[chinesekiwi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acix /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hehehe, it was your first time to hear depth in the sound stage, this why you got so confused.

Not really. I've tried the HD800's and listened to 'I can only dream of owning it due to the OMG pricetag' speakers in an acoustically dampened room.
It's not so much the soundstage depth of the K701 that's unnatural, it's the massive extreme left and extreme right of the soundstage that's unnatural.

It's like the pinched the right and left side of the soundstage and stretched it.

 

[chinesekiwi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aimlink /img/forum/go_quote.gif Quite often, it's just that we're very accustomed to a particular approach/sound and erroneously assume that it's the sound/approach we really like. This results in a restlessness that's never appeased since any venture into a different approach which may well be the one that in the end is better for us, is met with a quick and hasty retreat. I don't know if this could be the case with you. Only you would know, but I thought I'd let this out since there's a wider audience here.

Na man, I've experienced nearly all the sound signatures possible, from bass thin to bass heavy, from deep bass emphasis to mid-bass emphasis, bright, dark, great imaging, soundstage depth, mid-recessed, overly-coloured mids etc....

I have a fairly good idea and experience of different sound signatures. Earphones and IEMs are a great way to experience this.

 

[aimlink]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chinesekiwi /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's like the pinched the right and left side of the soundstage and stretched it.

A graphic description that.

 

[aimlink]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chinesekiwi /img/forum/go_quote.gif Na man, I've experienced nearly all the sound signatures possible, from bass thin to bass heavy, from deep bass emphasis to mid-bass emphasis, bright, dark, great imaging, soundstage depth, mid-recessed, overly-coloured mids etc.... I have a fairly good idea and experience of different sound signatures. Earphones and IEMs are a great way to experience this.

Are you saying you experienced the K701's? I'd say you never really did. A fleeting experience is no experience.

There's a K701 owner that I can think of who was on 7th heaven when he got his K701's. He raved a lot about it. In a few weeks, he fell out of love them.

IEM's are not full-sized headphones. You can't use your experience with them to claim experience with the sound signatures of full-sized cans. Tonal balance is just one aspect of the experience.

 

[chinesekiwi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aimlink /img/forum/go_quote.gif Are you saying you experienced the K701's? I'd say you never really did. A fleeting experience is no experience. There's a K701 owner that I can think of who was on 7th heaven when he got his K701's. He raved a lot about it. In a few weeks, he fell out of love them. IEM's are not full-sized headphones. You can't use your experience with them to claim experience with the sound signatures of full-sized cans. Tonal balance is just one aspect of the experience.

I've tried many full-sizes too

The thing is that the properties of a soundstage doesn't change at all with burn-in. It might change a bit with different amps and sources, but only minorly at that. As I said, I wanted to like them, really did, but I don't.
Also the fit on my head = weird. It was comfortable as in not clamping (like the K81DJ), but it didn't feel right on my head either.

 

[Justin Uthadude]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aimlink /img/forum/go_quote.gif It doesn't matter. That's OK. I do recall the 'culture shock' I experienced going from the Edition 8's I had been exclusively listening to for several months and then listening to the K702's. The sound stage was rather odd sounding indeed. After listening pretty much exclusively for about 3 weeks, it sounds fine to me. In fact, it sounds great. These ALO K702's make for a listening experience that's in the main more natural for me than the Ed8's. I get a sense of comfort from the tonal balance that I didn't with the Ed8's when listening to jazz, new age, world and classical music. The sound of the K702's came to me and now that I've acclimatized to it, I do prefer its sound. The sound staging has also changed after growing 'accustomed' to it. Again, more natural for me. I think it's more after my ears and brain have grown to understand it. I may well get an HD800 after all. After this experience with the AKG's, I'm now speaking from the POV of any quite radically different experience in sound/approach: We often put them aside as being not for us. Quite often, it's just that we're very accustomed to a particular approach/sound and erroneously assume that it's the sound/approach we really like. This results in a restlessness that's never appeased since any venture into a different approach which may well be the one that in the end is better for us, is met with a quick and hasty retreat. I don't know if this could be the case with you. Only you would know, but I thought I'd let this out since there's a wider audience here.

Aimlink, beautifully put. I have suspected this might be where the Sennheiser 'veil' might come from; someone coming from Grados for example, and not listening long enough to get over the initial first few days impression. Vice versa for Senn to Grado, et al. In any event, I believe I will now give any new phone a longer evaluation period to overcome this intrinsic human kneejerk reaction you have so wonderfully described.
.

 

[chinesekiwi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Justin Uthadude /img/forum/go_quote.gif Aimlink, beautifully put. I have suspected this might be where the Sennheiser 'veil' might come from; someone coming from Grados for example, and not listening long enough to get over the initial first few days impression. Vice versa for Senn to Grado, et al. In any event, I believe I will now give any new phone a longer evaluation period to overcome this intrinsic human kneejerk reaction you have so wonderfully described. .

