[number1sixerfan]

Lol, it really is not this complicated at all....put on akg k701....listen.....replace with grado rs-1....listen....and come to the conclusion that the k701 is bass light. No phone is perfect, and if the akgs had more bass I think their transparency and neutrality would suffer.

 

[SergioRZ]

Or... the RS-1 is bass heavy... right?

 

[number1sixerfan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SergioRZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif Or... the RS-1 is bass heavy... right?

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?

 

[dcstep]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SergioRZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif Did the same test with the IASCA CD track 35. You get the clicking sound, and then at around 10hz the 701's seem to start a very faint sound, more a vibration of course, but it is there... it keeps building up stronger, and again there is absolutely no steep change between 10hz and 100hz... it's all very progressive and smooth in the way sound becomes more prominent as the frequencies are upped... At 15hz the 701's are audible enough (at least what can be expected from 15hz frequency), and at 20hz it's clearly audible. The 701's seem to have all the bass extension that anyone will ever need. But then this is not an "extension" issue... it's more an EQ issue, or a linearity issue...

No one ever said the AKGs don't have extension to 20Hz. Everyone has agreed on that so far. The point is that the rolloff below 35Hz is MUCH steeper than on the Headroom graph that implies relatively flat response down to 20Hz. My guess is that the rolloff exceeds 20dB from 30 to 20Hz. In contrast, my UE 5Pros are only down 3 or 5dB in the same range.

So yes, you're right, it's an EQ or linearity issue. The linearity doesn't match the Headroom curves at all.

Dave

 

[KZEE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif No, it's the other way round. An open baffle* brakes any seal beforehand and makes the system by nature «suffer» from phase cancellations at low frequencies, which have to be compensated for by larger membrane excursions. That's why the so-called seal between earpads and head has virtually no meaning, neither for pumping the sound waves into the ear canal without acoustic loss nor in view of phase cancellation. (BTW: the K 501 is a closed-baffle system.) * Note that the «baffle» is the plate on which the driver is mounted. A closed baffle separates front and rear sound waves, an open baffle does not. .

Oh OK I see what you're saying about an open baffle, and I would a hundred percent agree with you that the seal doesn't matter with an open baffle design. But it was my impression from the various high-end cans that I've had apart that most of those were open-backed/closed-baffle designs, and thus the seal would be important with that type of design. However I didn't really look at the baffles all that closely, so I may be wrong about them being closed-baffle designs.

 

[Happy Camper]

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?

RS bass is pretty good. Not bloated like the Senn. and Beyer bass. They have better impact than the 701s. I think the RS is a bit bass/treble forward in presentation. I think the 701 has a better low bass detail though.

 

[Acoustic Chef]

Quote:

Originally Posted by number1sixerfan /img/forum/go_quote.gif Lol, it really is not this complicated at all....put on akg k701....listen.....replace with grado rs-1....listen....and come to the conclusion that the k701 is bass light. No phone is perfect, and if the akgs had more bass I think their transparency and neutrality would suffer.

Errrrrrrrrr

And Happy, I'm thrilled you're getting the power 1!! Good ears buddy!

 

[pfloding]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dcstep /img/forum/go_quote.gif That's consistant with my listening test with the Steriophile Test CD, except I never went below 20Hz, which was audible, but giantly rolled off from 30Hz. Some of us are seeking great reproduction of music and some look for great reproduction of sound effects. These super low frequencies are not near as important to a music listerner as to a gamer our AV enthusiast. I find that getting low bass out of a loudspeaker via placement is very hard to get right without messing up the midrange presentation. I suspect that the same issues befuddle headphone designers. What I'm befuddled about at this point is how the Headroom frequency charts can show the AKG so flat down to 20Hz, yet we hear something very different. Do we have an "expert" here that can explain that? There seems to be a total disconnect between those charts and what we hear. Dave

The problem, AFAICT, is that headphones don't vibrate your body, like a natural bass source would, so any bass going into the ears have to be boosted to compensate for this. Various designs compensate to various degrees. Obviously, EQ:in the headphone to compensate may introduce coloring.

