Nope, different experience on my system. I don’t think they are mid-forward, I would personally put them in the slightly U-shaped sound sig. Midrange texture/resolution is not as good as the mysphere but it is perhaps the 2nd best I’ve heard compared to utopia, d8kp, and hd800s.
As for “tube hps” I think I’ll disagree, they work phenomenally well on my SS (crayon cha-1), but maybe my amp is just an outlier. And I also don’t hear any honkiness like he mentioned in his video, fwiw.
Yeah your crayin is “special” for SS amps. Have you tried the yammy with any lessor SS amps?
No I have not… I have an rme, thx789, and burson soloist for SS but I’m not really interested in trying them on those, to be completely honest
I think it depends on the track and the amp/DAC like many headphones. They are not Harman curved for the masses or harman audio gurus 
. I think they need the right chain to sound optimal for my preferences like I said in my above post. I like them better with tubes 
but also enjoy them off solid state with most well-recorded music. As I have stated they remind of me of the HD800s and OG Utopia from this standpoint. If you spend the time building a chain around them they are so amazing. Hope that helps @AceofSpades
Edit: Also I think they are more lower treble/treble forward without taking measurements which we will have very soon and I will share. There could be a bit of upper mid-range fowardness though which I was playing with with Roon EQ last night and proper measurements will take all the guesswork out of the equation.
Yeah, some of those chains may be too analytical for them with the leather pads.
i heard them at e-earphone on cayin tube amps i really disliked them compared to solid state is was connected to a fiio k9 pro and another amp that sounded much more resolving to me
Had a listen to the 5000SE and D8000 Pro off the HPA4, EF600 and the Stax X9000 off SRM 700S, EF400 at E Earphone.
Glad I got to hear the Stax, was super impressed. Thinking of placing an order but they are back ordered. Immense detail, highly musical to my ears.
Similarly, Yamaha was a nice listen. But I rather wait for a “regular” edition to buy. As for Final, I was hoping to try a pair of D8000 Pro Limited, as that is what seems to be making the rounds. Unfortunately did not.
Went back to E Earphone again, this time off the HPA4 and ADI 2. Definitely agree with your comments on the Yamaha’s treble. Also agree with your comparisons to the Utopia re bass response. Utopia more slam, Yamaha not as slammy, more textured. For soundstage, the Yamahas I found neither deep nor wide.
I did not experience the “honk”.
That’s wiser, I didn’t think the extra pads were worth owning (but ymmv), fwiw. Although if you plan on only one set of hps, it could be more appealing. But no news on release date on the regular just yet.
The stage is interesting, I think once you get the synergy going you’ll be impressed with the depth (best I’ve heard). I agree it’s not that wide, but the focus and the way it “forces” you to look forward into the stage is what I find very unique and addicting (kind of like driving through a tunnel).
This will be unpopular, but i would like to ask for your help. I saw these at Munich high end, but unfortunately, they weren’t working on the equipment they provided . I’ve seen the FR and it looks like a unmitigated disaster, like beyond a reasonable doubt sort of thing, but people are actually very conflicted, because some decribe it like that FR suggests, and some describe it as something completely different. I’m not talking about preferences here , I’m talking about a description of the sound whether you like it or not. That FR is way way beyond the tolerances of the human HRTF, so it feel like it might be a unit variance thing?
Can you hear this sound demo https://youtube.com/shorts/LD0yS37EZ8E?si=0CVfuNFs90AbYPBv and tell me if it sounds like what you heard, or if this is completely inaccurate? Because the discussion of this headphone is driving me insane.
First, welcome to the forum!!
I’m not someone that puts much stock in FR and, at the end of the day, you will have to decide between what a FR says or what you hear with your ears. You’ll never grasp the nuance behind these things unless you experience it for yourself, and FR is just one aspect of the bigger picture. I realize some people can’t get that first-hand opportunity, but that’s just how it is. I’ve seen the FR and that’s not what I hear, having owned these for months.
