[MRC001]

Originally Posted by Drrizzt /img/forum/go_quote.gif
...
I've owned the He-500 for almost two years and just sold it beause i wanted to change, so i bought the legendary HD600 and all i can say is that i don't regret it, AT ALL.
...
There's an absolute magical cohesivness in the sound that cannot be matched by the He500, the HD600 doesn't need to promote himself with big bass muscle and spakling highs, ... it's just pure art to have brought such PERFECT balance between all aspects of the spectrum. Okay, sub bass are superior on the He500 ... the [HD600] mids allow me to hear new details in the recording, who would have thought that ?

I can understand that. Having owned the HD-600 for years and auditioned the HE-500 extensively at home on many recordings, given a choice between the two I would pick the HD-600. The HE-500 has wonderful bass response - clean & linear to subsonic but it has midrange suckout that makes voicing unrealistic. Natural acoustic instruments sound like a caricature on the HE-500. The HD-600 has very smooth natural mids, though it rolls off the low bass and high highs. Most of my listening is natural acoustic music so I would prefer the HD-600.
 
However, for me it wasn't a choice between these two. I discovered the Audeze LCD-2F (and 3F and X) which have the best of both worlds - the incredible clean linear bass of the HE-500 with even better mids and highs than the HD-600.

 

[disastermouse]

  I can understand that. Having owned the HD-600 for years and auditioned the HE-500 extensively at home on many recordings, given a choice between the two I would pick the HD-600. The HE-500 has wonderful bass response - clean & linear to subsonic but it has midrange suckout that makes voicing unrealistic. Natural acoustic instruments sound like a caricature on the HE-500. The HD-600 has very smooth natural mids, though it rolls off the low bass and high highs. Most of my listening is natural acoustic music so I would prefer the HD-600.
 
However, for me it wasn't a choice between these two. I discovered the Audeze LCD-2F (and 3F and X) which have the best of both worlds - the incredible clean linear bass of the HE-500 with even better mids and highs than the HD-600.

I don't think we're listening to the same HE-500 if you think they lack mids. Mids are amazing with my HE-500!

 

[Drrizzt]

Yes, absolutely, but they are rendered differently. The tone is beautifull but it seduces in an artificial way, it doesnt render the reality of the sound, as it is, it's more colored and less well integrate as a whole. Besides, to be more specific, i think the lower mids are less contaminated by some kind of a blur, it's more detailled to my ears. On the other hand, the peak at 3khz was pretty offensive to my ears, but here again, it's all about naturalness.
 
A had a hard time to figure out why i was all the time adjusting the volume, higher and lower according to some part of some tracks also, it's just that the HD600 is able to pick up the distance of the differents instruments that makes some of them sound distant or close. This is also where the He500 is unable.

 

[WhiskeyJacks]

I was about to say when I head the HE-500 it had a very pleasant and enjoyable midrange. Now the HE-560( modded with focus a pads, grill mod, balanced upgraded cable) has a slight recession in comparison but to be honest to it is very slight, and the midrange is still very enjoyable where as the tonality of my he-560 is fantastic. The HD600 was good headphone especially for the price I do not feel I enjoyed it more than my HE-560, I cannot argue if I did or not with the HE-500 because I only heard it and never owned it like the HD600 and HE-560.
 
EDIT: But I can say the low end was, to my ears, definitely superior on the HE-560 which was fast, detailed, extends very well, and tight with nice prat. The He-500 I feel like had decent low end too just not as fast and with less prat.

 

[MRC001]

  Yes, absolutely, but they are rendered differently. The tone is beautifull but it seduces in an artificial way, it doesnt render the reality of the sound, as it is, it's more colored and less well integrate as a whole. Besides, to be more specific, i think the lower mids are less contaminated by some kind of a blur, it's more detailled to my ears. On the other hand, the peak at 3khz was pretty offensive to my ears, but here again, it's all about naturalness.
 
A had a hard time to figure out why i was all the time adjusting the volume, higher and lower according to some part of some tracks also, it's just that the HD600 is able to pick up the distance of the differents instruments that makes some of them sound distant or close. This is also where the He500 is unable.

Wow we have very similar impressions of the HE-500. Here's my review from about 2 years ago:
http://www.mclements.net/Mike/mrc-blog/blog-140320.html
Compared to the LCD-2F, which I tried next:
http://www.mclements.net/Mike/mrc-blog/blog-140403.html
 
As an amateur musician I hear the absolute reference - the sound of live natural acoustic instruments - every day. The HE-500 mids simply don't sound like that. They are "nice" sounding but artificial. The HE-500 is a great headphone in many ways but it does not have natural, realistic midrange voicing. Someone who listens to mostly electronic music, or for whom realistic voicing of acoustic instruments is not as important, could really enjoy their excellent bass response and open, pleasing sound. However, they're not for me.