CHANGSTAR: Audiophile Headphone Reviews and Early 90s Style BBS
Lobby => Headphone Measurements => Topic started by: Marvey on September 03, 2014, 05:07:28 AM
-
A big thanks to uncola for sending these here.
- Remarkable consistency for an ortho.
- Low distortion
- Bass not as taut as original HE-400, but better than HE-500.
- "Fun" U-shaped signature without overbloated bass.
- A bit of treble peakage there at 9k
Overall a fine effort following in the footsteps and in the spirit of the original HE-400. The midrange distortion (audible) of the original HE-400 has been corrected. The treble bump of the original HE-400 is moved down a few thousand Hz from the mid/high treble to the mid treble.
-
CSDs
-
BTW - the packaging and the box are awesome. So much improved from the cheap box of the original HE-400. Smells nice too.
Design of the headphone is similar to HE-560, but has plastic cups instead. I actually prefer the shiney plastic cups to the veneer of the HE-560.
-
Looks like the same 4k bump (as the HE560) is still hanging out there. This time it's accompanied by another peak an octave above. I'm guessing you're not averaging responses anymore as the high treble looks to have a well defined curve.
-
Dem walls
(http://www.sherv.net/cm/emoticons/fighting/cannonball.gif)
-
Any comparisons between the 400i and the LCD 2?
-
The LCD-2 has more bass power and continues / flattens after the treble roll-off, whereas the HE-400i comes back with a mid-treble emphasis. The new HFMs (400i and 560) are a little bit softer with bass impact, but overall less muddy compared to the HE-500 and maybe less veiled / thick as the LCD-2.
If you can get past the LCD-2's dark tilt, the LCD-2 is really in another class of headphone compared to the HE-400i. As it should for the price differential.
-
The HE400is I have on hand appear to sound different in the treble region, mine is also dipped at 5kHz, but then rises quickly and is bumpy but not a huge defined peak, between 7kHz and 12kHz.
Marv would you say there is something up with upper treble (past 10kHz) measurement in your current setup? I know you said the HE560 measurements' massive upper treble rolloff was a measurement artifact, is that also the case here?
-
yes, it's possible past 10k not accurate. That dip may in fact be a peak.
CSD's show definite peak at 9k and possibly another one at 11-12k (the dip which turns into ringing). The ~9k peak is very evident from listening. I do wonder if this sample is not representative of the others.
-
Thank you a lot for the measurement, was waiting for them for quite some time!
It seems that HE-500 are more neutral, right? (Especially with jerg pads...)
-
Yes. HE-500 are more neutral. Thicker sounding. Broader, but much lower magnitude treble bump at same spot. Very smooth with jerg pads. HE-500 can actually sound dark on certain amps.
Would be super cool if we could get the new headband assemblies on the HE-500. Still a favorite of mine from power amp.
-
Thank you for clarifying...
If you can get past the LCD-2's dark tilt, the LCD-2 is really in another class of headphone compared to the HE-400i. As it should for the price differential.
purr1n, what kind of LCD-2s are you talking about? Do you mean LCD-2 rev2 or LCD-2F... Or some cherry-picked ones that measure well (there were and maybe still are some inconsistencies among different pairs, following your and others' impressions from the past)?
-
I think its the LCD 2.2 non-fazored.
-
I think its the LCD 2.2 non-fazored.
Do you think (or purr1n) that the fazored one is worse in some aspects? I have a lot of experience with rev1 and rev2 LCD-2s but no nothing about the fazored one except the opinion that it should make the headphone a bit cleaner...
-
I'm talking for myself here. I had the pre-fazored LCD 2.2 and the 3. I have the fazored LCD-XC. I preferred the non-fazored HPs simply because I liked the SQ especially the LCD 2.2. Loved the bass, the mid range and didn't worry about soundstage (I have the 800 for that). With the fazor, I feel that some of the Audez'e signature sound has been sacrificed, especially the low end.
Heck I miss my LCD 2.2 !
-
I'm talking for myself here. I had the pre-fazored LCD 2.2 and the 3. I have the fazored LCD-XC. I preferred the non-fazored HPs simply because I liked the SQ especially the LCD 2.2. Loved the bass, the mid range and didn't worry about soundstage (I have the 800 for that). With the fazor, I feel that some of the Audez'e signature sound has been sacrificed, especially the low end.
