[3X0]

Good call about another model! Now to see if it's an RE-800 or RE-500.

How does no one care about this official statement???

Sure hoping it's upward! I don't see much room between the RE-400 and RE-600, but plenty above the latter for a RE-800. HFM can also put the value proposition debate surround the RE-600 to rest with even a $100 price drop.

The ER4S to my knowledge corresponds VERY well to the diffuse field equalization models.

 

[Pianist]

Quote:

I call BS.

 
Why? You don't consider ER4S bass to be tight? Which IEMs do you think have tighter bass?

 

[eke2k6]

Quote:

 
Why? You don't consider ER4S bass to be tight? Which IEMs do you think have tighter bass?

 
Bass tightness is only one factor in "accurate" reproduction. I've already gone on several mini rants in the Ety love thread about why the Etys are fundamentally inaccurate.

 

[Inks]

Past 5k, it's ruler flat. It's lacking bass (mostly subass) and a bit too forward in midrange

 

[eke2k6]

Quote:

Past 5k, it's ruler flat. It's lacking bass (mostly subass) and a bit too forward in midrange

 
That's a lot to ignore, wouldn't you say?

 

[tigon_ridge]

Quote:

 
Why? You don't consider ER4S bass to be tight? Which IEMs do you think have tighter bass?

RE-400 does. Seriously, I've been listening to several different songs in lossless to compare, and the bass tightness on the 4S is there, but the 400 equals it in terms of sheer control, but also makes it more palpable. I seriously think you should give up this little nonsensical ranting about ER4S's bass control... anemic is anemic, I don't care how tight you think it sounds. Music has reverberation, and sounds have texture and weight... the 4S lacks severely in these regards, making them feel less euphoric, less intimate; it's not just about sub-bass, I was only using sub-bass as an example. "Cheap fart cannon?" You're gonna go there now, huh? With these cheap farts in my ears, I can easily tell the difference between a well-compressed 128 kbps and lossless without even trying. It makes vocals sound incredibly alive, especially with my current EQ setting. No matter how I EQ the 4S, I can't seem to inject more life into it. And that's what it all comes down to, ultimately, for me. Life = music.

 

[hifiman-us]

HiFiMAN is considering two or three options on a third in-ear. No plan to make a higher end version than RE-600. 
 
Btw, we should be getting our first shipment of RE-600s in the U.S next week. The latest delay was finishing the owner's guide. I thought it was done months ago but discovered that was RE-400.
 
Thanks to everyone for the interest. 
 
Peter

 

[Pianist]

Quote:

RE-400 does. Seriously, I've been listening to several different songs in lossless to compare, and the bass tightness on the 4S is there, but the 400 equals it in terms of sheer control, but also makes it more palpable. I seriously think you should give up this little nonsensical ranting about ER4S's bass control... anemic is anemic, I don't care how tight you think it sounds. Music has reverberation, and sounds have texture and weight... the 4S lacks severely in these regards, making them feel less euphoric, less intimate; it's not just about sub-bass, I was only using sub-bass as an example. "Cheap fart cannon?" You're gonna go there now, huh? With these cheap farts in my ears, I can easily tell the difference between a well-compressed 128 kbps and lossless without even trying. It makes vocals sound incredibly alive, especially with my current EQ setting. No matter how I EQ the 4S, I can seem to inject more life into it. And that's what it all comes down to, ultimately, for me. Life = music.

 
Read my posts carefully please. I didn't call RE-400 a fart cannon. I wrote that there are far cheaper dynamics than RE-400 that can produce as much or more sub bass than RE-400, even though those cheap dynamics are just fart cannons with a muddy, bloated mess in place of bass. RE-400 does have very good bass, but I just don't hear the same clarity, definition and resolution from its bass that I do from ER4 bass. I don't consider ER4S low end to be anemic either. I actually think its sharper and punchier when required than RE-400 bass is. RE-400's lows sound more monotonous, less distinct to me, although they are still very good and better than most I heard. BTW, I think RE-400's predecessor RE0 actually has a sharper, cleaner bass than RE-400 in direct AB comparison. RE-400 bass is slightly bloated and lacking some micro details. RE0 is actually close to ER4 in bass resolution, but still lacks the sharp punch and definition of ER4's low end.

 

[james444]

Quote:

Btw, we should be getting our first shipment of RE-600s in the U.S next week. The latest delay was finishing the owner's guide. I thought it was done months ago but discovered that was RE-400.

 
We can only imagine where people would stick them without an owner's guide.

  (sorry, couldn't resist)

 

[shotgunshane]

Music has reverberation, and sounds have texture and weight.

This is why I'd take a little extra decay over speed any day. I just sounds more realistic.

 

[tigon_ridge]

Quote:

 
Read my posts carefully please. I didn't call RE-400 a fart cannon. I wrote that there are far cheaper dynamics than RE-400 that can produce as much or more sub bass than RE-400, even though those cheap dynamics are just fart cannons with a muddy, bloated mess in place of bass. RE-400 does have very good bass, but I just don't hear the same clarity, definition and resolution from its bass that I do from ER4 bass. I don't consider ER4S low end to be anemic either. I actually think its sharper and punchier when required than RE-400 bass is. RE-400's lows sound more monotonous, less distinct to me, although they are still very good and better than most I heard. BTW, I think RE-400's predecessor RE0 actually has a sharper, cleaner bass than RE-400 in direct AB comparison. RE-400 bass is slightly bloated and lacking some micro details. RE0 is actually close to ER4 in bass resolution, but still lacks the sharp punch and definition of ER4's low end.

We'll have to just agree to disagree in regard how we personally appreciate bass presentation. I don't find the 400 bloated or slow in the least (each drum beat sounds real); if you think this is bloated, you should hear the GR07 - it has even more bloom. The 400 strikes the perfect balance in terms of bass thickness imo. As for bass timbre accuracy, even if you're correct it makes too little a difference to me.
 
Now, let's talk about something more important - midrange. On the ER4S, I can hear but can't feel the vocals. My EQ'd 400 produces vocals that are tactile, palpable, and I feel their emotions without needing to try. I can almost touch the music. Everything has flesh, whereas the 4S is more like a painting: it may look nice, but it's still just 2-D.
 
Soundstage height - the 4S has none.

 

[FieldingMellish]

I'm still chuckling over fart cannon. Something I've been accused of being.

 

[james444]

Quote:

This is why I'd take a little extra decay over speed any day. I just sounds more realistic.

 
The mere thought of something less accurate sounding more realistic disqualifies you as an audiophile.

 

[tinyman392]

Quote:

HiFiMAN is considering two or three options on a third in-ear. No plan to make a higher end version than RE-600. 
 
Btw, we should be getting our first shipment of RE-600s in the U.S next week. The latest delay was finishing the owner's guide. I thought it was done months ago but discovered that was RE-400.
 
Thanks to everyone for the interest. 
 
Peter

 
Thanks for the update...  Maybe we can finally get over a bit of this speculation once they arrive XD 

 

[proedros]

so , this will be in the 100-300 $ area...very interesting.

 
Quote:

HiFiMAN is considering two or three options on a third in-ear. No plan to make a higher end version than RE-600. 
 

 
Peter