[bangraman]

Mine aren't that burned in, and I'm fine with them. I'm not a thundering bass type of guy when not going portable, so they suit me down to the ground. Should I want truly thundering and attack-laden bass however, I simply call up the 'Vintage PCDP Mega Bass Emulation' (OK, so under the microscope of analysis it's probably nothing like a real vintage PCDP Mega Bass

) program on the DEQ2496. Oh yes. One advantage of having cans that have excellent technical performance and a non-excessive tonal balance to begin with is that they take very well to EQing.

 

[CannedHam]

I own the 271s as well (other cans I have owned are Stax SR84, Senn PX200, Senn HD600, and Grado 325's). My main speakers are full range stats, though I run an active xover along with sealed 120l subs and bass eq so I get sub 20hz response that can thump you in the chest.

For office use, I am extremely pleased with the 271s (even the auto-off works well there). The thing I appreciate the most is the midrange. First thing I played on them was some piano and it was *right*. I really enjoy the mids (why I bought them over the A900's). Having said that, I think they flatten the bass a bit. It is there... but it is just not truly dimensional. Note I am not a bass head, and I find overpowering or bloated bass will render almost anything unusable. My reference standard for bass tends to be dipole bass, as opposed to ported boxes that can crank out 20hz at reference levels.

I think, like any speaker, you really have to make up your own mind. Opinion sites like these are great, but people have different preferences (or worse, people will spout conventional wisdom about things they have never heard). Having said that, I would like to thank tyson and commando for their thoughtful opinions... they have been helpful.

C.

 

[gpalmer]

Quote:

Originally posted by bangraman Mine aren't that burned in, and I'm fine with them.

The behavior I've seen has been sort of strange with them. The first pair I had took weeks to burn in and then the bass did a magical appearing act overnight. The switch on one of the ears failed afterwards and HeadRoom replaced them with a new pair that sounded pretty good right out of the box. I would say it's a bit light on treble, but in combination with the Gilmore V2 it isn't bad. Not my favorite system, but a good fit for work phones. (Other than I wished they didn't have as much isolation). I assumed that the second pair I received was a return and didn't really think about it but maybe the first one was the unusual one...

 

[bangraman]

It's occured to me that these get more head-time than the Omega II's.


For me they lack the "WOW" factor, but they do have the "ehehehehe" factor. What is that, it's when you've had them on your head for a few hours, you start going "ehehehehe" because it sounds so damned good. Perhaps cackling to oneself in the dark is also a sign of insanity...

 

[3lusiv3]

Quote:

Originally posted by bangraman For me they lack the "WOW" factor, but they do have the "ehehehehe" factor. What is that, it's when you've had them on your head for a few hours, you start going "ehehehehe" because it sounds so damned good. Perhaps cackling to oneself in the dark is also a sign of insanity...

Wise words from a headphone geek!

 

[bangraman]

By the way guys if you own a K271S a good outboard EQ either digital or analog (but probably not software) is a very, very good idea. It takes to decent EQ like a duck to water and you can change the personality of the phone at a moment's notice. I can't stress this enough. The best affordable unit that I've owned is the Behringer DEQ2496. It adjusts for a very wide range of useful parameters not just for EQ, and does not get in the way of the delivery abilities of the K271S.

 

[kyrie]

WOW.
Bangraman, good call; good call indeed!
(though I have a computer-based setup, so I use a software equalizer).

For most headphones I have heard, equalization changes the tonal character of the headphones, but something seems amiss or artificial - oftentimes it seems that the equalization and the headphone is fighting over which should win.
That is not the case for the K271S, as I just now discovered. It takes to almost any reasonable equalization with amazing responsiveness and a natural fluidity. Of course, the basic tonal character of the headphones is still there. However, as bangraman said, one can change the personality of these cans quite a bit using simple equalization, and most importantly, it sounds perfectly natural.

eheheheheh...

 

[philodox]

bangraman, kyrie... thanks... I now have something else I need to buy

 

[Geek]

They're a sonic invert of the DT770; they have a perfectly smooth sound from midrange down to bottom end, the bass is very tight, super articulate, midrange is very prevalent, the upper mids and lower treble give the phones great energy and a very analytical, beautiful sort of sound, and the soundstage is great for closed headphones.

They drawback is if your amp sucks they suck too.

If your source sucks, they suck too.

They sound beautiful out of a meridian 507 with the cosmic reference; they had so much bass that my head was going to implode, or so I thought. My sources are the NS500V, which is bright and a little brittle, the RME 96/8, which has a lot of high end fuzz and a slightly undefined bass, but the sound was great through the K271S. I own a maxed out home amp with the reference module installed and a stepped attenuator, dimarzio m-paths, etc.

I dont know what you have been listening to in terms of associated equipment, your mileage will greatly greatly vary with these phones.

Compared to the DT250-80s, the only phones I've heard that offer competition, the highs of the K271S are a LOT cleaner and sound less honky; midrange is great on both, but the K271S doesn't have the harshness which drove me away from DT250-80s, but it keeps that intimate sound. It also images better and the bass is more controlled although a little bit weak (not as bright as the DT831, which lack bass prescence, and a lot less bassy than the HD650, which slams your face with loads of tight fast bass). They isolate well and are great overall performers. If someone's DT250s broke, I'd even consider telling them to switch to the K271S, they have a high end that is close to the quality of the HD600's analytically beautiful high end.

Hope that helps. They are in no way trash, and I'm in no way associated with AKG or any manufacturer.

Cheers,
Geek

 

[Snufkin]

Ugh, now that's the opposite of what I hear yet again.

I think the DT250 is a far superior headphone, the midrange on the K271 to me sounds harsh, flat and lifeless while on the DT250 sounds smooth. The high end detail on the DT250 is certainly less forward than the K271 but I don't have a problem with it really.
It's amusing that some people find the bass response in headphones like the K501 or DT831 to be "lacking" yet make comments about the K271 to have "thundering, amazingly deep bass" when in fact it's pretty close to the K501 (ok, not that lacking) and DT831. I think the DT831 was a better headphone allround, much better separation and less artificial sounding for starters. Bass response I'd put on a par.

There's no way I'm going to consider upgrading or changing my sources/amps just to make the K271 sound to my liking, I think I'll just let them go and not look back.

 

[lini]

Snufkin: It's really strange how the opinions differ on the K271S, isn't it? Unfortunately I'm still kinda broke - otherwise I'd love to join the next London meet (especially as the long planned European meet never seems to become reality... *sigh*

), bring my own K271S and compare it to bangraman's unit...

Greetings from Hannover!

Manfred / lini