Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › AKG K3003 High End 3 Way System Headphone
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AKG K3003 High End 3 Way System Headphone - Page 58

post #856 of 1696
Quote:
Originally Posted by raylliant View Post

I think the answer is yes. Its a matter of taste. The k3003 has wider soundstage and more sparkle treble. The ie800 is a relatively bass heavy IEM. 

 

I am also thinking of picking up either the k3003 and ie800 down the road, I currently have a W4r and I want some kind of a contrast from it and not just an improvement of it (not sure if i made sense).  Not sure if you've heard the w4r but any suggestions?

post #857 of 1696
Quote:
Originally Posted by RIQUE View Post

Anybody on this thread that was tried out the K3003 vs the Sennheiser IE800? I am about to buy one of them but I can't make up my mind. I guess they are both

fantastic IEM its just a matter or taste...or is it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ecva View Post

I am also thinking of picking up either the k3003 and ie800 down the road, I currently have a W4r and I want some kind of a contrast from it and not just an improvement of it (not sure if i made sense).  Not sure if you've heard the w4r but any suggestions?

 

Read my IE800 review, there's a comparison to the K3003 in the second post:

http://www.head-fi.org/t/642528/review-sennheiser-ie800-appreciation-frustration-and-a-bunch-of-what-ifs

post #858 of 1696
Quote:
Originally Posted by RIQUE View Post

Anybody on this thread that was tried out the K3003 vs the Sennheiser IE800? I am about to buy one of them but I can't make up my mind. I guess they are both

fantastic IEM its just a matter or taste...or is it?


IE800 are over bassy, but if you do not mind overboosted bass, they sound great. K3003 are more balanced

post #859 of 1696
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodvibes View Post

I haven't heard or likely will hear these so no comment on sound but I really don't understand dropping a rating due to isolation. Some folks like more and some less. As long as it's not too difficult to get the device acoustically coupled, isolation is a footnote. Should be mentioned but not criticized. I like more but many like to hear a car horn before they get hit. That said I'm sure it would have enough for me if I thought it best otherwise.


Isolation wasn't half bad on them to be honest. I think it's overblown on that aspect. To be honest I don't think it's the best idea to be too isolated in public areas due to safey.

post #860 of 1696
Quote:
Originally Posted by purrin View Post

 

There are no IEMs which have no flaws. It's just that some flaws may be worse than others, and even then it's very much dependent upon personal tastes. For example, James444 has stated that he prefers the dynamic bass driver implementation and that he does not note any substantial coherence issues. That's fine. I totally understand where he is coming from because I also feel that dynamic drivers produce more finely textured bass which sounds more "real" for lack of a better term.

 

To me, the downsides of combining rather different sounding dynamic and BA drivers for the bass and mid/treble respectively was too much of a trade-off for better bass quality. From personal sensitivity and ear-training from over 25 years of DIY speaker building, I have come to strongly value driver coherence - that a transducer system act as one. I would very much prefer maintaining very good blending between the drivers rather than trade that for gains elsewhere. It's a balancing act where compromises must be made.

 

I would refer back to the assertion I made about the K3003 driver integration being similar to the Martin Logan speakers (electrostatic panels mated to poor quality bass drivers). Some folks absolutely love the ML's and don't hear the integration issues. Many others hate them (at the THE SHOW in 2012, I saw the ML reps taking the subwoofers offline from their TOTL panels after a few listeners complained.) In the end, it's my opinion according to my sensitivities that the K3003's driver blending is one of the worst I've ever heard from a commercial transducer - reminding my very much of the ML Aerius speaker circa 1994. We all know many of you disagree, and that's fine.

 

Secondly, I can't quite fathom why AKG couldn't dial-in a smoother (that is non-peaky) response in the upper mids / lower treble. Even some advocates of the K3003 have acknowledged this irregularity. I think one even stated that he applied EQ, and another stated that while it was there, it was well tolerable. Again, this is where personal sensitivities and preferences may differ. I found the treble peak an enhancement with recordings of acoustic / natural instruments (orchestral works, chamber music); yet found it beyond my tolerance levels for modern adult contemporary or popular records. While I don't necessarily have an issue with purposely tuned elevated treble, I find treble peaks, i.e. non-smooth response, very objectionable and quite unfathomable for any transducer, TOTL or not.

