Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Odd that listeners hear more bass from HD 650 than K701
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Odd that listeners hear more bass from HD 650 than K701 - Page 6

post #76 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by PiccoloNamek View Post
Except for the fact that the K-701 doesn't have a peak in the upper mids, but rather, in the treble region.
True. I'm too lazy to pick the graphs to see exactly where in the lower treble.
post #77 of 119
I've never quite understood the controversy over the HD650 being bass-heavy, since Sennheiser itself, in their Owner's Manual to the HD650 says something like, "Despite all claims to purism...." It then goes on to admit, freely, that the 650 is colored, at the factory, to help you "feel" the music (code for BASS! code for BASS!) rather than to present you a neutral picture of what is actually on any given recording.

I've owned the 650, and feel that it's heavy compared to the 600 and 580, and prefer the latter two, but if I had to live with the 650 I could. Yes, it has extra bass, but I think it's well-done and fairly well-integrated.

That said, I'd rather let the musicians and the recording engineers give me what they intended to give me, rather than me adding a warm snuggly on top of it. Think of the HD650 as a permanent, $300 tone control. A "Bass" knob permanently stuck at 2 pm.

But what's the fuss when others call the Senn 650 bassy or heavy? It is. It's intended to be by its designers.....................and it's well-done for what it is. And the only "system" that can "correct" Sennheiser's efforts is, by definition, a "system" that can defeat, in part or in whole, Sennheiser's stated and accomplished intentions.
post #78 of 119
That is true. It still isn't "bass-heavy" though. The DT770 is bass-heavy. (!) The HD650 is not.
post #79 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by greggf View Post
I've never quite understood the controversy over the HD650 being bass-heavy, since Sennheiser itself, in their Owner's Manual to the HD650 says something like, "Despite all claims to purism...." It then goes on to admit, freely, that the 650 is colored, at the factory, to help you "feel" the music (code for BASS! code for BASS!) rather than to present you a neutral picture of what is actually on any given recording.
You're reading in it what you want to read, not what is being said. It's not being said that it's colored - and even then, no one says it's colored in the bass ;^) - it's being said that it's lifelike sounding, rich in sonic colors, complex in tonality, however... which in my book is not under the voice Colorations. Not really.

Also, a new HD650 indeed is a bit heavy on bass. Not a one year old one. So, right now, partly to my own surprise even, I would fault the Sennheiser engineers if they had tuned the headphone *any* differently. I mean, if you truly want Neutral (and I do), you'd also have to want full sounding vocals as in real life, impactful bass as in real life etc.
post #80 of 119
I hardly could call Sennheiser lifelike colored, especially in in upper registers. Thats what turned me away from them in the first place, dampened than life.
post #81 of 119
I spoke of variety and beauty of sonic colors - not of treble brilliance. A ever so slightly dark overall character helps to render vocal/instrumental tonal subtleties in the - vital - midrange, IMO. In other words, it helps the sounds to shine of their own light.

The treble is indeed on the refined side. Like with the highest pedigree British mini monitors, for that matter.
post #82 of 119
In my search for headphones, I auditioned the 650s, 600s, and 701s, among others. Out of the three, I clearly preferred the AKGs. There's just something going on with the Senns that I don't like. Between the 650s and 600s, I liked the 600s better--the bass was better defined and not as "thick," I thought--but both were distant runners-up to the 701s. The new AKGs are one of the least colored and detailed cans I've ever heard. IMO, they do make the Senns sound veiled and soft on top and overly heavy in the bass. I can see how many would criticize the 701s' lower registers as light or thin, but to my ears it's more precisely defined and pitch-accurate than either Sennheiser. But that's just my opinion, of course.
post #83 of 119
1st post of mine in this thread:

Perhaps the freq. response graphs represent "potential" of the given phones to reproduce frequencys as with bass in particular. Dependant upon associated gears rather than being etched in stone specifically as to what will be heard. I.e. Is that I can increase the bass response of my 701s with my choice of tube in the MAD and also bring the bass forward into prominence. Tell me did the frequency responce of the 701s change, or was it ever potential dependant upon my downstream gears?

