or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Some of the myths associated with K701/2
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Some of the myths associated with K701/2 - Page 6

post #76 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Monkey View Post
The premise that myths are false by definition reflects a superficial understanding and use of that word. Some simple research would reveal to you that myths are deeply textured and nuanced cultural narratives, the truth of which can be nearly impossible to ascertain--myth is comprised of both truth and fiction, often intertwined. Accordingly myths can be both true and false...simultaneously.

And lest you think that myths are solely the province of the ancient Greeks, read some Barthes or similar. We engage in myth all the time here. I think it is particularly noticeable on both sides of the great (I use that word loosely) burn-in and cable debates. Similarly, here, the myth of the bassless 701 is a good example. I've heard this phone dozens of times in all kinds of setups. Most of the time I think it sucks. Its anemic bass compared to other mid-to-high end phones is startling to me. But I have heard it sound good, as noted above, out of the big HR amps.

So which is it? Do they lack bass or not? The answer is who the hell knows. Maybe the bass is great, but only with a very certain few amps. Or maybe it does, indeed, suck, but I was in a good mood (read drunk if Tyll was around) each time I heard the 701 out of HR amps. Regardless, I would be inclined to say yes they lack sufficient bass to be fully satisfying, if asked. And there we have a myth. In my perception, the bass of the K701 is anemic. But I also have heard it sound good on a couple of occasions. How do I reconcile these two states? I tend to take the couple of dozen times they've sounded lousy to me and think that's more in line with the "truth." As I tell others that I think the 701 lacks bass, I perpetuate this myth, which has embedded in it both truth and falsehood.

People here like to speak in absolutes. "It has great bass; you just have the wrong amp!" or "cables make a difference, you just can't hear it!" Myths. Opinion as fact. Both true and untrue. Here, it appears that what you really meant instead of "myths" was "falsehoods." If that's the case, then that is what should have been stated. Words are important.

And there is plenty of room for reasonable minds to differ on my interpretation of myth. Lord knows there are plenty of people smarter than me who have made it their job to write about and discuss such things. But that "myth" is a word loaded with cultural and narrative significance that transcends merely whether a myth is true or false cannot reasonably be debated.
Well, Monkey, I think you answered your own question. If only one time they sound good to you, it means that the myth explodes. Conclusion: either you need to be in a good mood (drunk) or you need a good HR amp. I think the intention of this topic is great! I think it's a more of a sarcastic humor (for example, Made in China), which is very amusing.

BTW, if my memory serves me well, you are one of THE best when it comes to dark humor.
post #77 of 164
What myth?! no such thing around K701 at all, they are plain bad.
post #78 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by ast View Post
What myth?! they are plain bad.
Good myth!
post #79 of 164
Man, who cares if the K701 has bass or not, if you don't otherwise care about the K701? If it sounds good, then it is good, and if it sounds like it has bass, then it has bass. Obviously it has bass to some people, usually people who like the K701, including me. I've heard many different kinds and quantities of K701 bass with different equipment and on different tracks, which says to me it's at least capable. But really, the topic has become so utterly boring.

However, The Monkey, great discussion. It's nice to see people thinking here.
post #80 of 164
It's not if it has bass, it's if it has recessed bass relative to the other frequencies and it does. There's a difference.
post #81 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by chinesekiwi View Post
It's not if it has bass, it's if it has recessed bass relative to the other frequencies and it does. There's a difference.
Right. Does that make the topic any more interesting? It attracts K701 proponents and detractors, and usually makes for some of the most inane reading on Head-Fi. But you go ahead if you're having fun.
post #82 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skylab View Post

I'd like to hear your comment on EXACTLY what about my post you felt was a "myth", as opposed to being a simplified (as I said) description of the differences between tubes and SS devices. I don't claim to be the most knowledgeable person on earth on this topic by any stretch, but I don't think there was anything inaccurate about what I said.

I apologize for the off-topic post.
Sounds like you need to go back and read my posts again.
post #83 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by chinesekiwi View Post
It's not if it has bass, it's if it has recessed bass relative to the other frequencies and it does. There's a difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superpredator View Post
Right. Does that make the topic any more interesting? It attracts K701 proponents and detractors, and usually makes for some of the most inane reading on Head-Fi. But you go ahead if you're having fun.
Yup yup.