Nono, the 'Sennheiser veil' is a real thing and nothing to do with this. Having the HD600, HD555 and HD650 using exactly the same setup and hearing a clear veil in two (HD650, HD555) and not another (HD600)...well, yeah, moving on, same amp, same source, same everything.

 

[Justin Uthadude]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chinesekiwi /img/forum/go_quote.gif Nono, the 'Sennheiser veil' is a real thing....

CK-
This is exactly my point.
I am not arguing, nor have I ever listened to any Senns that start with a 6. I am merely agreeing with aimlink that what we have been listening to very well may influence how we interpret something new that is different. Truth be known, brain-in is probably more likely than burn-in. (If I remember correctly, Boomana, John MacClean and Uncle Eric don't believe the 'veil' is a real thing. It can't be both ways.)

Didn't mean to go offtopic. Let's pretend I used a different example. Besides, I have my eyes on something more on the line of your M3 and DT880/600. (And if I came from the HD650, I'd probably think the 880 had super bright treble)

.

 

[Kouzelna]

 
 
I spent a lot of time comparing the AKG K701 with the Beyerdynamic DT880/600 on two amps: the Glow Audio One tube amp, and (to a lesser degree), a fantastic Biosciencegeek (BSG) Cmoy, which by the way is the best amp pairing I've ever heard for the Etymotic ER-4S.  
 
Here are my thoughts on the comparison:
 
 
First Initial Impressions
 
The DT880/600 sounds so totally different than the 880/32, they should definitely be different models.  I can't even believe these are the same headphones?  They sound absolutely NOTHING alike, at all.  (I hated the treble of the 32 model; way, way too harsh IMHO).
 
From first impression, the DT880/600 is beautiful!  Everything on them is near-perfect.  The bass is awesome and precise, just beautiful.  The midranges are so intimate and I really, totally miss that so much coming from the K701.  And the treble is perfectly fine, exactly what it's supposed to be.  What stands out the most, is the awesome and stunning detail.  Just amazing.  Every single detail of the music is so accurately presented.  And layered perfectly, without getting muddy.  It's like I realize that you miss nothing at all.  Incredible.
 
I picked up some slight muddiness somewhere, perhaps where the midbass is.  I don't know, I'm not that technically astute.  But my theory is this:  the only place where the 880 fails against the K701 is in spatial presentation.  The K701 simply has much more space between the instruments, which avoids the muddiness at that frequency.  I think this is called congestion, meaning that some detail gets squashed together.  But it's rare, and only in that particular frequency.  However, this may not actually be a failure.  
 
The 880 presents a very tight, intimate sound, but does not sacrifice accuracy at all!  (Except for that slight congestion).  It's like listening in a good club.  The 701 is like the musicians having more room, like on a theater stage.  There's more air between the instruments.  That's the best way I can describe it.
 
The K701 also has a slightly higher (treble) sounding presentation as well, but that's just a taste detail, not a downfall.  And it has far more soundstage - even though the 880 is no wimp with soundstage!  I mean, the 701 is famous for that anyway.  I guess some people see it as artificial, I do not agree, it's fantastic.
 
To be honest, I thought of selling my K701 and go to a DT880/600 instead.  The midrange is just so good, and this is where the K701 somewhat lacks.  It's not bad with the 701, but it's just far more distant.  The weird things is, the 701 will achieve a near perfect sound, and many of it's faults will disappear, at a louder volume.  But you have to crank it higher than is comfortable for me.  The 880 performs perfectly at a better volume for me.  
 
I used mainly Vocal Trance for my listening tests, as that's my primary music for headphone use.  The whole point of Vocal Trance, among other things, is that sweet female midrange, which presents such intimacy when its reproduced right; it literally tickles your ears, as though she's breathing right into your ear.  Which, hey, I like!  

  The K701 is more like sitting a few rows back, and seeing the singer on the stage somewhat far away from you, not noticing you, like you're a big geek.  

 
Well, that's the initial thoughts anyway.
 
As usual, the Glow is kicking butt with this test.  I used the 880 stock, and the 701 with a 225 Ohm resistance cable a Head-Fier sent me, which sets it at 290 Ohm.  There is the tiniest, slightest hum with the 880 and the Glow; no hum with the 701 and cable.  (I tried the cable on the 880, but it hummed a lot).
 
 
Final Impressions
 
In the end, I do like the AKG K701 "better," which is good since I already own them and the DT880/600 is borrowed, but at GREAT sacrifice of the midrange.  It really, truly does improve with greater volume, but sadly at the lower volumes I like to listen because of ear sensitivity, the midrange tends to receed into the background substantially, though not fatally.  The Beyerdynamic DT880/600 does not have this issue, and sounds great at a lower volume.  
 
