[beaver316]

Has anyone returned their 400i because they lacked base? Thx

 
I won't be returning them, despite having less bass than my HE-400. It's a far superior headphone imo in almost every way to give up just because of the bass.

 

[mandrake50]

Not sure it matters to anyone, but I will be buying my demo set as well. At this point I am enjoying these more than anything else  have right  now. This includes the HD600 and HD650. It also includes the HE-400!

 

[skyline315]

 
Not sure it matters to anyone, but I will be buying my demo set as well. At this point I am enjoying these more than anything else  have right  now. This includes the HD600 and HD650. It also includes the HE-400!

 
I'm going to be buying my demo pair as well...

 

[chowmein83]

Just took delivery of my HE-400i yesterday, and got a couple of hours of listening in last night.
 
Below are some first impressions. For a bit of context, I'm somebody who is coming from the Sennheiser HD598 and the AKG Q701. Most of my listening was done through the NuForce UDH-100 DAC/amp combo.
 
First - The headphone is comfortable, but the clamping force is kind of tight out of the box. That was solved by stretching the headband a bit and leaving it in that position for some hours.
 
Second - These are not bass heavy cans, like others have said in this thread. Rather, the bass is what I would call accurate - if the song calls for lots of bass, the 400i will deliver lots of bass. If the song is not bass heavy, then the 400i will accordingly not provide that much bass. The 400i actually made me realize how some songs that I thought before had a lot of bass actually didn't have that much. Bass is also amazingly detailed and textured.
 
Third - I think people have overstated the lack of airiness and the closed-can feeling of the 400i. I was actually pleasantly surprised by how well the 400i handled classical and orchestral music. Sure, I think it does lack that tiny bit of airiness compared to something like the HD598 and the Q701, but I would say that the 400i has about 95% of the airiness that those two headphones have. But the 400i is in another class altogether for transparency. As for soundstage, it's actually decently big. Good depth, and actually surprisingly good width (better than what I remember when I listened to the prototype version). If I had to compare the soundstage width between the 400i and the HD598/Q701 (because the latter two have what I would consider about the same soundstage sizes), then I would say that the 400i has about 85% of the width of the latter two headphones. And I haven't done the grill mod on my 400i yet - it can only get better from here.
 
Fourth - Although these are fairly forgiving headphones, they still will make very apparent the differences in the quality of mixing and mastering between different songs. Basically, while some poorly mastered songs will sound "good" due to the somewhat smoothed (but still highly extended and detailed) treble, songs that are excellent recorded and mastered will sound "excellent" and will be obvious next to the more poorly-mastered music.
 
Fifth -This thing is actually sensitive enough to be decently driven by smartphones. I listened to the 400i for a bit using my Sony Xperia T as a source. The Xperia T can't actually drive headphones to a very loud volume, so I had to crank up the volume on that to around 80-85% to get to a comfortable listening volume, but the 400i still sounded very good out of that. (For comparison, to get to approximately the same listening level on the HD598, I have to crank my phone's volume to about 70-75%). On another note, the 400i seems to scale well with your gear.
 
Sixth - Tonality and transparency of the 400i is excellent. Everything sounds just right and extremely realistic with the 400i, especially guitars, pianos, and vocals. The Q701 lacks this transparency in its mids and highs, and the HD 598 while sounding tonally accurate like the 400i has this raspiness/harshness that is totally not present on the HFM headphone. Perhaps this is what people call "graininess"?
 
Overall, so far I'm extremely impressed with the headphone, and I feel it is worth every penny of the $500 I paid for it.
 
I'm planning to write up a review later after I do more critical listening and let the headphone burn in for the amount of time that HiFiMAN suggests (though I am somewhat skeptical about needing to burn it in over 100 hours). If anybody wants me to put in something for the review that other reviewers haven't done so far (though I'm pretty sure they've mostly covered everything), just let me know in this thread and I'll see what I can do.
 
* EDIT: Minor addition to the fifth point, to give a comparison of how sensitive the HE-400i is compared to the HD598.

 

[swspiers]

   
 
Second - These are not bass heavy cans, like others have said in this thread. Rather, the bass is what I would call accurate - if the song calls for lots of bass, the 400i will deliver lots of bass. If the song is not bass heavy, then the 400i will accordingly not provide that much bass. The 400i actually made me realize how some songs that I thought before had a lot of bass actually didn't have that much. Bass is also amazingly detailed and textured.
 
Third - I think people have overstated the lack of airiness and the closed-can feeling of the 400i. I was actually pleasantly surprised by how well the 400i handled classical and orchestral music. Sure, I think it does lack that tiny bit of airiness compared to something like the HD598 and the Q701, but I would say that the 400i has about 95% of the airiness that those two headphones have. But the 400i is in another class altogether for transparency. As for soundstage, it's actually decently big. Good depth, and actually surprisingly good width (better than what I remember when I listened to the prototype version). If I had to compare the soundstage width between the 400i and the HD598/Q701 (because the latter two have what I would consider about the same soundstage sizes), then I would say that the 400i has about 85% of the width of the latter two headphones. And I haven't done the grill mod on my 400i yet - it can only get better from here.
 