2nd:

Especially true, when we know what will be heard is so very interdependant upon the "system" into which it is placed. Also, our own hearing so often called 'preferance' which I believe goes so much further than that. I now must conclude people hear diferently and also acclimate and accommodate, perhaps in our brain with the use of Headphones speciffically. Then this presentation become the referance by which others are judged. Or else we can conclude the fans of both the HD-650 and Grados are simply whacky because the other phone has such obvious sonic flaws, forgeting we ourselves too are a major componet in this sonic chain .

/Maybe

Although I've been termed a fanboy in this thread, I believe the evidence stands.

I first owned HD-580s because I always thought of myself as being treble sensitive, and reading here as a newbee I knew those ice picks weren't my cup of tea. But the 580 after 20 days with the headfive were totaly uninvolving so I bought the vererable HD-650 which I then decided to compare in house to the 701s ... Ahhh, this is what i had hoped the defoaming of the 650s would accomplish without the cable upgrade i also was concidering before the 701s. Ahhh YES the breath of fresh air of a crystal clear November morning less the blanket effect RELATIVE to the 650s presentation to MY ears.
No predjudice, simply personal experience and a transition of what i believed and read here for confirmation proved my thinking wrong. This experience sorta argues against my theroy proposed above, however I do try to reach for understanding of what I and others hear with regards to phones i've used, with the benifit of the doubt as they say. I'm sure it is due to what we've heard ;-}
post #84 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quint View Post
In my search for headphones, I auditioned the 650s, 600s, and 701s, among others. Out of the three, I clearly preferred the AKGs. There's just something going on with the Senns that I don't like. Between the 650s and 600s, I liked the 600s better--the bass was better defined and not as "thick," I thought--but both were distant runners-up to the 701s. The new AKGs are one of the least colored and detailed cans I've ever heard. IMO, they do make the Senns sound veiled and soft on top and overly heavy in the bass. I can see how many would criticize the 701s' lower registers as light or thin, but to my ears it's more precisely defined and pitch-accurate than either Sennheiser. But that's just my opinion, of course.
No need for such remark. That's perfectly normal, as it is that I and others should see it the other way around. It's in the nature of earthly things... Different perceptions for different people.

Although... there's a few significant objective variables to it: that you probably heard the 'phones prior to any burn in; that you probably had them attached to something more suited to a low impedance headphone than to a high impedance one (a likely case); and that you should have listened to them too briefly, perhaps elsewhere than in the quiet of your house, where the K701's upfront presentation may easily win over the Senns' that is geared towards long and intimate listening sessions.
post #85 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Albert View Post
No need for such remark. That's perfectly normal, as it is that I and others should see it the other way around. It's in the nature of earthly things... Different perceptions for different people.

Although... there's a few significant objective variables to it: that you probably heard the 'phones prior to any burn in; that you probably had them attached to something more suited to a low impedance headphone than to a high impedance one (a likely case); and that you should have listened to them too briefly, perhaps elsewhere than in the quiet of your house, where the K701's upfront presentation may easily win over the Senns' that is geared towards long and intimate listening sessions.
The Senns line is geared toward covering the sins of gears and the recorded material downstream. And there is a price to be paid for that presentation. As there is with a more revealing headphone, one chooses and pays the price for the benifits of either. There is nothing less intimate between these two phones as an objective quality, other than preferance and blatent defensiveness by exclusive fanboyism IME ;-} I'm sure other people are sincere in relating their experience, however it is NOT an either or propisition except for the owner of both who sells one of the two IME ;-}
post #86 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi-Finthen View Post
1st post of mine in this thread:

Perhaps the freq. response graphs represent "potential" of the given phones to reproduce frequencys as with bass in particular. Dependant upon associated gears rather than being etched in stone specifically as to what will be heard. I.e. Is that I can increase the bass response of my 701s with my choice of tube in the MAD and also bring the bass forward into prominence. Tell me did the frequency responce of the 701s change, or was it ever potential dependant upon my downstream gears?

