CHANGSTAR: Audiophile Headphone Reviews and Early 90s Style BBS
Lobby => Headphone Measurements => Topic started by: Marvey on January 19, 2012, 11:24:26 PM
-
HiFiMAN HE-500 INITIAL SUBJECTIVE IMPRESSIONS
As usual, I listened to them before measuring them. Unfortunately I do not have my high-end rig at this time, so I had do with an O2 amp and Sansui 5000X receiver. I have no doubt that these would have sounded better from the BA.
The HE-500 has a very nice somewhat dark presentation with a slight emphasis somewhere in the midrange. I would say around 4k (based on the vocals from Madonna's Lucky Star from her Immaculate Collection CD). Some percussion and cymbal work could be a bit snappier so it sounds like a depression from 6-8k. The HD650 and SR009 actually have a similar depression at this spot and it's actually not a bad place to have it in light of modern recordings. As with every down, there's a up - at 10k, but I never felt there was a peak that far exceeded the top overall slight darkish slope of the HE-500. I can definitely see some people have issues with this trough followed by a peak, but it doesn't bother me that much. Compared to my own LCD3, the HE-500 has lots of air, but like many large orthos, it still falls short of the HD800. (I need to re-measure my LCD3, it could be defective, not sure.)
In other words, the tonal balance is very nice. The dark slope is what it is, a slope, not a shelf that starts in the midrange (yuck), so we are still able to hear the harmonics in good relation to the fundamental notes of the instruments and voices. (I don't think LFF will scream - WTF! I can't master with these.) I did not hear any problems (meaning resonances or ringing) when I auditioned them. Then again, I'm so dead tired after my recent move that I probably wouldn't find Grados grating.
Compared to the LCD3 or even the HD800, the lowest bass octave seems to be missing. Upon additional listens, I did not feel that bass quality, articulation, or texture were any worse than the Audeze's. The only difference was with bass volume which the LCD3 has in spades - I am not a basshead so I am satisfied with the HE-500's bass quality, although a half octave more extension would have been nice.
How much do these cans cost?
UPDATED COMMENTS: http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,101.msg624.html#msg624 (http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,101.msg624.html#msg624)
-
HiFiMAN HE-500 Frequency Response
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=101.0;attach=2712;image)
I didn't think the depression at 6k was that deep during subjective impressions. Given the strong null, it's probable that it's a measurement artifact. It seems that some orthos have these. (LFF mentioned this is a good spot to have it at - I concur - if anything maybe a bit less forward and not as aggressive energetically. It seems too many cans are voiced this way. At least that's my opinion.)
-
WTF! I can't master with these!! ;)
-
HiFiMAN CSD Waterfall Plots
The usual plots at -30 and -40db. Very clean. Slight ringing at 4kHz on the -40db plot on one channel (explains what I heard with Madonna's voice - I'm being nit-picky though.) Super duper clean with the floor at -30db.
-
I will eventually put this on HF, but this is sort of in the "Request For Comments" stage.
-
Interesting. I wouldn't expect the bass to have that much quantity given the impressions I've read, although it does roll off in the sub-bass region.
Were these measurements taken with the velour or leather pads? (I think these come with both -- right?)
Matching seems pretty decent (assuming the difference < 50hz is because of placement/seal). That 6K dip could be the reason I've seen these described as brighter, yet less sibilant, than LCDs?
Man, I'm really tempted to trade my R2's in for these now....
-
Interesting. I wouldn't expect the bass to have that much quantity given the impressions I've read, although it does roll off in the sub-bass region.
Were these measurements taken with the velour or leather pads? (I think these come with both -- right?)
Matching seems pretty decent (assuming the difference < 50hz is because of placement/seal). That 6K dip could be the reason I've seen these described as brighter, yet less sibilant, than LCDs?
Man, I'm really tempted to trade my R2's in for these now....
I always described them as being relatively neutral but a tad too much on the bright side but less bright than the HE-6.
-
I'm impressed, the csd is surprisingly clean and it seems both drivers are quite well matched.
-
Actually, the tonal balance reminds me a lot of the HP1000s
-
Cool! I was expecting a bit of resonance somewhere because I heard a bit of a "shout" as you might call it. Though less than the HP1000.
I didn't think their bass was the best evar. The word "wooly" kept coming to mind, but I thought it had plenty of extension in my subjective listening. Just not as defined or textured as something like the LCD-3. I bet the square wave wouldn't be perfect :'( But bass definition isn't in my top ten list so whatevsies. We've got much bigger fish to fry!!!
Would you mind taping the pads to the baffle and taking another measurement at some point? Tape just goes around the outside of the pad over where it meets the baffle. Can be any tape that will make a seal. I used some painter's type tape. I thought they sounded cleaner that way but the bass got overbearing.
-
Now for the question on everyone's mind: do they offer a better sound at a better price point than the LCD2s?
-
Cool! I was expecting a bit of resonance somewhere because I heard a bit of a "shout" as you might call it. Though less than the HP1000.
I didn't think their bass was the best evar. The word "wooly" kept coming to mind, but I thought it had plenty of extension in my subjective listening. Just not as defined or textured as something like the LCD-3. I bet the square wave wouldn't be perfect :'( But bass definition isn't in my top ten list so whatevsies. We've got much bigger fish to fry!!!
Would you mind taping the pads to the baffle and taking another measurement at some point? Tape just goes around the outside of the pad over where it meets the baffle. Can be any tape that will make a seal. I used some painter's type tape. I thought they sounded cleaner that way but the bass got overbearing.
The shout is probably the emphasis at 3-4k.
Upon another listen to more bass oriented tracks, I would have to agree that the bass sounds a little distorted and has some blub-blub-blub. This behavior is especially evident of K.D. Lang's If I Were You on her All You Can Eat album. It's certainly not horrible though. Just a little uncontrolled and certainly not muddy or smeared, which is worse than wooly. I only hear this on some music - for the most part, it isn't a problem at all. This is from the Sansui with a 100ohm Z headphone - speaker terminal adapter.
