HiFiman HE-500 (HE as in High End) Proving to be an enjoyable experience in listening.

Feb 8, 2013 at 12:13 PM Post #3,047 of 20,451
Quote:
There is no way: 
 
1. The HE-500s  have a less bright spot in the upper mids 
 
2. The  HE-500 is noway more accurate than the HE-5LEs
 
 
The HE-5LE is way more balanced across the spectrum when compared to the HE-500.  
 
 
HE-5 / 5LE

 
 
HE-500
 


If the HE-5LE is more accurate, could you describe the HE-500 as more "fun"?  (I haven't heard the HE-5LE)
 
Feb 8, 2013 at 12:27 PM Post #3,048 of 20,451
HE-5LE is not accurate.  It's quite plastic sounding, rounded and overly smooth.  It has it's fans but it's no LCD-2 replacement like the HE-500 can be.
 
Feb 8, 2013 at 1:55 PM Post #3,051 of 20,451
Quote:
HE-5LE is not accurate.  It's quite plastic sounding, rounded and overly smooth.  It has it's fans but it's no LCD-2 replacement like the HE-500 can be.

 
 
I'll bet my dime to your donuts that the HE-5LE is more accurate than the HE500s.  
 
Use a amp that's up to par.  The HE-5LE has only slightly less amping requirements than the HE-6.
 
No plasic sound on the First Watts F1J watch..
 
Feb 8, 2013 at 3:32 PM Post #3,052 of 20,451
Quote:
There is no way: 
 
1. The HE-500s  have a less bright spot in the upper mids 
 
2. The  HE-500 is noway more accurate than the HE-5LEs
 
 
The HE-5LE is way more balanced across the spectrum when compared to the HE-500.  
 
 
HE-5 / 5LE

 
 
HE-500
 

 
 
Maybe there is no such thing as a nanotechnology mic sitting on my ear-drum?  This is what happens when folks without a background in science try to interpret measurements,  ask the guy who took them how repeatable these are when the mic is moved a few thousands of an inch,  or the correlation to real acoustics  (ever listen to a pair of tweeters 90 degrees to your head?) Answer: there is no correlation. 
 
My 5LE's are history,   the HE-500's reproduce midrange more accurate to real life,  sorry I don't try to dazzel you with a 2D plot to represent acoustics that are much more complicated than a 6th grade algebra x-y plot.  I know what a guitar sounds like,  and the HE5LE's shine a spot light on the upper two octaves.  I sure people don't master music to these plots.
 
Feb 8, 2013 at 3:34 PM Post #3,053 of 20,451
popcorn.gif

 
Feb 8, 2013 at 4:51 PM Post #3,054 of 20,451
Quote:
 
And I have tried running them from the Dac/Amp combo Audiolab M-Dac, arguably one of the best Dac's out there, and also Arcam rPac/Fiio E9K. I just dont find these headphones engaging at all. 
 
Anyone wants to point out what I am doing wrong then please by all means let me know. Thanks 

You are using the worst AMPs to drive these things. something with only 138mW and something with >25ohms of output impedance is sure to destroy your sound.
 
Feb 8, 2013 at 5:01 PM Post #3,055 of 20,451
Quote:
 
 
I'll bet my dime to your donuts that the HE-5LE is more accurate than the HE500s.  
 
Use a amp that's up to par.  The HE-5LE has only slightly less amping requirements than the HE-6.
 
No plasic sound on the First Watts F1J watch..

 
You do love your F1J :P
 
I owned the HE-5LE while I had a black velvet B22.  Power wasn't an issue, not that 4mW is hard to muster.
 
A 12dB scoop out starting around 500Hz is not natural ;)
 

 
Feb 8, 2013 at 6:44 PM Post #3,056 of 20,451
Quote:
 
 
Maybe there is no such thing as a nanotechnology mic sitting on my ear-drum?  This is what happens when folks without a background in science try to interpret measurements,  ask the guy who took them how repeatable these are when the mic is moved a few thousands of an inch,  or the correlation to real acoustics  (ever listen to a pair of tweeters 90 degrees to your head?) Answer: there is no correlation. 
 
My 5LE's are history,   the HE-500's reproduce midrange more accurate to real life,  sorry I don't try to dazzel you with a 2D plot to represent acoustics that are much more complicated than a 6th grade algebra x-y plot.  I know what a guitar sounds like,  and the HE5LE's shine a spot light on the upper two octaves.  I sure people don't master music to these plots.

 
Yea I'd agree with that. Not to mention that each individual has their own Head Related Transfer Function along with their own hearing acuity. FR plots are quite useless, especially when the headphone FR manages to stay within 3-6 dB. At the least you need a water plot chart. Even though energy doubles at 3 dB, when you ask people to match the volume to when they think it's double of what they were hearing, it's usually around 10 dB. Psychoacoustics is a must to know.
 
Feb 9, 2013 at 12:27 AM Post #3,058 of 20,451
Just picked these puppies up after my tax refund. Fiance wasn't happy but my ears are. Had a few friends listens and the consensus is that it is hard to believe headphones are on your head. The most realistic experience this side of a concert. One happy customer here.
 
Feb 9, 2013 at 12:43 AM Post #3,060 of 20,451
I know hearing is very subjective but when I read stuff like, "The soundstage is very congested and centred. I can't delineate where the instruments are placed on the stage" I just shake my head. Maybe I'm the odd one out but I don't listen to headphones to critically analyze where the instruments are located or if I can hear the singer breathe, etc and personally, I don't think anyone can do that without knowing where the instruments actually were during a recording. If you could, and you accidentally put your headphones on "backward" the instruments would be on the other side of the stage. OMG!
 
I once read a speaker review in Stereophile and the reviewer state he could actually hear the floor move under the drum set during certain parts. Hogwash.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top