For me, the 701 has a more open and expansive sound, first of all.  I could live with the more intimate sound of the 880, however, because of the quality of its midrange.  Both cans also have pristine detail and reproduction.  Additionally, both have excellent bass: not slamming, but precise - and strong enough!  Especially the 880, which has a slightly fuller bass, whereas the 701 has a tight, but less full bass.  As a drummer, this would be the difference between muffling your bass drum more, or less.  You still get strong bass, but the 880 has noticeably more "boom," though it is by no means boomy like, for example, the Denons or the M50.  It is very precise.  In fact, it is just better than the 701 by a noticeable but small degree.
 
But here is where the 701 shines: sparkling, airy highs mixed with glorious 3D soundstage.  They are literally "set free" to soar, and dip, and twirl, so to speak.  The 880 sounds like this too - until you hear the 701.  Then, there is no going back.  Honestly, there is no comparison.  When you hear certain tunes that stress those frequencies and effects, the 880 actually sounds a bit flat when compared to the 701.  This is a major issue for me, especially with all the effects and constant activity in Vocal Trance music, so I have to make the very difficult choice of choosing the 701 over the 880, even though it bums me out.  
 
So in closing, the 880's sound is really concentrated in the midrange, with a solid bass.  The 701 sacrifices the mids, it seems, or simply presents them from a further distance, but presents all the detail, airiness and effects with such an open and clear presentation that it fills your head with sound.  It is perhaps the most opposite I've yet heard of Sennheiser's infamous veil - it is totally free and open, where the music never sounds flat, or congested in any way.  The worst trait is simply its distance with midrange (vocals, mainly) - again, mostly solved at higher volumes, but too high for me to listen.
 
 
Hope this proves helpful.  

 

 

[bhanja_trinanjan]

 
Quote:

 
 
I spent a lot of time comparing the AKG K701 with the Beyerdynamic DT880/600 on two amps: the Glow Audio One tube amp, and (to a lesser degree), a fantastic Biosciencegeek (BSG) Cmoy, which by the way is the best amp pairing I've ever heard for the Etymotic ER-4S.  
 
Here are my thoughts on the comparison:
 
 
First Initial Impressions
 
The DT880/600 sounds so totally different than the 880/32, they should definitely be different models.  I can't even believe these are the same headphones?  They sound absolutely NOTHING alike, at all.  (I hated the treble of the 32 model; way, way too harsh IMHO).
 
From first impression, the DT880/600 is beautiful!  Everything on them is near-perfect.  The bass is awesome and precise, just beautiful.  The midranges are so intimate and I really, totally miss that so much coming from the K701.  And the treble is perfectly fine, exactly what it's supposed to be.  What stands out the most, is the awesome and stunning detail.  Just amazing.  Every single detail of the music is so accurately presented.  And layered perfectly, without getting muddy.  It's like I realize that you miss nothing at all.  Incredible.
 
I picked up some slight muddiness somewhere, perhaps where the midbass is.  I don't know, I'm not that technically astute.  But my theory is this:  the only place where the 880 fails against the K701 is in spatial presentation.  The K701 simply has much more space between the instruments, which avoids the muddiness at that frequency.  I think this is called congestion, meaning that some detail gets squashed together.  But it's rare, and only in that particular frequency.  However, this may not actually be a failure.  
 
The 880 presents a very tight, intimate sound, but does not sacrifice accuracy at all!  (Except for that slight congestion).  It's like listening in a good club.  The 701 is like the musicians having more room, like on a theater stage.  There's more air between the instruments.  That's the best way I can describe it.
 
The K701 also has a slightly higher (treble) sounding presentation as well, but that's just a taste detail, not a downfall.  And it has far more soundstage - even though the 880 is no wimp with soundstage!  I mean, the 701 is famous for that anyway.  I guess some people see it as artificial, I do not agree, it's fantastic.
 
To be honest, I thought of selling my K701 and go to a DT880/600 instead.  The midrange is just so good, and this is where the K701 somewhat lacks.  It's not bad with the 701, but it's just far more distant.  The weird things is, the 701 will achieve a near perfect sound, and many of it's faults will disappear, at a louder volume.  But you have to crank it higher than is comfortable for me.  The 880 performs perfectly at a better volume for me.  
 
I used mainly Vocal Trance for my listening tests, as that's my primary music for headphone use.  The whole point of Vocal Trance, among other things, is that sweet female midrange, which presents such intimacy when its reproduced right; it literally tickles your ears, as though she's breathing right into your ear.  Which, hey, I like!  

  The K701 is more like sitting a few rows back, and seeing the singer on the stage somewhat far away from you, not noticing you, like you're a big geek.  

