Pink Floyd, Dire Straits and any vocal songs) but they are less genre-oriented, hence a better all-rounder overall.
Note: I use the 5LEs with the Alpha Pads. I used to use the 500s with velour pads.