Originally Posted by YoJinBro
Hey hey hey -- I wasn't blaming anyone!
No problem mate my rant was more towards elwappo99. If you are truly excited about something it seems to be always hyperbole rather than enjoying genuinely good product. Well I guess flaming also increases your post count and awards you new fancy statuses. I stand behind everything I have said and now after burn in I love my annies even more. It's been said also in hifiguys review that the treble or mids are slightly tuned down and the bass is increased. Nothing too major, but also the warm signature might create the feeling that some of the sparkle is gone and the annies sound closer to HD650. For me this means more balance. And they still have definitely more sparkle than the HD650. If you don't like these tuning desicions I won't recommend annies. So like I've been saying many many times, these headphones are for people who are not fully enjoying K/Q series either because of the comfortability issues or the lack of bass. I know that there are always people who prefer one model over the other, but what I've been trying to do is give people some idea how these annies differ from the standard editions. I've been even directly comparing K701 vs annies in local hifi store just for you K701 people to do wise desicions. Here I'll quote myself from my previous posts:
"I also found that the basic sound signature was similar, except that the 65's didn't have so clear and edgy mids/highs and the overall sound was smoother (I would assume the mids and highs of 701's settle after proper burn in, but the 65's have pretty smooth sound straight out of the box). The bass, however, was the part where I found the most striking differences between these two. The bass of 701's was very good, but just not optimal for all the genres I listen. I'm not a basshead but I want my headphones to be versatile enough so I can enjoy all of my music without having to change headphones between listening sessions.
I did, however, notice some differences and felt like I was listening fully open cans with the 701's and semi-open cans with 65's (this is probably due to the memory foam). The 65's felt louder with the same volume levels but I didn't concentrate on this enough to be sure (if the 65 drivers come indeed closer to your ear in then it explains the louder sound). With 65's I got warmer colour to the sound but it wasn't too noticeable. I would even say that the bass line was separated better with the 701's, but the kicks and overall feeling were a bit too cold and distant for my taste. The 65's seemed to have softer roll from low frequencies to midrange which probably helped creating the impression of a smoother sound. I think some people won't like this especially if they feel that the increased smoothness comes with the cost of crispness. With 701's the midrange felt a little bit too bright at times, which is one of the reasons I prefer the sound of 65's. The bright mids and highs gets more justice when there is more action in the bass department IMO.
If you have tried K/Q701/2's and found the sound to be good but somewhat too bright and lacking bass (impact), these are definitely the headphones for you. If you liked the K/Q701/2's but found the head band or the the pads to be disappointing, these are the headphones for you. If you don't mind the bumps and love the sound of your K/Q701/2's, these are probably not worth upgrading."
All this writing and posting photos for what... being constantly accused of hyperbole. At least madlust was man enough to say he's sorry after testing the annies himself. I respect people like blackmore who carefully read these threads and make wise desicions based on that (not to buy in this case). Holy s**t maybe I'm too old for this forum.