New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Removed - Page 2

post #16 of 74

Hmm.  If I do ever upgrade my cans then it looks like it'll have to be the W1000X... 

 

my poor wallet.  

post #17 of 74
Thread Starter 

Wow, I'm impressed! Glad to see it getting attention it clearly deserves.

 

http://www.headfonia.com/akgs-new-reference-the-k550/

post #18 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katun View Post

Wow, I'm impressed! Glad to see it getting attention it clearly deserves.

 

http://www.headfonia.com/akgs-new-reference-the-k550/


Now the K701 is "fuzzy and grainy"! What a joke!

 

I don't get all this praise about how it has such a black background and completely grain free. I actually felt the KRK KNS-8400 was much more clear.

K550 had this weird tonality to it at times, similar to how the Sony ZX700 was with some songs. For $300 I expected it to actually be much more clear.

Maybe it clears up after 100 hours of burn-in.

 

At least he described many of the issues I had with it. Mostly recessed vocals and needs more body on the mids (his words, not mine).

 

He should have compared it to the Q701 instead of the K550.

 

Not trying to bash the headphone, but just point out that it's not a headphone for everyone. I imagine most will be split at 50/50 on if they'd love this. Guess it's the same with the KRKs I love.

 

BTW I always wondered what the W1000X is like. It's graphs look a bit ugly. If I hate it, very unlikely it can be returned, so it's a huge risk.


Edited by tdockweiler - 5/29/12 at 9:10pm
post #19 of 74
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tdockweiler View Post


Now the K701 is "fuzzy and grainy"! What a joke!

 

I don't get all this praise about how it has such a black background and completely grain free. I actually felt the KRK KNS-8400 was much more clear.

K550 had this weird tonality to it at times, similar to how the Sony ZX700 was with some songs. For $300 I expected it to actually be much more clear.

Maybe it clears up after 100 hours of burn-in.

 

At least he described many of the issues I had with it. Mostly recessed vocals and needs more body on the mids (his words, not mine).

 

He should have compared it to the Q701 instead of the K550.

 

Not trying to bash the headphone, but just point out that it's not a headphone for everyone. I imagine most will be split at 50/50 on if they'd love this. Guess it's the same with the KRKs I love.

 

BTW I always wondered what the W1000X is like. It's graphs look a bit ugly. If I hate it, very unlikely it can be returned, so it's a huge risk.

 

I wrote this off a K550 that had no burn in whatsoever. So maybe it gets even better with a little time? Regardless, I liked it straight from the box.

 

I think the entire sound could use a bit more body, but it's not quite as thin as the Q701. That's a minor nitpick though. Can't get everything perfect.

 

Surprised to see his comment about the vocals. Side by side with the SRH940 revealed they are very close, with the SRH940 being just a bit better.

 

They've actually got the W1000X for about $520 on Amazon. If you don't like it, you could always return it. Loved to hear your input if you got it though.

post #20 of 74

How do these headphones perform for gaming when considering the bass factor? I don't want bass boom that may draw too much attention to itself (which I know is not the case of the K550), but I do want enough bass. 

 

Thanks.

post #21 of 74

Wow... the ATs taking a beating...

 

I actually found the A900X very comfortable (with the exception of the earpads) but I do have a long face! :-p It's sound though I actually liked A LOT! And I believe I mentioned it in my review, but to me the ATs perform SIMILAR to my SRH940s with regards to mids and treble (not as much clarity/detail extraction/sparkle) but fuller-sounding due to bass presence (which definitely has more quantity than the Shures...)

 

So... what was the problem though? You couldn't get a good seal due to weight, wing styling and angled cups??? And if so, why compare both headphones?

post #22 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katun View Post

Wow, I'm impressed! Glad to see it getting attention it clearly deserves.

 

http://www.headfonia.com/akgs-new-reference-the-k550/

 

I like Mike's reviews but lately he's been taking it "too easy" with them. Maybe it's "new toy syndrome" or something... Or maybe the K550 are actually THAT good. I haven't bitten because of the mixed-feelings out there regarding these.

post #23 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by gelocks View Post

Wow... the ATs taking a beating...

 

I actually found the A900X very comfortable (with the exception of the earpads) but I do have a long face! :-p It's sound though I actually liked A LOT! And I believe I mentioned it in my review, but to me the ATs perform SIMILAR to my SRH940s with regards to mids and treble (not as much clarity/detail extraction/sparkle) but fuller-sounding due to bass presence (which definitely has more quantity than the Shures...)

 

So... what was the problem though? You couldn't get a good seal due to weight, wing styling and angled cups??? And if so, why compare both headphones?

 

Based on memory does the A900X have forward upper mids? I honestly do prefer a headphone with slightly forward upper mids.

A headphone that's good for female vocals is kind of a must. SRH-940 was pretty good in this area.

post #24 of 74

The whole mid spectrum is actually completely forward but it is definitely not as "shouty" as other Audio Technica headphones I've tried (but not owned) and I found it quite pleasing with Male and Female vocals because they feel believable (quite similar to the Shures). I believe that's why I liked them and often describe them as: "just like the Shure's but fuller sounding"... lol

 

I'm pretty sure that if you look for other A900X reviews, you will probably find more people feeling the same way... but as every recommendation, every one hears differently but at least a kind of "general consensus" can be reached regarding these ATs...

post #25 of 74
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by gelocks View Post

Wow... the ATs taking a beating...