 

So hopefully, this explains why I find the K3003 highly flawed. It happens to hit on two pet peeves of mine (driver coherency and response smoothness). I can't say how its weaknesses are going to affect others, if others will even perceive them as such. It's there for me, but it may not be for others. Heck, maybe we can all take a vote on it.

 

 

P.S. I'll name a few IEMs which I do not consider to have serious flaws with driver coherency and response smoothness (although they all have other flaws):

 

  1. Spiral Ear SE-5 Way
  2. ER-4S
  3. Shure E2C
  4. UERM
  5. DBA-02

 

 

Excellent post, purrin.

 

I only wish you had also tried the "reference" filter (the one most seem to prefer, the one AKG themselves regard as, er, "reference") — IIRC, you only tried the "treble boost" filter. Also wish you had not tried so hard, as you noted a while ago, to shove them in (read: attempted a very deep insertion). Perhaps a bit of tip rolling might have also yieded different results, something very common with universal IEMs. Like I said a few days ago, that's not to say you would necessarily come to different conclusions—you might even find the "reference" filter worse-sounding, even—but there's a (good) chance you might have viewed them differently, or at best not as flawed.


Edited by music_4321 - 4/12/13 at 1:41am
post #861 of 1696
he didn't use the reference filter? *shakes head*
post #862 of 1696

I don't think the treble filter was as bad as it is made out to be. I actually felt the sound was more cohesive with it over the reference filter. It could get a tad hot on some tracks but that was more so source dependent than anything else. Definitely more airier I felt. The bass filter was just awful and I don't know how in the hell AKG found it acceptable....

post #863 of 1696
Quote:
Originally Posted by lee730 View Post

I don't think the treble filter was as bad as it is made out to be. I actually felt the sound was more cohesive with it over the reference filter. It could get a tad hot on some tracks but that was more so source dependent than anything else. Definitely more airier I felt. The bass filter was just awful and I don't know how in the hell AKG found it acceptable....

 

The "treble boost" filter has not been been generally considered to be bad and, in fact, several people seem to have preferred it over the "reference" filter. But, by far most people have expressed they find the "reference" filter to be the best / most correct sounding of the three. Practically everyone (with one or two [possibly 3] exceptions that I'm aware of) has found the "bass" filter to be pretty inadequate.

I personally found that the "treble" filter worked very well with some (not all) classical orchestral works and even some very decently non-classical recorded/mastered music, but I still found the "reference" filter to be clearly the best choice for most of the music I listen to, and I listen to pretty varied music.

If I remember correctly, you, lee730, in fact, had expressed a couple of times that you had found the "reference" filter to be the better one of the three — or perhaps my memory, which tends to be pretty good, fails me this time.

post #864 of 1696
Quote:
Originally Posted by music_4321 View Post

 

The "treble boost" filter has not been been generally considered to be bad and, in fact, several people seem to have preferred it over the "reference" filter. But, by far most people have expressed they find the "reference" filter to be the best / most correct sounding of the three. Practically everyone (with one or two [possibly 3] exceptions that I'm aware of) has found the "bass" filter to be pretty inadequate.

I personally found that the "treble" filter worked very well with some (not all) classical orchestral works and even some very decently non-classical recorded/mastered music, but I still found the "reference" filter to be clearly the best choice for most of the music I listen to, and I listen to pretty varied music.

If I remember correctly, you, lee730, in fact, had expressed a couple of times that you had found the "reference" filter to be the better one of the three — or perhaps my memory, which tends to be pretty good, fails me this time.


In terms of technicality I did prefer the treble filter but when averaging how well the reference filter does across the board with more music genres I think it wins. So it really depends. For specific genres of music the treble filter was amazing. At least from what I gathered regarding other peoples comments the treble filters wasn't preferred due to sibilance/harshness in the treble. I just didn't find that to be a huge problem on the AKG3003. Nothing that would make me hate it for that matter.


