[dcstep]

Quote:

Originally Posted by number1sixerfan /img/forum/go_quote.gif That may be, but I was saying rock is more bass heavy than jazz or classical. Do you find this to be the case? I'm not sure as I don't really listen to a lot of rock, but from the songs I do listen to it seems that rock is more bass heavy than jazz and classical.

Well, I think it has to do with what we listen to. My favorite jazz recordings often have very extended bass and lots of it. The quality of the bass often defines some of the best jazz recordings. Strauss, Wagner and Mahler are loaded with incredible bass and, of course, St. Saenes will get your pants legs flapping with a good system. Bach's Tocata and Fugue in D minor is another pants flapper.

Still, I hear what you're saying. In general, rock and pop have a higher percentage of their signals in the bass region. It may not go as low, but the kick drum and electric bass are almost always prominent. In both jazz and classical the bass will often lay out for long stretches. Those of us that listen to classical and jazz still need our bass as much as the rockers.

Dave

 

[ndskyz]

I think what he is saying is Jazz (good jazz

) Tends to go much lower in the Bass department than rock and roll. The upright Bass or a Piano tends to go lower than most of any rock and roll Bass guitar I've ever heard. Yes Rock tends to have more bass than jazz...it just doesnt go as low. I wouldnt punish my 701's listening to Rapp or Rock..thats what My other phones are for.

Quote:

Originally Posted by number1sixerfan /img/forum/go_quote.gif That may be, but I was saying rock is more bass heavy than jazz or classical. Do you find this to be the case? I'm not sure as I don't really listen to a lot of rock, but from the songs I do listen to it seems that rock is more bass heavy than jazz and classical.

 

[ph0rk]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ndskyz /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think what he is saying is Jazz (good jazz ) Tends to go much lower in the Bass department than rock and roll. The upright Bass or a Piano tends to go lower than most of any rock and roll Bass guitar I've ever heard. Yes Rock tends to have more bass than jazz...it just doesnt go as low. I wouldnt punish my 701's listening to Rapp or Rock..thats what My other phones are for.

The low B on a modern rock 5-string has a fundamental at 31 hz. If downtuned to A, 27.5 hz. Low E is 41 hz (and the octave up is, obviously, 82hz - so a large portion of basslines live in the 41-82hz region, occasionally dipping to 31hz). Some individuals use 7 or more string basses to reach even lower.

Whether or not the bass tone in any given recording includes a substantial portion of the fundamental is another story - often all you get is the upper harmonic content, especially in classic rock, but often in jazz and blues. That's okay - pure fundamental is relatively uninteresting. But a bass guitar can most certainly compete with an organ, synth, or orchestra down to 30 hz.

 

[sejarzo]

IMHO, the speakers with which rap/rock are mastered probably have much greater mid-bass response than those used for classical/jazz/acoustic.

When rap/rock are played back on flatter speakers/cans, the result is a bass balance that seems to be "light", even though it was found to be "right" during mixing and mastering.

 

[Stephen Murphy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sejarzo /img/forum/go_quote.gif IMHO, the speakers with which rap/rock are mastered probably have much greater mid-bass response than those used for classical/jazz/acoustic. When rap/rock are played back on flatter speakers/cans, the result is a bass balance that seems to be "light", even though it was found to be "right" during mixing and mastering.

What are you basing this information on? It doesn't really make any sense. Bob Ludwig used to master lots of records; rock jazz and classical. Either his working system was flat or it wasn't. I doubt he was using a different system to master each genre of music. A mastering engineer knows what he wants the final product to sound like no matter what the type of music. No way he would use some bass-heavy speakers to master a disk and have it come out bass-shy on a normal system.

 

[ndskyz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ph0rk /img/forum/go_quote.gif The low B on a modern rock 5-string has a fundamental at 31 hz. If downtuned to A, 27.5 hz. Low E is 41 hz (and the octave up is, obviously, 82hz - so a large portion of basslines live in the 41-82hz region, occasionally dipping to 31hz). Some individuals use 7 or more string basses to reach even lower. Whether or not the bass tone in any given recording includes a substantial portion of the fundamental is another story - often all you get is the upper harmonic content, especially in classic rock, but often in jazz and blues. That's okay - pure fundamental is relatively uninteresting. But a bass guitar can most certainly compete with an organ, synth, or orchestra down to 30 hz.

Fundamentally yes..and on paper is great...but in actual practice... I havent heard it.

 

[vcoheda]

recabled and balanced, the bass will improve. but it's still going to be a K701. if you want more bass (esp. hard hitting), ultimately you will have to look elsewhere.

 

[dcstep]

I think that anyone recabling 701s to get more bass will be very disappointed.

Dave

 

[SergioRZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sejarzo /img/forum/go_quote.gif When rap/rock are played back on flatter speakers/cans, the result is a bass balance that seems to be "light", even though it was found to be "right" during mixing and mastering.

If by flat you mean "accurate", true to source... then it does not seem light... it just seems right as it should

I think most people are just used to listening with really bad colored sound systems (and this also includes room sound modes), which usually tend to be bass biased with a lot of boominess ...

