[BigCabDaddy]

The sound characteristics I describe are inherent to the earpads, meaning they impart those changes onto the base sound signatures of the headphone drivers. "Dark, lounge-y" would be relative to the velour pads. The HE400s will still sound like HE400s, but noticeably darker and lounge-ier. It'd be still uniquely different from how HE500s, or LCD2, sound.

You can think of the sound signature of each headphone as a unique squiggle line, and changing earpads causes parts of the squiggle line to be bumped up or down or more rounded or less rounded, but in the end, one squiggle will look completely different from another squiggle.

Understood, but it's a move in that direction if I understand both squiggles, right?

 

[TMRaven]

I don't really remember going from pleather to velour and hearing more treble or less bass, which is what I was expecting.  The big difference is just a much more coherent midrange.  When I first heard the difference I said it sounded like he-400 with better acoustical damping.  In short I dont really think there's a reason to go back to stock pleathers anyways.

 

[AyeVeeN]

What's weird now is that either I've become completely accustomed to the HE-400's treble or I damaged my hearing even further (I found out I can hear ~13.5kHz rather than 12kHz though) or my equipment is just weird. I tried EQing down the 16kHz range (ALL the way down) again and I can hardly hear any difference anymore whereas before it made the headphone sound significantly darker, though upping the 16kHz range is blatantly noticeable.
 
@TM
 
How's the HE-400 w/ the M&M combo? Thinking from switching from my E9 as the channel balance issue is pretty annoying and I'm not always able to compensate for it by changing the balance within my soundcard.

 

[TMRaven]

I had a powerful experience with the Magni/Modi, but that's only because I was using my iMac's onboard before that with the AD700 for weeks prior, and I had gotten well acquainted with the iMac's sound.  At the time my O2/ODAC was on loan with my HE-400.  It was the first time I've heard such a drastic change in sound in my audiophile experience from sources.
 
When I first got the magni/modi and hooked up the AD700 through it I was like 'wow, really noticeable upgrade and much more detailed treble,'  plus I could make out certain subtleties in songs I knew by heart that I couldn't have before.
 
 
When I ab'd the magni/modi with o2/odac later on using he-400, I was really hard-pressed to tell a difference.  In short I very much like the magni/modi with the he-400, but it definitely gives you lots of treble if the headphone or recordings have it.  I don't really know how they would fare against the E9, but I know I'd recommend them to anybody in general, outside of hd800 and he-6.

 

[hemipowered007]

anyone ordering from headamp have an idea for shipping time to California? Im getting so anxious...I WANT MY HE400!....its killing me, but i dont want to bug Justin just yet...so ill bug everyone here instead!

 

[jerg]

Quote:

I don't really remember going from pleather to velour and hearing more treble or less bass, which is what I was expecting.  The big difference is just a much more coherent midrange.  When I first heard the difference I said it sounded like he-400 with better acoustical damping.  In short I dont really think there's a reason to go back to stock pleathers anyways.

You trust purrin's measurements right? If so, his direct pleather vs velour HE400 measurements made it quite apparent that there is a broadband decrease of 3~5 dB from 2500 Hz all the way to the upper extremes with pleather pads, relative to velour pads.
 
The only thing that remained was the treble peak, but that seems to be a ringing issue inherent with the driver which would explain why the pad change did not attenuate or raise it at all.
 
If you just imaging that the upper treble ringing peak isn't there, then the only thing changed between the pleathers and the velours was the uniform broadband raising / decreasing in levels from 2.5kHz onwards.

 

[TMRaven]

Yes and no.  For one, his pleather vs velour frequency graphs are near identical, and only a difference was shown through csd, which is unusual.  Plus,  I remember having to turn my volume up a tad bit with the velours in comparison to the pleathers to get a similar sound level.  Also, if there was a broadband increase from 2.5khz onwards for the velours, in practice it wouldn't mean that their treble was increased, it would mean that bass would decrease as people would on average be turning the volume down on their he-400 to compensate for the louder frequencies that the human ear is most sensitive to, which in turn will lower bass.  A decrease in bass volume was something I did NOT notice with velours.
 
