= HiFiMAN HE-560 Impressions & Discussion Thread =
Aug 3, 2014 at 11:35 AM Post #6,361 of 21,105

ThePianoMan

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Mar 18, 2014
Posts
560
Likes
212
I whish that instead of being shocked with amazing spurts of impressive bass on only some passages..

To sound amazing all the time on bass passages..

But then the bass would not be accurate or reference. .
oh well, can't have it all,
Then again I can always eq..


I remember my first experience with realistic (very non-one-notey bass) and it takes a moment for the ears to adjust. But once you're there you realize how sloppily some stuff is mastered!
 
Aug 3, 2014 at 3:37 PM Post #6,363 of 21,105

Heartsmart

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Oct 13, 2011
Posts
257
Likes
54
Location
Sweden
What I meant was not just 16/44, 24/192 quality debate (there is another thread) for that. I meant from media/file type support perspective.

I also own the Arrow 4G and HE-500, while it is a good amp, I do not think it can drive the HE-560/500/400/400i to their full potential. I think money can be better spent somewhere else. And adding a USB DAC will open up a new way if music enjoyment experience.


Thanks for your impressions :)
 
Aug 3, 2014 at 5:23 PM Post #6,364 of 21,105

SBranson

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 21, 2012
Posts
2,310
Likes
5,120
Location
BC, Canada
and 16/44 is enough quality..as long u use lossless material.... Hell..even on the high end rig i have now i use 16/44 khz files (capable of 24/192) ..and they sound wonderful on it... I also have 24bit and they indeed introduce a better experience....but those files only are good on really good systems..on ur regular mid-fi tier rig u wont hear much of a difference,,,imho ofcourse..
 

 
I wouldn't call my system a "really good system" as it consists of the HE560s, CEntrance HiFi M8 and an ipod with all lossless, mostly from CDs so 16/44.  I finally brought the rig up to the main computer to try out a couple of my 24/192 files and I think there is quite a difference.  Violins sound much more real and there is much better separation.  
I am now looking at new sources, the sony zx-1 for instance.
 
These headphones are very capable and scalable..  
 
Aug 3, 2014 at 6:04 PM Post #6,365 of 21,105

davidsh

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 4, 2012
Posts
5,593
Likes
192
^24/192 sounding better than cd quality is a hoax unless something's wrong with your DA converter. Placebo and that sorta stuff :wink:
 
Aug 3, 2014 at 6:55 PM Post #6,367 of 21,105

davidsh

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 4, 2012
Posts
5,593
Likes
192
Think you could do it in an ABX? Would be interested in the results.. Not sure if a little too OT though :S
 
Aug 3, 2014 at 6:57 PM Post #6,368 of 21,105

souomaior

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Sep 6, 2007
Posts
220
Likes
25
Location
In Outer Space
How is the sound of the HE-560, compared to the Sennheiser HD595, in terms of soundstage, imaging, bass, mids and treble?
 
Aug 3, 2014 at 7:14 PM Post #6,369 of 21,105

Soundsgoodtome

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Apr 19, 2013
Posts
6,883
Likes
1,280
Location
SEATTLE
Me? If so I'd need an operator since Spotify offline has to be played via their player while FLAC is via Foobar2k. It could very well be the Wasapi driver making the difference as well as Spotify offline + player doesn't support Wasapi or ASIO.
Think you could do it in an ABX? Would be interested in the results.. Not sure if a little too OT though :S
 
Aug 3, 2014 at 7:32 PM Post #6,370 of 21,105

hifimanrookie

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Posts
5,299
Likes
138
Location
Amsterdam
I wouldn't call my system a "really good system" as it consists of the HE560s, CEntrance HiFi M8 and an ipod with all lossless, mostly from CDs so 16/44.  I finally brought the rig up to the main computer to try out a couple of my 24/192 files and I think there is quite a difference.  Violins sound much more real and there is much better separation.  
I am now looking at new sources, the sony zx-1 for instance.

These headphones are very capable and scalable..  

U just said something very dangerous: 24 sounding better then 16... Lolz on this thread u know u have many unbelievers about a lot of things (as on he500 thread)...so u can expect some reactions.. :D but my friend..i am in the same boat as u..i do also believe that 24bit or sacd do sound better then 16bit..and 16bit more then 320mp3.. And even on those two people debate about..lolz.. Oh well..people love to debate and disagree.. :D
 
Aug 3, 2014 at 7:59 PM Post #6,371 of 21,105

davidsh

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 4, 2012
Posts
5,593
Likes
192
Me? If so I'd need an operator since Spotify offline has to be played via their player while FLAC is via Foobar2k. It could very well be the Wasapi driver making the difference as well as Spotify offline + player doesn't support Wasapi or ASIO.
Think you could do it in an ABX? Would be interested in the results.. Not sure if a little too OT though :S

I thought we were discussing formats here, tbh. Like 320 kbit OGG vs. FLAC -ish.
 
@hifimanrookie, @SBranson 
A little surfing around the internet, reading articles etc. should show you that fundamentally 24/192 isn't in any way better than 16/44.1 for playback (human ears at least) if you are interested in the subject. If not, no reason for me to discuss it any further.
 
In my opinion HE-560 could stand to be a little more resolving by the way. I found my staxes and hd800 to do a better job at seperating instruments/sounds when I had HE-560 for a visit. Problem with that sorta stuff (detail, seperation) is that perception is colored by the FR/sound signature IMO, so take it with a grain of salt. Just don't think HE-560 is the best in details and seperation etc.
 
Aug 3, 2014 at 8:39 PM Post #6,373 of 21,105

Wildcatsare1

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jan 22, 2014
Posts
6,381
Likes
6,093
Location
Lexington, KY
^you really need to not feed the trolls, Davidish has an opinion, it isn't gospel, or universally believed. "Go on the internet", and you will also find many opinions that the engineers at Phillips/Sony screwed the pooch by establishing a standard without fully understanding the limits of human hearing. Agree to disagree and never trust a Zealot, there are very few universal truths.
 
Aug 3, 2014 at 10:33 PM Post #6,375 of 21,105

SBranson

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 21, 2012
Posts
2,310
Likes
5,120
Location
BC, Canada
@hifimanrookie, @SBranson 
A little surfing around the internet, reading articles etc. should show you that fundamentally 24/192 isn't in any way better than 16/44.1 for playback (human ears at least) if you are interested in the subject. If not, no reason for me to discuss it any further.
 

 
No problem.  You can just chalk this one up to my happy delusions then.  I'm fine with believing I hear the same track played back to back (focusing on a very small bit for reference's sake)  in 16/44 and 24/192 on the same player (audirvana) sound quite different.  But I'm one of those loonies who think that vinyl sounds better than any digital medium too so take my comments with the grain of salt.  So does SACD not sound any better either?  
Perhaps if I read I can convince my ears I don't hear a difference but for now, my ears tell me there is a difference.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top