HiFiMAN 602: Talk about your initial impressions and specs
post-7035976
Post #781 of 1,195

Anaxilus

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Mar 12, 2010
Messages
12,065
Reaction score
336
Joined
Mar 12, 2010
Posts
12,065
Likes
336


Quote:
This is my second time with the M50. I sold the first pair to finance the 602 and I found that the 602 is almost no use only with two IEMs, so I figured I could have a go with it agan. So in total about 4~5 months until two months ago and then today. I covered all holes with some 3M cellophane tape. Maybe what I needed to use was a rather thick material.
 
btw this is a used pair(7+ months) so I did no burn in.

Try felt feet.  I would also try letting one or two holes open.  I'm not sure covering every hole is a good idea.  There does need to be some air movement.  You sound surprised w/ the sound of the recent pair yet you had them before.  they sound different then?
 
     Share This Post       
post-7035991
Post #782 of 1,195

yooss

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 2, 2010
Messages
440
Reaction score
15
Joined
May 2, 2010
Posts
440
Likes
15
No, not much with the sources I used before. However with the 602 the bass is overpowering. The lows, mids, highs everything have refined a lot, but just the bass becomes too powerful. I'm actually listening to it right now with EQ and the SQ is acceptable with the bass toned down a lot, but $400 for this much improvement? nah. The more I listen the more I feel the need for a better can. I'm definitely selling this pair.
 
btw I'm using
60hz -5
300hz -3
1khz 0
3khz 2
6khz 0
 
     Share This Post       
post-7035997
Post #783 of 1,195

Anaxilus

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Mar 12, 2010
Messages
12,065
Reaction score
336
Joined
Mar 12, 2010
Posts
12,065
Likes
336


Quote:
No, not much with the sources I used before. However with the 602 the bass is overpowering. The lows, mids, highs everything have refined a lot, but just the bass becomes too powerful. I'm actually listening to it right now with EQ and the SQ is acceptable with the bass toned down a lot, but $400 for this much improvement? nah. The more I listen the more I feel the need for a better can. I'm definitely selling this pair.

That's weird, many impressions tend toward a slight Bass rolloff on the 602.
 
Edit - Now that you mention it.  That reminds me of my initial impressions listening to the M50 and Monster MD from the HO of the Sflo2.  The bass was waaaay too much.  After a few days to a week, it was better but I preferred the LO.  After the FW update no issues at all.  So I have to say I am familiar w/ what you are saying.
 
     Share This Post       
post-7036010
Post #784 of 1,195

yooss

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 2, 2010
Messages
440
Reaction score
15
Joined
May 2, 2010
Posts
440
Likes
15
Oops. Double post.
 
     Share This Post       
post-7036018
Post #785 of 1,195

yooss

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 2, 2010
Messages
440
Reaction score
15
Joined
May 2, 2010
Posts
440
Likes
15
Maybe it's the amp being powerful than most other sources and more current leading to more bass. I am listening to Muse-Uprising with the 602 EQ and comparing it against my Droid and the bass seems to have the same amount(although the SQ difference is just huge).
 
Quote:
That's weird, many impressions tend toward a slight Bass rolloff on the 602.
 
Edit - Now that you mention it.  That reminds me of my initial impressions listening to the M50 and Monster MD from the HO of the Sflo2.  The bass was waaaay too much.  After a few days to a week, it was better but I preferred the LO.  After the FW update no issues at all.  So I have to say I am familiar w/ what you are saying.

wait a sec. a FW update solved this problem? 
 
     Share This Post       
post-7036045
Post #786 of 1,195

Anaxilus

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Mar 12, 2010
Messages
12,065
Reaction score
336
Joined
Mar 12, 2010
Posts
12,065
Likes
336


Quote:
wait a sec. a FW update solved this problem? 

Sure did.
 
I'll listen to the 602 again v. the QA350 which is similar to the Sflo2 in signature.  My impressions tended to agree w/ those that the 602 had a slight bass roll-off.  I'll HO v. HO this time.  
 
Then again I guess I need to wait 20-30 minutes to make sure.  

