[Smugsie]

This is the same question I'll ask, and it's a question I asked when I got an ATH-A900X.

Are there any headphones more detailed than the Q701's? Like a headphone a significant enough difference to justify its' price?
Not more bass, not more treble, just plain detail.
My speculation is that detail goes as far as the quality of a recording and bitrate, because the Q701's and ODAC/O2 is the highest end setup I own.

 

[Soundsgoodtome]

  This is the same question I'll ask, and it's a question I asked when I got an ATH-A900X.

Are there any headphones more detailed than the Q701's? Like a headphone a significant enough difference to justify its' price?
Not more bass, not more treble, just plain detail.
My speculation is that detail goes as far as the quality of a recording and bitrate, because the Q701's and ODAC/O2 is the highest end setup I own.

The HE4 has micro-details that can not be heard on the Q701. The level of clarity is also a step up from the Q701s. Believe it or not, the Qs actually has a very apparent musical tone to it. I wouldn't call it a veil since veil is associated with a dark sound but there's is a layer over the Q701's sound. It is not as apparent after long term use but after last night's extended listen to the HE4 and when first acquiring the Qs, it's definitely noticeable. It's not bad in any way as it does add a nice level of decay and tone but it's not 'accurate.' Then again the accuracy on the HE4 to instruments is spectacular compared to most dynamic drivers, it rivals T1s and HD800 in this sense.

Hopefully that didn't sound out there, still honing in on explaining my ears.

 

[tdockweiler]

  This is the same question I'll ask, and it's a question I asked when I got an ATH-A900X.

Are there any headphones more detailed than the Q701's? Like a headphone a significant enough difference to justify its' price?
Not more bass, not more treble, just plain detail.
My speculation is that detail goes as far as the quality of a recording and bitrate, because the Q701's and ODAC/O2 is the highest end setup I own.

 
I don't find the Q701 to be any sort of detail monster and that's a good thing. It's more detailed than the HD-600/650 and K601/K400 but that's not hard to do.
To me the DT-880, T90, DJ100 and KRK KNS-8400 are more detailed for sure. To me this doesn't mean much though.
 
I found the DT-880 and T90 like putting all my music under a microscope. You could really pick apart all the tracks (and your gear) and there was a major variation between all of them. More so than on the Q701.
Lower bitrate tracks (say like 169kbps or so) and somewhat poorer recordings don't sound all that bad on the Q701. Q701 with a budget setup is still somewhat forgiving. You still need good recordings.
 
I have to say thought that I thought detail of the Q701 wouldn't improve much when upgrading from the ODAC/Modi, but it definitely does. When I switched from my Modi to the Micro DAC it was way easier to weed out the bad tracks.
 
One strange thing I noticed was that on the K712 I heard some tracks sound noticeably clearer. It could be a case of a hand picked/better driver. IMO the K712 isn't worth more it's asking price. Maybe the K712 is a bit more detailed to some with expensive gear and lots of HD tracks.
 
Another old one that had more detail (based on memory) was the MDR-SA3000. Not just due to less bass. I think that headphone is too hard to find now.
 
To me the Q701 is like a more musical studio monitor. With the DT-880 it was a little hard to just enjoy my music. That thing didn't seem to have any warmth of it's own and was too cold/analytical.

 

[Smugsie]

   
I don't find the Q701 to be any sort of detail monster and that's a good thing. It's more detailed than the HD-600/650 and K601/K400 but that's not hard to do.
  I have to say thought that I thought detail of the Q701 wouldn't improve much when upgrading from the ODAC/Modi, but it definitely does. When I switched from my Modi to the Micro DAC it was way easier to weed out the bad tracks.
 
 
To me the Q701 is like a more musical studio monitor. With the DT-880 it was a little hard to just enjoy my music. That thing didn't seem to have any warmth of it's own and was too cold/analytical.

 

  Believe it or not, the Qs actually has a very apparent musical tone to it. I wouldn't call it a veil since veil is associated with a dark sound but there's is a layer over the Q701's sound.
 

Alright, so I quoted your posts and what I've read from you two, I left in there of what I found as my highlights.
I'd like to thank you both for saving my wallet. Just a bit.
Plus, I don't think I can give up the gigantic soundstage on the Q701's

For me, a significant upgrade would be like when I went from the E07K + E12 to an ODAC + O2 with the Q701's. Looks like I'm stuck in midfi for now ;D

By the way @tdockweiler, would you like to add this to the first post?
I'm working with the software so that I can get an accurate measurement from the Q701's.
 

 

[Solrighal]

The Q is the most detailed headphone I've heard so far. It's edgy though to my ears.

 

[Soundsgoodtome]

  Plus, I don't think I can give up the gigantic soundstage on the Q701's

For me, a significant upgrade would be like when I went from the E07K + E12 to an ODAC + O2 with the Q701's. Looks like I'm stuck in midfi for now ;D

 

Diminishing returns become huge when making the jump from mid to hi-fi. I would suggest that if you want to experience a significant step for not much more, go orthodynamic. Keep an eye out for the HE400i as it's easily driven and suppose to have the sound of the HE500. They should be out in a month or so.

FWIW, the Q701 at their current price are amazing phones for the money.

 

[Za Warudo]

The Q is the most detailed headphone I've heard so far. It's edgy though to my ears.

It might be due to your amp.  I don't know about the E18, but my X3 doesn't really pair that well with it.  It sounds fine with my DACport.  I just got a Yulong D100, I'm not sure about how well it pairs yet, but first impressions are pretty good.

