HA4600 vs HA4700

  • Thread starter Thread starter mrface2112
  • Start date Start date
M

mrface2112

Well-known member
ok....i bought some of Harvey's MoreMe headphones and now i need a headphone amp that'll handle 5 or 6 channels. i'm leaning towards the behringer amps, as they've gotten decent reviews over here.

i see that the Beh HA4400 has gotten some good reviews in these parts (mainly pimped by Gidge). I also see that it's been discontinued and can be found for $59 at Sweetwater.

What I haven't seen is anyone using the HA4600 or the HA4700. Both of these can be found at musician's fiend for $99, but i was wondering if anyone's used either of them, and what the differences are (aside from what i can find on the Beh website, which appears that the 4700 can handle an 8Ohm load) between the 4600 and 4700.

I was also wondering if the extra $40 worth it to pick up an HA4600 or HA4700 over an HA4400? the eq channels would be nice, i suppose.

Third question, does anyone know of anywhere that's blowing out the HA4600's? Musician's Fiend seems to be the only place that's stocking the 4600's (and at the same price as the 4700). I'd (obviously) hate to spend $99 when i could spend $79 or something.


thanks in advance.

wade
 
I'm curious too. ShreveAudio had a great price on the 4400 but they ran out. I can get the 4700 at GC but I'm wondering if it's worth almost twice as much.
 
bummer

it was Shreve and not Sweetwater that had the 4400 for $59....i typo'd above and that's a bummer to hear that they're out.

i suppose if the 4600 and 4700 are going for the same price at the "major warehouse outlet" places, then it only makes sense to get the 4700.

although, part of me wants to hang back and see if anyone starts blowing the 4600's out at a cheap price. hate to buy one and have them go on sale the next day.

i normally cringe away from behringer gear, but the one thing that seems to be consistently viewed as "ok" are their headphone amps....


wade
 
My guess is that the 4600s will eventually go on sale, as the 4700 is supposed to be an improvement on the design of the 4600. It may take a few months, because they probably have so many of them on the shelves that it makes more sense to try to sell as many as possible for the $99 pricetag, until the 4700s completely make their way into the market and the 4600 is in shorter supply (so that a lower price won't mean too much lost profits).
 
I got the HA4700 a couple of days ago for £68.50....The eq is obvioulsy very basic but still a nice little feature. Although it has 4 channels, only the first is free from a loud buzzing in the right headphone so I'll be sending for a new one!....for some reason I'm not surprised though!

I still think it's a decent unit at a decent price, with some nice upgrades from the 4600....I'll change my mind if I get another faulty one though!
 
Forgot to say that I also recently bought a 4700. It's pretty decent for $99 (Guitar Center). It isn't the "cleanest" headphone amp in the world. That is, there are subtle changes in the sound when comparing it to the direct sound from the headphone output on my Layla24 card. However, it's "good enough" for tracking. My observation about it being less that clean is subject to some "salt," because the inputs to the HA 4700 are coming from the Mackie mixer, so it's far from a clean signal to begin with. Perhaps, I'll try to take inputs direct from the soundcard (w/ no mixer in between and see what happens).
 
I ended up getting the 4700 also. It's not bad for the money. I'll see how it holds up.

One thing that REALLY pisses me off with all the budget amps is that they put the Aux inputs on the fucking front panel. Then they put extra headphone jacks on the back?!?! How does that make any sense? If you put it in a rack with Auxes going to the individual channels then you have cables hanging over the front of it. That is the dumbest design decision I've seen in a long time and many companies follow it.

Is there some reason for that I am not getting?

I noticed in the manual they have a 'pro level' 8000 that powers 8 cans and they finally put the aux inputs on the back. I've never even seen that one for sale.
 
I can't understand the front panel aux thing either, it's my main complaint. Would have made much more sense to put the 3rd headphone socket on the front.

I haven't found anywhere that stocks the HA800, then again not many places seem to have the HA4700. Maybe it hasn't been released yet.

....just found out from behringer.com it's "available 4th quarter 2003"
 
Last edited:
I think that the aux send at the front is a very smart idea

Its makes things easy when you patch a sound source to the
headphones, I usualy don't need aux to stay connected
at all time

IMO
 
rockem said:
I think that the aux send at the front is a very smart idea

Its makes things easy when you patch a sound source to the
headphones, I usualy don't need aux to stay connected
at all time

IMO
Click to expand...

What would you patch into the headphone amp on a temporary basis? Do you not have a mixer?
 
In my setup, I have the LR ins of the HA4600 connected to the headphone out of my mixer, so if I want to give someone more of a certain channel in their headphones only, I patch out one of the auxes into the front of the HA4600, and turn up the channel or channels they want, which is very easy with my compact simple setup.
 
Rock God said:
Would have made much more sense to put the 3rd headphone socket on the front.
Click to expand...

It is on the front, along with the aux in jack.

:confused:
 
maestro_dmc said:
It is on the front, along with the aux in jack.

:confused:
Click to expand...

There are extra headphone jacks on the back. At least on the 4700.

I guess their market is for people who don't have PatchBays or many Aux sends. That's the only way to explain the front mounted inputs.
 
I think the idea is that the mix from the control room goes into the master inputs in the back, and the instrumentalist plugs an output from his/her instrument into the input on the front of the unit, i.e. the direct output of a DI box. This then can be blended with the master mix coming in the back of the unit.
 
SonicAlbert said:
I think the idea is that the mix from the control room goes into the master inputs in the back, and the instrumentalist plugs an output from his/her instrument into the input on the front of the unit, i.e. the direct output of a DI box. This then can be blended with the master mix coming in the back of the unit.
Click to expand...

That's even more scary. Who would want to use a Behringer Headphone amp on the front of their signal chain? Just about everything but keys or bass is miked.
 
Originally posted by TexRoadkill That's even more scary. Who would want to use a Behringer Headphone amp on the front of their signal chain? Just about everything but keys or bass is miked.
Click to expand...

Tex,

I think he's talking about the 1/4 inch "direct output" of a direct box. I presume that he intends for the xlr output to go directly to the recorder bypassing the Behringer box.
 
Rev E said:
Tex,

I think he's talking about the 1/4 inch "direct output" of a direct box. I presume that he intends for the xlr output to go directly to the recorder bypassing the Behringer box.
Click to expand...

So you run a mic into a DI to split it? I guess you guys have better DI's than me. Mine convert line/instrument to mic level not split mic to line level with another parallel mic out.
 
Tex, you are usually so "with it" are you just messin' around or what?;)

I just do not think we are on the same page at ALL.:(
 
Yes, of course I'm talking about the direct out of the DI going to the front panel input on the headphone amp! Most DI's have a direct out and a mic level out.

All I'm saying is that probably the reason there's a front panel input on the Behringer is so you can easily patch in from the front and then blend your instrument in with the master mix coming in the back. It allows the player to adjust their own levels in relation to the mix to whatever they are comfortable with.

I used to own the 4400, but sold it, as I just didn't need it once I got a mixer that had four headphone outputs.
 
TexRoadkill said:
So you run a mic into a DI to split it? I guess you guys have better DI's than me. Mine convert line/instrument to mic level not split mic to line level with another parallel mic out.
Click to expand...

SonicAlbert (and I) were talking about using an instrument into a DI not a mic. Using an instrument into a DI in the most typical way gets you a parallel signal. 1/4inch in --> 1/4out + xlr out. SonicAlbert was saying xlr to recorder. 1/4 would go to the Behringer for "more me" monitoring.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top