I'm excited that Sennheiser is releasing a few new IEM's this year in the US: Sennheiser IE 40 Pro - $100 Sennheiser IE 400 Pro - $350 Sennheiser IE 500 Pro - $600 I have been in the process of looking to replace my aging Shure SE530's (the newer equivalent replacements today being the Shure SE535's). The last few months I've been reading through the forums for alternatives in the crowded field of IEM's. Going the path of Shure and staying under the $1000 range, I'd be going with the Shure SE846 ($1000) as a possible replacement and something beyond the Shure SE535's that they would replace for my current SE530's. Yet for the price I would pay for the Shure SE856 ($1000), many say there are better IEM's that are better and cheaper for the money and considering the Shure SE856 is simply older technology by todays IEM standards. For example, some say that for the money, the BGVP DM6 ($200) would get me closer to the Shure SE846 but for a far less of cost. And that to really achieve anything better than the BGVP DM6, you would really need to go beyond the $1000 range to get an IEM that is beyond the quality of what you would get for something like the BGVP DM6. Of course, there are probably other IEM's even better than the BGVP DM6 but fall under even $500 that go a bit beyond the Shure SE846's. Near to the $1000 mark some say the Campfire Audio Andromeda ($1100) is better bang for the buck over the Shure SE846 ($1000). And that there would be a good audible difference between say the BGVP DM6 ($200) and Campfire Audio Solaris ($1500), but of course you would have to pay for the improvement by quite a lot: $200 vs $1500. Making this up a bit: but If the Campfire Audio Andromeda's are only %5 better in sound quality over the BGVP DM6 where the Campfire Audio Solaris are say only %10 better in sound quality over the BGVP DM6, then someone would have to determine how much they are willing to pay for that slight improvement. Looking at the new Sennheiser models to be released sometimes in March, the bigger question I have is how these will be any better then the current Sennheiser IE 800 S ($950)? Looking at the IE 500 Pro and considering that Sennheiser has given these all a lower model number (ex: 40, 400, 500) when compared to the IE 800, I'm trying to curb my enthusiasm as to if even Sennheiser expects the IE 500 Pro to excel over the IE 800 S given the price and model number? Assuming they would, then why didn't Sennheiser give it a bigger model # like 1000 (ex: IE 1000 Pro)? Considering they did not, then is it safe to assume that the IE 500 Pro will fall under the IE 800 S in terms of audio quality? Or, has Sennheiser with the newer technology it has put into the IE 500 Pro expecting this IEM to excel beyond the IE 800 S? As the IE 500 Pro's are not out just yet here in March and there don't appear to be any reviews yet in audio comparison's between other IEM's, I'm curious to know what others anticipate for the new Sennheiser models when released? For example, product manager Jannik Schentek says: "For the IE 400 PRO and IE 500 PRO, we have reinvented the single dynamic driver principle. Other in-ears in the same price range work on the balanced armature principle, which we find to be inferior to a wideband dynamic driver". Other claims by Sennheiser is the new IEM's are: "a completely natural, clear and spacious sound stage with a total harmonic distortion (THD) as low as under 0.08% at 1 kHz and 94 dB. When the sound is so precise and detailed, the acoustical stress for the wearer is reduced, and they discover that they can set their monitors to a lower level." Yet, if you look at the THD of the IE 800 S, they are speced at "< 0.06% (1 kHz, 94 dB)" on Sennheiser's website which is already lower than the newer THD for the IE 500 Pro. Should I assume the IE 500 Pro's are meant to satisfy those at the $600 price range, but to still remain under the IE 800 S in terms of audio quality? Or, should I be excited that Sennheiser may be offer something (the IE 500 Pro's) for half the price that will excel over the IE 800 S ($950)? I'm a bit doubtful about this.