Shahrose

They're no brighter or leaner than the HD800 or the HE6. What were you driving them with? Was it a pre-production pair? Then again, you say the HE500 are bright, which I don't find to be the case. Could just be a matter of preference. (I'm also a low volume listener: 65-70 dB usually)

Well then you scored. Too bad they stopped making the better-sounding old ones.

Personally, I found the HE6 to be in a whole different class. BTW, deepak. Do you have the older or newer version of the HE500? The old one has the unwieldy speaker wire for a cable and the plastic-backed, softer, larger circumference pads. The latest ones have a light, thin silver cable and stiffer, rubber-backed earpads. I actually liked the older one better for sound. They had great liquid mids. The newer one has tighter bass and a smaller soundstage but loses the special midrange.

It's been available for a few months now. Retails for $699 at most authorized dealers, including TTVJ. What's more, I have one, so it definitely exists.

In that case, I agree with you. The HD600 and HE500 blow away the 840. Those are mid-end closed cans. Give the 1840 a shot if you ever get the chance. I've seen a couple places selling them for $639 shipped. Oh and I'm also one of the ones who preferred the HE500 over the LCD-2. The Audez'es were better in some areas, but all things considered, I enjoyed the HE500 more.

Are you sure you aren't thinking of the closed 840? I'm talking about the newly released open 1840. I owned a couple HD600s and still have 3 pairs of 650s. Done A/B and long term comparisons. The Shures are clearly a step up in technical performance and scale higher. Their tone, aside from being a little bass-light for some, is also quite good (natural). BTW...owned several pairs of HE500s to compare as well. Just saying because I don't really trust meet/store impressions.

The HE500 aren't bad, but if you want something better for the price, try the SRH1840. Easier to drive, way lighter, more detailed, neutral and transparent. What you lose is the HE500's bass impact, but I think that's overdone anyways.

So would the Dynafet and Beta22 sound more similar?

Added more detail to the OP for those folks who asked. I'll throw the Peak/Volcano into the mix later.

Maybe it's just your preference, which is cool, but I wonder if you'd have a different opinion with more time spent. Owned both, sold the K1000 and didn't regret it for one second. Too far behind technically.

Oh and for anyone who finds them distant-sounding...you're not alone. After spending a couple years with the 800s, my fix was a pure silver cable. Copper and stock SPC pushes the sound farther out and slows/thickens it. Cable cynics will scoff...in which case they can have fun with their distant mids.

Bought mine twice...made a mistake selling them the first time. IMO? Best dynamic cans available, and I've owned most stuff.

I'll be getting my Peak/Volcano back from Todd this week after a socket upgrade. Will do a brief comparison with the Beta22 then. Also, I don't agree that the wire-with-gain amps are bright. Check your source before blaming the amps.

Thanks KG. Now someone needs to start building this bad boy. I don't hear much from Rockhopper, MisterX or the usuals these days. Know what? Supersym Dynahi, premium parts, with HeadAmp's build quality and finish = endgame amp.

I'm not interested in going balanced right now, but might be later. How's this supersymmetry Dynahi different from the old Dynamite? Main thing I want to find out is if there's a potential for SQ improvement. Same goes for the new Dynahi rev. vs old.