LOL, I actually don't even feel they sound all that dark tonight. Wondering if the caps on the Sansui are breaking in or something... It sounds neutral with some mid-bass and residual brightness. I need my reference amp and headphones back to re-calibrate. I thought they sounded more compressed yesterday too.
These are really good - I would buy them at their current price.
-
Don't let them change you!
-
Now for the question on everyone's mind: do they offer a better sound at a better price point than the LCD2s?
Here's the thing with the Audeze's which I can't figure out. They are the only headphone that can manage to sound both thick and thin at the same time. That is thick bass and thin treble. I think I've figured out why. It's that damn shelf that starts at 500Hz and ends two octaves later at 2000Hz. The HE-500 sounds better "integrated" - the treble has the necessary "body" to go with it.
LCD3 comment: Hmm, I'm also wondering why I'm hearing more reverb effect out of the Sansui than the BA. Maybe the high output Z has something to do with this. Glad HE-500 has no such issues.
-
too be honest,from all the great things i heard about these i would of never expected them the be shelved down that much. overall though i really appreciate your impressions and work.
-
These are definitely on my 'try' list, of only there was a place I could try them!
-
too be honest,from all the great things i heard about these i would of never expected them the be shelved down that much. overall though i really appreciate your impressions and work.
The Audeze LCD2r1 is the headphone that inspired me to start doing measurements. I was all psyched to hear them. When I heard them for the first time at the Bay Area meet, I was like "WTF!" (along with many other people.)
When I reported back to Head-Fi (HD800 vs LCD3 comparison thread), people were kind of hostile to me including an admin (who no longer seems active.) Even one or two "respected" Head-Fi'ers implied that I my impressions were unreliable (despite the fact that I got to hear them all to myself for quite some time in the morning before the meet started.) Of course I was stupid enough not to trust my own instincts and ended up buying them to see for myself.
NEVER AGAIN... AND HOPEFULLY NEVER FOR ANYONE ELSE, if I can help it. Thus the measurements and this site were born.
-
too be honest,from all the great things i heard about these i would of never expected them the be shelved down that much. overall though i really appreciate your impressions and work.
The Audeze LCD2r1 is the headphone that inspired me to start doing measurements. I was all psyched to hear them. When I heard them for the first time at the Bay Area meet, I was like "WTF!" (along with many other people.)
When I reported back to Head-Fi (HD800 vs LCD3 comparison thread), people were kind of hostile to me including an admin (who no longer seems active.) Even one or two "respected" Head-Fi'ers implied that I my impressions were unreliable (despite the fact that I got to hear them all to myself for quite some time in the morning before the meet started.) Of course I was stupid enough not to trust my own instincts and ended up buying them to see for myself.
NEVER AGAIN... AND HOPEFULLY NEVER FOR ANYONE ELSE, if I can help it. Thus the measurements and this site were born.
i never heard the LCD2 or 3 so i can't say on them,but i guess i never bothered really since after getting the 240DF to perform way i wanted and doing pretty well on my fostex i haven't bothered much really on trying the much more expensive offerings. i do though one day would like to try them out if i ever find the time to go to local meet or something(i got invited to one already but couldn't make it since i was busy).
head-fi is weird. lot can be bit closed minded due to hype of something and if it involves the site's sponsors and so forth. i see it lot since i like pc hardware as well. i only go there for the fostex thread and to talk to couple people and help out but, haven't much since no one really doesn't want to listen unless you have proof of your work or something. i'm cool with that though so i just mess around in the pony thread or QQ lol.
i like this site and your reviews. always open and straight-forward with stuff. also educational since i never knew what waterfall plots were till i started reading up on your stuff.
-
NEVER AGAIN... AND HOPEFULLY NEVER FOR ANYONE ELSE, if I can help it. Thus the measurements and this site were born.
I definitely appreciate the sentiment there. When I just started getting into this stuff HF worked well enough since everything I was looking at was relatively cheap. A lot of bs, but enough data to be found and the investment wasn't huge. Now I'm looking to step up and I'm finding HF to be pretty useless. I don't have enough extra money to just buy a headphone to test out. These graphs are awesome, and I was able to meet you guys at last year's meet so I know you are pretty consistent and don't pull punches. I can't really contribute, but it's great to have this added resource.
-
coming from the HE-4, will these have a lot less recessed midrange in comparison? I heard these at a store with the EF5 tube amp but that was pretty disappointing, and then I heard the HE-400 with different amps and was impressed albeit I'd like something less bright, and was told the HE-500 might be the choice then. looking at the graphs this does seem to be the case, but I don't think I have heard any headphones that have a similar FR curve... maybe.
cheers!
-
Hmm. The HE-500 has more energy in the upper mids and lower treble compared to the HE-400. But the HE-400 do have a lot of mid/upper treble! Also the HE-500 is a bit thicker sounding in the bass. So the HE-500 could be the best bet if you found it too bright.
The HE-400 has a tonal balance very similar to the SR007 on my stat setup. The HE-500 tonal balance is really nice, just that the bass does seem less controlled than the HE-400 - which has cleaner and tighter bass.
-
Hmm. The HE-500 has more energy in the upper mids and lower treble compared to the HE-400. But the HE-400 do have a lot of mid/upper treble! Also the HE-500 is a bit thicker sounding in the bass. So the HE-500 could be the best bet if you found it too bright.
The HE-400 has a tonal balance very similar to the SR007 on my stat setup. The HE-500 tonal balance is really nice, just that the bass does seem less controlled than the HE-400 - which has cleaner and tighter bass.
well that sort of confirms what I was thinking and hoping for then :)
the bass on the HE-400 is really good, hopefully the one on the 500 isn't that much worse. comparing it to the HD650, I would assume the HE-500 wins in terms of control/tightness? if so, I could definitely live with that.
thanks a lot!
-
Yup. I would have to say that the HE500 beats out HD650 in terms of bass quality. A good way to get an indicator of this is by checking out Harmonic Distortion graphs in the bass.
-
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/SennheiserHD650.pdf
vs
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/HiFiMANHE500.pdf
cool. didn't expect them to have that similar FR curves when compared side by side... alright, I don't think I can go wrong with this one.
thanks a lot, once again!