 
Well, that's the initial thoughts anyway.
 
As usual, the Glow is kicking butt with this test.  I used the 880 stock, and the 701 with a 225 Ohm resistance cable a Head-Fier sent me, which sets it at 290 Ohm.  There is the tiniest, slightest hum with the 880 and the Glow; no hum with the 701 and cable.  (I tried the cable on the 880, but it hummed a lot).
 
 
Final Impressions
 
In the end, I do like the AKG K701 "better," which is good since I already own them and the DT880/600 is borrowed, but at GREAT sacrifice of the midrange.  It really, truly does improve with greater volume, but sadly at the lower volumes I like to listen because of ear sensitivity, the midrange tends to receed into the background substantially, though not fatally.  The Beyerdynamic DT880/600 does not have this issue, and sounds great at a lower volume.  
 
For me, the 701 has a more open and expansive sound, first of all.  I could live with the more intimate sound of the 880, however, because of the quality of its midrange.  Both cans also have pristine detail and reproduction.  Additionally, both have excellent bass: not slamming, but precise - and strong enough!  Especially the 880, which has a slightly fuller bass, whereas the 701 has a tight, but less full bass.  As a drummer, this would be the difference between muffling your bass drum more, or less.  You still get strong bass, but the 880 has noticeably more "boom," though it is by no means boomy like, for example, the Denons or the M50.  It is very precise.  In fact, it is just better than the 701 by a noticeable but small degree.
 
But here is where the 701 shines: sparkling, airy highs mixed with glorious 3D soundstage.  They are literally "set free" to soar, and dip, and twirl, so to speak.  The 880 sounds like this too - until you hear the 701.  Then, there is no going back.  Honestly, there is no comparison.  When you hear certain tunes that stress those frequencies and effects, the 880 actually sounds a bit flat when compared to the 701.  This is a major issue for me, especially with all the effects and constant activity in Vocal Trance music, so I have to make the very difficult choice of choosing the 701 over the 880, even though it bums me out.  
 
So in closing, the 880's sound is really concentrated in the midrange, with a solid bass.  The 701 sacrifices the mids, it seems, or simply presents them from a further distance, but presents all the detail, airiness and effects with such an open and clear presentation that it fills your head with sound.  It is perhaps the most opposite I've yet heard of Sennheiser's infamous veil - it is totally free and open, where the music never sounds flat, or congested in any way.  The worst trait is simply its distance with midrange (vocals, mainly) - again, mostly solved at higher volumes, but too high for me to listen.
 
 
Hope this proves helpful.  

 

Never heard the DT880, partially like (and dislike) the T1, but your K-701/2 analysis is spot on... They do not sacrifice too much midrange, they sacrifice a BIT of it... in the sense that there seems to be a lack of energy to the ringy resonance of pianos, the presence of B-flat clarinets and the violin. A bit extra sparkle to the female vocals, but the rest of the mid a step back. That is all that is wrong with them. Otherwise, they yank the pants off every other transducer (loudspeaker and headphone)  that I have heard.

 

[Palpatine]

I really like the K702, bur with my current amp the DT 880 600 ohm is much better. When I get my SS, I will again purchase the K702. But...it is a completely different phone than the DT 880 600 ohm. I have really begun to love those Beyers. If you liked them too, I would suggest getting another pair.

 

[Acix]

Kouzelna, good job on the impression. I'm agree with you... the presentation of the 702 is addicted. About the higher volume issues, this can easy solved by getting a good SS amp with more current to push and hold tight the 702 drivers at any volume. 

 

[Kouzelna]

Interesting.  When I'm rich and famous, I do have my eye on a HeadRoom Mini.  Thanks for the tip, I've never quite understood current.

 

[krumme]

Well thank you. Thank you

 
Owing a k530 and soon upgrading, this i what i wanted. Critical and appriciative on the same time.
 
Quote:

 
 
I spent a lot of time comparing the AKG K701 with the Beyerdynamic DT880/600 on two amps: the Glow Audio One tube amp, and (to a lesser degree), a fantastic Biosciencegeek (BSG) Cmoy, which by the way is the best amp pairing I've ever heard for the Etymotic ER-4S.  
 
Here are my thoughts on the comparison:
 
 
Hope this proves helpful.  

 

 

[Kouzelna]

Thread resurrection here...
 
I did end up selling my AKG K701 by "accident": thought I had sold my amp, then didn't, but had already sold my AKG.  Ugh!
 
So I bought another can, and, thought I'd give the Beyer DT880 - 600 a spin.  Having fun so far!  But they really are totally different from each other.
 
(Amps back up for sale - I love it! But I'm moving overseas this year, need only what I can pack on my back).
 
http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/544255/glow-audio-one-tube-amplifier-perfect-condition-450-s-h