Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › JVC harx700 - a poor mans ath-a900!!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

JVC harx700 - a poor mans ath-a900!! - Page 6

post #76 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psiga View Post
I want 'em to feel like they've opened up. Maybe tens of hours of burn-in will do that, or an amp that properly loads rather than just playing loud. If I crank the volume a couple notches higher than I'm comfortable with, it starts coming through more clearly. Hm.
Psiga, have the 900s opened up like you wanted? How would you describe its sound now that it's burned in? And what kind of music would you recommend it for?
post #77 of 227
900 get hot? I thought it was the 700's that get hot. Or maybe you're just in a hot room?
post #78 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by micmacmo View Post
Psiga, have the 900s opened up like you wanted? How would you describe its sound now that it's burned in? And what kind of music would you recommend it for?
Hm. They're really interesting. On one hand they are considerably more detailed than I would expect to get for this price, and on the other hand they are not sensitive enough for me. Subtle details that I pick up from a place closer to the noise floor in the RP21 and KSC75 are lost on the RX900. They fade to a heavier black. I'm guessing, but not certain, that it could be fixed with a synergistic dedicated amp, since this is 64 Ohm, which is twice the impedance of the RP21 and KSC75. My TBAAM powers it plenty loud, but doesn't push the little details or big beats as well as it might on the 32 Ohm guys.

That said, they have a grander sound than the RP21, as the soundstage extends farther. They still sound collapsed in one way, though: there is a lot of up and down, left and right, but practically no forward and backward.

Physically, I find them comfortable at first, then they start getting uncomfortable after about 20 minutes. Different from but no worse than the RP21, in that regard.

As far as sound goes, the bass is okay; punchier but considerably lighter than the RP21, as we already have determined. Highs are pleasant enough, but not airy or anything fun like that. Mids sound veiled to me, and I'm not a big fan of them. Vocals and things like violins don't sound as pleasant as they do on the otherwise-inferior KSC75.

The big thing for me, that makes my case really abnormal, is that I run Winamp with BBE Sonic Maximizer, and always tweak heavily to suit each particular set of headphones I'm using. These are the first headphones I've tweaked which benefitted from swinging the 'Process' slider nearly to maximum -- which I had a hard time believing at first, because it would sound awful on any other thing. It brings more sparkle to the highs, and makes the mids clear rather than veiled. I could blather on about it, but doing so probably wouldn't help anyone make a purchasing decision.

As for what music is good with them: It's hard for me to say, because almost all of my listening is done with the plugin, and that kind-of makes or breaks a lot of things. I can say that the lack of fore-and-aft headstage probably messes up symphonic stuff; the veiled mids kinda mess up female vocals and bowed instruments. The detail is nice, so things snap and pop and smack better than other cheap phones. I'm starting to hear fretwork, piano keys being pressed, drum membranes snapping, and metallic resonances that the RP21 would smear away completely.

I'm fine with using these as my general-use headphones for a while, and I listen to...anything that sounds good to me. Various tracks from artists all over the place: Zoe Keating, Ali Farka Toure, Yelle, Susumu Hirasawa, Astral Projection, Sa Dingding, and any number of other people whose names may or may not be recognizable.

In the end, I think they're nice enough for the price, and will probably stick with them until moving on to a very high end setup.
post #79 of 227
Psiga, thanks a million for your detailed description! Very helpful. I also use KSC75, so it's a nice to have a shared baseline. But could you clarify two statements that aren't quite obvious to me?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psiga View Post
Subtle details that I pick up from a place closer to the noise floor in the RP21 and KSC75 are lost on the RX900. They fade to a heavier black.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psiga View Post
...the veiled mids kinda mess up female vocals and bowed instruments. The detail is nice, so things snap and pop and smack better than other cheap phones.
I thought detail was generally associated with mids and highs, so I'm not sure how there can be detail with veiled mids. Also, if there is good detail, but some of the subtlety is lost, is it because these headphones are particularly noisy? Also, what do you mean by a "heavier black?"

