Separate names with a comma.
That looks more professional, I still like the gold color better (personally speaking)
The classic HiFiMAN black and gold:
Has anyone tried using impedance adapters on the RE-400? I just tried my P-to-S converter (that I use for my Etymotic ER4PT) which is 75 ohm. So 32 + 75 = 107 ohm total (+- 3.2)
Actually it seems a little less midcentric now when using the small bi-flange tips. Seem to loose a little bass(warmth) though but not that bad. Haven't seen specs on the RE-600 but I guess it will have higher impedance than the RE-400.
I wonder why Hifiman does not make replaceable cables for their IEMs? I'm interested in the re600 but from my perspective investing in an IEM over $200, it should have replaceable cables. Does anyone know if they have this in their roadmap or is this not a problem for most people and im just in the minority?
Replaceable cables are pretty hard to incorporate reliably, especially in a small IEM like those. Remember that the standard 2 pin socket is as wide as the IEM shell itself - and anything else would be lock-in and hard to replace. I still remember the lesson of Sleek Audio SA-6.
RE-400 cable doesn't show the signs of hardening yet - by this time RE-ZERO was already noticeably hardened.
RE-600 relaxed mids sounds very wrong to me. If it's as "relaxed" (actually dropped) as RE-272, I'll probably pass - unless this will be done by the filter - but I'm not sure how to replace this while keeping increased Vas required for bass reproduction.
RE-400 have just the right amount, not recessed and not forward like RE-ZERO/RE0. Their main flaws are slight darkness (fixed by mod), maybe slightly too much reverb (not really), lowish isolation and too loose cable cinch. And of course the fact that the included tips don't fit my ears well, but RE-272 ones do.
My apologies if someone has already posted this but RIN has measured the 400's:
There are some good graphs on what modding (foam/filter/tips) does to the RE-400 on that site.
I tried a new mod where I trim the thickness of the white foam with small scissors to about half its height (0.5mm - it's about 1mm from start). Instead of the T4000-filter I use the T2000-filter from my RE-272. Also the long stem RE-272 Bi-flange is working good but I don't have a spare part of that tip so instead I have to use the larger Bi-flange (black) from my RE-400. That Bi-flange doesn't fit me perfect as I can't wear it a long time. Found out that the second larger flange is bothering me so I cut that out with scissors so it only has a single flange but with a long stem. Most of the sound signature is retained. There are differences in treble/airyness. A little bass is lost because of less total dampening. Vocals seem very slightly distant because of using the larger bi-flange with the longer stem - perhaps I could shorten the stem to make vocals less distant (I think the RE-272 stem is about the right size). Vocals on the RE-272 seem more upfront/forward (not always in a good way). Biggest downside to this mod is I can't undo the mod and make it a standard RE-400 anymore. I bought another pair of RE-400 a week ago just so I could try different mods so no loss. I mostly use the unmodded RE-400 when I'm in the mood for more bass.
Maybe they meant more effortless/more dynamic/better separation?
Funny thing, so maybe RE-272 long flange actually makes for the deep insertion up to the reference plane in my ears, with the IEM put pretty far out of the ear. That's plausible.
Large biflange seems to get rid of the 15k null but yes, it drops some air. RE-272 long biflange seems to do the same, but also controls the bass and doesn't reduce the air.
The measurement confirm what I thought - both the damper and the foam drop 5.5k, but differently. While my hearing seems to require it, it is too much in stock.
The 3k drop measured is I think an artifact of the acoustic coupler - it's identical to what Tyll measurements present and different from what I hear. Remember that ER-4S measures near linearly on it, while it sounds forward. This artifact is consistent for all IEMs measured, e.g. Brainwavz B2 also has it.
(Purrin's measurements have a different compensation and seem to have none of that - but his coupler is inaccurate > 10k for IEMs.)
The drop is not an artifact but due to DF equalization. IMO a downsloaping DF has potential as DF is quite accurate but a bit forward, but more research has to be done. Harmon Kardon started to look into it.
I ordered a pair of the RE-400's so I'm excited to hear how they sound but from all the impressions and reviews I've seen I'm pretty sure I'l like them because the forward mids and crisp treble that's not harsh. One thing that I've seen some different opinions on is the soundstage, I've seen some say its average to a little above and others say its quite wide so I guess I'll have to wait and see but as long as its about the same as the X10's I'll be happy.
Soundstage is sometimes pretty personal. I found the 400 soundstage to be very in-head.
That's very true because I've found some to be large while others say it more average. ClieOS in his review said "its above average but not excessively wide" and I usually agree with most of his impressions but you never know.
A note on soundstage:
Soundstage on RE-400 can be perceived in different ways depending on which tips you use or if you mod it. Personally I don't have a problem with it's soundstage anymore here is why.
I bought the Sennheiser HD-598 first and almost immediately liked its soundstage. A month later I bought the Sennheiser HD-600 and thought its soundstage was boring. With time I realized I prefer the soundstage on HD-600 compared to HD-598 because when listening music with HD-598 soundstage is wide all the time regardless of what song I'm listening to whilst in HD-600 it is wide when the recording calls for it (live music for example). So in this regard I see HD-598 as "fun" and HD-600 as "natural".
That is why I like the RE-400 so much because I find it natural.
what does re600 look like? is there any picture yet?