 

I actually found the A900X very comfortable (with the exception of the earpads) but I do have a long face! :-p It's sound though I actually liked A LOT! And I believe I mentioned it in my review, but to me the ATs perform SIMILAR to my SRH940s with regards to mids and treble (not as much clarity/detail extraction/sparkle) but fuller-sounding due to bass presence (which definitely has more quantity than the Shures...)

 

So... what was the problem though? You couldn't get a good seal due to weight, wing styling and angled cups??? And if so, why compare both headphones?

 

I think AT's open winged headphones fair a lot better than their closed counterparts. Too much wait is really the demise of the whole wing system.

 

Well, there really was an assortment of problems. Some more severe than others, but it was mostly a combination of things that made them not very ideal.

 

1) While the earpads weren't terrible, they definitely weren't what I'd bill as comfortable. Not very roomy, not very soft, too much surface area.

2) The wings didn't have enough tension so the entire headphones sinks on your head and I had to periodically adjust them back up.

3) The earcups don't hug against the head very well, making fit feel awkward to wear and a decent seal difficult to achieve consistently.

4) Weight distribution is poor. The wings feel very light indeed, though, that makes the rest of the weight default to the earpads. Not good.

 

I think this picture does a perfect job of giving you an idea of the weight and ergonomics issue. (The W1000X weighs the same as the A900X)

 

0020421000_6802.jpg

 

Basically, I compared the two headphones because of three main reasons:

 

1) Both were relatively new on the market, were similar in price, shared similar sound, and were both closed.

2) The A900X has been getting very little attention, so I wanted to provide users with some information about it.

3) I knew the K550 deserved a good review from me, and I figured I might as well kill two birds with one stone.

post #26 of 74

Yeah I see what you mean... Weird though, that at least on my head they didn't 'fit' like that... (I don't think I took pictures with them on though... I think...) But I can get why they wouldn't seal... still even though they were great sounding (to me at least), the DEAL-breaker for me were those darned earpads! Gosh so bad!! I wanted actually to buy the ones from the W1000X you pictured, but, $100... a bit too much for earpads (instead, I'll probably just buy the W1000X in the future! hehehe). Still a lot of people probably don't mind the feel of the earpads.

post #27 of 74

BTW, now I want to try the K550s!!!! LOL

They'd have to wait though... (have on transit: Ultrasone Signature Pro's, Philips Citiscape Downtowns, Fostex T50RPs... #CompulsiveBuyerMode ...)

post #28 of 74
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by gelocks View Post

Yeah I see what you mean... Weird though, that at least on my head they didn't 'fit' like that... (I don't think I took pictures with them on though... I think...) But I can get why they wouldn't seal... still even though they were great sounding (to me at least), the DEAL-breaker for me were those darned earpads! Gosh so bad!! I wanted actually to buy the ones from the W1000X you pictured, but, $100... a bit too much for earpads (instead, I'll probably just buy the W1000X in the future! hehehe). Still a lot of people probably don't mind the feel of the earpads.

 

When I first listened to them, I thought they sounded pretty good too! And they do standalone. But of course, once you start comparing to something you like better, the other one just seems to fall through the cracks.

 

Yeah, $100 is pretty crazy for a set of earpads. But then again, that's flagship parts pricing for you. I'd think one would just save up and buy the W1000X instead. They're about $150 more than the A900X.

 

When doing this comparison, I actually wanted to give them both equal chances in regards to head time. So while I was playing my 360, I wore the K550 for exactly an hour and then the A900X for exactly any hour right after. Next day, I did the same thing, but started with the A900X. While I was definitely able to get through the hour with the A900X, I was pretty relieved to take them off. It's probably the only headphone I can think of in which the initial comfort is actually worse than long term comfort. Then again, it's long term comfort definitely isn't great. I felt the entire surface area of the pads the whole time while wearing them, which was not very comfy. The K550 would make it easy through the hour, sometimes requiring a slight adjustment of the headband. The nights I spend writing this review I would wear the K550 listening to music and usually ended up with them on for around 3 hours plus without even noticing, which is a very good thing considering I'm super picky about comfort. So, while the A900X is definitely wearable, it's just not an ideal thing to wear. Like wearing jeans in the desert or shorts in the snow; absolutely not ideal, but you can endure through if you have to.

post #29 of 74
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by gelocks View Post

BTW, now I want to try the K550s!!!! LOL

They'd have to wait though... (have on transit: Ultrasone Signature Pro's, Philips Citiscape Downtowns, Fostex T50RPs... #CompulsiveBuyerMode ...)

 

So suddenly huh? Haha, gotta laugh at that one. tongue.gif

 

Also, I had the T50RP a bit ago and directly compared them to the K550, A900X, SRH940, and SRH840. They didn't fair to well...

 

Then again, that's stock. I assume you're going to mod?

post #30 of 74

Yep.

Not me personally (probably buy another pair for that... just don't have the time right now and I'm a 'dumass' with projects like that! :-p) So I'm going to be testing them stock, and cringe while doing it (since it seems it's really nasty without any mods!) but then I'll eventually send them when I get more funds and have them modded. Should be fun... :-p

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)