[kuma]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bangraman I do believe it rocks, but in a very slightly VH-1 sort of way.

LOL!

I've got the picture.

 

[warpdriver]

I always find it a bit weird when people assume that a headphone good for acoustic and classic means it isn't good for rock. I've listened to many types of music on my 701's, and it's more dependent on the recording itself rather than the genre of music. I've used the 701's for everything from War of the Worlds DVD movie, to trance, folk, to dance, hip/hop to new age, to Big Band, to classic rock, and there are WOW moments for every one of those genres.

 

[sacd lover]

Quote:

Originally Posted by warpdriver I always find it a bit weird when people assume that a headphone good for acoustic and classic means it isn't good for rock. I've listened to many types of music on my 701's, and it's more dependent on the recording itself rather than the genre of music. I've used the 701's for everything from War of the Worlds DVD movie, to trance, folk, to dance, hip/hop to new age, to Big Band, to classic rock, and there are WOW moments for every one of those genres.

I agree, the 701 does justice to any genre I have tried .... and thats mostly classic rock and electric blues.

Back to the topic, I really liked what I heard from the W5000 at a meet. But when I heard the price and knowing the 701's were atleast equally good or better for my tastes .... that ended my interest. Unless you have to have a closed headphone I believe the 701 is the way to go.

 

[PeeeMeS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sacd lover I agree, the 701 does justice to any genre I have tried ....

x2 here
I find myself listening to the K701s more than any of my other headphones

The only gripe I have with them is the low threshold for bass distortion.

They really are a steal at the price. If they just had the HD650's bass, they'd be "it" for me.

 

[PFKMan23]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sacd lover I agree, the 701 does justice to any genre I have tried .... and thats mostly classic rock and electric blues. Back to the topic, I really liked what I heard from the W5000 at a meet. But when I heard the price and knowing the 701's were atleast equally good or better for my tastes .... that ended my interest. Unless you have to have a closed headphone I believe the 701 is the way to go.

Although I haven't had the pleasiure of hearing the W5000s, I do agree thathe k701s mates well with my music which would mainly consist of classical and pop music. I've also lsitend to blues, rock, and other genres although pop and classical are what I mainly listen to.

 

[guynamedjohn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by warpdriver I always find it a bit weird when people assume that a headphone good for acoustic and classic means it isn't good for rock.

I didn't mean to imply that the k701 was no good for rock. I've had multiple rock inspired eargasms with it. I love the k701 with Pink Floyd for instance. The w5000 gives a warmer, fuller sound that in general I prefer with rock, but my preference varies from album to album. If I had to recommend ONE set of headphones to anyone I would recommed the k701s without hesitation - and a good amp, natch.

 

[Patu]

W5000 does rock better indeed. I draw the conclusion like this, I much preferred SA5000 to K701 for rock and now I prefer W5000 to SA5000 for rock.

I will be borrowing K701 again shortly. I want to audition it with D02.

 

[gevorg]

Which of the two will "wow" New Age music, violin, and accoustic/flamenco guitar?
What about piano concerto?

 

[Wmcmanus]

Tough call, and it depends mostly on what you're looking for. Definitely the K701's when considering price/performance. But in an absolute sense, I'd go with the W5000's because of their added warmth and overall musicality. They're more alluring, whereas the K701's lean toward the neutral side.

Not to muddy things, but I actually like the AD2000's more than either. Or at least I think so. All of them are excellent in their own ways. What I really dig about the AD2000's is that they are open and airy with a nice wide soundstage (although not as wide as the K701's). They also extract details quite well, much like the K701's. But the AD2000's also give you a more exciting presentation (the "good" AT coloration) much like the W5000's.

Oh, and I say "good" AT coloration because (IMO), not all AT coloration is created equally. I don't like the flavor they've imposed on the W100 or W1000. But I do quite like the AT house sound as represented in the W5000 and AD2000. Even that (the "good" AT coloration) comes across in a slightly different manner for each, probably because the W5000's are closed and the AD2000's are open.