 

[Solrighal]

I'm waiting for a delivery on Monday - an ODAC XL and an O2. I have high hopes.

 

[Smugsie]

I'm waiting for a delivery on Monday - an ODAC XL and an O2. I have high hopes.

Keep those hopes high! The edgyness will balance out once the ODAC pushes the Q701's warmth forward!

 

[Solrighal]

It might be due to your amp.  I don't know about the E18, but my X3 doesn't really pair that well with it.  It sounds fine with my DACport.  I just got a Yulong D100, I'm not sure about how well it pairs yet, but first impressions are pretty good.

Keep those hopes high! The edgyness will balance out once the ODAC pushes the Q701's warmth forward!

See, that's what I don't get. I've heard others saying the Q's are warm but I don't hear that at all. Can the ODAC do that?

 

[Smugsie]

See, that's what I don't get. I've heard others saying the Q's are warm but I don't hear that at all. Can the ODAC do that?

Imagine the K701's as an underamped Q701.

 

[Solrighal]

I'm not sure I get your point.

I'll tell what I am finding with these cans - at the right place, right time with the right music they can sound stunning. I can listen to my V-Moda's anywhere and get a kick out of them but the Q's are different. I guess because they're open-backed I really need a quiet environment to fully enjoy them. I'm also not tempted to crank the volume either. I'm listening to Walkie-Talkie by Air right now and I think this is the best I've ever heard it. I can follow everything and hear things I've never heard before but I'm in bed, chilled out. Makes all the difference. If these get better still with the ODAC & O2 I might just not go any further with this hobby.

These Q's I would say definitely benefit from burn-in. They've got a more rounded sound now. Maybe.

 

[tdockweiler]

 

I've had a few wonky measurements here and there, but they all had a consistent graph like this. I did 10 measurements before outputting them here on headfi, and this type of graph appeared 5/10 times.

We've all had the same conclusion, more bass, less mids, less soundstage. We just needed the measurements of exactly how much
I'm glad that no one brought up treble though.. because there wasn't any improvement from that end anyway.

 
I haven't seen anyone post that they heard less mids. I think Chicolom did, but that was with a K712 I think.
Any difference in the low mids is not audible to me. Sounds mostly the same in that area.
Mids are what's most important to me, so if I had my mids go south then that's not cool with me.
It's always possible, but I just can't hear it. Wouldn't less mids make the Q701 even MORE neutral?

When I listen to my modded Q701 it sounds pretty neutral overall.
 
Perhaps I could hear a difference if I sat and A/B'd two pairs for hours. That would actually be interesting.
 
I have also not noticed any less soundstage width, but more depth.
 
I wonder what changes in frequencies causes the brain to hear more soundstage depth? I don't know this, but maybe someone who runs a recording studio would know!
Obviously it's only when it's IN the recording, like where the singer is on a stage and spaced back a lot.
 
For my own amusement I should switch back to the stock version for several weeks and see if I can stand it. I'll probably miss the modded version too much.
 
Someone needs to bribe Tyll and see if he can do some measurements of both versions.
 
I'd love to see how the measurements of the modded Q701 compared to the K712.
 
I also wonder if K712 pads on the Q701 give a measurable difference.

 

[Chris J]

This is the same question I'll ask, and it's a question I asked when I got an ATH-A900X.


Are there any headphones more detailed than the Q701's? Like a headphone a significant enough difference to justify its' price?

Not more bass, not more treble, just plain detail.
My speculation is that detail goes as far as the quality of a recording and bitrate, because the Q701's and ODAC/O2 is the highest end setup I own.

More detail?
Electrostatic Headphones.

 

[tdockweiler]

BTW I linked those bass port mod measurements on the first post.
I haven't been visiting that much lately.
 
I also have often found the Q701 at times lacking warmth with really specific setups.
 
When using the docked Ipod Touch 2G to O2 it seems to be the thinnest/brightest it's ever been. I really don't like this combo at all.
I think the problem is that the Ipod Touch 2G has some harshness in there somewhere. Both of those together make the Q701 sounds much thinner and tinny sounding.
 
I'm not a huge fan of the O2 with the Q701. It's OK, but I prefer the technically worse Fiio E9 (just for the Q701). When I use the O2 with the Q701 I have to use a source that has extra warmth.
In my bedroom I currently am using a docked monochrome Ipod Classic 3G that uses Firewire! Sounds pretty good and has a Wolfson DAC. Somehow the bass of the Q701 seems a bit "off" with the O2.
 
The Vali sounded great with the Q701, but not with much else. The Vali and my Micro Amp + Astrodyne PS sounds pretty similar with the Q701.
 
FYI the iFI iCAN, Micro Amp and Vali also are pretty close in sound with the Q701. The iFI iCAN was the warmest but had the smallest soundstage. The Micro is like a much smoother O2 and sounds perhaps a tiny bit warmer than the O2. It's not a warm sounding amp though at all. I would say it's just not cold/analytical. Perhaps like an O2 tuned by ear with dozens of headphones.
 
Lately i've been trying the Q701 with a Bravo V2 ($60 hybrid tube amp) and really don't like it. It's kind of harsh with any source. It has tons of volume but seems to just not sound great with the Q701. It does however sound amazing with my HD-650. My guess is that the Bravo V2 is just not a good match for the Q701.
 
Sometimes I wish I had two Micro Amps because the Q701 always sounds amazing with that.
 
I swear that someday i'll do a head to head deathmatch of the Micro vs the Matrix M-Stage. I only picked the Micro due to being US built. Been loving it with the AKG headphones since I got it probably 3 years ago.