 
     Share This Post       
post-7036054
Post #787 of 1,195

yooss

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 2, 2010
Messages
440
Reaction score
15
Joined
May 2, 2010
Posts
440
Likes
15
Quote:
Anaxilus said:
 
I'll listen to the 602 again v. the QA350 which is similar to the Sflo2 in signature.  My impressions tended to agree w/ those that the 602 had a slight bass roll-off.  I'll HO v. HO this time.  
 
Then again I guess I need to wait 20-30 minutes to make sure.  


30 minutes... well I guess I will have to sleep right now(It's 3:45 in the morning
)
 
looking forward to hear your findings tomorrow, so no hurry!
 
     Share This Post       
post-7036266
Post #788 of 1,195

Anaxilus

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Mar 12, 2010
Messages
12,065
Reaction score
336
Joined
Mar 12, 2010
Posts
12,065
Likes
336
Ok, a few 602 impressions.
 
Testing is 602 HO --> D7000 versus QA350 HO --> D7000.  Both units running for 30 minutes using WAV files of Roisin Murphy ('Let Me Know' and 'You Know Me Better') and Harry Nilsson ('One' and 'Remember').  Both units batteries at 50% or less at start of testing.
 
Quick notes.  Using the QA350 which uses a single Wolfson 8740 compared to the dual DACs on the Sflo2 but by all accounts the QA350 is the better performer but not by far.  Not sure but the Sflo2 might have had a slightly wider SS but it is no longer in my possession to verify.  Did my best to match gains.  About 5.75 volume, high gain on 602 and about 5 dots @ 10 'o clock on QA350.  Both sound great on the D7000 without an amp and produce plenty of volume.  I do prefer LO to Arrow though in both occasions.  Definitely not a deal breaking night/day difference.  Not so sure about that after going back to the LO anymore.
 
The best analogy I could make between the 602 and the QA350 is that of digital versus analog which has been said repeatedly already.  A good headphone reference would be the M50 versus the HFI580.  The M50 sounds more natural and organic whereas the HFI580 has a bit of that Ultrasone unnatural timbre to it.  I don't find it objectionable but it is noticeable by comparison.  It certainly can be useful for electronic based music.  Another is the use of edge enhancement on HDTVs.  The idea behind this technology was to sharpen the edges of screen images to give the consumer a better impression of detail and sharpness.  The problem is that it often looks unnatural and creates odd anomalies which is why most video purists have it disabled on their High-end screens.  This is exactly what I hear switching between the 602 and QA350.  At first listen, if you are used to that more digital sound details jump out at you, separation appears clearer and sharper.  Switching to the 602 then sounds less bright, less sharp, it has a bit more noise but not as much as other players I couldn't stand for more than 2 minutes.  So the QA350 does appear to offer a blacker background on which to paint its sonic picture.  But is the 602 less detailed?  No, everything you hear on the QA350 is resolved clearly and to my ears in better fashion.  This becomes apparent switching back to the QA350.  Female vocals sound more unnatural, brighter and more processed than the 602 which has a natural smoothness to vocal qualities.  Treble has a sort of harsh, brittle quality to it on the QA350.  String plucks and cymbals sound a bit too metallic.  Music just sounds more natural and flows better to my ears on the 602.  It becomes very engaging and sucks you in.  By comparison now the QA350 gets more fatiguing but is still an enjoyable listen once you acclimate.  It just sounds less refined compared to what music sounds like in a live setting.  The QA350 just sounds like everything that should be there is there but a bit exaggerated.  A bit too much bite here, a bit too much reverb there and slightly too bright.  At times the 602 can be somewhat fuzzy and congested in comparison though.  If the 602 is like water flowing along a creek bed, the QA350 is like a crack of lightning striking the ground.
 
As to the earlier Bass rolloff in my discussion w/ yoos.  I still think the 602 is slighty rolled in comparison but I seem to notice adjusting gain higher on the 602, bass seems to get bigger compared to a more linear response on the QA350.  I could be wrong.  Who has the better HO?  It will really come down to signature preference.  As to which is truer to the source?  That's a very complicated question for another thread.  Which is more detailed?  Depends on how you perceive the picture being painted.  YMMV. 
 
