[Rudiger]

   
Beautiful! Where, may I ask, did you get those grills from?

This.
 

 
The sound of the trash improved a lot

 

[Rudiger]

 

I brought my HE-560 at work today because I'm alone in the office.
I do not have time to go into details, but IMO the Lehmann Audio Rhinelander is really excellent pairing with the HE-560.

 

[DougD]

 
This.
 

 
The sound of the trash improved a lot

 
Seems air-ier and more open, even from here. A bit edgy around the sides. A solid black bottom. Slightly narrow at the base but widening as you go higher, to a totally open top.
 
Outstanding work.

 

[TeskR]

   
Seems air-ier and more open, even from here. A bit edgy around the sides. A solid black bottom. Slightly narrow at the base but widening as you go higher, to a totally open top.
 
Outstanding work.

Excellent analysis, but have you done a blind A/B test between modded and unmodded?

 

[lukeap69]

Seems air-ier and more open, even from here. A bit edgy around the sides. A solid black bottom. Slightly narrow at the base but widening as you go higher, to a totally open top.

Outstanding work.

ROTFL

 

[Rudiger]

I'll try to make objective measurements, but think that is 20 cm diameter and 60 cm high. Listening is perhaps placebo effect but to my ears there is a definite improvement.
However, now I do not know where to throw my papers.

 

[jerg]

I felt that my written impressions of HE560 done months ago is now fairly useless as that was based on the test prototype which sounds nothing like the finalized production model, so took a couple of hours (okay more than a couple of hours...) and wrote up my thoughts on the relevant thing now.
 
May be of special interest to those who are thinking of modding, as I included some snippets of my recent findings with regards to a couple of mods on HE560s.
 
http://www.head-fi.org/products/hifiman-he-560/reviews/11406

 

[swspiers]

 
Look, I have been involved in psychological research and I am all about the value of evidenced based science, but you are oversimplifying here as I have said. If you think for a moment that simple measuring devices and basic graphical output can even hope to equate to the complex processing involved in how our brain hears, then I do not know what to say. Measurements are just one device, and compared to the subjective brain you don't seem to value, they are extremely crude and un-nuanced tools at that.

+1
 
The constant rejection of the neurological processing that happens when we process music is maddening!  People fling out terms like 'placebo effect' with an almost religious fervor on this forum, absolutely disregarding the fact that ears are only a receiving device, not a processing one.  As such, it is hardly 'objective' to disregard the science behind pyschoacoustics, and the fact that we barely know enough to call it a science.  There is much that we do not understand yet...

 

[garunamodi]

 
The constant rejection of the neurological processing that happens when we process music is maddening!  People fling out terms like 'placebo effect' with an almost religious fervor on this forum, absolutely disregarding the fact that ears are only a receiving device, not a processing one.  As such, it is hardly 'objective' to disregard the science behind pyschoacoustics, and the fact that we barely know enough to call it a science.  There is much that we do not understand yet...

It doesn't help that many people jump onto the objective bandwagon without properly understanding science. Same goes for the subjective camp.
 
This is, in a nutshell, the best stance to have IMO:
 
We shell out a lot of money for the sound waves that go into our ears. At all stages in this chain, changing something could change these waves. If it doesn't but costs considerably more, why should I bother? Typical examples used are the benefits of 24/192 music against 16/44.1, and cables. I'm not commenting on whether they do or not, but I'd like just some evidence to say they make a change at all before I shell out hundreds over them.
 
Once it is reasonable to assume a difference exists, take the options, do a blind listening test, and decide which you prefer. Try and describe the differences too if possible. And finally, enjoy, because if that's not why you're here then what is?
 
 
On topic: @jerg those are amazing reviews! Would it be fair to say that the HE560 is for critical listening, while the HE400i is similar but with a (small) "fun" tilt?

 

[Byrnie]

 
Were the HD 700s as odd a sound signature as I hear? Apparently the treble just doesn't make sense on the 700. Anyway, depending on what you are looking for of course, but you should be in for a treat. If you are at all into electronic music holly bat balls does the 560 handle this genre extremely well. I loved the D7000 with electronic music, but the overblown bass (and less articulate bass as compared to the 560) I think obscured too much micro detail which the 560 really finds without over-scaling this information. The more I listen, the more I like. The only negative is a slightly too tight clamping force that does cause a little discomfort; however as I tend to sit for shorter listening sessions this isn't a huge issue. Anyway, look forward to your impressions.

I really tried to love the HD700 (given how comfortable I found them) but yea something just wasn't clicking for me with them in a lot of my rock albums/tracks.  I think it was the treble or upper-mids but I never really nailed down what I wasn't liking.  Whatever it was I didn't notice it with electronic music.  Yes, I listen to lots of electronic music and rock.  Well it will be hard to pull me away from my TH900s for electronic but we'll see how they fair.

 

[davidsh]

The processing of the brain might be beyond grasp, but the brain can't process something it can't pick up in the first place (aka. extremely low distortion beyond threshold of hearing for example). That's how I see it.

 

[Odium Child]

I do not have time to go into details, but IMO the Lehmann Audio Rhinelander is really excellent pairing with the HE-560.

Where do they get those names...Rhinelander is the name of my hometown.

 

[Rudiger]

You should request a copy free

 

[Articnoise]

How about that someone perceive a better sound from a can/amp/dac/cable or a combination of them for evidence. I for one have my audio gear for listening to music and the ones that make me think it does it best (I enjoy most) are the ones I will keep.
 
The music itself is not only about technicalities, so how can the reproduction of it be dissected to pure technical parameters looked up on one by one? The picture is bigger than its parts. For me music is a mix of rhythm, notes and emotions. Like a musician or a band can be very technical good, if not doing it with soul it’s just sound flat and boring to me. The reason is not that a note or something have been added or taking away technically. What the soul is and how it is manifested is very, very hard to put in word then describing music, because it’s (personal) emotions. The best gears for me is the one that can transmit this abstract emotion.
 
I found out many years ago that the parameters that can be measured mostly indicate how much (quantity) of something like distortion and level of a certain frequency is, but not how good they do it (quality). And definitively not saying anything on then playing multiple tones at different frequencies at the same time - like in the real world.
 
For example which measurement will indicate a precise image and a deep and wide soundstage? Or a refined, rich or good slam and punch or better clarity and transparency? The distortion and jitter (level and sort of it) will to some degree indicate on clarity and transparency, but far from given the full truth.
 
Lastly why all this confidence in that machines been superior in detecting the best gear? I have for example never heard of a maker of violins that doesn’t use the ears to tone the instrument or a musician that not using his/her ears for toning the strings on the guitar.
 
Sure we can take measurement and use them to visual and as a point of indication of some parameters as long as we understand what they really saying and what not. All above is in my opinion.

 

[swspiers]

The processing of the brain might be beyond grasp, but the brain can't process something it can't pick up in the first place (aka. extremely low distortion beyond threshold of hearing for example). That's how I see it.

Actually, the brain interpolates sound quite often, especially below 40 Hz.

It just won't need to if the headphones are flat in the sub-bass.