I also love how pe-LOOK FREQUENCY RESPONSE GRAPH. Wow.

No one said the K701 had lots of bass. We just argued that the notion it has no bass is misleading. If you read through the thread instead of posting graphs, you would have realised this.

Oh look here on page 2 -
Quote:
Originally Posted by sokolov91 View Post
Sure, it is an exaggeration -I will readily admit that, but It is fairly light... it is on par with my SA5K which is quite basslight, and the SA5K have more impact. Dunno if its my/was amp.

Also, when you get to the point where the bass rolls of, it is indeed minuscule. Whether or not it is more a problem with all open headphones and not only the AKG I guess I don't have enough experience to know. HD600 are equally guilty though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MomijiTMO View Post
It is definitely not a bassy headphone . I'm just having a go at those barking up the wrong tree. You see, while you know it has bass, you wish to convey it is on the lighter side but a lot of people will misinterpret your comment and then go about telling others it has NO BASS. ...
post #84 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by ast View Post
What myth?! no such thing around K701 at all, they are plain bad.
Wow. What's the problem? Did the K701 murder your parents or something? First you attack another member for genuinely liking the headphones after having tried most everything else in the price range:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ast View Post
dude, listen to yourself: you are making K70x more a religon than a hobby, hence lost all your objectivity. Seems to me it doesn't matter how K70x sound, you will love them anyway, because you perceive there is a conspiracy against them here on head-fi.
then you troll up this thread with the "fact" that it sounds bad.

dude, listen to yourself: you are making K70x more a religion than a hobby, hence lost all your objectivity. Seems to me it doesn't matter how the K70x sound, you will hate them anyway, because you perceive that their sound is a fact and entirely disregard personal taste and the opinions of others.

Sound about right?

Normally I'd leave trolling like this alone because the troll of a headphone I've never heard isn't my business. But these two posts of yours really rub me the wrong way. I don't think you or anyone else has the experience or ability to chastise a member for researched preference and deride a headphone as universally flawed just because it doesn't mesh with your own preference.

And this is how rumors get started.
post #85 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Head Injury View Post
Wow. What's the problem? Did the K701 murder your parents or something? First you attack another member for genuinely liking the headphones after having tried most everything else in the price range:

then you troll up this thread with the "fact" that it sounds bad.

dude, listen to yourself: you are making K70x more a religion than a hobby, hence lost all your objectivity. Seems to me it doesn't matter how the K70x sound, you will hate them anyway, because you perceive that their sound is a fact and entirely disregard personal taste and the opinions of others.

Sound about right?

Normally I'd leave trolling like this alone because the troll of a headphone I've never heard isn't my business. But these two posts of yours really rub me the wrong way. I don't think you or anyone else has the experience or ability to chastise a member for researched preference and deride a headphone as universally flawed just because it doesn't mesh with your own preference.

And this is how rumors get started.
hey, sounds like K701 IS your parents or something.

I didn't attack that guy at all, instead simply pointed out his comment lacks objectivity. On the other hand, YOU are making personal attacks here. I don't even know who you are and never want to 'rub you' in any way.

Forums full of people say some headphone bad or really bad whereas others say the other way, such as Edition 9, GS 1000, etc. How come if I say K701 is bad then suddenly I am 'trolling'?
post #86 of 164
Really, I can't understand all the hate against these cans.
I'm more than happy with them, they do everything I want from a pair of headphones.
If someone thinks they are bass light, then simply get a different pair of headphones, but why keep saying the same things for ever? They are bass light, they sound "plasticky" they have a great sound stage but it's not natural, bla bla bla.
I think the biggest issue with these cans is the price...they're too cheap :-)
post #87 of 164
Head Injury don't feed this troll...

Quote:
Originally Posted by ast View Post
hey, sounds like K701 IS your parents or something.

I didn't attack that guy at all, instead simply pointed out his comment lacks objectivity. On the other hand, YOU are making personal attacks here. I don't even know who you are and never want to 'rub you' in any way.