Heck I miss my LCD 2.2 !
Yeah, I quite miss them as well (owned LCD-2 rev2 myself in the past)... I am trying the HE-500 with jerg pads and Paradox Slant... But from my current experience with a slightly modified LCD-2 rev1, I have a feeling I would like LCD-2 rev2 a lot =/
On a mission to find the most neutral-sounding affordable orthodynamic headphone... What I know is that I always liked HE-500's frequency response. And that LCD-2 rev1 with removed grills and felt discs with ADZ-6 cable (on a ES9018 Compass2) sounded close-to-neutral to my ears. But they were too fuzzy-sounding...
-
My knowledge in terms of relating FR graphs to what I hear is pretty small.
If I'm hearing some female vocals coming across as a little harsh at times, would that be explained by any of the spikes we see on the graph or am I imagining things?
I am finding these headphones a little "shouty"/fatiguing on certain tracks, but it's not a consistent thing. Other tracks come across as completely smooth and natural.
If someone can educate me here, I'd be appreciative.
*random observation* - I do believe these headphones and Radiohead are nearly a perfect match.
-
Slight 3-4k emphasis will result in shrill vocals. The treble peak at 8-9k could result in sibilance with the ess's? Rather than a broad bump, it's a fairly sharp peak. Because of this, certain tracks which happen to contain a lot of energy in that specific area will hit it - "spot lite" treble is a good way to think of it.
Maybe Focus-A pads would be the solution?
PREDICTION: This will be a funky one which there will be varying opinions - largely dictated by recordings used.
-
I'm talking for myself here. I had the pre-fazored LCD 2.2 and the 3. I have the fazored LCD-XC. I preferred the non-fazored HPs simply because I liked the SQ especially the LCD 2.2. Loved the bass, the mid range and didn't worry about soundstage (I have the 800 for that). With the fazor, I feel that some of the Audez'e signature sound has been sacrificed, especially the low end.
Heck I miss my LCD 2.2 !
I agree with you, I always felt that my new LCD-3.F lacks some liquid mids that LCD-3.C had. Now the mids of LCD-3.F seems to be rough and less refined
-
Slight 3-4k emphasis will result in shrill vocals. The treble peak at 8-9k could result in sibilance with the ess's? Rather than a broad bump, it's a fairly sharp peak. Because of this, certain tracks which happen to contain a lot of energy in that specific area will hit it - "spot lite" treble is a good way to think of it.
Maybe Focus-A pads would be the solution?
PREDICTION: This will be a funky one which there will be varying opinions - largely dictated by recordings used.
If I end up buying these headphones, then I'll definitely give the Focus-A pads a try.
The shrillness I've noticed is not a big enough problem to be a deal-breaker by any means. I remember the HE-500s giving me the same problem at times. I've also only got about 24 hrs. in on these headphones, so we'll see if they sound the same after a few more days.
My current plan is to listen to these for about a week straight, and then switch to my DT880/Valhalla pairing and see how I feel. And, honestly, if I found a good deal on used pair of 500s, that would tempt me as well. So far, I slightly prefer the 500s sound, but the weight/comfort factor of the 400i is hard to overcome.
And yes, I think your prediction will be spot on.
-
If I end up buying these headphones, then I'll definitely give the Focus-A pads a try.
The shrillness I've noticed is not a big enough problem to be a deal-breaker by any means. I remember the HE-500s giving me the same problem at times. I've also only got about 24 hrs. in on these headphones, so we'll see if they sound the same after a few more days.
My current plan is to listen to these for about a week straight, and then switch to my DT880/Valhalla pairing and see how I feel. And, honestly, if I found a good deal on used pair of 500s, that would tempt me as well. So far, I slightly prefer the 500s sound, but the weight/comfort factor of the 400i is hard to overcome.
And yes, I think your prediction will be spot on.
I am well known as a 'FocusPad/FocusPad-A' hater... But still I have to recommend FocusPad-A myself. It's a more linear/smooth sounding pair of pads, quite reminiscent of my favourite old (not current) Hifiman velour pads (but less airy and open-sounding...). Still, I just don't like how they sound and ESPECIALLY how they feel (comfort).