Always wondered what the differences were between the Beta and Dynahi and only knew one other person who truly articulated them. Just decided to get them both and find out for myself. I'll also throw in Justin's version of the Dynalo to make it more relevant. HeadAmp GS-1 w/ DACT Dynahi built by Fallenangel, w/ Gilmore PSU 3-channel Beta22 + Sigma22 dual chassis, built by SolderWorksAudio (fishski13) Rockhopper M^3 + Sigma11 (and another with STEPS) Headphones used: HD800, HE6, SRH1840, SRH940, HD650 and the recently sold K1000 and T1 (all but the Shures recabled) Source: JKSPDIF MK3 feeding a modded Eastern Electric Minimax DAC Cables (for anyone who cares): all aftermarket To keep it short, the Dynahi is still the King of SS IMO. Too bad it's so hard to come by (and build). These days, most settle with (often overpriced) mediocre amps from Schitt, Violectric, Rudistor, Cavalli, Ray Samuels among others... Compared to the Dynahi: The Beta22 has a larger soundstage and smoother lower treble, but it blurs images by stretching them, softens the sound a bit by rolling off edges (dulling attack) and kind of imbues its own character onto every recording. Transparency is definitely the Gilmore's strong suit. It offers better fidelity to the source, whereas the 22's sound is more homogenous with varying DACs, transports, recordings etc. The Dynahi is faster, more accurate in tone, imaging and recreating the recording’s acoustic space. Another consistent difference is that the Hi produces a more upfront presentation. There's a density and weight behind its sound images that the Beta lacks...the latter sounds thin in comparison and I don't mean tonally. It has to do with the Beta stretching images and blurring/pulling apart the sound that I described earlier. I also find the Dynahi fares better with current-hungry headphones like the HE6. Compared to the GS-1: The Beta has way more power, a larger soundstage, smoother lower treble/upper mids, is more forgiving and has a bit more bass quantity and extension. The GS-1 is more transparent, linear/accurate, has better imaging, and a blacker background. Much of this is similar to what I heard in comparison to the Dynahi. Makes sense since the Hi and Lo share the same signature, with the Hi being more refined, extended and powerful. The GS-1, though, can be a bit hard around the edges, a quality which is absent on both the Beta and Dynahi. This makes the Beta sound a bit more refined than Justin's Dynalo. Detail level is the same on both, though the Beta makes it somewhat easier to discern because it separates and pulls apart the soundstage more than both the GS-1 and Dynahi. Overall though, I'm not sure which I'd pick between the GS-1 and Beta22. One advantage of the Beta is that it's pretty forgiving compared to the Dynahi and GS-1. It makes a lot of crappy recordings (and sources) palatable, at the expense of transparency ofcourse. It accomplishes this by: 1) rounding/dulling leading edges and slightly lengthening decay, similar to what the M^3 and typical tube amps often do…and 2) overlaying its inherent signature over everything...that is, a slightly warm, dark, diffuse, expansively layered sound. It sounds like I’m ripping on the Beta, but I enjoy its sound, especially with brighter cans like the HD800 and SRH1840. It’s more a testament to how good the Gilmore amps are than the Beta underperforming. I could give a lot more detail about the Beta’s sound, but this should probably suffice. All of these are high-quality amps, but I'd rank them as: Dynahi > Beta22 > GS-1 > M^3 …M^3 popped up out of nowhere there. How does that sound? Like a slightly lower quality version of the Beta IMO. Close enough that I’d consider it to be the best value among quality SS amps. It’s also way smaller, and easier to build/troubleshoot. EDIT: April 29th 2012 Some people have been bugging me for more details on the Beta vs Dynahi comparison, especially in terms of what the former does well. So here it is: In comparison to the DynaHi and Lo, the B22 projects larger images and pushes them farther away. Despite this, the layering of the sound is excellent. To me, it feels like it’s just as good as the Dynahi in this regard. Some may argue it’s better because it fills up a larger space with its layering. Yes, the Beta may stretch and blur images somewhat, but in terms of depth presentation, it’s world-class. As I’ve already mentioned, AMB’s amps are just more forgiving. They have a characteristic smooth, rounded, expansive sound that manages not to obscure detail or muddy the sound. The bass also holds weight and authority, but doesn’t quite punch like the Dynahi because it’s a bit slower and more drawn out. This can be a good thing at times when you want a more rhythmic/liquid low-end foundation. Another thing the Beta does well is how it creates and decays sounds. It’s tough to explain but subtle sounds appear out of nowhere and disappear into a black background. This, combined with its large soundstage, makes for a surrounding, involving listen. Dynamics on both amps are startling. Tough to decide which, between the two, is better. Both amps can range from delicate-sounding and nuanced, to absolutely head-rattling and explosive. If I could sum up the sound of both amps in a few words? The Dynahi would be fast, up-front, impactful, transparent. The Beta would be laid-back, rounded, liquid, enveloping. Clearly, the two differ in their presentation of sound. The Dynahi shows differences from upstream gear more readily whereas the Beta seems to colour the sound with its own character, but in a pleasant way. For this reason, I find the B22 to sound good from a wider range of sources. For the very same reason, I believe the Dynahi can scale up higher…

Not sure where you got the "tube amps for the HE6" from. My experience is the opposite. I've found most orthos to sound better from good SS, though it's not cut and dry ofcourse. The Dynahi is the best amp I've heard with the HE6.

The HD650 scale pretty nicely. Upgrade the cable (doesn't have to be anything fancy) and get a proper source and amp. They can sound like crap from an entry-level setup; slow, boomy, smeared. Pity so many write them off without hearing their full potential.

I know you touched on it briefly blessingx, but if you get time, would you be able to provide a more detailed comparison between the Arete and Beta22?

Well Audez'e is now saying they've changed the driver as well as the pads. New ones are slightly brighter with better imaging and tighter bass.

Hey Tyll, I know you like both the LCD-2 and HE-500, but which do you prefer?

Same.

I agree. Matches my experience. (NwAvGuy / Filburt).

I've owned the several soundcards (to use as transports including the Essence ST/STX), Teralink-X2, the Musiland 02US, stock HiFace, and the jkeny modded HiFace (MK1 and MK2) (https://sites.google.com/site/hifacemods/home/mk2-boxed-hiface-1) With all of my DACs, the modded HiFace was the best by a large margin. I was surprised to learn that the USB/SPDIF conversion makes as big of a difference as the DAC itself in my system. The modded HiFace is very transparent...which what a USB/SPDIF bitperfect converter should be. It also sounds detailed and natural and has solid drivers. Another option is the Audio-GD Digital Interface, but personally, I would exercise caution in purchasing from Audio-GD...build quality isn't the greatest and new products/revisions are released at a furious pace, making your new purchase obsolete quickly. Anyways, the DI also processes the signal so it's not even bit-perfect (though apparently it sounds pretty good). I don't want to take anything away from Kingwa from Audio-GD though...he is a great guy to deal with atleast. My recommendation would be to give the battery modded (jkeny) HiFace a shot. He has suspended production but I saw a couple of units floating around in the sale forums on Head-Fi for cheap. Watch out for customs thinking the batteries are bomb-related though...they ripped apart a jkeny HiFace MK2 I shipped to the US...though I guess that's more to do with Homeland security in the States...

Jeez...I thought Head-Direct would have learned by now.