    
Update - Ahhh, so much better now LO --> Arrow (Bass 'O', Imp 'O', Xfeed 'O', Gain 'II').  Less congested, more separation and better SS and imaging.  Details galore, no need to search for anything.  I wasn't able to notice much difference HO v. LO a week ago.  Now that I've had more time w/ the HO I hear the differences.  HO compared to HO I can understand anyone preferring the QA350 or 602 over the other.  Most would go for the QA350 signature.  But amped via LO it reminds me clearly why I sold my Sflo2.  I'll take my 602 amped over the QA350 amped.  The QA350 sounds muddier and less refined than the 602 clearly.  The Sflo2 performed less well than the QA350 LO last I compared.  The 602 is another level of performance IMO.  Everything just sounds 'right' now.  
  
 
I might update comparisons later using my ESP950. 
 
     Share This Post       
post-7036332
Post #789 of 1,195

.Sup

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Messages
3,559
Reaction score
100
Location
Ljubljana
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Location
Ljubljana
Posts
3,559
Likes
100
Age
34


Quote:
Yeah so does my cell phone.  It just seemed like they had never seen one that didn't.  I've never bought an electronic device w/ an expectation as to the design of the power adapter.  Except for my laptops perhaps.


True, its not something a man should expect but it is something that would make less clutter in my "cable" box.
 
     Share This Post       
post-7036502
Post #790 of 1,195

yooss

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 2, 2010
Messages
440
Reaction score
15
Joined
May 2, 2010
Posts
440
Likes
15


Quote:
Ok, a few 602 impressions.
 
Testing is 602 HO --> D7000 versus QA350 HO --> D7000.  Both units running for 30 minutes using WAV files of Roisin Murphy ('Let Me Know' and 'You Know Me Better') and Harry Nilsson ('One' and 'Remember').  Both units batteries at 50% or less at start of testing.
 
Quick notes.  Using the QA350 which uses a single Wolfson 8740 compared to the dual DACs on the Sflo2 but by all accounts the QA350 is the better performer but not by far.  Not sure but the Sflo2 might have had a slightly wider SS but it is no longer in my possession to verify.  Did my best to match gains.  About 5.75 volume, high gain on 602 and about 5 dots @ 10 'o clock on QA350.  Both sound great on the D7000 without an amp and produce plenty of volume.  I do prefer LO to Arrow though in both occasions.  Definitely not a deal breaking night/day difference.  Not so sure about that after going back to the LO anymore.
 
The best analogy I could make between the 602 and the QA350 is that of digital versus analog which has been said repeatedly already.  A good headphone reference would be the M50 versus the HFI580.  The M50 sounds more natural and organic whereas the HFI580 has a bit of that Ultrasone unnatural timbre to it.  I don't find it objectionable but it is noticeable by comparison.  It certainly can be useful for electronic based music.  Another is the use of edge enhancement on HDTVs.  The idea behind this technology was to sharpen the edges of screen images to give the consumer a better impression of detail and sharpness.  The problem is that it often looks unnatural and creates odd anomalies which is why most video purists have it disabled on their High-end screens.  This is exactly what I hear switching between the 602 and QA350.  At first listen, if you are used to that more digital sound details jump out at you, separation appears clearer and sharper.  Switching to the 602 then sounds less bright, less sharp, it has a bit more noise but not as much as other players I couldn't stand for more than 2 minutes.  So the QA350 does appear to offer a blacker background on which to paint its sonic picture.  But is the 602 less detailed?  No, everything you hear on the QA350 is resolved clearly and to my ears in better fashion.  This becomes apparent switching back to the QA350.  Female vocals sound more unnatural, brighter and more processed than the 602 which has a natural smoothness to vocal qualities.  Treble has a sort of harsh, brittle quality to it on the QA350.  String plucks and cymbals sound a bit too metallic.  Music just sounds more natural and flows better to my ears on the 602.  It becomes very engaging and sucks you in.  By comparison now the QA350 gets more fatiguing but is still an enjoyable listen once you acclimate.  It just sounds less refined compared to what music sounds like in a live setting.  The QA350 just sounds like everything that should be there is there but a bit exaggerated.  A bit too much bite here, a bit too much reverb there and slightly too bright.  At times the 602 can be somewhat fuzzy and congested in comparison though.  If the 602 is like water flowing along a creek bed, the QA350 is like the crack of lightning striking the ground.
 
