Originally Posted by a_recording
Thanks for the comments kman. Even though I was never a fan of the K701, this makes me intrigued enough to check out the K612 / K712. I gotta ask though, can you give us some more specific comparisons between the MA900 and K612?
Well with more specific comparison between the MA900 and K612. I'll do a short review I guess.
I guess I'll start with the bass.
MA900: The bass on the seems to focus more on the midbass and seems to be of a slightly punchier nature, it's quite nice a lot of the time. The upper bass and lower bass doesn't seem to be quite aligned with the mid-bass, thus the MA900 is a bit mid-bass heavy and it also has a bit of a lower bass rolloff.
K612: The K612 has a linear bass, the lower and upper bass are pretty much equal to the midbass, it has a solid and robust sound to it and is more textured and refined than the MA900s bass. It extends further into the lower bass than the MA900, but like most open-headphones there is still a bit of roll-off.
Next the midrange.
MA900: The midrange in this headphone is what I consider forward, a bit n-shaped. Also because of the wide soundstage, it seems to lack some intimacy, vocals don't have quite enough presence as they should. So I find this headphone both forward yet somewhat lacking in intimacy at the same time in term of midrange. I find the midrange to have a good amount of detail and is fairly textured, there is some grain in the midrange. The upper midrange seems a bit elevated and can come across as a tad glary in certain instances, it's not as glary up top as say the Q701 though.
K612: This is where this headphone truly shines, it's an extremely linear and flat midrange, this one of the cleanest and flattest midranges I have heard. It has a good amount of depth, texture, and detail to the midrange. The vocals have a sense of realism and presence I rarely hear in a pair of headphones. It's clear and transparent. To me it seems neither forward or recessed in the midrange, it could be very slightly forward, but that's it.
Now to the treble:
MA900: Smooth and non-fatiguing with a slight roll-off, there seems to be some slight grain in the lower treble in this headphone, but other than that the treble is really nice.
K612: Also smooth and non-fatiguing, there is more clarity and extension in the treble, it's a more revealing and detailed treble but it's not harsh and I don't find it grainy.
Finally soundstage and imaging:
MA900: The soundstage is where this headphone truly shines, it's large, wide, and big sounding. A very speaker like presentation here, can be a tad too wide at times. The imaging is also great with good positioning and accuracy. This is a soundstage lovers headphone.
K612: This headphone has a nice large round soundstage, it could be argued it's a bit more accurate than the MA900. In terms of imaging this headphone is a little more precise and accurate than the MA900, but it's not a big difference.
MA900: This headphone overall is fairly neutral, a bit warm sounding with a forward midrange, non-fatiguing treble, and slight emphasis on the midbass. But where this headphone shines is in the soundstage, soundstage lovers will love this headphone.
K612: I find the K612 a linear, neutral, and organic sounding headphone. I would say it's a bit on the warm side. I find it the more detailed and faster headphone of the two. Very well rounded, has no obvious bumps or recesses to the sound. If you are looking for a neutral and linear headphone, this is one of the most linear and neutral headphones out there.
Note: I find both very comfortable, the MA900 has the slight edge due to less weight.
Edited by kman1211 - 11/1/13 at 2:45pm