2nd:

Especially true, when we know what will be heard is so very interdependant upon the "system" into which it is placed. Also, our own hearing so often called 'preferance' which I believe goes so much further than that. I now must conclude people hear diferently and also acclimate and accommodate, perhaps in our brain with the use of Headphones speciffically. Then this presentation become the referance by which others are judged. Or else we can conclude the fans of both the HD-650 and Grados are simply whacky because the other phone has such obvious sonic flaws, forgeting we ourselves too are a major componet in this sonic chain .

/Maybe

Although I've been termed a fanboy in this thread, I believe the evidence stands.
Since we use the term fanboy here to classify someone who speaks highly of one headphone and degrades others, that's why fanboy was used. Now maybe we get lose using it here. To me, everyone is at least partially a fanboy of one headphone or another. I admit I got riled since you've been antigonizing me for being a Single Power owner, Hi-Finthen, so I was even more biased. I freely admit to being a Sennheiser fanboy if that means my preference in Sennhieser: a headphone that to my ears has the potential to be "natural" sounding to me. That many at the ATL meet liked my setup for their headphones (AKG, Grado, and AT), means that your comments of my setup being unnaturally bright for an unnaturally veiled headphone are not correct IMO. And if you continue to insist on making a point to say that you only need an expensive amp to deveil a Senn in more of your posts, I'll probably be returning to this fact.

All along I have been agreeing with your first statement. It stands to reason that if you believe in synergy of system, certain headphones will stand out from others. Some of this has to do with your music preferences. Due to your recent posts, it seems as though you're anti-Sennheiser and anti-Grado. You see AKGs as never being able to be colored, and I notice your second headphone choice is Beyer. I've freely admitted that to my ears, AKGs are too colored in the mids on the systems I've tried. However, I have never said that AKG owners are "whacky because the other phone has such obvious sonic flaws", barring that "people hear diferently and also acclimate and accommodate". Whoey!!! I like music outside of headphones.....I play classical guitar, listen through speakers, and I go to concerts. So I have not been conditioned to believe that the headphone I'm listening to is "reference". Maybe some of it has to do with the difference in our ears/perception......and maybe it's more pronounced with headphones because drivers are so close to our ears. I give AKG and Beyer owners their consideration, so I and Grado fanboys expect the same. Now we can continue to list our own preferences.....as we're just going to continue the cycle of argueing what's the most "natural" It is dependant on preferences and setup, so this becomes a moot debate, as many headphones have the potential to be "natural"
post #87 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Albert View Post
It seems that the K701 have a serious lack of dynamics that makes for a reduced perception of bass. Hence an intentionally boosted f. r. curve.
The lack of dynamics is not a weakness of the K701s; the AKG K701s are not easy to drive. With my PPA, the AKG K701s sound good, but less dynamic than when they're plugged into my Gilmore Dynalo with Dual Tread PSU. With my HD580s, there is much less difference between the PPA and Dynalo. If you think that the K701s lack dynamics, then they haven't been matched to an amplifier with adequate current.
post #88 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Davesrose View Post
Since we use the term fanboy here to classify someone who speaks highly of one headphone and degrades others, that's why fanboy was used. Now maybe we get lose using it here. To me, everyone is at least partially a fanboy of one headphone or another. I admit I got riled since you've been antigonizing me for being a Single Power owner, Hi-Finthen, so I was even more biased. I freely admit to being a Sennheiser fanboy if that means my preference in Sennhieser: a headphone that to my ears has the potential to be "natural" sounding to me. That many at the ATL meet liked my setup for their headphones (AKG, Grado, and AT), means that your comments of my setup being unnaturally bright for an unnaturally veiled headphone are not correct IMO. And if you continue to insist on making a point to say that you only need an expensive amp to deveil a Senn in more of your posts, I'll probably be returning to this fact.