I don’t think so, and I’ve talked with a few owners who share the same opinion as I do, aside from some things that I believe can be chalked up to chain variances. I also don’t think that Yamaha would let that slide, they are a huge company with more resources than most of the comparatively small-named audio brands in the hifi space. That and their Japanese pride are on the line, which is something that’s inherent to their strict culture.
I’m just one opinion on the internet, so you shouldn’t put much stock in what I say either. I can’t guarantee you’ll have the same experience as me, but I assure you this isn’t some headphone that was put together haphazardly.
Hi, i appreciate the response. I mentioned I wasn’t interested in your preference or opinions about its tuning. I’m sympathetic to the fact its only your opinion, but thats not a problem here. I just wanted you to hear the demo and tell me if they sound simular to what you heard on the real thing or if its completely different. I would genuinely appreciate if you watch it and just inform me.
I honestly don’t think you can get much from sound demos… But, no, it doesn’t sound anything like that
How in the world would you expect to extract any accurate reproduction of a headphone or speaker via a YouTube video or Short??
I listened to this demo, and the only valuable insight was music discovery on the track played.
If anyone is stating this helps depict any headphone, they are lying to you and themselves.
Thats why i asked! I wanted to know if they were or not. That was it. Nothing more. You people made a mountain out of a mole hill.
Yamaha HA L7A Flagship Headphone Amplifier and YH 5000se Headphones synergistic sound!
I wasn’t satisfied with my 1st draft, so here is the now complete 2nd (and final) draft fully revamped and improved!
Main system: An all-Allnic headphones chain comprised of the D10,000 OTL/OCL & HPA-300B. A custom Brise cable was used for both headphones.
It’s been interesting comparing both the 4000 and 5000 (I’ll use 4 and 5 to differentiate from now on to make it easier). While they share the exact same driver and have nearly identical specs, they both take a very different approach; these are two completely different headphones!
If you don’t want to glean through all the detailed explanation, here’s the gist of it (does not apply to perfectly treated bathrooms lol):
The 4 is like singing in the shower. Even if you’re off-key and out-of-tune, you still enjoy every moment singing the lyrics and tunes of your favorite songs. And it doesn’t matter the quality because in your head you sound spectacular and almost perfect!
The 5 is like taking a cardiod microphone (ie. a very revealing microphone) in the shower and recording vocals there. Every reflection, drip, flush, reverb, and even space can all be heard and felt. You then realize what an abomination it is to record inside a bathroom; what a nightmare!
(Analogy ends here)
The 4 and 5 are very similar when it comes to how they present texture (including the closed back) and they have almost the same kind of resolution capabilities and speed (same driver so probably not that surprising). But I would still put the 5 a slight level above the 4 for three main reasons: bass, space, and energy. These three attributes are what makes the 5 such top tier reference headphones. I’ll come back to this a bit later…
Tonally, the 4 is immediately more intimate and laid back over the 5. It has more mid bass punch, midrange weight/richness, and a tempered high end compared to the 5. Not a dark or mellow sort of treble, but one that doesn’t draw attention to itself. It’s as clean as the 5, but what it lacks is the kind of air, extension, and forwardness that the 5 can produce, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing depending on the music you listen to. The 4 is the more balanced sounding out of the two, but it’s also the more coloured one. The main takeaway here is that the 5 is a “lean in" kind of sound, while the 4 is “laid back."
Now back to those three attributes…
Bass
While the 4 has more punch in the mid bass, it doesn’t extend as deeply as the 5 when it comes to the sub bass. I wouldn’t call the mid bass on the 5 lacking in any way either, it’s just that the 4 has more of it. The caveat, however, is a slightly “stuffy" low end, meaning the 4’s bass is not as clean as the 5’s. So when listening to a bass drum, bass guitar, or the lower octaves of a piano, for example, the texture and delineation of those low notes gets slightly blurred on the 4, while the 5 would sound noticeably cleaner. This following part is conjecture on my end, but I think that’s mainly due to those stainless steel filters on the 5 versus the 4’s PET filters for regulating pressure within the cup housing. The stainless steel is more porous allowing that air pressure to escape easily, which then leads to noticeably cleaner sounding bass on the 5. I’d be very interested to hear a more technical explanation from the Yamaha engineers, but an educated guess will have to do.