Bottom line for me, the AD2000's reach out, grab me, and pull me into the music more so than do either the K701's (which are more neutral, present a wider soundstage, and are also very capable of "wow" moments) or the W5000's (which are more full bodied, robust and impactful, but missing a sense of air and excitement that the AD2000's offer).

Close call between the K701's and W5000's. The AD2000's seem to bridge the two quite nicely and are much closer to the K701 price point. They are also much closer to the K701 sound signature in terms of their openness and similarities in soundstage, but with an added bonus of a bit more of the "fun" factor.

Yet, I would be remiss if I didn't emphasize this: they are all excellent cans and I could easily live with any of them forever. At this level, you can't go wrong (forgetting the money you spend for the moment) but you really need to do your own listening.

 

[Patu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gevorg Which of the two will "wow" New Age music, violin, and accoustic/flamenco guitar? What about piano concerto?

I'd say that this round goes for K701.

 

[Cyrilix]

I think there's too much subjectiveness in this thread. Maybe we should focus more on the level of detail and extension on both ends of the spectrum, rather than preference issues like tonal balance and "presentation".

I think expensive cans are only worth it if they perform well technically. Otherwise, there is a plethora of other cans that suit varying tonal preferences.

 

[Carl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyrilix I think there's too much subjectiveness in this thread. Maybe we should focus more on the level of detail and extension on both ends of the spectrum, rather than preference issues like tonal balance and "presentation". I think expensive cans are only worth it if they perform well technically. Otherwise, there is a plethora of other cans that suit varying tonal preferences.

Both of them are pretty good technically, so the main deciding factor as to which is better is going to come down to the likes of tonal balance and presentation. Audio is a very subjective thing.


Personally, I think the W5000 is exceptionally good technically, but the presentation and tonality don't do it for me.

 

[kuma]

The W5000 is the only cans that does not make me miss the RS1 too badly.

Does K701 rock better than a K501?

 

[robm321]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wmcmanus Tough call, and it depends mostly on what you're looking for. Definitely the K701's when considering price/performance. But in an absolute sense, I'd go with the W5000's because of their added warmth and overall musicality. They're more alluring, whereas the K701's lean toward the neutral side. Not to muddy things, but I actually like the AD2000's more than either. Or at least I think so. All of them are excellent in their own ways. What I really dig about the AD2000's is that they are open and airy with a nice wide soundstage (although not as wide as the K701's). They also extract details quite well, much like the K701's. But the AD2000's also give you a more exciting presentation (the "good" AT coloration) much like the W5000's. Oh, and I say "good" AT coloration because (IMO), not all AT coloration is created equally. I don't like the flavor they've imposed on the W100 or W1000. But I do quite like the AT house sound as represented in the W5000 and AD2000. Even that (the "good" AT coloration) comes across in a slightly different manner for each, probably because the W5000's are closed and the AD2000's are open. Bottom line for me, the AD2000's reach out, grab me, and pull me into the music more so than do either the K701's (which are more neutral, present a wider soundstage, and are also very capable of "wow" moments) or the W5000's (which are more full bodied, robust and impactful, but missing a sense of air and excitement that the AD2000's offer). Close call between the K701's and W5000's. The AD2000's seem to bridge the two quite nicely and are much closer to the K701 price point. They are also much closer to the K701 sound signature in terms of their openness and similarities in soundstage, but with an added bonus of a bit more of the "fun" factor. Yet, I would be remiss if I didn't emphasize this: they are all excellent cans and I could easily live with any of them forever. At this level, you can't go wrong (forgetting the money you spend for the moment) but you really need to do your own listening.

Since we are throwing in extra cans, I'll say the RS-1 also has "good" coloration (or great in my book) which is why I like them over the 701s, but the 701s are amazing from top to bottom, very clean, neutral, and airy. They tend to sound good across the board like no other cans I've experienced. The RS-1 doesn’t sound good on everything, neither do the Sennheissers. But I haven't heard the W5000 so why am I posting?

 

[kuma]

Quote:

The RS-1 doesn’t sound good on everything,

In my book, it does.
And so does the W5k.