-
By the way, do you know if that innerfidelity graph was taken with the earlier velour pads or the pleather pads.
-
I found it here: http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/comparing-world-class-headphones-hifiman-he-500
judging by the picture, velour pads. I'll be going with those for comfort either way.
-
I found it here: http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/comparing-world-class-headphones-hifiman-he-500
judging by the picture, velour pads. I'll be going with those for comfort either way.
I find the shure 840 pads to be much more comfortable than the either variation of the Hifiman pad, and they're cheap to boot.
-
Thanks...
-
I found it here: http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/comparing-world-class-headphones-hifiman-he-500
judging by the picture, velour pads. I'll be going with those for comfort either way.
I find the shure 840 pads to be much more comfortable than the either variation of the Hifiman pad, and they're cheap to boot.
They fit on an HE500? I've never tried doing that :-00
-
I found it here: http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/comparing-world-class-headphones-hifiman-he-500
judging by the picture, velour pads. I'll be going with those for comfort either way.
I find the shure 840 pads to be much more comfortable than the either variation of the Hifiman pad, and they're cheap to boot.
They fit on an HE500? I've never tried doing that :-00
Well they fit on my 5LE - I assume it's the same housing.
You gotta stretch the shit out of them to get them on - I use a bit of blue tack to keep them secure while they get stretched. I like the comfort a LOT more than either hifiman pad.
I'll take a picture when I get home.
-
The more important thing with using non-manufacturer pads is how they attenuate the sound. What changes in your HE500 sound with the pad switch? I'd have to imagine Hifiman designed their pads to tailor to the properties of the drivers, so using different pads are always a gamble in that regard.
-
For me the highs on the 5LE were a bit too much - I found the 840 Pads tamed it a tough. Listening with the velours now, and they do sound nice on well recorded music. The 840 pads may make the bass a little too overpowering for some.
Here is a picture with the 840 pads on HE-500s (as the 5LEs were on my head).
http://i.imgur.com/jwiKR.jpg
-
A generous friend of mine loaned me his HE500. Since I have spend considerable time between these and my HD558, I would like to share my relative impressions. I used a variety of pop, classic, rock, latin... all sorts of music, and a loaned UHA-6S. A special thanks goes to my friend.
Relative to the HD558, the HE500 sounds more laid back, but with more air. To me, the HE500 offers a dramatic improvement in the bass and midrange, and is much cleaner sounding. It is also more forgiving of sibilant recordings. The bass is very deep. Definition of percussions is also much superior on the HE500. Compared to the HE500, the HD558 can sound "synthetic" and a little bit distorted.
That said, there is one particular flaw with the HE500 to my ears: It can sound "hollow" for a lack of a better term. I played around with an equalizer and introduced a smooth notch around 5kHz and listened through my HD558. I think I was able to sort of reproduce this "hollow" effect. It is somewhat harmless IMO, but I think I can hear it.
Overall, I think the HE500 is a great headphone, a step up in terms of bass/midrange quality, depth, cleaness, and air.
:ship:
-
A generous friend of mine loaned me his HE500. Since I have spend considerable time between these and my HD558, I would like to share my relative impressions. I used a variety of pop, classic, rock, latin... all sorts of music, and a loaned UHA-6S. A special thanks goes to my friend.
Relative to the HD558, the HE500 sounds more laid back, but with more air. To me, the HE500 offers a dramatic improvement in the bass and midrange, and is much cleaner sounding. It is also more forgiving of sibilant recordings. The bass is very deep. Definition of percussions is also much superior on the HE500. Compared to the HE500, the HD558 can sound "synthetic" and a little bit distorted.
That said, there is one particular flaw with the HE500 to my ears: It can sound "hollow" for a lack of a better term. I played around with an equalizer and introduced a smooth notch around 5kHz and listened through my HD558. I think I was able to sort of reproduce this "hollow" effect. It is somewhat harmless IMO, but I think I can hear it.
Overall, I think the HE500 is a great headphone, a step up in terms of bass/midrange quality, depth, cleaness, and air.
:ship:
Sounds exactly like the measurements. That is indeed quite a big chunk of missing information, wedged between the mids and the mid-treble.
-
Another observation is that to my ears, the HE500 is clearly superior to the HD558 in terms of soundstage. My favorite tests for this are movies (Star Wars for example.) Believe it or not, the KSC-75 is also very good for movies (soundstage), but the HE500 is way ahead of the curve.
The first thing I though was leakage. The HE500 leaks much more than either the HD558 or the KSC-75, probably due to the driver size and type. But sound crossfeeding through the cups due to leakage seems far fetched to me... I would think this would be minimal.
I also thought about air, but while the KSC-75 has tremble, it has very little air and manages soundstage...
Another possible explanation could be FR phase, which I understand affects soundstage quite a bit. If the phase is well behaved then my best guess is that CSD plots will be well behaved and clean. The HE500 CSD plots seem very clean relative to the HD558 and KSC-75, and this may be an indication of well behaved phase which in turn may render superior soundstage.
Whatever the reason, the HE500 soundstage is just phenomenal IMO.
-
A generous friend of mine loaned me his HE500. Since I have spend considerable time between these and my HD558, I would like to share my relative impressions. I used a variety of pop, classic, rock, latin... all sorts of music, and a loaned UHA-6S. A special thanks goes to my friend.
Relative to the HD558, the HE500 sounds more laid back, but with more air. To me, the HE500 offers a dramatic improvement in the bass and midrange, and is much cleaner sounding. It is also more forgiving of sibilant recordings. The bass is very deep. Definition of percussions is also much superior on the HE500. Compared to the HE500, the HD558 can sound "synthetic" and a little bit distorted.
That said, there is one particular flaw with the HE500 to my ears: It can sound "hollow" for a lack of a better term. I played around with an equalizer and introduced a smooth notch around 5kHz and listened through my HD558. I think I was able to sort of reproduce this "hollow" effect. It is somewhat harmless IMO, but I think I can hear it.
Overall, I think the HE500 is a great headphone, a step up in terms of bass/midrange quality, depth, cleaness, and air.
:ship:
Sounds exactly like the measurements. That is indeed quite a big chunk of missing information, wedged between the mids and the mid-treble.