As to the earlier Bass rolloff in my discussion w/ yoos.  I still think the 602 is slighty rolled in comparison but I seem to notice adjusting gain higher on the 602, bass seems to get bigger compared to a more linear response on the QA350.  I could be wrong.  Who has the better HO?  It will really come down to signature preference.  As to which is truer to the source?  That's a very complicated question for another thread.  Which is more detailed?  Depends on how you perceive the picture being painted.  YMMV. 
 
    
Update - Ahhh, so much better now LO --> Arrow (Bass 'O', Imp 'O', Xfeed 'O', Gain 'II').  Less congested, more separation and better SS and imaging.  Details galore, no need to search for anything.  I wasn't able to notice much difference HO v. LO a week ago.  Now that I've had more time w/ the HO I hear the differences.  HO compared to HO I can understand anyone preferring the QA350 or 602 over the other.  Most would go for the QA350 signature.  But amped via LO it reminds me clearly why I sold my Sflo2.  I'll take my 602 amped over the QA350 amped.  The QA350 sounds muddier and less refined than the 602 clearly.  The Sflo2 performed less well than the QA350 LO last I compared.  The 602 is another level of performance IMO.  Everything just sounds 'right' now.  
  
 
I might update comparisons later using my ESP950. 

Nice read, thanks!
 
     Share This Post       
post-7036663
Post #791 of 1,195

CSIR

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Messages
218
Reaction score
20
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Posts
218
Likes
20
I completely agree with what Anaxilus has said about the sound.  The analogy I would use is that of an LCD screen in the store compared to plasma.  At first you go wow look how nice the LCD picture is (really bright and details jump out at you).  But when you look closer the plasma renders fast moving things better and the dark spots on further inspection are actually clearer.  This 602 is affecting my sleep cause I don't want to shut it off at night.
 
     Share This Post       
post-7036796
Post #792 of 1,195

fdhfdy

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Mar 9, 2008
Messages
1,127
Reaction score
12
Joined
Mar 9, 2008
Posts
1,127
Likes
12
got mine 3 days ago, found both of the hifiman players are sensitive to the quality of music files, hm602 sounds very well with right ones.  
 
Also found 602 sounds better with my dt 860 than pk1/pk2
 
     Share This Post       
post-7037063
Post #793 of 1,195

walfredo

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 7, 2010
Messages
806
Reaction score
55
Joined
Aug 7, 2010
Posts
806
Likes
55


Quote:
My cards work perfectly.  What spec and brand of cards are you using?  Haven't played w/ my internal memory yet.  Try cycling it off and on.

So, I tried more cards.  My old sandisk 2GB and kigston 4GB class 4 too.
 
My Transcend 8GB class 6 and a generic 32GB class 6 do not.
 
I got a kingston 32GB class 4 since I'd like to use a large card.  It did not work at first.  But after I reformatted it using "default size" for "cluster size", it worked.  So, I'm happy now! :)  But it is very picky regarding cards.
 
Another annoyance is that I need to plug the card in-and-out ever time I turn it on.
 
But since the SQ is so good, I'm willing to put up with it. :)
 
[]s
Walfredo
 
     Share This Post       
post-7037110
Post #794 of 1,195

Anaxilus

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Mar 12, 2010
Messages
12,065
Reaction score
336
Joined
Mar 12, 2010
Posts
12,065
Likes
336


Quote:
So, I tried more cards.  My old sandisk 2GB and kigston 4GB class 4 too.
 
My Transcend 8GB class 6 and a generic 32GB class 6 do not.
 
Another annoyance is that I need to plug the card in-and-out ever time I turn it on.
 
 
Walfredo

Thats odd about removing the card each time.  I've had the same card in mine since it arrived, haven't pulled it out since.  
 
It was mentioned that the player doesn't befriend > Class 4.
 
     Share This Post       
post-7037119
Post #795 of 1,195

walfredo

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 7, 2010
Messages
806
Reaction score
55
Joined
Aug 7, 2010
Posts
806
Likes
55
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Student_Driver /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 

Has anyone tried the 602 with large closed cans? Any recommendations here? Whats the best choice to maximize SQ without negative impact due to complex loads or power requirments?

 
 
It sounds very nice with the Audio Technica W1000 and with the Fostex T50rp.  With the Fostex, in particular, the synergy is awesome.  It sounds better with the 602 and this my desk amplifiers (Doge 6210 and Shanling PH3000).
 
     Share This Post       

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top