Personally I find the K701 fine for pretty much everything, including gaming. Just use a decent amp. If you are used to massive (unrealistic) headphone bass the K701 might not be for you, however.

 

[pfloding]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dcstep /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yes indeed, the character changes dramatically after 30Hz or so and then there's another big change at 20Hz, which is where music ends but there is ambiant information that is useful. Listening to the same test CD through my Vienna Acoustic Beethoven Baby Grand speakers, with a down 3dB spec at around 30Hz, the bass signal continues clearly down to 20Hz, at a reduced level, but not nearly so much as with the AKG. It is useful to listen through a few differenct setups so you can get a bead on what you're listening for. Dave

In this case (Vienna) you have room gain which is not necessarily part of the spec (it may, or may not be). Also, your body picks up the low frequencies.

 

[Vul Kuolun]

You're aware of the fact that human hearing is less sensitive to deeper frequencies? You'd have to subtract the fletcher-munson curves from the headroom measurements to see a curve that might match with your subjective perception.

If you're listening to a sine sweep on a perfect linear headphone, it would seem to you as if it was rolling off towards the highs and the lows. If it doesn't, it either has a build in loudness-characteristic, or you're listening way too loud.

If you like more bass, use an eq.
I'm taking a bet that you do not own a single recording that has not been sent through a eq during the mixing and mastering process in the first place.
Does it really make a difference if the soundguy turns the 70Hz knob or if you do?
Nor did he know at which volume you're listening to your music, neither did the AKG-developers. And we're not talking about personal tastes yet.

 

[dcstep]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vul Kuolun /img/forum/go_quote.gif You're aware of the fact that human hearing is less sensitive to deeper frequencies? You'd have to subtract the fletcher-munson curves from the headroom measurements to see a curve that might match with your subjective perception. ... If you like more bass, use an eq. I'm taking a bet that you do not own a single recording that has not been sent through a eq during the mixing and mastering process in the first place. Does it really make a difference if the soundguy turns the 70Hz knob or if you do? Nor did he know at which volume you're listening to your music, neither did the AKG-developers. And we're not talking about personal tastes yet.

Yes, we know these things. In comparison to Vienna Acoustic speakers and UE5Pro phones, the AKGs roll off much faster below 30Hz. In providing frequency response they should NOT be adding the F-M curves to the equation. If they were trying to display what we hear, they'd subtract them, not add them.

My system doesn't have EQ and I don't want EQ. My studio friends have much more robust devices than available to me, so it does make a difference who applies the EQ. Computer EQ noticeably degrades the signal, so I run all of those controls flat and use an analog attenuator to control volume.

We're merely discussing the AKGs lack of bass in comparison to other devices. We're also discussing the Headroom frequency response curves and how they seem to differ from our observations.

Dave

 

[number1sixerfan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pfloding /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just use a decent amp. If you are used to massive (unrealistic) headphone bass the K701 might not be for you, however.

Just because the akg's are light on the bass does not mean that other phones that are more bass heavy than it are unrealistic. The akg's have tight bass yes. However they do not have "realistic" bass imo because on a lot of recordings it is a false presentation within the lower frequencies. For music like rock or hip hop, it simply will not reproduce the lower frequencies accurately imo. For jazz, classical, etc. the bass is perfect and does not leave you wanting for more but for some genres it is a different story.

 

[ken36]

My approach would be to listen a lot and learn to appreciate the headphone for what it is. There might come a time in the future, when your mood is such that tight bass is what you crave. I know my moods change a lot. That's why I have my four sig rigs. Think of how you play a track over and over, but then you don't. You will eventually long for that track and start playing it again.

 

[dcstep]

Actually, rock has much less bass extension than jazz and classical. The percentage of the signal that's below 100Hz may be higher, but the lowest notes are not as low.

Dave

 

[number1sixerfan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dcstep /img/forum/go_quote.gif Actually, rock has much less bass extension than jazz and classical. The percentage of the signal that's below 100Hz may be higher, but the lowest notes are not as low. Dave

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.