Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › NEW! AKG K812
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

NEW! AKG K812 - Page 56  

post #826 of 985

^Ultrasone signature pro? Dunno..

post #827 of 985
Quote:
Originally Posted by emertxe View Post
 

 

Yeah, I would also draw it differently but it very roughly shows what to be aware of... Still, I would rather trust Headroom, innerfidelity or changstar for graphs comparison.

They all have their ups and downs so far as comparison is concerned. I believe that all of the sites have changed their methods throughout the years possibly making old measurements not comparable to the ones done recently.

 

Back to the k701/k702 look at the changstar graph... Still has a 2khz peak so that is definitely something in common with the goldenears graph. The headroom graph for these cans are further from accurate to my ears.

post #828 of 985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acix View Post
 

 

I dont see your point, both graphs are a good confirmation of what I was hearing when I compare the two hps.   

Yes they may show the relative differences between the two but if you are already used to the 2khz peak then other cans become lacking in that area. To fresh ears (people that have never heard the k701/702s before, I always get people complaining about the shoutiness/honkiness in the upper mids which agrees with what I hear also which is why I find the changstar and goldenears graphs to be closer to how i hear them vs the headroom graph.

post #829 of 985
Quote:
Originally Posted by donunus View Post
 

They all have their ups and downs so far as comparison is concerned. I believe that all of the sites have changed their methods throughout the years possibly making old measurements not comparable to the ones done recently.

 

Back to the k701/k702 look at the changstar graph... Still has a 2khz peak so that is definitely something in common with the goldenears graph. The headroom graph for these cans are further from accurate to my ears. 

 

I think you over-complicate things a bit... Just take well-known headphones and compare graphs from one source. I have heard many headphones before even checking their FR graph and still, I have no problem using graphs to get a very good idea.

 

Only one specific headphone so far I was very surprised about (expecting something different from graphs) - HD650.

post #830 of 985

I am not really over complicating things. What would be the use of comparing two measurements from one site when one of the measurements was done with a different microphone and different method for example.

 

Also about the hd650, reason why you are surprised is because they don't all sound the same.

post #831 of 985
Quote:
Originally Posted by donunus View Post
 

Yes they may show the relative differences between the two but if you are already used to the 2khz peak then other cans become lacking in that area. To fresh ears (people that have never heard the k701/702s before, I always get people complaining about the shoutiness/honkiness in the upper mids which agrees with what I hear also which is why I find the changstar and goldenears graphs to be closer to how i hear them vs the headroom graph.

 

The experience can be opposite to yours for the vocal music lovers. For me the K702 are a tool, and a very useful one.  

post #832 of 985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acix View Post
 

 

The experience can be opposite to yours for the vocal music lovers. For me the K702 are a tool, and a very useful one.

Being a female vocal music fan, my impressions of the Q701 was more forward vocals than the HD800. The Q701 does something special in the vocal frequency range in a good way. Another vocal specialist to me is the HD600.

post #833 of 985
Quote:
Originally Posted by niranhopper View Post
 

Being a female vocal music fan, my impressions of the Q701 was more forward vocals than the HD800. The Q701 does something special in the vocal frequency range in a good way. Another vocal specialist to me is the HD600.

 

I'm with you here, the Q701 shines better than any mid-fi cans I've ever heard on female vocal acoustical songs, though I dare not compare it to the HD800 since I've never heard one. I've never heard the HD600, but the HD650 sounds a bit too dark for me. It's not bad by all means, but probably not my cup of tea. Sounds exceptionally extraordinary with rock songs though, just not so much for acoustical in my opinion.

post #834 of 985
Quote:
Originally Posted by 62ohm View Post
 

 

I'm with you here, the Q701 shines better than any mid-fi cans I've ever heard on female vocal acoustical songs, though I dare not compare it to the HD800 since I've never heard one. I've never heard the HD600, but the HD650 sounds a bit too dark for me. It's not bad by all means, but probably not my cup of tea. Sounds exceptionally extraordinary with rock songs though, just not so much for acoustical in my opinion.

... I fnd my modded w1000x to be super epic with female voices as well! 

post #835 of 985
And my stock Koss KSC75, driven by Cary CAD 300B , simply kills every headphones out there. Dont you believe it? Well, try first.
post #836 of 985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackmore View Post

And my stock Koss KSC75, driven by Cary CAD 300B , simply kills every headphones out there. Dont you believe it? Well, try first.

post #837 of 985
1. Sibilance is a headphone non dampened flaw, not just your source.
2.I haven't heard the Auditor so I don't know but some reviewers here have reported that the Auditor is an Phonitor without the meters and crossfeed, if true I disagree that this is a crap combination.
3. Comparing the AKG K701/702 to the HD800 is just a plain joke, the 701's are brighter than the HD800. Yes the HD800 does have a peaky treble but you cut this down by doing the Anaxmod and powering it with proper amplification. Throwing tube amplification at the HD800 doesn't fix the problem.
4. The HD800's are studio headphones I know of worldwide famous DJ's and some musicians/engineers that use it for monitoring. Tyll can't recommend the HD800's enough for monitoring purposes only.
5. The HD800 isn't some headphone you can plug into a pos amp or ipod and expect it to sound good.
Edited by DefQon - 10/28/13 at 3:08pm
post #838 of 985
Quote:
Originally Posted by DefQon View Post

1. Sibilance is a headphone non dampened flaw, not just your source.
2.I haven't heard the Auditor so I don't know but some reviewers here have reported that the Auditor is an Phonitor without the meters and crossfeed, if true I disagree that this is a crap combination.
3. Comparing the AKG K701/702 to the HD800 is just a plain joke, the 701's are brighter than the HD800. Yes the HD800 does have a peaky treble but you cut this down by doing the Anaxmod and powering it with proper amplification. Throwing tube amplification at the HD800 doesn't fix the problem.
4. The HD800's are studio headphones I know of worldwide famous DJ's and some musicians/engineers that use it for monitoring. Tyll can't recommend the HD800's enough for monitoring purposes only.
5. The HD800 isn't some headphone you can plug into a pos amp or ipod and expect it to sound.

 

+1

 

Acix, awaiting your epic response...

post #839 of 985
So the the auditor is not a phonitor without crossfeed,(i am laughing)you can ASK André inderfurth from SPL!regrads and you can ASK him the next question when is the realase of the New ...... Headphone amp:p from spl!regards nomax:p
post #840 of 985
Is everybody knowing DR.BURCKHARD SCHWÄBE?(he was the engenier of the ORPHEUS AMP)you WANT the best amp FOR HD 800?he has the best in his Product Pipeline!you WANT a Transistor amp?take the phonitor!regards
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › NEW! AKG K812