or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Video Games Discussion › Mad Lust Envy's Headphone Gaming Guide: (3/18/2016: MrSpeakers Ether C 1.1 Added)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mad Lust Envy's Headphone Gaming Guide: (3/18/2016: MrSpeakers Ether C 1.1 Added) - Page 236

post #3526 of 37324

Here's an excerpt ^ of the gaming comparison

 

 DT990 vs Q701: Gaming (with Dolby Headphone)

 

  • Those who have used Dolby headphone know that it very slightly smooth the highs.  The Q's highs are already smooth enough in stereo, so they don't need this.  It takes away some of their "air", which they don't have that much of to begin with.  The DT990s DO need this smoothing.  They still need even more smoothing though IMO.

 

  • When gaming with Dolby Headphone the DT990 keeps up better with the Q701 then it does in plain stereo.  The DT990's soundstage gets a good deal larger with DH than it does in stereo mode.  I think the treble gives it some extra reach. 

 

  • In Dolby Headphone the Q701 soundstage is still a little better.  The soundstage sounds a bit more diffuse, coherent, and fluid with the Q701s where the DT990 sounds a little more disconnected.  In other words, it's harder to hear where  one virtual speaker ends and the other begins with the Q's (which make them a little more immersive for me), whereas the DT990s it's a bit more obvious that it's jumping from one to the other.  Again, probably related to the angled drivers. 

 

  • Positioning is pretty good on the DT990s, although objects out in front of you don't sound quite as nice as on the Q701s due to the DT990s having less depth and less front imaging.  Probably goes back to what I said about the DT990 soundstage being more left-right centric in stereo wile the Q701s present a better and deeper image in front of you (angled drivers, again).

 

  • Overall I'd rate the Q701 positioning/imaging a bit better, and separation a bit better on DT990s. 

 

  • The DT990 has less mids and more highs, so it can etch out and outline objects a bit sharper/better (sort of like AD700s), but they sound sort of hollow and artificial to me, and the placement sounds a bit better on the Q701s.  The fuller mids on the Q701 gives objects more body and mass, although they aren't as sharply outlined as on the DT990s. 

 

  • I actually think the Q's have more of a home-theater-like sound than the DT990s.  The flatter/less colored response of the Q's sounds more speaker like than the elevated highs of the DT990 (speakers shouldn't be producing that much treble).  The DT990s low end response is nice, but the leaner mids make them lose some weight to the sound.  The  Q701s have nearly the same bass but more body and weight to the mids.

 

  • I'd say the Q701s are still the most fun and immersive gaming can's I've tried, although they're not quite the best competive/fps cans I've tried.  The AD700s still have the best raw positioning, and the PC360s are very good as well. I actually prefer the DT880s signature more for gaming than the DT990s.  I bet the T1s would be fantastic (angled drivers FTW).

 

  • The Q701s can be run straight off the MixAmp, even when mixing in chat.  I will say that their soundstage clearly benefits when double amping with my M-stage.  The M-stage increases the Q701's soundstage size a bit past PC360 size and closer to AD700 size, and the imaging/positioning got better as well. The Q701s didn't benefit when adding in my E9 amp though. 

 

  • I didn't try to run the 600 ohm DT990 straight off the MixAmp, and you probably shouldn't either.

Edited by chicolom - 1/26/12 at 11:42am
post #3527 of 37324
Thread Starter 
Now you make me wanna try the Q701. But I'm sticking to my DT990s. tongue.gif

I have no doubt the Q701 trumps the DT990 is soundstage and positioning. The AKGs were just godly in this regard.

So perhaps, the Q701 should be the new all purpose gaming can that doesn't need an extra amp. I just won't say so until I've heard it myself.

Anyone wants to loan me a pair, I'll happily put them to the test.

Edit: Hmm... are they really fun for music? Because considering how I don't have much use for the DT990 now that I have the D7000s, I might benefit more from the AKGs.

What scares me is that they'll sound reminiscent to the K701 which I hated for music, unless I raped them with bass boosts from the E5 and E7.
Edited by Mad Lust Envy - 1/26/12 at 11:56am
post #3528 of 37324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Lust Envy View Post

Hmm... are they really fun for music? Because considering how I don't have much use for the DT990 now that I have the D7000s, I might benefit more from the AKGs.
What scares me is that they'll sound reminiscent to the K701 which I hated for music, unless I raped them with bass boosts from the E5 and E7.


