[amartignano]

Quote:

Originally Posted by atx I'm approaching the 100 hr burn-in mark and so far I am not impressed. The K701 won't replace the sweet-sounding mids of K501.

Hi atx,

Can you be more clear? Do you find the K701 to have more "hard" mids?

Thanks.

Andrea

 

[cosmopragma]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrea Hey, this is just what we've been waiting to hear about! Thanks.

Maybe it's wiser to wait until they are fully burned in.
The germans that have them for a longer period since they were released here first report a burn-in time of at least 200 hours (with bass heavy music)and had serious doubts about the cans at the 100 hours mark.

Am I the only one who gets annoyed by the impatience?
A hundred posts in several threads : "Sounds mediocre straight out of the box", "sounds decent at 40 hours", "sounds worse than yesterday", "100 hours, not bad, but the mids aren't spectecular", "they are burned in for 70 hours now and they are quite nice, but the tonal balance is a bit incoherent", "the treble is a harsh and I hope it will smooth out" and so on and so on.

I'm done with this kind of useless opinions and will stay away from this waste of time.Fortunately there's a "Unsubscribe from this thread" button.

 

[amartignano]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cosmopragma Maybe it's wiser to wait until they are fully burned in. The germans that have them for a longer period since they were released here first report a burn-in time of at least 200 hours (with bass heavy music)and had serious doubts about the cans at the 100 hours mark. Am I the only one who gets annoyed by the impatience? A hundred posts in several threads : "Sounds mediocre straight out of the box", "sounds decent at 40 hours", "sounds worse than yesterday", "100 hours, not bad, but the mids aren't spectecular", "they are burned in for 70 hours now and they are quite nice, but the tonal balance is a bit incoherent", "the treble is a harsh and I hope it will smooth out" and so on and so on. I'm done with this kind of useless opinions and will stay away from this waste of time.Fortunately there's a "Unsubscribe from this thread" button.

"Agree"... although I think that burn-in is mainly a matter of comprehension and to get used to the sound of a new hadphones, disregarding the changing in our personal freq respone due to physiological conditions.
But we have to be a little used to the sound of the new rig to be "objective" in our listening impressions.

From the AKG forum, the AKG engineers:

Quote:

From our experience and knowledge we cannot confirm that there is a burn in effect of the transducers taking place. Normally the sound of headphones changes only over many years and then mainly in caused by the earpads (less low end since the ear pads get more densily by sweat etc.). The reason for loosing bass can also be caused by a less tight contact between the earpads and the head. This can happen due to wearing spectacles, long hair etc. -- kind regards Horst AKG hotline

http://www.akg.com/akg_structuretree...odeid,148.html

I don't think they are deaf or stupid...

Andrea

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cosmopragma Maybe it's wiser to wait until they are fully burned in.

It definitely IS wiser.

Some people seem to wait for a confirmation of their bias, others know in advance that break-in won't affect the sound enough to make them change their initial impression...

I for one am patient enough to form my own opinion after the arrival of my pair and at least 150 if not 250 hours of use -- my own adaptation process and some possible system tweaks (cables!) included.
.

 

[Andrea]

Cosmopragma -- that could even be, but 100 hours -is- more than a decent amount for me. As a burn in believer, I'd still rather be rational about it. Even my HD650 had already fully blossomed, in the midrange if not at the extremes, at around 80 hours. And just the midrange was a critical aspect of the HD650's performance prior to that point, to my ears, besides one I'm rather sensitized to.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by amartignano From the AKG forum, the AKG engineers: Quote: From our experience and knowledge we cannot confirm that there is a burn in effect of the transducers taking place. Normally the sound of headphones changes only over many years and then mainly in caused by the earpads (less low end since the ear pads get more densily by sweat etc.). The reason for loosing bass can also be caused by a less tight contact between the earpads and the head. This can happen due to wearing spectacles, long hair etc. -- kind regards Horst AKG hotline

This doesn't speak for the AKG engineers, IMO. Anyway, as long as their headphones sound good (after break-in!

)...


Quote:

I don't think they are deaf or stupid...

Well, then Sennheiser, Stax, Grado, ... engineers are... And I could count myself in, plus all the current beta testers.
.

 

[blomquist]

That's just Business Talk, imagine the situation when they would have a statement on the retail box: "Full fidelity only provided after 100 hours of use"
hahaha....