-
If I end up buying these headphones, then I'll definitely give the Focus-A pads a try.
The shrillness I've noticed is not a big enough problem to be a deal-breaker by any means. I remember the HE-500s giving me the same problem at times. I've also only got about 24 hrs. in on these headphones, so we'll see if they sound the same after a few more days.
My current plan is to listen to these for about a week straight, and then switch to my DT880/Valhalla pairing and see how I feel. And, honestly, if I found a good deal on used pair of 500s, that would tempt me as well. So far, I slightly prefer the 500s sound, but the weight/comfort factor of the 400i is hard to overcome.
And yes, I think your prediction will be spot on.
Still, I just don't like how they sound and ESPECIALLY how they feel (comfort).
No comfort issues for me, thankfully.
I'm amazed that Focus v. Focus-A can cause such a difference. I guess there's only one way to find out :P
-
has anybody tried the Focus/Focus A pads with other HE headphones, specifically HE 4 and/or HE 6?
-
has anybody tried the Focus/Focus A pads with other HE headphones, specifically HE 4 and/or HE 6?
I did try both on HE-4... Don't bother with FocusPad, FocusPad-A is passable soundwise though (in terms of comfort, it's the other way around). Old Hifiman velour is my favourite with HE-4... And as I said, FocusPad-A are quite similar (but not as transparent and open-sounding). IMHO, of course :-)
Regarding the HE-4, I have written a fully-featured HE-4 guide including pad-rolling... It's on Head-fi, accessible from my signature (Ron12).
-
Tried FocusPad-A with the HE-500, and I thought they sounded really good with them. Subjectively seemed to clean up the bass a bit too.
-
has anybody tried the Focus/Focus A pads with other HE headphones, specifically HE 4 and/or HE 6?
I did try both on HE-4... Don't bother with FocusPad, FocusPad-A is passable soundwise though (in terms of comfort, it's the other way around). Old Hifiman velour is my favourite with HE-4... And as I said, FocusPad-A are quite similar (but not as transparent and open-sounding). IMHO, of course :-)
Regarding the HE-4, I have written a fully-featured HE-4 guide including pad-rolling... It's on Head-fi, accessible from my signature (Ron12).
Yes, I read that last night. I have the velours on the HE-4 now and was curious about the FocusPads. I really like that HP and is one reason I feel I don't need to spend on acquiring either the 400i or the 560.
-
has anybody tried the Focus/Focus A pads with other HE headphones, specifically HE 4 and/or HE 6?
I think you already know my answer to that one!
-
Oh yes sir. Ordering them vegans over the weekend.
-
My knowledge in terms of relating FR graphs to what I hear is pretty small.
If I'm hearing some female vocals coming across as a little harsh at times, would that be explained by any of the spikes we see on the graph or am I imagining things?
I am finding these headphones a little "shouty"/fatiguing on certain tracks, but it's not a consistent thing. Other tracks come across as completely smooth and natural.
If someone can educate me here, I'd be appreciative.
*random observation* - I do believe these headphones and Radiohead are nearly a perfect match.
Quoting myself. What a nerd.
Anyway, just wanted to point out that moving from the Asgard 1 to the Vali, completely eliminated any fatigue issues I was having.
The sound is significantly smoother/cleaner now. No "shoutiness" or listening fatigue issues at all.
I still intend to try the Focus-A pads at some point.
All in all, though, the 400i/Vali combo is good enough that my "upgraditis" is going to be cured for quite some time.
-
I'm talking for myself here. I had the pre-fazored LCD 2.2 and the 3. I have the fazored LCD-XC. I preferred the non-fazored HPs simply because I liked the SQ especially the LCD 2.2. Loved the bass, the mid range and didn't worry about soundstage (I have the 800 for that). With the fazor, I feel that some of the Audez'e signature sound has been sacrificed, especially the low end.
Heck I miss my LCD 2.2 !
Seems we feel the same way. The X and XC don't do much for me.
-
XC was the bassiest of the Audezes I've personally heard.
-
FWIW:
http://www.headfonia.com/hifiman-400i-mid-fi-best/