or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Q701 impressions thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Q701 impressions thread - Page 224

post #3346 of 9490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris J View Post


Please don't take offence, but this may explain why I'm not a big fan of the HE500 and the HEs.

 

It's all preference. I'm not a basshead but I find the 701 a bit too thin. I don't mind the HD800 because while it is similar, it is better extended and less harsh than the 701s. Headphones are very subjective, no matter how objectively you try to approach it.

post #3347 of 9490
Quote:
Originally Posted by djcarpentier View Post

I thought the he-500 was supposed to have more bass than the q701. That graph seems to agree with that. The strong point of planars was supposed to be frequency extension.

Regardless, I've never really felt that the q701 is bass light, there is just a lack of bass bloat anywhere on it. Maybe the open soundstage and clarity make it appear that way. Plugged into my Sansui amp, the last thing it is is bass light.

 

I'm not really going to get sucked into an argument about graphs. You can't tell what a headphone sounds like from looking at a graph.

 

Compared to 95% of the headphones out there, Q701 is very light on bass. I think most would agree. It has a very quick sound which is good if you are looking for that kind of signature, but bass extension will never be its strong point.

post #3348 of 9490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris J View Post


Please don't take offence, but this may explain why I'm not a big fan of the HE500 and the HEs.

None taken.  We all have our own preferences.  Simply put, on certain music genres, I still reach for the Q701 daily over my HE500. I am fortunate enough to not be locked in 1 sound signature.  I enjoy the 2 for their strengths equally.


Edited by koiloco - 7/26/13 at 5:04pm
post #3349 of 9490

I think i'm trying to justify the x1 as a poor mans he-500. I do think the he-500 is exactly what I'm looking for, at least sound signature wise, I just can't justify throwing that much money to headphones right now. I'm kind of thinking they'll be a gift to myself come income tax, and that i'll go with the x1 for now. Of course this is just my personal quarrel i have to deal with.

My speakers are 2.1, so some albums come through the speakers because i like the bass to be more pronounced than what the Q's give me. A perfect example is the new Daft Punk album i just picked up. I bought and downloaded it at night, so naturally i had my headphones on the first listen through. The next morning i played it through the speakers, and i just can't go back to the Q's with it.

 

I also bought "Sing to the Moon" by Laura Mvula the same night. This album sounds great through the Q's, enough so that i don't care to listen to it through my speakers.



So i guess i have my complimentary sound already, in my speakers. I just would like a headphone for nights and what not.

(edit: and just for the record, that vevo video doesn't do her voice enough justice)


Edited by 1-MiC - 7/26/13 at 8:33pm
post #3350 of 9490
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1-MiC View Post


A perfect example is the new Daft Punk album i just picked up. I bought and downloaded it at night, so naturally i had my headphones on the first listen through. The next morning i played it through the speakers, and i just can't go back to the Q's with it.

 

 

Strangely I find Random Access Memories one album that doesn't give me the Q701 cringe but sounds a little dull on HD650, I guess I'm just HF oversensitive and that album doesn't have much around 2K or 7K (whichever one it is I find unpleasant).


Edited by jimmers - 7/26/13 at 8:47pm
post #3351 of 9490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stalker81598 View Post

 

I'm not really going to get sucked into an argument about graphs. You can't tell what a headphone sounds like from looking at a graph.

 

Compared to 95% of the headphones out there, Q701 is very light on bass. I think most would agree. It has a very quick sound which is good if you are looking for that kind of signature, but bass extension will never be its strong point.


You've really heard all the headphones out there and 95% of them have more bass than Q701, really? You think "most" would agree - interesting.


Edited by jimmers - 7/26/13 at 9:00pm
post #3352 of 9490
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmers View Post


You've really heard all the headphones out there and 95% of them have more bass than Q701, really? You think "most" would agree - interesting.

 

I apologize if my opinion of the Q701 has offended you in some way. Please feel free to stop reading my posts and go somewhere else at any time.

post #3353 of 9490
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmers View Post


You've really heard all the headphones out there and 95% of them have more bass than Q701, really? You think "most" would agree - interesting.

Okie, 95% might be a little bit harsh.  I think it's 94% actually.

post #3354 of 9490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stalker81598 View Post

 

I apologize if my opinion of the Q701 has offended you in some way. Please feel free to stop reading my posts and go somewhere else at any time.


Your opinion of the Q701 doesn't offend me at all, my feeling for them is one of disappointment.

The only things that irked me were the fallacious statements.

Thank you for your permission to ignore you and leave, but I think I will do as I wish.

post #3355 of 9490
Quote:
Originally Posted by koiloco View Post

Okie, 95% might be a little bit harsh.  I think it's 94% actually.


wink_face.gif

post #3356 of 9490
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmers View Post


Your opinion of the Q701 doesn't offend me at all, my feeling for them is one of disappointment.
The only things that irked me were the fallacious statements.
Thank you for your permission to ignore you and leave, but I think I will do as I wish.