By the way, my 701's have been burning everyday and each day they get better. Low frequency response is now much better than before, also because the pads are now starting to bed in (I do a little help by pressing them when I put them on) and the drive is much closer to the hear now

I've been comparing my 701's with my main listening system (which has speakers and can be very accurate), and I really don't think that the 701's are bass shy anymore... they sound right!

When I was choosing what cans to buy, I did feel that the HD650 were very heavy on the bass, which sounded artificial... that's actually the main reason why I didn't get them and went the 701's route...

 

[tinder]

Quote:

Originally Posted by number1sixerfan /img/forum/go_quote.gif I wouldn't say bass heavy. They have a very hard hitting bass though. It is more impactful than heavy in quantity. It has much more bass than the k701, but I don't think it is bass heavy. Any other rs-1 users want to chime in?

Well, i've owned the K701 and still own the HD650 and the RS1 and would say that the HD650 is more bass heavy than the RS1....i find that the RS1 is the happy medium between the K701 and the HD650.

 

[Acoustic Chef]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SergioRZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif If by flat you mean "accurate", true to source... then it does not seem light... it just seems right as it should I think most people are just used to listening with really bad colored sound systems (and this also includes room sound modes), which usually tend to be bass biased with a lot of boominess ... By the way, my 701's have been burning everyday and each day they get better. Low frequency response is now much better than before, also because the pads are now starting to bed in (I do a little help by pressing them when I put them on) and the drive is much closer to the hear now I've been comparing my 701's with my main listening system (which has speakers and can be very accurate), and I really don't think that the 701's are bass shy anymore... they sound right! When I was choosing what cans to buy, I did feel that the HD650 were very heavy on the bass, which sounded artificial... that's actually the main reason why I didn't get them and went the 701's route...

 

[Stephen Murphy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SergioRZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think most people are just used to listening with really bad colored sound systems (and this also includes room sound modes), which usually tend to be bass biased with a lot of boominess ...

Why would you assume that? Most people reading and commenting here are in search of better sound and I highly doubt they would be sitting around listening to one-note-bass systems.

As far as K701s sounding like a main speaker system, I would agree if the speakers in question were two-way bookshelf speakers on stands well away from the rear wall. Do they sound like a good pair of floor standers? Not a chance. They don't come anywhere near delivering the texture and heft of a full speaker.

 

[Acoustic Chef]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen Murphy /img/forum/go_quote.gif Do they sound like a good pair of floor standers? Not a chance. They don't come anywhere near delivering the texture and heft of a full speaker.

On my system it does...

[size=x-small]And god layith upon thi, and said "let the truth be told!"

-Audiophile 1:01[/size]

 

[SergioRZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen Murphy /img/forum/go_quote.gif Why would you assume that? Most people reading and commenting here are in search of better sound and I highly doubt they would be sitting around listening to one-note-bass systems. As far as K701s sounding like a main speaker system, I would agree if the speakers in question were two-way bookshelf speakers on stands well away from the rear wall. Do they sound like a good pair of floor standers? Not a chance. They don't come anywhere near delivering the texture and heft of a full speaker.

The problem is that "better sound" concept... it really varies a lot, and some people search for sound that is more true to the source (what actually is in the CD/LP/Tape/File) while others search for sound that is more pleasing for their tastes. Both are perfectly valid approaches, but still, they are quite different. So we never really know what we are talking about when we talk about "better sound"...

IMHO, anyone that listens to music with Senn's 600 or 650 (the ones I've tried) and doesn't feel the artificial bass going on there.... must be used to some creepy bass heavy stuff. All that bass is not in the recording, believe me! That sounded to me like room modes in headphone cups! How scary is that?

Oh yes, sure any good cans at the 701's quality level are more than a match for any speaker in the world, be it micro-monitor or huge blaster type. I myself treat my ears a lot of times with B&W 802D, sometimes even the B&W Nautilus, and I can say without doubt that a good set of cans will do it all the same, or better, if we exclude the soundstage that Headphones simply can't reproduce (at least I've never heard headphones do that).

You mention texture... maybe it's just the "grain", specially in voices, that you don't get wit headphones (have you noticed how clean the sound is from headphones?)... some good low capacitance speaker cables will do that for speakers

 

[dcstep]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SergioRZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif Oh yes, sure any good cans at the 701's quality level are more than a match for any speaker in the world, be it micro-monitor or huge blaster type. I myself treat my ears a lot of times with B&W 802D, sometimes even the B&W Nautilus, and I can say without doubt that a good set of cans will do it all the same, or better, ...

Whoa, no offense meant, you must have giant problems with your speaker setup if it can't match your 701s. I love my 701 thru my Woo WA6 when I can't set my speakers loose, but no way they can match properly setup full range speakers. You must not have your speakers properly placed or there's some issue in your system.

I agree that it's easier to set up a great headphone system, but I've never heard any headphone based system match a properly setup fullrange speaker system.

Dave