Forums full of people say some headphone bad or really bad whereas others say the other way, such as Edition 9, GS 1000, etc. How come if I say K701 is bad then suddenly I am 'trolling'?
...instead kill it with fire!

hehe
post #88 of 164
I agree with realmassy above. If I go to a restaurant with friends, and one says "I like the lasagna" and I say "I like the hamburger" who is wrong? If we were judging fashion, and someone said "I like scarves" and someone else said "I like leather gloves," would we really be jumping all over each other in the same way?

It's such a stupid question to ask, and, yet, here at head-fi (or at other online forums) people fling themselves heart and soul into flaming each other over each other's opinions. Those are the ones who have not yet realized that in recreational hobbies, such as a common love of audio equipment, it is perfectly OKAY to have different preferences. Please people, we're not here to tear each other apart; we are here because we share an interest in headphones and related paraphernalia.

Ps. Monkey I am impressed at your digested discussion of the great Barthes... It is always important to ask ourselves, in discussions revolving around certain key terms (such as "myth" versus "truth"), just what those words mean. As it turns out, the word myth as used in this thread is different from the word myth as used with the narratives of the ancient Greeks or other cases, and the way we use it here actually does assume a definition which opposes it to truth (meaning a definition relating to falsehood). I would add that Barthes is less an authority on the possibilities of truth/falsehood than are the pioneers of linguistics, who concluded that, as all language was invented arbitrarily, then all language is absent of any positive meaning, and yet because we may act or react on the basis of our perceived understanding of those meanings, we actualize the power of those meanings, reducing the whole phenomenon of language to a smokescreen existence like that of the Wizard of Oz. There was no real Wizard for Dorothy, but for the people of Oz, the Wizard's existence had real consequence in their lives--so the Wizard was both real AND not real.

When Barthes spoke of myth, he did not mean that people had a misinformed definition of the word. He was instead outlining a new, ad hoc definition to describe the process by which groups of people come to believe in something as intrinsic to the truth of their culture, their daily life--which also happens at this forum with an alarming amount of misguided passion...

LOL sorry I saw somebody at this forum talk about something other than impedances and capacitance and got excited... oh jeez!
post #89 of 164
Well said. Semiotics major?
post #90 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScuderiaHeadFi View Post
I agree with realmassy above. If I go to a restaurant with friends, and one says "I like the lasagna" and I say "I like the hamburger" who is wrong? If we were judging fashion, and someone said "I like scarves" and someone else said "I like leather gloves," would we really be jumping all over each other in the same way?

It's such a stupid question to ask, and, yet, here at head-fi (or at other online forums) people fling themselves heart and soul into flaming each other over each other's opinions. Those are the ones who have not yet realized that in recreational hobbies, such as a common love of audio equipment, it is perfectly OKAY to have different preferences. Please people, we're not here to tear each other apart; we are here because we share an interest in headphones and related paraphernalia.

Ps. Monkey I am impressed at your digested discussion of the great Barthes... It is always important to ask ourselves, in discussions revolving around certain key terms (such as "myth" versus "truth"), just what those words mean. As it turns out, the word myth as used in this thread is different from the word myth as used with the narratives of the ancient Greeks or other cases, and the way we use it here actually does assume a definition which opposes it to truth (meaning a definition relating to falsehood). I would add that Barthes is less an authority on the possibilities of truth/falsehood than are the pioneers of linguistics, who concluded that, as all language was invented arbitrarily, then all language is absent of any positive meaning, and yet because we may act or react on the basis of our perceived understanding of those meanings, we actualize the power of those meanings, reducing the whole phenomenon of language to a smokescreen existence like that of the Wizard of Oz. There was no real Wizard for Dorothy, but for the people of Oz, the Wizard's existence had real consequence in their lives--so the Wizard was both real AND not real.

When Barthes spoke of myth, he did not mean that people had a misinformed definition of the word. He was instead outlining a new, ad hoc definition to describe the process by which groups of people come to believe in something as intrinsic to the truth of their culture, their daily life--which also happens at this forum with an alarming amount of misguided passion...
I would love to be a fly on the wall to listen in on when you are having a discussion with your family! Wow!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Some of the myths associated with K701/2