If you can't stand reading each other's posts, just block each other.

The rest of us would just like to enjoy the thread...............please?
post #3357 of 9490
Quote:
Originally Posted by PleasantSounds View Post

If you like the Q701 then listening to HD800 may be a bad idea - they do everything the Qs do, only so much better. That experience has cost me a lot of dough. Mind you: they are much more sensitive to the selection of upstream gear, and generally require different setup than the Qs. On the other hand, investment in the right gear will reward you with even more refined and satisfying sound, if budget is not a concern.

Well, I'd be surprised and disappointed if the HD800 didn't outperform the Q701 gvien the price difference. The fact that a lot of people are actually comparing two headphones where one costs nearly 4-5 times as much as the other is testament to how well the Q701 performs at it's price point. Once you take the required DACs and amps into consideration you can be moving close to 7-8 times the price difference.

This next comment is most certainly not directed at you, PleasantSounds, but I've noticed a tendency for people to start dissing the Q/K70x when comparisons between them and the HD800 are asked for. Those that are doing the dissing are IMO completely missing the point. Is the HD800 better than the Q/K70x? Yes, but does that make the Q/K70x rubbish? No it most certainly does not given it's price point.

Technically speaking I have a "budget that is not a concern", the question is would I get value for money from the HD800 with suitable DAC/amp? Yes would be the answer. Would I get as much value for money from them when compared to my current setup, which is the Q701 and a Fiio E17? Hell no.

If somebody's taste is Classical, Jazz, or Acoustic then I would have no problems at all with recommending a Q701 in conjunction with an E17 as a budget setup which has a sound quality well above that which anybody would have a right to expect for the price. In fact that setup may well be the only setup some people will ever want.
Edited by Slaphead - 7/27/13 at 12:23am
post #3358 of 9490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slaphead View Post


Well, I'd be surprised and disappointed if the HD800 didn't outperform the Q701 gvien the price difference. The fact that a lot of people are actually comparing two headphones where one costs nearly 4-5 times as much as the other is testament to how well the Q701 performs at it's price point. Once you take the required DACs and amps into consideration you can be moving close to 7-8 times the price difference.

This next comment is most certainly not directed at you, PleasantSounds, but I've noticed a tendency for people to start dissing the Q/K70x when comparisons between them and the HD800 are asked for. Those that are doing the dissing are IMO completely missing the point. Is the HD800 better than the Q/K70x? Yes, but does that make the Q/K70x rubbish? No it most certainly does not given it's price point.

Technically speaking I have a "budget that is not a concern", the question is would I get value for money from the HD800 with suitable DAC/amp? Yes would be the answer. Would I get as much value for money as from them when compared to my current setup, which is the Q701 and a Fiio E17? Hell no.

If somebody's taste is Classical, Jazz, or Acoustic then I would have no problems at all with recommending a Q701 in conjunction with an E17 as a budget setup which has a sound quality well above that which anybody would have a right to expect for the price. In fact that setup may well be the only setup some people will ever want.

 

I compare the Q701 to the HD800 not because they are close in performance, but because they have a similar presentation. There's really no contest as far as performance is concerned. IMO of course.

 

I don't think its that people are necessarily "dissing" the Q701. When comparing the two, stating that the HD800 is better in every regard is just stating the truth. Which is expected considering the price difference. I don't dislike the Q701, I simply think the HD800 is better.

 

I agree that the Q701 is very good at its price point. Soundstage is spacious and detail resolution is impressive.

post #3359 of 9490
I have both the Q701 and the HD800. The Sennheiser is certainly better, but on many recordings I still prefer the AKG. I recently purchased the new AKG K712 pro, and I prefer it now over the Q701. The Q is an excellent performer, but the 712 adds a little more bass, while retaining the wide open and detailed sound these cans are known for. The 712 also has a flat leather headband that does away with the head bumps on the previous versions, as well as a redesigned ear pads. All in all I think they sound better than the Q and they are more comfortable to wear. I had a hard time finding these in the US, but thanks to a post here on headfi, I found them online from razor dog for $399.00.
post #3360 of 9490
Quote:
Originally Posted by macbob713 View Post

I have both the Q701 and the HD800. The Sennheiser is certainly better, but on many recordings I still prefer the AKG. I recently purchased the new AKG K712 pro, and I prefer it now over the Q701. The Q is an excellent performer, but the 712 adds a little more bass, while retaining the wide open and detailed sound these cans are known for. The 712 also has a flat leather headband that does away with the head bumps on the previous versions, as well as a redesigned ear pads. All in all I think they sound better than the Q and they are more comfortable to wear. I had a hard time finding these in the US, but thanks to a post here on headfi, I found them online from razor dog for $399.00.

 

Have you heard the Anniversary K702? Still curious it has the same amount of bass as the 712... 

 

Are there any recordings you'd still prefer the Q701 on? What recordings (or maybe, what genres) do you choose the K712 for over the HD800? 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Q701 impressions thread