1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice

[REVIEW] HifiMan RE400 ‘Waterline’ – The New Reference

First
 
Back
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Next
 
Last
  1. lwien
    Quote:
     
    How do the 400's compare to the BA-200's that you have?
     
  2. Inks
    From the lows to the treble

    BA200 has more subbass but RE400 has less midbass so it's clearer in the lower midrange.

    Midrage is more forward on BA200 I think RE400 is more balanced here. Both have a peak at around 5k, RE400s is a tiny bit more harsh.

    BA200 has more treble but sounds a bit too much at times while RE400 sounds a bit too soft. Treble extension is better on BA200

    Timbre is better on RE400. Soundstage wise, RE400 was a bit more wider.

    Hard to say which is better...W2 with certain tips and maybe resistance is like a hybrid of the two, beating them both IMO
     
  3. lwien
    Thanks for the detailed comparison.   Much appreciated.   I was really bouncing back and forth between them and decided last week to go with the 400's.  Hope I made the right decision.  Do the 400's benefit from a bit of burn-in?   Some have said yes and some have said no.
     
     
  4. Inks
    Burn-in is placebo, but it works to give an IEM some time to adjust.

    No, I don't want to discuss burn-in
     
  5. FieldingMellish
    Quote:
     
    It's kind of related to Stockholm syndrome.
     
  6. lwien
    Quote:
     
    Brilliant analogy.   Don't know if it's true or not, but brilliant nonetheless. !!
     
  7. quartertone
    Quote:
    You thought differently a year or two ago, no?
     
  8. Inks
    No I though the same. I assumed it was true when I started which was like over 5 years ago
     
  9. lwien
    Quote:
     
    While the Stockholm Syndrome analogy was brilliant, this is just a blatant insult to all those who think otherwise. 
     
    I know that we really don't want to derail this thread on the validity of burn-ins, but there are a LOT of very high quality and reputable manufacturers who recommend it as well as many very well respected members here who recommend it as well.    While of course, they could all be wrong, but to blatantly invalidate their recommendations as pure hog wash is a bit over the top, eh?    Why not leave the door open to the idea that they "may" be right rather than label them as wearers of the proverbial tin hat?
     
    Even the the manufacture of these headphones recommend it.   Are you suggesting that Dr. Fang Bian (Mr. Hifiman) is out of his mind for recommending this on his headphones?
     
  10. FieldingMellish
    Tin hat. har har ... THAT I like.  [​IMG]
     
  11. ghost jammerz
    ok, i got my RE-400… is it just my ears, that i think it sounds "muddy"?? i mean, the sounds are there, the hi and low, and the mids are quite forward, but the representative of each element is not solid if i may say..and instrument separation is not the best i've heard.. i got another cheap IEM, the Fischer Audio Silver Bullet, i think it is comparable to the RE-400 in terms of SQ? and it is cheaper then RE-400.. but yes the RE-400 i much more comfortable.. need more time to digest this tho..
     
  12. jgwtriode
    1. [​IMG]
    1. Inks
    2. [​IMG]
    3.  
    4. online
    1. 3,903 Posts. Joined 1/2007
    2. Location: Los Angeles


    From the lows to the treble

    BA200 has more subbass but RE400 has less midbass so it's clearer in the lower midrange.

    Midrage is more forward on BA200 I think RE400 is more balanced here. Both have a peak at around 5k, RE400s is a tiny bit more harsh.

    BA200 has more treble but sounds a bit too much at times while RE400 sounds a bit too soft. Treble extension is better on BA200

    Timbre is better on RE400. Soundstage wise, RE400 was a bit more wider.

    Hard to say which is better...W2 with certain tips and maybe resistance is like a hybrid of the two, beating them both IMO
     
     
    BA 200 may have slightly more subbass...but properly sealed the RE 400 is pretty  much the same but with more of a sense of tone and texture.  I would honestly say that's a toss up.  I think properly set up the 400 may have just a hint more midbass where I find it's actual range of warmth to start...continuing into the lower  part of the midrange.  The BA 200 is warmer in the midrange, tonally perhaps a bit more forward, ie just a hint more energy there. Yeah I agree on the peak, it's managed a hint better in the 200 but I believe that's because the  upper mids and highs are softer on
    the 200...no matter which tips you use.  The most air and detail is with double flange buried all the way in. They have a smokey seductive warmth that is very pleasing...I have only very occassionaly heard any harshness even with  bad recordings.  The high's are sweet and gorgeous but are a touch rolled off and lacking slightly in air although they still are very detailed.
     
    They just don't bloom and air out the way  the 400's do.  The hifiman is a touch fussier about  material but is very tolerant, the peak is slightly more apparent but is very will managed when you get the depth right. The midrange is more neutral but still is subtly warm and perhaps a hint sweeter than the 200.  I would speculate you have a very subtle shift in the mids from warm to neutral to sweet in the 400's as you move up.  The 200 I find is actually not lacking in mid bass warmth it's just that the midrange is even a bit warmer and then
    the upper midrange and high's are a hint sweeter with warmth and softening that is very musical.   I get the best results with the Large Double tips.  I modify them by cutting the top flange so I can slide a homemade foam tip over it. I like foam silicone hybrids and I make my own core's for them. Foam just adds a subtle warmth and sweetness and a hint smoother response without lessening detail.  I am sending my 200's to my son.  I actually modded mine to improve their upper frequecny response and I like them a touch better than stock...but the RE 400 are better.  In the highs and in the focus and soundstaging by just a hint.  What really makes them better is  that they are
    noticeably  better in PRAT and dynamics.  They are just more involving.  If I haven't listened to my 400's for a while I will put the 200's on and go WOW!  But then I play the same thing on the 400's and it like that's it.  My son has my old Klipsch S4's...oh yeah is he in for a surprise.  Heheheheh!
     
    FWIW
     
    Happy Listening!
    2013-05-1819.08.21.jpg
     
  13. Inks
    If the RE400 has more midbass and on par subbass with BA200, looks like the BA200 may need a better seal, ime. BA200 definitely doesn't have rolled off treble, only at the highest extreme, but because of its bigger bass, treble is perceived as less than what it is, that 10k region is problematic a bit.
     
  14. ghost jammerz
    Quote:
    the stock small bi-flange tip… can recommend any good tip to buy?
     
  15. raisedbywolves
    Quote:

    that's interesting. same thing with me. stock biflange made things sound thin, so i switched to sony hybrids. what size hybrids do you generally wear? the single flange tips that came look too small for me, but maybe deep insertion would offset that?

    edit:

    trying to put the tips on and i managed to get the right one on, but i'm about to give up getting the left on. the stem hole is just too small, argh.
     
First
 
Back
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Next
 
Last

Share This Page