 

+1000
 
These are not artificially airy or bassy headphones.  If the recording has 'air', it's there.  Same with soundstage and bass.

 

[mandrake50]

  +1000
 
These are not artificially airy or bassy headphones.  If the recording has 'air', it's there.  Same with soundstage and bass.

All I seem to think of with the 400i is "natural". Nothing out of place and nothing that causes me to not want to listen to them for long periods. No artificial emphasis and really no significant deficiencies.

 

[swspiers]

I'm getting  a sense that most of us are agreeing that they shot this one right down the middle, and do a lot of things very well, and not much of anything wrong.

 

[wje]

  Shoulda been named HE450.

 
I had suggested the HE-460i -- in keeping with the HE-560.  However, 450 would have worked too.  I think the 'i' is going to confuse people during sales, etc.  The buyer will have to double-check to confirm that they're getting the 'i' version.  I would have been better to change the number also.  Increments are key. 

  Hey Wje
would you say the difference between the T90 and the HE400i is worth having both? I have the HE400 now too I was going to sell them if I went for the HE400i.

 
I'm going from memory - which can be hard.  I love BeyerDynamic headphones, but feel as though I was caught up in the advertising with the "Tesla" technology.  Instead of looking at the bullet points, I should have gone deep into the details.  The T90 left me unimpressed because when I had the DT-880, it was a bit too light on the bass.  For me, it couldn't even provide a neutral level of bass.  In that regard, the T90 was too close to the DT-880 in performance.  Since I had the 880 twice, and then when I received the T90, I felt like I was going down the road with the 880 all over again.  I'd hate to tell you to jump to the HE-400i and see disappointment on your end.  It would be easier to suggest to find a way where you could try the HE-400i in your listening area, with your music, your amp, etc.  This would give you the best idea for comparison and picking the model to keep.
 

   
They are more similar than anything else IMO. But the 400i is king of comfort and efficiency. 

 
Never a more fitting statement to compare the two.  It would be nice to try the HE-500 with the newer focus pads.  However, I don't have an HE-500 within reach and there's also the weight issue, with the HE-400i and the svelteness (not by the thin definition, but others).

  I'm getting  a sense that most of us are agreeing that they shot this one right down the middle, and do a lot of things very well, and not much of anything wrong.

 
I think that's a fair quote.  It can't be stated enough that while the bass is different, it doesn't mean that it's anemic when it comes to bass.  The same could be said when it comes to home subwoofers.  I'd see several threads where someone upgraded from a previous lesser-grade subwoofer to something from SVS.  They were not initially blown away.  Why?  Their old subwoofers produced distorted bass and people were accustomed to flabby bass - preferring quantity over quality.  Once one acclimates, the change becomes much clearer.  I feel that for those who are transitioning between the HE-400 and the HE-400i, it is a somewhat similar comparison to the subwoofer scenario.
 
The ultimate decision still falls with the buyer and listener.  It's what their ears hear and how they perceive something that is key.  They are the one who has to be happy with their purchase.

 

[llcook51]

   
I'm going to be buying my demo pair as well...

Might as well join the crowd. My demos have found a home in sunny South Florida.

 

[Billheiser]

  Might as well join the crowd. My demos have found a home in sunny South Florida.

I've decided not to buy my tour 400i.  Like it, but not better than my hd600.  I owe a review/report on the tour unit and I'll do that in near future, but that's my bottom line.

 

[llcook51]

   
I won't be returning them, despite having less bass than my HE-400. It's a far superior headphone imo in almost every way to give up just because of the bass.

Initially, I thought they lacked adequate bass. But, as the hours have mounted up, they have proved me wrong. The bass is tight and natural.
 
One important point. When you listen to better quality source material (e.g. HD Tracks) these cans rise to the occasion. No matter whether it is Metallica or Miles Davis, the sound is phenomenal.
 
Thanks HiFiman.

 

[swspiers]

  I've decided not to buy my tour 400i.  Like it, but not better than my hd600.  I owe a review/report on the tour unit and I'll do that in near future, but that's my bottom line.

I'm looking forward to reading that, especially a comparison to the hd600!

 

[llcook51]

  I've decided not to buy my tour 400i.  Like it, but not better than my hd600.  I owe a review/report on the tour unit and I'll do that in near future, but that's my bottom line.

That is why there are so many different great headphones. Each listener's ears are different. Everyone's musical preferences differ.
 
I have the HD 600, also. It is a great can. You cannot go wrong with it.

 

[swspiers]

  That is why there are so many different great headphones. Each listener's ears are different. Everyone's musical preferences differ.
 
I have the HD 600, also. It is a great can. You cannot go wrong with it.

They're still on my short list of must-try headphones for sure.

 

[venze]

So what about T90 comparing to these ones? Did someone tested them both?