It's not as drastic on the measurements Tyll has done. Given the humungous nulls seen on the SR-Omega graph (which I couldn't hear) I do think it's an artifact like purrin says.
I actually prefer the way my HD580 soundstages in some recordings over the HE500. The 500 can be just a tad too artificially wide left to right on some recordings which I know don't have that much separation.
-
In Tyll's plots the HE500 seems very similar to the HD598 (somewhat similar signature to the HD558 in Marv's plots) from 1kHz and up after compensation. I can't say that is what I heard. To me, my HD558 sounds more forward, and the HE500 definitively darker but with more air to it. Maybe there is production variation...
As far as the "hollow" effect, I could also describe it as very slight reverberation with some songs. I had to have my HD558 on for some time to be able to detect it. I would very quickly adjust to it... Maybe I'm used to faulty cans, or maybe my ears have gone south :)p17
The soundstage was definitively bigger in the HE500.
*Edit: Reverberation may be an inaccurate term because that may imply ringing which I did not experience with the HE500... Other than a slight "hollow" effect, I don't know how to best describe it.
-
ultrabike, were you listening using velour or pleather pads?
I have found the pleather pads cause, what I can only describe as, a slight 'tubey' sound (not related to headphone amps, but rather that the sound appears to be coming out of a tube I suppose). I feel the velour pads make the headphones brighter and also get rid of that slight tubey/hollow sound.
Personally, it's not big enough of a difference to warrant the change, and the pleather pads are way more comfortable than the velours (they have a bigger hole for the ears to rest in and are so much softer!). Also, on the contrary to what most people are saying, I find that the soundstage doesn't really change at all, and in fact seems to be more coherent (at times, the soundstage using the velour pads was a little boxy/angular, some instruments seemed isolated from the rest of the music).
That's my opinion anyway! Some things in audio are just so difficult to describe ;D
-
Yes, they were pleather pads! My impressions sort of corresponds to yours! A subtle "tubey/hollow" could be another way to describe it. Like you said, it is very minor. I perceived when going back and forth with my HD558. I agree that the pads are super comfy. I love these headphones :)
BTW, I suggest to drop a word or two about yourself here: http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,302.0.html (http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,302.0.html) and Welcome! ahoy
-
In Tyll's plots the HE500 seems very similar to the HD598 (somewhat similar signature to the HD558 in Marv's plots) from 1kHz and up after compensation. I can't say that is what I heard. To me, my HD558 sounds more forward, and the HE500 definitively darker but with more air to it. Maybe there is production variation...
As far as the "hollow" effect, I could also describe it as very slight reverberation with some songs. I had to have my HD558 on for some time to be able to detect it. I would very quickly adjust to it... Maybe I'm used to faulty cans, or maybe my ears have gone south :)p17
The soundstage was definitively bigger in the HE500.
*Edit: Reverberation may be an inaccurate term because that may imply ringing which I did not experience with the HE500... Other than a slight "hollow" effect, I don't know how to best describe it.
One possible solution to this reverb effect could be to just remove the grills, they have a big (and negative) impact on the sound. Seriously, my guess is all Hifiman cans will sound substantially better with less obstructive grills, as it is already the clear case with HE400.
The stock grills introduce a lot of extra noise and distortion on the sound, kills the otherwise potentially great imaging/soundstage capacities, and muffles the sound to a noticeable degree. With the new grills I use on my Hifiman's it propels them to a new level of clarity, with zero changes on the voicing of course.
(http://cdn.head-fi.org/3/30/900x900px-LL-3000fd71_IMG_0060.jpeg)
-
Interesting
-
Your grills look better than stock too by the way. Nice
-
Your grills look better than stock too by the way. Nice
I think it's the same mesh type as what's used on HE Jades (at least one of the earlier versions), although the source of the mesh in my case is from a dollarama garbage bin. A couple others on HeadFi HE400 thread have also successfully done the same mod with very happy impressions.
-
Too bad the HE5s are glued in.
-
Too bad the HE5s are glued in.
Glue is why God created hair dryers. :)p8
-
Too bad the HE5s are glued in.
Glue is why God created hair dryers. :)p8
Always a good idea to expose wood cups that are susceptible to cracking to dry hot air. :)p8
Maybe I'll just oil them up first and do that.
-
I didn't notice much difference when I took my HE500's grills off. But I didn't really spend much time with it.
Jerg, you should put some kind of speaker cloth or women's panties on the inside of that grill for dust and dirt protection. You don't want to get particles into the driver, you'll get rattles from them bouncing around on the diaphragm and could permanently ruin the phones unless you can take the driver apart completely. And it won't take long for that to happen with them open like that.
-
Cloth removal was a nice improvement on the HE5-LE... I doubt the cloth is ever going back in now. But you're talking grills here, right.... interesting.
-
I didn't notice much difference when I took my HE500's grills off. But I didn't really spend much time with it.
Jerg, you should put some kind of speaker cloth or women's panties on the inside of that grill for dust and dirt protection. You don't want to get particles into the driver, you'll get rattles from them bouncing around on the diaphragm and could permanently ruin the phones unless you can take the driver apart completely. And it won't take long for that to happen with them open like that.
A previous rendition of my grills mod used to have fabric on the inside, but it still imposed too much of a "closed-in" effect on the sound for me to justify having it. I only use these cans at home so other than dust in the air, I don't see anything else floating around into the drivers...I used to be paranoid about that but later just didn't bother.
The effects that you aren't noticing are subtle in the sense that they don't change anything about how the sound signature sounds, but rather it's a significant effect on the "clean-ness" / "open-ness" of the sound. How you can easily gauge the effect is to just play pink noise through the unit while they are on your head, and hover the material-in-question in and out the grill opening area to see the effect it has on the pink noise.
Cloth removal was a nice improvement on the HE5-LE... I doubt the cloth is ever going back in now. But you're talking grills here, right.... interesting.
Trust me, the stock steel grills impose a MUCH bigger negative effect on the sound than the speaker cloth on those grills. Actually don't trust my words, instead you could test it by the simple method outlined above with pink noise and such.