All along I have been agreeing with your first statement. It stands to reason that if you believe in synergy of system, certain headphones will stand out from others. Some of this has to do with your music preferences. Due to your recent posts, it seems as though you're anti-Sennheiser and anti-Grado. You see AKGs as never being able to be colored, and I notice your second headphone choice is Beyer. I've freely admitted that to my ears, AKGs are too colored in the mids on the systems I've tried. However, I have never said that AKG owners are "whacky because the other phone has such obvious sonic flaws", barring that "people hear diferently and also acclimate and accommodate". Whoey!!! I like music outside of headphones.....I play classical guitar, listen through speakers, and I go to concerts. So I have not been conditioned to believe that the headphone I'm listening to is "reference". Maybe some of it has to do with the difference in our ears/perception......and maybe it's more pronounced with headphones because drivers are so close to our ears. I give AKG and Beyer owners their consideration, so I and Grado fanboys expect the same. Now we can continue to list our own preferences.....as we're just going to continue the cycle of argueing what's the most "natural" It is dependant on preferences and setup, so this becomes a moot debate, as many headphones have the potential to be "natural"
Thank you Dave. However i am not a fanboy of any phone. i recognise their limitations within each companys offerings. Both they, and we make compromises. There are no absolutes that is why fanboyism is comical, yet you fail to see the humor .... Actually i'm loving my RS2s so even there, you're drawing the wrong conclusion from my statements.
Also, I never put down Singlepowers. Or yours... Idid look into one back before I decided upon the Mapletree and was told in a thread that the PPX3 (before the initiation of the Slam being the only PPX in production without it being an upgrade) would not properly drive my 701s and the 2 ea adaptors would be needed for 57XX tubes and this ended my interest in it as I was not prepared to shell out $800 on an amplifier alone. Especially one which I have not seen alot of Grado fans flock to, as that was my intended next can to in home audition. So enough, of my without reason not liking Senns, Singlepower or Grados etc, if you please. I've never bashed any product, in fact i will point out my experience, both good and bad, as we are not our gears as some here seem to defend their choices. All gears have limitations and are compromises IMO, only different in what those maybe. I'm a realist, not a fanboy ;-}

P.S. Dave did you change out the tubes at the AL meet for use with the other phones? i would expect that would be the thing to do as i expect the combination you would presently choose to run in the SP would be choosen specifically for the phones it drives. Ie. a detailed sparkely HF tube complement such as I do with mine for specific cans and a more favorable presentation than other choices i have on hand. This is what I did mean as your rig being tuned to be bright. I know I would search out that tube complement if I had a Senns Singlepower rig. Just a thought to clarify our understanding of what we mean. FWIW ;-}
post #89 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi-Finthen View Post

P.S. Dave did you change out the tubes at the AL meet for use with the other phones? i would expect that would be the thing to do as i expect the combination you would presently choose to run in the SP would be choosen specifically for the phones it drives. Ie. a detailed sparkely HF tube complement such as I do with mine for specific cans and a more favorable presentation than other choices i have on hand. This is what I did mean as your rig being tuned to be bright. I know I would search out that tube complement if I had a Senns Singlepower rig. Just a thought to clarify our understanding of what we mean. FWIW ;-}
I do see your juvenile humor at not commenting about what sound characteristics the k701 may posses, but insist that Sennheisers are the only headphones that need a special amp to fix their many shortcomings. Your threads are evident in that.

And no, I used my favorite tubes for the ATL meet.....ones that are neutral, give impact, and offer soundstage. I did not do anything special for the meet. The facts speak for themselves....FWIW ;-}
post #90 of 119
You're right, of course, but each phone had well over 500 hours on it. I know that because they're my friends' cans. FWIW, I borrowed my friend's RSA Stealth to audition them. Don't know what 'phones it was a particularly good or bad match with, but I just reported what I heard. I listened to each 'phone at length--about an hour each. I'm aware of the perils of short auditions, and my friends were very accommodating in this regard. Sure, there are drawbacks to such an audition method, but it was the best I could manage.

Although... there's a few significant objective variables to it: that you probably heard the 'phones prior to any burn in; that you probably had them attached to something more suited to a low impedance headphone than to a high impedance one (a likely case); and that you should have listened to them too briefly, perhaps elsewhere than in the quiet of your house, where the K701's upfront presentation may easily win over the Senns' that is geared towards long and intimate listening sessions.[/QUOTE]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Odd that listeners hear more bass from HD 650 than K701