Sorry for my limited fluency within the world of head-fi. Again, many thanks for your thoughtful reply.
post #80 of 227
Ah, yeah, I can see how it would come off sounding a bit contradictory.

When I say 'heavier black', I mean sort-of like a monitor with a gamma and contrast that truncates a lot of information in shadows.

These RX900s are detailed in the sense that the drivers have a faster response than other headphones I've used. Thus, short and sharp details that might be smeared out by slower-moving drivers are popping up more.

However, the impedance is twice as high as the other headphones I've mentioned, so the drivers are less sensitive to faint signals. Thus, subtle and nuanced details that are closer to the noise floor are being truncated out.

So: Soft details are muted, and strong details are crisp.
post #81 of 227
Amazing! You give me an apt metaphor that's visual and I instantly understand what you mean from an audio perspective. Brains are funny things that way.

And thanks for your broader feedback. It sounds like 900s are perfect candidates for amplification. And I have an amplifier. Now I just need the phones...
post #82 of 227
If you come to these from KSC75s, you will probably:

Dig the much bigger sound, impressive detail, deeper and punchier bass.

Miss the airy sparkle, open comfort, sensitivity of 32Ohm drivers.

And man oh man these are not fit to wear in public.


I'm still wondering about the differences 'tween the RX700 and RX900. For the $23 difference, I was willing to take a hit just to play things safe, but... They have nigh identical enclosures, and folks are describing very similar sonic traits. For the budget crowd who'd jump on $35 but hesitate on $58, it would be nice to know what the differences are[, if any].
post #83 of 227
It's quite likely that the RX900 have bigger diameter drivers, therefore a little deeper bass and less colored sounds while retaining clarity in highs, more coherent sound but a similar signature due to enclosure similarities... Are the specs identical?
I guess someone should GET BOTH, OPEN THEM UP and TAKE PICTURES.

The phones are so cheap it's worth trying, when you don't like them so much, you can give them out. You can use them where you're afraid your more expensive cans could be damaged. Or re-sell them at head-fi. Some non-US members would take them because very few online shops ship overseas.

I just wonder they are somehow underrated here, with that price-performance ratio.

I'd take a pair of either, second hand...
post #84 of 227
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by d.phens View Post
It's quite likely that the RX900 have bigger diameter drivers, therefore a little deeper bass and less colored sounds while retaining clarity in highs, more coherent sound but a similar signature due to enclosure similarities... Are the specs identical?
I guess someone should GET BOTH, OPEN THEM UP and TAKE PICTURES.

The phones are so cheap it's worth trying, when you don't like them so much, you can give them out. You can use them where you're afraid your more expensive cans could be damaged. Or re-sell them at head-fi. Some non-US members would take them because very few online shops ship overseas.

I just wonder they are somehow underrated here, with that price-performance ratio.

I'd take a pair of either, second hand...
i think they were underrated because they just weren't 'discovered' around here until i ordered a pair out of curiosity. and spacemanspiff bought both and has compared them in another thread. i will probably get the 900 as well soon enough and then sell the one i like least. i love the 700 for gaming so far-even more than my ath-a900
post #85 of 227
I just got mine JVC HA-RX900, been only listening for 10 minutes, but some first impressions compared to Grado SR-60s, I noticed in general everything seems to sound thicker, and I can hear more detail compared to Grado SR-60s. Definitely a different presentation then Grado's I can't really explain it. But I'm satisfied with my purchase, hopefully these will get better with burn-in.