-
We pretty much noticed no difference doing the HE500 grill mod. However, there are two versions of the HE5, w/ thicker cloth on the latter than the former. I hear a difference between the two and assume they use the same driver but things were changed like the foam and headband in the later model HE5 so no idea what else. I know the HE5LE does make a difference as well and was part of the 'Fang' mod.
-
Jerg, you will eventually get some dirt in there. Or let me put it this way, if a lot of people started doing that mod, some of them would wind up with ruined HE500's or HE500's in need of repair. I have ruined orthos before from leaving bare drivers exposed while I have the cups opened up working on damping schemes. Some drivers can be taken apart some can't unless your name is Don. ;)
pantyhose shouldn't do much, I'd recommend that but do what you want.
-
What you can do is put the protective fabric directly at the back of the driver instead of on the grill, that would minimize the reflections.
-
That's a good idea. I don't think panyhose on the grill will do anything though, if anything it will do a bit to help reflections off that wire grill.
-
Brown pantyhose and brown lcd vegan pads. A blue and brown 2 tone! p:0
-
Are there any issues w/ humidity or condensation on Fang's drivers?
-
Jerg, you will eventually get some dirt in there. Or let me put it this way, if a lot of people started doing that mod, some of them would wind up with ruined HE500's or HE500's in need of repair. I have ruined orthos before from leaving bare drivers exposed while I have the cups opened up working on damping schemes. Some drivers can be taken apart some can't unless your name is Don. ;)
pantyhose shouldn't do much, I'd recommend that but do what you want.
Hm, I might cannibalize a spare set of HFM pleather pads and use the fabric screens on those as a backing then; they seem to be extremely transparent, possibly more-so than other fabric options.
Although the "fabric on grill" vs "fabric on driver" is still in the air...oh which to do, which to do.
-
It really doens't matter if you use something like pantyhose. I have the Hifimans here and that's the same kind of material on them.
-
Done; crude job but it's a functional mod. Ended up ripping off the fabric from the stock grills and taped them to stretch flat over the back sides of the drivers (it seemed to be a finer and less densely-woven fabric than pantyhose cloth).
(http://i.imgur.com/0zSoq.jpg)
-
been trying these quite a bit with a friends FiiO E17 now, super impressed. used the pleather pads which weren't the comfiest though. but they seem more comfortable than what I remember my HE-4 being. sound is among the nicest I have heard even with such a weak amplifier/DAC. think I will try them with the Burson HA160DS or if possible the Gungnir/Mjolnir combo next, as they have that in the store for demo. amazed how well the treble behaves.
-
been trying these quite a bit with a friends FiiO E17 now, super impressed. used the pleather pads which weren't the comfiest though. but they seem more comfortable than what I remember my HE-4 being. sound is among the nicest I have heard even with such a weak amplifier/DAC. think I will try them with the Burson HA160DS or if possible the Gungnir/Mjolnir combo next, as they have that in the store for demo. amazed how well the treble behaves.
The Burson HA160 is an amp that makes everything sound like smooth boring mush. If you audition the headphones with the Burson you need to understand what is the sound of the amp and what is the sound of the headphones. I don't consider the Burson a good amp to audition headphones with because it adds to much of its own sound and color and character.
-
Yeah, I'd have to agree with that as someone who used it for awhile. It can actually sound good with some headphones, but won't be true to the character of any of them.
-
oh, well gosh darn then. I shall ask if they have a balanced cable for the schiit instead first. thanks for the heads up!
-
Hm, I measured the impedance (or rather, just the resistance) of the two drivers in my HE500, and they turned out to be 45 Ohm - 32 Ohm. Pretty bad right? But the actual channel balance still sounds almost completely dead on even down to 20 Hz. Does anyone know what such a big impedance/resistance imbalance could potentially cause, or is it mostly benign?
-
It'll only cause a 1.48db difference which mighty covered up by small driver variances as well..
10 * log(45/32) = 1.48db
You can try the SPL Meter iPhone app and put the iphone headset mic in between your ear and driver for a poor man meter that works well for relative comparisons in drivers, and play tones.
-
It'll only cause a 1.48db difference which mighty covered up by small driver variances as well..
10 * log(45/32) = 1.48db
You can try the SPL Meter iPhone app and put the iphone headset mic in between your ear and driver for a poor man meter that works well for relative comparisons in drivers, and play tones.
1.5dB across the whole FR would be a pretty big difference though, if I use Sinegen I could easily detect a 1dB perceived imbalance as the fact that the projected centerpoint of the tone would shift a little to one of the sides, and basically the balance stays center except some abrupt shifts at a few points (reflected by the horizontal shift in FR between channels also shown with purrin's FR plots). Maybe Hifiman engineers somehow tune the drivers by hand to offset any resistance/impedance difference?
-
That seems unlikely they'd do that. It'd be easier to just match driver impendences from the batches so they are pared up equally. Try the SPL Meter app method with the iphone mic, there might be a 1.5db difference that you're just used to or can't hear from slight off center (even if you can hear the change when you do it in sinegen, deltas with just one tone are easier to hear).
-
That seems unlikely they'd do that. It'd be easier to just match driver impendences from the batches so they are pared up equally. Try the SPL Meter app method with the iphone mic, there might be a 1.5db difference that you're just used to or can't hear from slight off center (even if you can hear the change when you do it in sinegen, deltas with just one tone are easier to hear).
That's definitely possible. I don't have an iphone though so can't do this test off the bat. I did however try adding 1.5dB to either side and then doing tone sweeps, and whichever side I added 1.5dB on turned out to be louder throughout the sweeps. Also tried same dB per channel but swapped the headphones so my ears are listening to the opposite channels, and the sweeps still turned out dead center for most of the part. I really don't see how it is imbalanced.
Are the impedance measurements with a simple multimetre on 60Ohm resistance setting, actually impedance though? I read somewhere on Head-fi that these measurements are not representative of anything tangible.
-
It'll only cause a 1.48db difference which mighty covered up by small driver variances as well..
10 * log(45/32) = 1.48db
You can try the SPL Meter iPhone app and put the iphone headset mic in between your ear and driver for a poor man meter that works well for relative comparisons in drivers, and play tones.