Edited by lee730 - 4/12/13 at 6:10am
post #865 of 1696
Quote:
Originally Posted by lee730 View Post


In terms of technicality I did prefer the treble filter but when averaging how well the reference filter does across the board with more music genres I think it wins. So it really depends. For specific genres of music the treble filter was amazing. At least from what I gathered regarding other peoples comments the treble filters wasn't preferred due to sibilance/harshness in the treble. I just didn't find that to be a huge problem on the AKG3003. Nothing that would make me hate it for that matter.

 

Ah, so that's what it was. I don't remember you ever stating such differences between both filters when you auditioned the K3003s 9/10 months ago—or subsequently—, but good to know now.

post #866 of 1696
Quote:
Originally Posted by up late View Post

he didn't use the reference filter? *shakes head*
Didn't you admit you have never heard the k3003?
post #867 of 1696
Quote:
Originally Posted by purrin View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by k3oxkjo View Post

What would be more OK is if you told us what IEM's are NOT flawed...

 

There are no IEMs which have no flaws. It's just that some flaws may be worse than others, and even then it's very much dependent upon personal tastes. For example, James444 has stated that he prefers the dynamic bass driver implementation and that he does not note any substantial coherence issues. That's fine. I totally understand where he is coming from because I also feel that dynamic drivers produce more finely textured bass which sounds more "real" for lack of a better term.

 

To me, the downsides of combining rather different sounding dynamic and BA drivers for the bass and mid/treble respectively was too much of a trade-off for better bass quality. From personal sensitivity and ear-training from over 25 years of DIY speaker building, I have come to strongly value driver coherence - that a transducer system act as one. I would very much prefer maintaining very good blending between the drivers rather than trade that for gains elsewhere. It's a balancing act where compromises must be made.

 

I would refer back to the assertion I made about the K3003 driver integration being similar to the Martin Logan speakers (electrostatic panels mated to poor quality bass drivers). Some folks absolutely love the ML's and don't hear the integration issues. Many others hate them (at the THE SHOW in 2012, I saw the ML reps taking the subwoofers offline from their TOTL panels after a few listeners complained.) In the end, it's my opinion according to my sensitivities that the K3003's driver blending is one of the worst I've ever heard from a commercial transducer - reminding my very much of the ML Aerius speaker circa 1994. We all know many of you disagree, and that's fine.

 

Secondly, I can't quite fathom why AKG couldn't dial-in a smoother (that is non-peaky) response in the upper mids / lower treble. Even some advocates of the K3003 have acknowledged this irregularity. I think one even stated that he applied EQ, and another stated that while it was there, it was well tolerable. Again, this is where personal sensitivities and preferences may differ. I found the treble peak an enhancement with recordings of acoustic / natural instruments (orchestral works, chamber music); yet found it beyond my tolerance levels for modern adult contemporary or popular records. While I don't necessarily have an issue with purposely tuned elevated treble, I find treble peaks, i.e. non-smooth response, very objectionable and quite unfathomable for any transducer, TOTL or not.

 

So hopefully, this explains why I find the K3003 highly flawed. It happens to hit on two pet peeves of mine (driver coherency and response smoothness). I can't say how its weaknesses are going to affect others, if others will even perceive them as such. It's there for me, but it may not be for others. Heck, maybe we can all take a vote on it.

 

 

P.S. I'll name a few IEMs which I do not consider to have serious flaws with driver coherency and response smoothness (although they all have other flaws):

 

  1. Spiral Ear SE-5 Way
  2. ER-4S
  3. Shure E2C
  4. UERM
  5. DBA-02

Now, that was really something completely different from that rubbish (pardon my French!) you wrote in the review section! I’m sort of happy you didn’t publish something like that in the review section as I’m sure it would have founded a much more credible deterrent! I agree with music_4321: “excellent post”! Personal, interesting, and more than well-articulated!

