[WhiteCrow]

 bring it.

 

 

[tdockweiler]

Quote:

 
Also, the Q701 is the exact same thing  as the K701/K702. They are only different cosmetically. 

Proof? Have you tried them both with your own ears or are you just saying this, just like people say the HD-598 is just a cosmetic upgrade of the HD-555?
 
Sorry, I get tired of people saying things like this. I'm sure it's true, but maybe not after all.
 
 
 

 

[MDR30]

3-4 dB bass difference, as well as 3-4 kHz.
 

 

[qwer9108]

 
 
Quote:

NUH UH. People say they're good so they are good riiiiiiight?

 

 
LOL you guys are hilarious

 

[KuKuBuKu]

Quote:

3-4 dB bass difference, as well as 3-4 kHz.
 

Those are simply inconsistencies within testing.
 
 

 

[KuKuBuKu]

Quote:

Proof? Have you tried them both with your own ears or are you just saying this, just like people say the HD-598 is just a cosmetic upgrade of the HD-555?
 
Sorry, I get tired of people saying things like this. I'm sure it's true, but maybe not after all.
 
 
 

Look at the graph above. Also, the HD598 was supposed to be an upgrade of the 595, not the 555. the 558 was the supposed upgrade to the 555. If you look at the graph, they all sound the same.

There are some slight differences between 2k and 10k, but these are again probably inconsistency with headphone placement, not modifications. 
 
 
It's alright, I know how you feel. Lots of misinformation on Head-fi.

 

[tdockweiler]

Quote:

Those are simply inconsistencies within testing.
 
 

And you know this because...???
Not that I trust Headroom's graphs, but I doubt they would vary that much.
 
I'm waiting for someone here to compare the Q702 to the K702. I personally wouldn't pay the extra money for a "possible" upgrade to the Q702 from the K702. If they really did have a little extra bass, it sure would be nice, but I'm perfectly ok with the K702's bass as it is.
 
 

 

[tdockweiler]

 
Quote:

. If you look at the graph, they all sound the same.

Graphs for me have never really been accurate compared to what my ears hear. Sometimes. For example, the HD-600 looks to have more forward mids than the HD-598 on the headroom graphs, but when you compare them both (I have), it's super easy to realize that the HD-598's mids are MUCH more forward sounding.
 
Then there is the K601 graph (from Google's cache). It seems to have a boosted lower treble and yet again the graphs don't seem to show this.
 
I'm still sickened by this graph:
 

 
In reality it's very bass light and definitely a studio monitor in every way. It's also a very, very bright headphone. The graph makes it out to look like a 750DJ or something. I bet if you asked 10 people, they'd all think it's neutral or kind of bass light. Still one of the best portables there is.
 
Then there is the SA5000. There is  no way it can sound like what the graph shows. One of the ugliest graphs I've seen.
 
BTW have you tried the HD-598? I don't remember. To me and many others on here, it doesn't sound anything like the HD-555 or modded 555. This is coming from someone who owned it for 4 years and always disliked it and felt it was the most boring headphone on earth. The HD-598 is one of the first Sennheiser headphones I actually loved. I think I even prefer it to the HD-600 and 650.
 
 

 

[WhiteCrow]

The 5XX series are ALL different. They are similar but I can grantee that they tooled with the housing or something to change the sound otherwise I'm sure some one would be raising hell all over the interwebs about this.

 

[MDR30]

Quote:

Those are simply inconsistencies within testing.
 
 

Headroom should really be adressed on this one, but the graphs confirm listening reports and my own impressions. A 4 dB difference from 20 to 500 Hz really makes quite a significant alteration of the frequency balance. I suggest you listen for yourself.
 

 

[WhiteCrow]

Yea after watching how they test headphones it seems incredibly hard to get an accurate response when compairing two models, but they WILL make sure they have the same seal with a 50 or so hz bass response test.

 

[Ikarios]

Using headroom graphs is a terrible way to see if two headphones are different or the same. Heck if you look at ONE graph with ONE headphone there can be significant differences between the two channels. Not to mention differences in placement on the head, seal, head shape, etc etc... we all have different ears and brains, and we all hear things differently. The only way to tell for sure if you'd like something is to listen to it, that's it.

 

[KuKuBuKu]

Quote:

Using headroom graphs is a terrible way to see if two headphones are different or the same. Heck if you look at ONE graph with ONE headphone there can be significant differences between the two channels. Not to mention differences in placement on the head, seal, head shape, etc etc... we all have different ears and brains, and we all hear things differently. The only way to tell for sure if you'd like something is to listen to it, that's it.

How do you know if its a placebo or not?
 

 

[Ikarios]

Quote:

How do you know if its a placebo or not?
 

Close your eyes and have a friend hand you headphones. That's how I do my tests. Or I give the two headphones to a friend who doesn't know much about the particular models I'm testing, let them try both, and see if their findings match mine.

 

[sphinxvc]

Quote:

Using headroom graphs is a terrible way to see if two headphones are different or the same. Heck if you look at ONE graph with ONE headphone there can be significant differences between the two channels. Not to mention differences in placement on the head, seal, head shape, etc etc... we all have different ears and brains, and we all hear things differently. The only way to tell for sure if you'd like something is to listen to it, that's it.

Have you tried the Q701?  
 
I'm seriously thinking of picking up a burned-in pair to see if the slightly enhanced bass is a myth or not.  
 
If it does turn out to be true then they'd be bonafide HD800 killers.