From what source? From a low impedance source, I can't imagine the channel difference being anywhere near that high?
-
It'll only cause a 1.48db difference which mighty covered up by small driver variances as well..
10 * log(45/32) = 1.48db
You can try the SPL Meter iPhone app and put the iphone headset mic in between your ear and driver for a poor man meter that works well for relative comparisons in drivers, and play tones.
From what source? From a low impedance source, I can't imagine the channel difference being anywhere near that high?
I'm not familiar with headphone electrical science, how does the source impedance factor into this exactly?
-
That seems unlikely they'd do that. It'd be easier to just match driver impendences from the batches so they are pared up equally. Try the SPL Meter app method with the iphone mic, there might be a 1.5db difference that you're just used to or can't hear from slight off center (even if you can hear the change when you do it in sinegen, deltas with just one tone are easier to hear).
That's definitely possible. I don't have an iphone though so can't do this test off the bat. I did however try adding 1.5dB to either side and then doing tone sweeps, and whichever side I added 1.5dB on turned out to be louder throughout the sweeps. Also tried same dB per channel but swapped the headphones so my ears are listening to the opposite channels, and the sweeps still turned out dead center for most of the part. I really don't see how it is imbalanced.
Are the impedance measurements with a simple multimetre on 60Ohm resistance setting, actually impedance though? I read somewhere on Head-fi that these measurements are not representative of anything tangible.
For planars it is actually impedance because the resistance over frequency for planars is pretty much flat. For dynamic and especially IEMs this isn't true..
-
I'm not familiar with headphone electrical science, how does the source impedance factor into this exactly?
This question has several answers.
Firstly... the drivers are probably LEVEL matched as impedance matching says absolutely nothing about the drivers efficiency.
The efficiency depends on: magnet field strength, distance between 'coil' diaphragm and magnets, current through the coil, (voltage across it divided by the impedance, resistance in this case), number of 'windings'.
What is weird is that there is such a spread between the resistances. It might be due to the production method but personally think it is odd.
Given the fact that they measure different yet sound equally loud says that the efficiency of the drivers is not under tight tolerances and they 'match' drivers probably by measuring them and selecting drivers closely level matched.
This could mean the impedance (due to variances in the production process) could vary.
This is not a problem when a low output resistance amplifier (source resistance) is used but due to voltage division COULD cause L-R balance issues when driven from a higher output R amplifier.
A non- issue really as planars should be driven from low resistance amplifiers anyway.
The resistance you measure = impedance for planars. It is different for 98% of all 'normal' dynamic headphones though.
In this case the measured DC resistance is the lowest impedance and in general will be above that value .
-
That makes total sense. They're level matched and not impedance matched. And it probably just turns out there is an impedance variation due to production process..
-
I'm not familiar with headphone electrical science, how does the source impedance factor into this exactly?
This question has several answers.
Firstly... the drivers are probably LEVEL matched as impedance matching says absolutely nothing about the drivers efficiency.
The efficiency depends on: magnet field strength, distance between 'coil' diaphragm and magnets, current through the coil, (voltage across it divided by the impedance, resistance in this case), number of 'windings'.
What is weird is that there is such a spread between the resistances. It might be due to the production method but personally think it is odd.
Given the fact that they measure different yet sound equally loud says that the efficiency of the drivers is not under tight tolerances and they 'match' drivers probably by measuring them and selecting drivers closely level matched.
This could mean the impedance (due to variances in the production process) could vary.
This is not a problem when a low output resistance amplifier (source resistance) is used but due to voltage division COULD cause L-R balance issues when driven from a higher output R amplifier.
A non- issue really as planars should be driven from low resistance amplifiers anyway.
The resistance you measure = impedance for planars. It is different for 98% of all 'normal' dynamic headphones though.
In this case the measured DC resistance is the lowest impedance and in general will be above that value .
Thanks for the explanation. So it seems that the impedance imbalance would be fairly benign under normal use then.
-
Thanks for the explanation. So it seems that the impedance imbalance would be fairly benign under normal use then.
correct... when driven from low output R amplifiers.
Higher output R amplifiers could have a slight influence on L-R balance but little on tonal balance.
Well a higher output R seems to calm the 10kHz peak down a bit.
Would be cool if Purrin could show these effects in FR and waterfall by simply repeating a measurement with an added output R of say 47 to 100 Ohm.
I have not yet built my own rig, nor do I have access to an HE500 anymore.
-
Interesting. Seems like these are seriously dark/muffled/cupped with the stock leather pads. Kinda similar from memory to my older DT1350, except way better everywhere. Especially the 1800 Hz hole affects the sound, making for weird behind-the-head soundstaging.
Have a yummy correction curve. Of course my pair of HE-500 is not yet burned in as per manufacturer's recommendation, but this shouldn't change anything major.
With or without the correction, there seem to be no audible resonances. Well maybe there's some slight extra grit with electric guitars and low trumpet overblow, I'm not entirely sure. Could be something near 4k.
Bass is hard hitting and not really distorted at all, very fast. Treble has very nice body to it yet is not lacking sharpness at all. Mids are just superb, best I've heard out there. Generally powerful presentation but not lacking in finesse and micronanodetail when equalized. It makes TWFK and old Beyer T70 sound like a gritty mess. Modded equalized RE-ZERO are somewhat close, but far longer delay, reverberated and not as powerful bass impact.
I'll follow up with velour and quite a bit later with home-made Jergpads.
Reference 500 Hz, matched loudness vs the IEMs, calibrated as usual using a set of radio voice recordings (approx. 40 sones at -6 dBFS = not loud). Driven off Leckerton UHA6-mkII, OPA2209, gain switch on, dial around 2/3 position.
(http://ompldr.org/vaGFlMg/HE-500-leckerton-leather.png)
I'd love to send them in for the measurement, but I want to compare them head to head vs Paradox first.
On another note: Hifiman cannot make cables. The HE-500 cables are horrible PVC or PET (or some other crud stiff transparent plastic) that causes nasty plasticky microphonics, aggravated by the braid. It is also very long. Fortunately unlike IEM's it's replaceable.