 

[atx]

Quote:

Originally Posted by amartignano Hi atx, Can you be more clear? Do you find the K701 to have more "hard" mids? Thanks. Andrea

It's a bit hard to explain. With the k701, it's like there's a layer/veil of air between your ears and the performers, so it sounds farther, less personal, than with the k501. I wouldn't describe it as "harder." I bought the 701s expecting it would easily replace my 501s, but this is not the case at all. The 701 is not a "better 501," but a different sounding headphone altogether.

I find the k701 to be neither here nor there. I don't think there's a single sound characteristic about this headphone that makes it stand out among the competitors. It won't replace the DT880 either because the 880s have better bass (deeper, punchier), faster (it has a "black-er" background), and frankly, more fun.

Of course, my impressions could change with more burn in.

 

[chesebert]

Quote:

Originally Posted by atx It's a bit hard to explain. With the k701, it's like there's a layer/veil of air between your ears and the performers, so it sounds farther, less personal, than with the k501. I wouldn't describe it as "harder." I bought the 701s expecting it would easily replace my 501s, but this is not the case at all. The 701 is not a "better 501," but a different sounding headphone altogether. I find the k701 to be neither here nor there. I don't think there's a single sound characteristic about this headphone that makes it stand out among the competitors. It won't replace the DT880 either because the 880s have better bass (deeper, punchier), faster (it has a "black-er" background), and frankly, more fun. Of course, my impressions could change with more burn in.

Comments like this is what robbs my wallet!.....grrr....is it better than K501? I need definitive answers...I have too many headphone as is.

 

[amartignano]

Quote:

Originally Posted by atx It's a bit hard to explain. With the k701, it's like there's a layer/veil of air between your ears and the performers, so it sounds farther, less personal, than with the k501. I wouldn't describe it as "harder." I bought the 701s expecting it would easily replace my 501s, but this is not the case at all. The 701 is not a "better 501," but a different sounding headphone altogether. I find the k701 to be neither here nor there. I don't think there's a single sound characteristic about this headphone that makes it stand out among the competitors. It won't replace the DT880 either because the 880s have better bass (deeper, punchier), faster (it has a "black-er" background), and frankly, more fun. Of course, my impressions could change with more burn in.

Thanks ATX. These impressions are precious, especially when you say that K501 and the K701 have different "souls", and K701 are less fun than my "beloved" Beyer DT880.

I wonder if the K601 resembles more the K501 with more bass and better controlled "frequency balance" as I've read here and there in the forum.

thanks

Andrea

 

[stevieo]

my k701 has just past the 110 hour mark. i have been running it with very very loud micheal jackson "thriller". the cans were total mud until about the 100 hour mark. they are starting to clear up & the bass is just starting to soften but have a very long way to go. these cans need major bass during the burn-in phase & at serious volume too. they don't seem to flinch at the punishment either. also, i highly disagree with the statement that burn-in is psychological. every day i give them a quick listen check & they are just starting to clear enough to show real potential. these cans are such a beast to burn-in that i will probably run them a good 500 hours before i bother to pull them off the burner & give them a serious listen. the bass drivers are the stiffest i have ever encounterd & wimpy burn-in will not cut it. impressions of the k701 after a mere 100 or 200 hours are premature, imo. in my limited experience, i predict these cans will become keepers.

 

[Gradino]

Quote:

Originally Posted by atx I'm approaching the 100 hr burn-in mark and so far I am not impressed. The K701 won't replace the sweet-sounding mids of K501.

I think that the 701 have a sound very very sweet than 501. I am of course of this. The sweetness is one of the principal characteristics of 701!!!!

How is possible don't listen this???

S.

 

[Patu]

I've burned them in over 12 hours more (overall about 60-65 hours now) and now they sound listenable again, but still a bit fatiguing and edgy. Not so harsh anymore. I hope the sound still smoothens a lot when I burn them in more.

 

[JaZZ]

There's still hope.

.

 

[Gradino]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patu I've burned them in over 12 hours more (overall about 60-65 hours now) and now they sound listenable again, but still a bit fatiguing and edgy. Not so harsh anymore. I hope the sound still smoothens a lot when I burn them in more.

My headp. have now about 20 h but the sound is ever smoothens and never fatiguing i listen....

You listen with rp5.1? (i haved it...)

S.