I'm a very objective guy and I loooove measurements, but I will always put my subjective impressions ahead of measurements.
 
 
A better picture to show what Jerg is trying to show.
 

 

[jerg]

Quote:

Yes and no.  For one, his pleather vs velour frequency graphs are near identical, and only a difference was shown through csd, which is unusual.  Plus,  I remember having to turn my volume up a tad bit with the velours in comparison to the pleathers to get a similar sound level.  Also, if there was a broadband increase from 2.5khz onwards for the pleathers, in practice it wouldn't mean that their treble was increased, it would mean that bass would decrease as people would on average be turning the volume down on their he-400 to compensate for the louder frequencies that the human ear is most sensitive to, which in turn will lower bass.  A decrease in bass volume was something I did NOT notice with velours.
 
I'm a very objective guy and I loooove measurements, but I will always put my subjective impressions ahead of measurements.
 
 
A better picture to show what Jerg is trying to show.
 

The difference is shown through the CSD but less apparent in the FR because purrin (whether intentionally or not) decided to line up the two FR curves around the upper mids/treble region, rather than the midrange. If you line up the FRs around 500 Hz instead, the upper mids / treble attenuation with the pleathers is as apparent as the CSDs. Another interesting thing is that if you line up the FR the way I said, you'll also notice the pleathers having a bit less (maybe 1~2 dB less) bass relative to velours as well.
 
Why you might turn up vol for velours even though it is brighter in sound signature is easily explained by it being more acoustically leaky (breathable fabric rather than sealed pleather material) so less sonic energy being contained within the earpad opening.
 
Also contributing to this tonal difference is that bass and lower midrange sounds thinner albeit a bit tighter on the velours, also probably due to its increased acoustic leaking/damping factor, so it might measure a certain level, but in practice its thickness is actually lacking.

 

[TMRaven]

Just to entertain you, I aligned the frequency response up at exactly 500hz like you mentioned.  Blue= velours green=pleather.
 

 
 
 
'As apparent as the CSDs'?  Hardly.

 

[jerg]

Quote:

Just to entertain you, I aligned the frequency response up at exactly 500hz like you mentioned.  Blue= velours green=pleather.
 

 
 
 
'As apparent as the CSDs'?  Hardly.

Really? You don't see the huge difference in levels from 20 Hz all the way to 2kHz? That's what I meant purrin didn't line up.
 
Here's what I mean: Redpurple is areas where velours are higher in level than pleathers, purplered is areas where pleathers are higher in level than velours. This is the original graph btw.
 
 

 
If the differences in level are due strictly to horizontal shifts, then there would be an equal correspondance of red vs purple areas in a relevant area; that is not the case between 20Hz ~ 2kHz, where velours are EXCLUSIVELY higher in level, IF the upper end (2kHz and up) is lined up. As you can see the 2kHz~5kHz is only a shift as there is equal parts red and purple, and the only other notable thing is the little pleather-only hump around 7kHz.
 
If you line up the levels around mid-midrange (500Hz~2kHz) then it's fairly blatant that the velours will have higher 2kHz~20kHz levels than pleathers.

 

[TMRaven]

Quote:

Really? You don't see the huge difference in levels from 20 Hz all the way to 2kHz? That's what I meant purrin didn't line up.

 
 
'If you line up the FRs around 500 Hz instead, the upper mids / treble attenuation with the pleathers is as apparent as the CSDs.'
So what is it, upper mids or bass- mids? 
 
 
Just once more I'll entertain this idea, but you're starting to grasp at straws.
 

 
 
 
Lining up the bass- lower mids as best I can going off the signature bumps and valleys around 400-2khz.  Now the velour pads have more treble, mids AND more bass than the pleathers.    You can try to spin it however you want, but these FR graphs don't show a difference like the CSD graphs.

 

[jerg]

Quote:

 
 
'If you line up the FRs around 500 Hz instead, the upper mids / treble attenuation with the pleathers is as apparent as the CSDs.'
So what is it, upper mids or bass- mids? 
 