-
Interesting. Seems like these are seriously dark/muffled/cupped with the stock leather pads. Kinda similar from memory to my older DT1350, except way better everywhere. Especially the 1800 Hz hole affects the sound, making for weird behind-the-head soundstaging.
Have a yummy correction curve. Of course my pair of HE-500 is not yet burned in as per manufacturer's recommendation, but this shouldn't change anything major.
With or without the correction, there seem to be no audible resonances. Well maybe there's some slight extra grit with electric guitars and low trumpet overblow, I'm not entirely sure. Could be something near 4k.
Bass is hard hitting and not really distorted at all, very fast. Treble has very nice body to it yet is not lacking sharpness at all. Mids are just superb, best I've heard out there. Generally powerful presentation but not lacking in finesse and micronanodetail when equalized. It makes TWFK and old Beyer T70 sound like a gritty mess. Modded equalized RE-ZERO are somewhat close, but far longer delay, reverberated and not as powerful bass impact.
I'll follow up with velour and quite a bit later with home-made Jergpads.
Reference 500 Hz, matched loudness vs the IEMs, calibrated as usual using a set of radio voice recordings (approx. 40 sones at -6 dBFS = not loud). Driven off Leckerton UHA6-mkII, OPA2209, gain switch on, dial around 2/3 position.
(http://ompldr.org/vaGFlMg/HE-500-leckerton-leather.png)
I'd love to send them in for the measurement, but I want to compare them head to head vs Paradox first.
On another note: Hifiman cannot make cables. The HE-500 cables are horrible PVC or PET (or some other crud stiff transparent plastic) that causes nasty plasticky microphonics, aggravated by the braid. It is also very long. Fortunately unlike IEM's it's replaceable.
I do hope you try my earpad mod soon and post some impressions.
As for cabling, the HE6 coppers or the old HE500 coppers were much better than this new silver-plated copper crap. Really soft and flexible, and minimal microphonics compared to the new silvers.
-
Interesting. Velours are less linear, but bass is quite a bit tighter still, but less hardhitting. (regardless of eq) Perhaps the impact is actually some harmonic distortion?
Crunch at 4k is gone. Sound is a tiny bit less reverberated, slightly more precise everywhere. Blacker background?
Sounds closer to balanced armatures with these on - but way more refined.
Same conditions, same loudness. :)p8 I've even checked surrounding temperature.
(http://ompldr.org/vaGFpdg/HE-500-leckerton-velour.png)
Sound with leather pads on sounds silky or perhaps liquid, while with velours sounds... veloury, refined.
The latter presentation is way more monitor worthy.
Edit: Actually, the lack of "hit" was due to slightly too deep 37 Hz cut. Fixed and it's clearly superior in all regards - well, it does still feel like a tiny bit less impact. Way more listenable unequalized as well - less dark.
-
More experiment: now with Beyer T70 velours. (same as T1 and DT990 I think) Had to trim the mounting plastic ring using nail scissors to accomodate these.
These velours are made of thicker cloth, are softer and flatter (thinner). Not to mention they don't have the dust protection screen.
The sound has a body inbetween leathers and velours. Lack of the dust protector improves air quality quite a bit. (The eq boost actually now can bring them to flatness. Previously I had to cheat in a slow rolloff.) Way, way sharper than even TWFK, but this isn't fake sharpness - does not sound like odd order harmonic distortion. It isn't overly liquid smooth like leathers, but doesn't have the slight grit of stock velour either.
Sound without equalization is quite similar (from memory) to GR07, but way, way more refined and airy.
Lower mids and bass have a bit more body with these than with stock velours. Soundstage is slightly narrower in a good way, forward positioning is better than leathers or stock velours. No slight shout or reverb unlike leather pads.
With equalization, these are the winner for now. Equalized the sound is like equalized modded RE-ZERO, but even more neutral and much better note weight and power. Less reverb, more precision. :)p1
Here's the correction curve. The very narrow notch is quite dependent on placement on ears in all cases. This one at 8500 Hz is with the headphones pushed slightly forward on the head. Ranges from 8200 to 9500 Hz, but is trivial to reproduce reliably on the head.
(http://wstaw.org/m/2013/02/02/HE-500-leckerton-t70-velour-no-screen.png)
The notch is probably the acoustic shadow of sorts of the huge mounting wire in the middle front of the driver.
Huh, these are now merciless vs mastering issues and encoding artifacts, a true monitor quality. They do keep all the qualities of the recording now.
-
More experiment: now with Beyer T70 velours. (same as T1 and DT990 I think) Had to trim the mounting plastic ring using nail scissors to accomodate these.
These velours are made of thicker cloth, are softer and flatter (thinner). Not to mention they don't have the dust protection screen.
The sound has a body inbetween leathers and velours. Lack of the dust protector improves air quality quite a bit. (The eq boost actually now can bring them to flatness. Previously I had to cheat in a slow rolloff.) Way, way sharper than even TWFK, but this isn't fake sharpness - does not sound like odd order harmonic distortion. It isn't overly liquid smooth like leathers, but doesn't have the slight grit of stock velour either.
Sound without equalization is quite similar (from memory) to GR07, but way, way more refined and airy.
Lower mids and bass have a bit more body with these than with stock velours. Soundstage is slightly narrower in a good way, forward positioning is better than leathers or stock velours. No slight shout or reverb unlike leather pads.
With equalization, these are the winner for now. Equalized the sound is like equalized modded RE-ZERO, but even more neutral and much better note weight and power. Less reverb, more precision. :)p1
Here's the correction curve. The very narrow notch is quite dependent on placement on ears in all cases. This one at 8500 Hz is with the headphones pushed slightly forward on the head. Ranges from 8200 to 9500 Hz, but is trivial to reproduce reliably on the head.
(http://wstaw.org/m/2013/02/02/HE-500-leckerton-t70-velour-no-screen.png)
The notch is probably the acoustic shadow of sorts of the huge mounting wire in the middle front of the driver.
Huh, these are now merciless vs mastering issues and encoding artifacts, a true monitor quality. They do keep all the qualities of the recording now.
