Shahrose

Interesting...I suspected this would be the case. BTW, for anyone wanting to read a "journal" of my experience with the HE-6 over a period of a few weeks. I've posted it here on Head-Fi: HifiMAN HE-6 Planar Headphone - Page 145 - Head-Fi.org Community

Hey Matt. You should come by and listen to them at the next mini-meet in the GTA (I'll fire off a quick PM on Head-Fi when I know the details). I didn't own the LCD-2, but got an extended audition in a quiet room from several setups (Dynahi, A-GD Ref1/Phoenix, DNA Sonett, and my own setup). I feel the LCD-2 has more precise imaging and staging than the HE-6, but sounds a bit more closed (less airy). This may be because of the darker sound of the Audez'e. I also think the LCD-2 is faster and more textured. I'm sure there are other differences but I would have to spend more time (weeks) with the two.

Yea that was one of my complaints. Their old releases have lost a lot of value because of it. I guess they're trying to make amends by offering HE-5/LE customers with the $100 discount on the HE-6. Hey Brian. I think they're OK with my setup. I have a feeling they could improve with a more powerful amp. As it stands, I think the O2Mk1, HD800 and LCD-2 are better. Regarding their treble, it's smooth and forgiving yes, but it glosses over detail and texture that is revealed by the recabled 800s. It's grain-free, linear and extended but not the most resolving. I feel the strength of the HE-6 lies in their visceral bass and natural/unfatiguing tone.

BTW Corey, did you ever get to try the HE-6 loaner with your Beta? I'm interested in hearing your thoughts about the pairing.

Yea, not going to do that again Can't argue with that.

I don't know why it happened, but the treble energy went down noticeably within the first few hours. I don't think there have been any major changes since.

You're overthinking this... Anyways K3cT. The sibilance issue is gone. I guess it needed some burn-in, which is strange because I always thought orthos didn't require it.

You're welcome to. But it will have to be late next week, too much work until then.

I didn't know Head-Casers frequented HF too often.

Just got them. Initial impressions: Good: -Excellent bass, in every parameter. Quantity is greater than the HD800, but a bit lower than the 600. -Open, airy and delicate sound, especially treble (something I've noticed on the HE-5, LCD-2 and now the HE-6) -Good transient response, attack and natural decay. -Comfort is surprisingly good considering the ~500g weight (I'm sensitive to heavy cans...the LCD-2 were uncomfortable for sessions longer than 30 min) Bad: -Too much treble around 9-14KHz, sounds bright and sibilant despite the treble quality. -Soundstage is flat and small, a far cry from the likes of the HD800. It's slightly smaller than the HD600's SS as well. -Build quality is disappointing for a $1200 headphone. -Difficult to drive well. Overall, these are an improvement over the HE-5s, but the sibilant treble is quite bothersome. I prefer the HD800 right now. The treble might change with burn-in (if orthos burn-in at all), but it would have to be a more-than-subtle change to make me like it.

lol I wouldn't be surprised. The HE-6 is what the HE-5 should have been last year. I've ordered a pair anyways, will update the thread briefly when I get them.

What do you guys think about these?

HD600

x2 on the AD8610. They were the fastest, most neutral and transparent opamps of the ones I had for the M^3 (OPA637, OPA627, AD8065, AD843).

I skipped all his technical mumbo jumbo and went straight to his amp comparisons...which as I said, were pretty informative.

The review is actually pretty informative. The guy doesn't seem like a newb.

I got my GS-1 with DACT stepper + HiFi Tuning L/R channel fuses yesterday. My impressions may change later as I get accustomed to its sound, but so far here's what I think: 1) I like the M^3 just as much as the GS-1. The M^3 has significantly more bass punch, without being boomy and is smoother, without being veiled. The GS-1 has less decay (less natural to my ears) in the lower part of the frequency spectrums (bass to lower midrange). 2) The GS-1 has a larger and more holographic soundstage (without blurring), as if sounds are actually emanating from around you...nice 3) The GS-1 has slightly higher resolution and is a bit more revealing of upstream gear (changing ICs and DACs made a bigger difference than it did with the M^3 or Sheer or Violectric amps) 4) The GS-1 is a better amp than the Sheer HA-006++ overall...better transparency, resolution, transients, focus, dynamics, background blackness, and treble extension (bass ext is equal). But, the Sheer is more forgiving of source material, is bassier/smoother and has a more pleasing tone with quite a few recordings. 5) Justin's amps look and feel great. The GS-1 makes the Sheer offering look like DIY in terms of aesthetics (though I think the Sheer amps have solid construction as well).

I was thinking the same thing when reading those impressions.

Actually, I have all of the Black Keys stuff, including their new Brothers album. It's one of the better sounding albums from all their releases.

Brian, you should try Head-Fi.org - Headphone forums and reviews for audiophiles if you can't stomach the more blunt responses of these forums.

Still waiting for my GS-1 to arrive (bought it second hand). It should be here early next week...I'll post a quick update then.

I'm curious...does anyone know why?

Sounds like you just prefer the K702 sound signature over the JH13.

Hey E, I know you were considering the HD800 to replace the T1, but after reading your comments, I think you'd have pretty much the same issues with the Senns. They have a bit less bass than the T1, they aren't great for low-volume listening, and you may still feel they're priced too far above the HD600/650 for what they offer. The $250-500 is the sweet spot for headphones IMO; you get a lot of bang for your buck.

After a bit of listening here are my thoughts on the HA-006++ (the new upgraded one): -It's smoother and slightly warmer than the M^3 (AD8610) and Gilmore Lite (the Glite is the thinnest/brightest of the 3 amps as far as I can recall) -It is not a fast-sounding amp. The transient speed (most noticeably in the bass) isn't as good as the M^3. Basically the M^3 has more control. -Its dynamic range is not as good as the M^3. The M^3 also has a blacker background between notes, as well as a slightly more airy presentation than the HA-006++ -The soundstage is larger than the M^3, but also a bit more diffuse. Both amps have great layering within the soundstage. The HA-006++ just produces "larger" aural images, as if it's playing in a larger space. Conclusion: I find the HA-006++ to have a more pleasing tone, a larger soundstage, more bass and less treble than the M^3. OTOH, it also has less dynamics, slower transients, less top-end air/microdetail and more diffused imaging than the M^3. The HD800 certainly benefits from the slightly tubey (and forgiving) sound of the HA-006++ at times, but the M^3 is the technically superior (and more transparent) amp IMO.