*edit* I just played some hip hop, and when I listened to them with the Grado's it sounded fine, but when I use these RX900s it was incredibly distorted and bass heavy, I can't tell if it's because the RX900s are very revealing or super bass heavy. I'm hoping this either goes away or if its just the source.
post #86 of 227
goober-george, please keep us posted on how they change over time.
Thanks!
post #87 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by goober-george View Post
I just got mine JVC HA-RX900, been only listening for 10 minutes, but some first impressions compared to Grado SR-60s, I noticed in general everything seems to sound thicker, and I can hear more detail compared to Grado SR-60s. Definitely a different presentation then Grado's I can't really explain it. But I'm satisfied with my purchase, hopefully these will get better with burn-in.

*edit* I just played some hip hop, and when I listened to them with the Grado's it sounded fine, but when I use these RX900s it was incredibly distorted and bass heavy, I can't tell if it's because the RX900s are very revealing or super bass heavy. I'm hoping this either goes away or if its just the source.
Everyone who has had enough time with these headphones have already reported burn-in is required for the highest quality. You based your report on 10 minutes post-opening of the package.
post #88 of 227
I'm catching up with the [H] thread that ourfpshero, spliff, Alai, and bubba are cross posting in... JVC harx700 - a poor mans ath-ad900!! - [H]ard|Forum Spliff's take is:

"The 900 has larger, deeper cups and has more padding than the 700. The sound stage is bigger. Sound is more refined, detailed and separated.

Worth $20 extra yes."


"The 900s are slightly open! Around the edge of the exterior cups there is metal mesh where the 700s are sealed. They are not as hot and probably get a bit more "air-y-ness" to their sound.

The headband is of different, more soft leather-like material."

He posted comparison photos:

"There are signifigant differences in the presentation. I think that since it is the same driver that it is more like changing the room acoustics than anything else.

The headband is like soft leather. So are the pads which are thicker than the 700. Soft like the beyer leather pads I have had for Darths."


"So these need more power. Might actually benefit from an amp. I turned my X-Fi all the way up and keep the volume level low in software. You know the mp3 player volume is on 7 of 100 etc.

They either need an amp or need to break in some more. I can hear congestion compared to the 700. Not quite as detailed or clean as the 700 yet.

I feel like they have more to give though and was thinking of getting a mini 3 amp anyway.

Bass is more tuneful with these. Less slam but better sounding."


"The only issue that I have with the 900 is that the highs are a bit laid back. That is not a bad thing really but it does make the sound appear a bit in the back of the room. This is where an amp should help bring things up and out front a bit more.

The bass is really good in quantity now. There is more sound stage too. Bigger sound than the 700s."


"the 900s sound very bad when they first play. they really need to run for a few days until the drivers are moving properly. just tight or something to start."


"So far I have not been wrong about anything I suggested. The 900s need more time to settle in before they sound right. Some folks say burn in is bs but I know differently. The drivers are brand new and simply need time to work out the stiffness. Some speaker companies actually put this in their manuals.

Be patient. Wait for all the new owners to chime in after they have them for a bit and then say you are suspicious. No reason not to be. I don't believe anything until I try it myself too. In this case, I was not expecting much. The surprise continues as to what I hear with these. I can honestly say that I have not heard this level of detail and sound separation from any headphone except Stax and the modded K340s and K1000s I have had. I know that sounds like total bull but I swear it is the truth. What I can't really pin down is what is the sound quality level? Yes they have tons of separation and you hear everything in a song or in a game. However, is it still a bit muddy compared to a higher end headphone? Since I do not have anything else to compare these to except my memory, I have started a thread on head-fi asking other members to give them a try and report back."


Ooh, looks like buy.com has sold out of the RX900s for a while, and you can only get them through their affiliate store, onecall, for $107 shipped. I'd be hard pressed to recommend them at that price. The $35 RX700 is apparently still available directly from buy.com, though. For now.
post #89 of 227
The RX900 is still an excellent headphone at $107, the $89 list price plus s/h. I rank these over the Denon AH D1001 which list at $149 (but can be had for $81).
post #90 of 227
The 900s belong in the $100-150 range. I am not surprised but a little sad that they have jumped up.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › JVC harx700 - a poor mans ath-a900!!