Are your parametric EQs based solely on your perceived frequence response?
-
Yes, the parametric eq are 100% by ear and are well reproducible - the nasty sharp dip can be slightly wider and shift within 1khz due to placement on head. The roudness in the earlier eqs are due to the more precise estimation of the peaks taking lots of time.
I can confirm that Paradox is nearly perfeclty linear with some bass "round" boost combined with slight slow subbass roll (-2 dB), wide small sparkly 6-10k boost and a relatively small (6 dB) high shelf beyond about 11 kHz. Everything else within 1 dB. The sound is laid back, bass boosted, small space but refined and energetic. Highest fidelity of the three.
RE-400 on the other hand have some 4k boost (3 dB?) and some slight highest end shelf (also -3 dB), also wideband bass boost, with 0 at 30 Hz, -3 dB at 150 Hz. The sound is bass boosted and slightly splashy. Also highly energetic, bit smoothed out.
HE-500 have some 5-6kHz boost (3 dB), missing 8kHz (-2 dB + peak) energy and recessed 1-2kHz (-1, -2 dB) and are grainier than both of the above, suggesting distortion or unevenness in FR. Bass is "noisy". Lowest fidelity of the three.
Not comparable: TWFK Brainwavz B2 - noticeably bandlimited, midbass boost (+2 dB), mids cut at 1, 2kHz (-2, -4), major highs boost centered on 5.5kHz (+8 dB). Highly splashy and flattened soundstage, noticeable mids distortion and some high mids ringing. Fidelity similar to HE-500, but different issues.
I'm not sure what's happening with the Hifiman's highest end though. Paradox are about as bright when unequalized, yet more linear - both are a bit dark, but in a very different way. HE-500 is closer to neutral, but less even - dips are detectable. Paradox are somwhat dark and tiny bit bass boosted, but are smoother and more linear, even when equalized. Bit cleaner all the way. (HE-500 with velours with screen removed.)
I might have to send this pair to Purrin for measurement. It is possible that my anatomy is just shifting the resonances upwards noticeably or my pair has higher membrane tension.
-
Which pads, pleather or velour, were used in this test of the HE-500?
HiFiMAN HE-500 INITIAL SUBJECTIVE IMPRESSIONS
As usual, I listened to them before measuring them. Unfortunately I do not have my high-end rig at this time, so I had do with an O2 amp and Sansui 5000X receiver. I have no doubt that these would have sounded better from the BA.
The HE-500 has a very nice somewhat dark presentation with a slight emphasis somewhere in the midrange. I would say around 4k (based on the vocals from Madonna's Lucky Star from her Immaculate Collection CD). Some percussion and cymbal work could be a bit snappier so it sounds like a depression from 6-8k. The HD650 and SR009 actually have a similar depression at this spot and it's actually not a bad place to have it in light of modern recordings. As with every down, there's a up - at 10k, but I never felt there was a peak that far exceeded the top overall slight darkish slope of the HE-500. I can definitely see some people have issues with this trough followed by a peak, but it doesn't bother me that much. Compared to my own LCD3, the HE-500 has lots of air, but like many large orthos, it still falls short of the HD800. (I need to re-measure my LCD3, it could be defective, not sure.)
In other words, the tonal balance is very nice. The dark slope is what it is, a slope, not a shelf that starts in the midrange (yuck), so we are still able to hear the harmonics in good relation to the fundamental notes of the instruments and voices. (I don't think LFF will scream - WTF! I can't master with these.) I did not hear any problems (meaning resonances or ringing) when I auditioned them. Then again, I'm so dead tired after my recent move that I probably wouldn't find Grados grating.
Compared to the LCD3 or even the HD800, the lowest bass octave seems to be missing. Upon additional listens, I did not feel that bass quality, articulation, or texture were any worse than the Audeze's. The only difference was with bass volume which the LCD3 has in spades - I am not a basshead so I am satisfied with the HE-500's bass quality, although a half octave more extension would have been nice.
How much do these cans cost?
UPDATED COMMENTS: http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,101.msg624.html#msg624 (http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,101.msg624.html#msg624)
-
Which pads, pleather or velour, were used in this test of the HE-500?
HiFiMAN HE-500 INITIAL SUBJECTIVE IMPRESSIONS
As usual, I listened to them before measuring them. Unfortunately I do not have my high-end rig at this time, so I had do with an O2 amp and Sansui 5000X receiver. I have no doubt that these would have sounded better from the BA.
The HE-500 has a very nice somewhat dark presentation with a slight emphasis somewhere in the midrange. I would say around 4k (based on the vocals from Madonna's Lucky Star from her Immaculate Collection CD). Some percussion and cymbal work could be a bit snappier so it sounds like a depression from 6-8k. The HD650 and SR009 actually have a similar depression at this spot and it's actually not a bad place to have it in light of modern recordings. As with every down, there's a up - at 10k, but I never felt there was a peak that far exceeded the top overall slight darkish slope of the HE-500. I can definitely see some people have issues with this trough followed by a peak, but it doesn't bother me that much. Compared to my own LCD3, the HE-500 has lots of air, but like many large orthos, it still falls short of the HD800. (I need to re-measure my LCD3, it could be defective, not sure.)
In other words, the tonal balance is very nice. The dark slope is what it is, a slope, not a shelf that starts in the midrange (yuck), so we are still able to hear the harmonics in good relation to the fundamental notes of the instruments and voices. (I don't think LFF will scream - WTF! I can't master with these.) I did not hear any problems (meaning resonances or ringing) when I auditioned them. Then again, I'm so dead tired after my recent move that I probably wouldn't find Grados grating.
Compared to the LCD3 or even the HD800, the lowest bass octave seems to be missing. Upon additional listens, I did not feel that bass quality, articulation, or texture were any worse than the Audeze's. The only difference was with bass volume which the LCD3 has in spades - I am not a basshead so I am satisfied with the HE-500's bass quality, although a half octave more extension would have been nice.
How much do these cans cost?
UPDATED COMMENTS: http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,101.msg624.html#msg624 (http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,101.msg624.html#msg624)
I'm 100% sure it was with stock velour pads.
-
Fuzzy pads.