What didn't you like about the K701 for music?  Bass issues?

post #3529 of 37324
Thread Starter 
Yeah, the bass didn't have the quantity I desired, and the mids were artificial sounding. Treble and bass QUALITY were great though.
Edited by Mad Lust Envy - 1/26/12 at 12:17pm
post #3530 of 37324

Hmmm, people seem to have varying opinions about how much the q701 differs from the K7xx. 

 

I have now been shown a pair of the K701s at £165 delivered, which is exactly £100 cheaper than the cheapest Q701 I have seen. I'm finding it hard to resist jumping in at that price. Is the Q701 THAT much better?

 

From what everyone says about the DT 990 i feel like it OUGHT to be ideal for what I want, but when I went to try it (the pro version) the level of bass seemed overwhelming to me. But then, I'm not used to anything much beyond ear buds really.

 

Given that Im not used to serious bass, maybe i wouldn't notice anything missing on the K701? And i've read that they get better with amping and burn in.

 

 

post #3531 of 37324
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by suitheist View Post

Hmmm, people seem to have varying opinions about how much the q701 differs from the K7xx. 

 

I have now been shown a pair of the K701s at £165 delivered, which is exactly £100 cheaper than the cheapest Q701 I have seen. I'm finding it hard to resist jumping in at that price. Is the Q701 THAT much better?

 

From what everyone says about the DT 990 i feel like it OUGHT to be ideal for what I want, but when I went to try it (the pro version) the level of bass seemed overwhelming to me. But then, I'm not used to anything much beyond ear buds really.

 

Given that Im not used to serious bass, maybe i wouldn't notice anything missing on the K701? And i've read that they get better with amping and burn in.

 

 


The DT990 Pros bass was overwhelming to me too, but the Premium DT990 was perfect.
post #3532 of 37324

When you raped them with bassboosts they sounded good? Whats wrong with EQing them to get the sound you want? Did it mess up other aspects of the sound?

 

Again, for some reason the premium dt990 is £100 more expensive than the pro- which just seems hard to justify to me. I mean, if as people say it the clamping force that does it, why cant you just buy the pros and loosen up the headband a bit?

post #3533 of 37324

Ya, I don't think the DT990 600 bass is overwhelming.  It's tight and doesn't intrude over the other frequencies.  That was one of the things that worried me before I tried it.  The treble is an issue though for me.

post #3534 of 37324
Thread Starter 
Yes, I thought the K701 was great with the E5's bass boost, as well as with the E7's EQ2 and EQ3. I'm sure that's quite a bit more bass than the stock Q701 though. Those two amps however didn't give them enough juice to drive them properly. I bet the E17 with the pre-amp option for bass boosting out to the E9 would do wonders to the K701/2. But then, it wouldn't sound like the K701/2, lol. Those levels of bass boosting completely alters the sound to something else entirely.

Wish I had the Lyr at the time I owned the K701, but I had sold them prior to getting the Lyr.
Edited by Mad Lust Envy - 1/26/12 at 12:59pm
post #3535 of 37324

I got my PC 360s and my mixamp and I'm enjoying them so far. Trying to adjust to the signature for once in my life quality. I have one pun with this setup. For some reason, the clarity on voicechat is not that good. In fact, it's difficult to hear/understand people at times. Any clue to why that is?

post #3536 of 37324

Do you think they would sound as good with an E11 and software EQ?

post #3537 of 37324
Thread Starter 
The AKGs need quite a bit of power to sing. I'm sure they'd sound good off the E11 and it's bass boosting, but they deserve better.

As for the PC360's voice chat, it's very clear for me, though for me to hear EVERYONE else, I tone down in game audio so voices aren't trampled by the game audio. Like CoD, I drastically turn down in game music, and I set my mixamp to power voice chat a bit more than game audio.
post #3538 of 37324

thanks for the review!

post #3539 of 37324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Lust Envy View Post

The AKGs need quite a bit of power to sing. I'm sure they'd sound good off the E11 and it's bass boosting, but they deserve better.
As for the PC360's voice chat, it's very clear for me, though for me to hear EVERYONE else, I tone down in game audio so voices aren't trampled by the game audio. Like CoD, I drastically turn down in game music, and I set my mixamp to power voice chat a bit more than game audio.


Ok, I'll attempt that and see how it works.

post #3540 of 37324
Thread Starter 
The problem with voice mixing is that if you set game and voice audio to 50/50, they struggle to get your attention at the same time. For the purpose of chatting, it's just logical to tone down game audio so you can hear your friends. Like the Mixamp, I set it to like 70% voice/30% game audio.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Video Games Discussion
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Video Games Discussion › Mad Lust Envy's Headphone Gaming Guide: (3/18/2016: MrSpeakers Ether C 1.1 Added)