 

Having been subjected to “speakers from hell” (“Martin Logan speakers”, “ML Aerius speaker”) and “over 25 years of DIY speaker building” I can see where your “allergy” for hybrids and incoherency is coming from. Let me give you an analogy; when I was quite young I had too much whiskey to drink. I became really sick, but I’ll spare you the details. For years (or was it a decade or two, can’t quite remember…) after this incident even the slightest whiff of whiskey made me feel sick. I had developed what I would call “a whiskey allergy”. I think this might be your case; that you’ve developed an “incoherency allergy”. As soon as you hear incoherency your mind becomes negatively hyper sensitive to it, whereas the rest of us can simply enjoy its effects just as those who haven’t had too much whiskey to drink can enjoy its effects. The fact that none of the IEMs you mention are hybrids (all BA based, except the dynamic Shure E2C), strengthens me in my theory. I wouldn’t be surprised if the very word “hybrid” makes you shiver, no?

 

I don’t know, but music_4321 indicates that you only tested them with the “High boost” filters (the AKG official name) and “attempted a very deep insertion”? If that is correct my immediate emotional response is: “Uh-oh! eek.gif” I’ve tried this myself, and despite being an ardent fan of the K3003 I can’t exactly say I found it ideal. As you seem to be both serious and knowledgeable about sound, like music_4321 I would be curious to see how the “Reference filters” and possibly “a bit of tip rolling” would affect your assessment. Guess it won’t happen?

 

Again, thank you for explaining and motivating why you find the K3003 “highly flawed”. Posts (and reviews) like that is a very good example of what HF IMHO should always be about! Please DO NOT edit your review by linking to it! wink_face.gif

post #868 of 1696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aero Dynamik View Post

Now, that was really something completely different from that rubbish (pardon my French!) you wrote in the review section! I’m sort of happy you didn’t publish something like that in the review section as I’m sure it would have founded a much more credible deterrent! I agree with music_4321: “excellent post”! Personal, interesting, and more than well-articulated!

 

Having been subjected to “speakers from hell” (“Martin Logan speakers”, “ML Aerius speaker”) and “over 25 years of DIY speaker building” I can see where your “allergy” for hybrids and incoherency is coming from. Let me give you an analogy; when I was quite young I had too much whiskey to drink. I became really sick, but I’ll spare you the details. For years (or was it a decade or two, can’t quite remember…) after this incident even the slightest whiff of whiskey made me feel sick. I had developed what I would call “a whiskey allergy”. I think this might be your case; that you’ve developed an “incoherency allergy”. As soon as you hear incoherency your mind becomes negatively hyper sensitive to it, whereas the rest of us can simply enjoy its effects just as those who haven’t had too much whiskey to drink can enjoy its effects. The fact that none of the IEMs you mention are hybrids (all BA based, except the dynamic Shure E2C), strengthens me in my theory. I wouldn’t be surprised if the very word “hybrid” makes you shiver, no?

 

I don’t know, but music_4321 indicates that you only tested them with the “High boost” filters (the AKG official name) and “attempted a very deep insertion”? If that is correct my immediate emotional response is: “Uh-oh! eek.gif” I’ve tried this myself, and despite being an ardent fan of the K3003 I can’t exactly say I found it ideal. As you seem to be both serious and knowledgeable about sound, like music_4321 I would be curious to see how the “Reference filters” and possibly “a bit of tip rolling” would affect your assessment. Guess it won’t happen?

 

Again, thank you for explaining and motivating why you find the K3003 “highly flawed”. Posts (and reviews) like that is a very good example of what HF IMHO should always be about! Please DO NOT edit your review by linking to it! wink_face.gif

Oh C'mon, please link it, Its real fun reading it. Too much seriousness in life makes me headache even without a whiskey wink_face.gif


Edited by Audiowood - 4/12/13 at 2:56pm
post #869 of 1696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audiowood View Post

Oh C'mon, please link it, Its real fun reading it. Too much seriousness in life makes me headache even without a whiskey wink_face.gif
or whiskey can get rid of headache. biggrin.gif
Hey what do you expect? this is an Internet forum!
post #870 of 1696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kunlun View Post

Didn't you admit you have never heard the k3003?
that's right. trying to find a place that has a demo pair. i'd be starting out with the reference filter but that's just me. wink.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › AKG K3003 High End 3 Way System Headphone