 
Just once more I'll entertain this idea, but you're starting to grasp at straws.
 

 
 
 
Lining up the bass- lower mids as best I can going off the signature bumps and valleys around 400-2khz.  Now the velour pads have more treble, mids AND more bass than the velours.    You can try to spin it however you want, but these FR graphs don't show a difference like the CSD graphs.

Thanks for doing this photomanipulation, I needed it to really show what my point is.
 
Here, I cropped your above adjusted plot so that it only shows 500Hz ~ 20kHz, like the CSD range. Then I highlighted the differences in levels and put it alongside the earlier image you made layering the two CSDs (which were also standardized around mid-midrange in level).
 
 

 
See what I mean now? Of course the two aren't perfect in correspondance due to different vertical scales, however this should be clear enough that if the measurements of the two pad types are lined at around 500 Hz, then the upper midrange~treble differences are very clear.

 

[TMRaven]

There is a major discrepancy between the two graphs.  If the FR graph was as different as the CSD, then it would show the velours to be filling out the major dip in the 2.5khz range, it also would show a more gradual transition from upper mids to lower treble around the 5-6khz region.  The FR graph doesn't give that broadband- smoothed out effect, it just shows two separate clumps where the velour is higher in magnitude.  This isn't even getting into the bass being stronger at the same time on the fr graph,  which is most likely evidence that by selectively aligning the graphs at 500-2khz I'm only shifting the velours to a higher position on the y-axis compared to the pleathers.
 
 
You could also argue that unit to unit variation or even ear position variation on Purrin's device could give even greater discrepancies than what we see in these graphs.  In short it's why I think the measurements are not the final word in what I should describe as pad differences, and why subjective impressions should be given the majority of the spotlight.  In short I think there's still no reason to use stock pleathers.  Hell, I still remember plenty of people saying they thought the pleathers had a more jarring treble than the velours long ago.  Bottom line I think the major difference between the pleathers and velours is:  pleathers= mushy and ill-defined.  Velours = better defined sound.
 
I will stop here.  Always nice to talk HE-400 in an HE-400 thread, but I don't want to dwell over measurements.

 

[Spiderman]

My posts and quotes aren't working very well.

 

[jerg]

Quote:

There is a major discrepancy between the two graphs.  If the FR graph was as different as the CSD, then it would show the velours to be filling out the major dip in the 2.5khz range, it also would show a more gradual transition from upper mids to lower treble around the 5-6khz region.  The FR graph doesn't give that broadband- smoothed out effect, it just shows two separate clumps where the velour is higher in magnitude.  This isn't even getting into the bass being stronger at the same time on the fr graph,  which is most likely evidence that by selectively aligning the graphs at 500-2khz I'm only shifting the velours to a higher position on the y-axis compared to the pleathers.
 
 
You could also argue that unit to unit variation or even ear position variation on Purrin's device could give even greater discrepancies than what we see in these graphs.  In short it's why I think the measurements are not the final word in what I should describe as pad differences, and why subjective impressions should be given the majority of the spotlight.  In short I think there's still no reason to use stock pleathers.  Hell, I still remember plenty of people saying they thought the pleathers had a more jarring treble than the velours long ago.  Bottom line I think the major difference between the pleathers and velours is:  pleathers= mushy and ill-defined.  Velours = better defined sound.
 
I will stop here.  Always nice to talk HE-400 in an HE-400 thread, but I don't want to dwell over measurements.

His FRs never translate perfectly to his CSDs, it seems to be the nature of the measurements (something to do with different smoothing algorithms, measurement-to-measurement variability, as well as things that happen in the CSD in the initial temporal frames that cause the resulting visible curvature to deviate from the FR curvature). My point still stands that if the FRs are matched at the same spots as the CSDs, objectively purrin measured a net decrease in levels in the upper end of the frequency range, regardless of how well the FRs matched the CSDs. The bass levels are not relevant to my point, as it isn't even shown in the CSD.
 
 
In the end though, your subjective impressions of the difference between the two types of pads disagree with what was shown through those particular measurements, while my subjective impressions coincide, and that is that.