Space
This part is basically how the 5 extracts the ambiance within the recording, how it’s able to provide extra insight into the distance between a voice or instrument and a microphone, and even the size of the venue. The 4 doesn’t really do that. While that certain quality isn’t essential to music enjoyment, I think it’s one of the reasons why the 5 is so damn impressive. Again, I think it goes back to those filters they use for the 4 and 5. The 5 has nearly zero isolation, it’s like the cups were “unveiled" or something (hopefully you got the joke lol). The 4, by comparison, blocks off more ambient noise like a semi-open design, but I use that term loosely. When I put my hands over the cups with music playing, the distance needed between my hand and the cup before it starts negatively affecting the sonics, is greater on the 5 than on the 4. This means that the 5’s filters allow for greater air permeability over the 4. Anyway, that’s just my observation.
Energy
You know that surrounding energy you get from live events? The 5 has it, the 4 doesn’t. I don’t have much of an explanation or description for this, it’s just the feeling I get every time I listen to the 5. Perhaps it’s the extra treble energy, air, or what not but that’s missing from the 4. In addition, the 5 can extend farther both ways so its micro and macro dynamics are perceptibly greater than the 4, not by a huge margin though. Also worth noting, the 4 is slightly more prone to sibilance than the 5.
The 4’s secret weapon over the 5
Now it may seem like the 5 has everything going for it, and it does… for my personal sound, at least. But the 4 has something over the 5 that may be a winner trait for many, aside from the much cheaper price. Simply put, it’s forgiving, both in source gear and music recordings.
I paired the 4 with my MacBook (I was just burning them in) the other day using its stock cable and honestly it sounded fairly decent. That’s not to say it didn’t scale well with my main system, but I think it’s a bit agnostic in what you plug into it, at least compared to the 5. The 4 still sounded like the 4 on my MacBook versus main system. I also tried the 5 on my MacBook to make sure I wasn’t tripping and yeah, it sounded horrible. Mids sucked out greatly and bass that was just pure disappointment. I was done after the third song, it was a bright and lean experience. The 4 in particular had a pretty mellowed out treble response when paired with the MacBook but that’s about it, it was still listenable.
When it comes to actual music playing, the 4 is considerably more forgiving with poorly recorded music over the 5. That’s not to say the 5 makes things unlistenable, but garbage in garbage out. It won’t sugarcoat things and will do its best to leave things uncoloured. With the 5, you end up slightly picky when choosing your songs. The 4 makes things sound good and is the “flavor pick" between the two. Rock and acoustic sound particularly impressive on the 4. Plenty of body and punch that lets you just enjoy the music, regardless of how poorly recorded it was, and I revisited a bunch of my older songs because of this trait.
A small note on comfort… The 4 has a slight edge but both are still extremely comfortable!
(Exaggerated to prove my point)
To wrap things up, the 5 is the best at fulfilling the stereotypical audiophile dream–maximum technicalities while still being “musical," big stage, big bass, big dynamics, awesome at low and high volumes, no compromises… but on particular tracks. The 4 gives a 
to all those, forget about cables, tweaks, gear… I’ma-take-this-music-and-make-it-sound-good-just-relax-and-listen… oh!-and-it-just-so-happens-that-I-perform-pretty-well-too kinda vibe!
I love both almost equally. The 5 is my ideal sound through and through, and is at the top of Yamaha’s “tuning fork.” However, the 4 lets me enjoy more of my (poorly recorded) favorite songs. It’s the difference between “truth” and “feeling.” Do you want to hear what it sounds like or do you want to feel good about what you’re listening to?
Whoever tuned the YH-4000 at Yamaha has my utmost respect 
. They’re coloured, yeah, but these headphones have such a unique and creative take on the music that I can’t help but listen in bliss.
If you have a chain that works well with the 5, this would be my priority. However, if you don’t plan on delving deep into the hobby and don’t mind some colour in your music, the 4 (especially at MSRP) might be the last headphone you’ll ever desire!