holderlin
New Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2001
- Posts
- 46
- Likes
- 10
I auditioned this combo, comparing it to Headroom Cosmic (old model without Base Station 1) and Sennheiser HD600 (no Clou cable). The SAC amp had about 60 hours of burn-in time. Headphone only about 15 hours.
First, an apologia. I'm a novice at explaining what I hear. I know next to nothing about electronics or its terminology so I can't offer any mega- or killo- talk (which would help me better explain some things that I hear). I'll also say that at age 43 my hearing is more discerning than in earlier years, but at the price of some loss in the upper frequencies -- not enough however to affect most musical listening. I'm sure there will be other, more experienced and eloquent commentaries on this particular combo. And I anxiously await their views because I have learned a lot from this and other audio forums. (At the end of this post I include links to reviews in the past 6 months on AKG K1000 and/or SAC amp.) However, I decided that an early, initial-impression post might be warranted because I have received a few e-mails asking me for my views of this combo from people wanting to act on Jan's current sales-action before it's too late. This is not really a review, just my listening notes, so take it with a grain of salt.
Equipment: Arcam Alpha 5
ART Di/O DAC
Dimarzio ic w/ radioshack 1/4" adapters to connect to ART Di/O
Getting Started: The AKG take some fussing to get the right sound. I fiddled a little with adjustments on AKG K1000. I first tried to turn the ear-grilles out. My head's pretty skinny so I lost too much bass. I returned them parallel to my ear for better bass and tilted the headband toward the front of my head to improve the bass still more. After quite a while of listening (each time having to find the best spot), I've settled on tilting them the headband toward the back of my head to pick up a clearer and stronger bass signal. This has become my standard listening position which means quiet, fairly still listening in a chair -- no boogying on the dance floor or the headphones will fly who knows where! I find the AKG very comfortable. There is a slight pressure on your temple with no pressure on your ears. I prefer this to the conventional headphone feel.
For my first audition I listened to Mahler 4th Symphony, 2d movement. This is a scherzi, a demented and rusticated parody of a waltz. It is a nice audition piece because of the wide palette of instruments (horns, flutes, woodwind, a full complement of strings--including harp, and percussion). In addition to the more common symphonic tutti it also has many moments in which these instrument groupings play against one another in small ensemble roles, with ample opportunity to hear instruments playing solo. Mahler in general is good for listening to a wide array of instruments in combination with one another.
Here are my initial impressions.
The AKG/SAC combo is extremely transparent with gobs of detail and a very precise and expanded soundstage. I thought the Sennheiser's were transparent when I compared them to Grado 125 but compared to the AKG the Senn show signs of coloration and warmth with a relatively squished projection of instrumental separation and difference. A discernable "silence" is etched between instruments with AKG. Instrumental separation and placement is very audible and nicely imaged. It does an amazing job of allowing the various layers and intensities/dynamics of instruments during complex tutti moments.
The potential down-side of AKG's transparency and detail is that it tends toward an analytical presentation, which may be fatiguing for extended listening. The Senn have a smooth (even soothing or "laid-back") balance across the sound range. However, compared to the AKG, the Senn's lows on bass instruments sound tubby and puffy (i.e., they lose more focus than the AKG) Where the Senn may make the stroke of a contrebass sound like a puff or glug of sound, you can hear the attack of the bow to string in the AKG. Again, I found this an interesting lesson in relativity because in my earlier comparisons of Senn and Grado, I clearly thought the Senn had better detail.
In contrast to my preference for the AKG in presentation of the bass sounds (percussion, lower brass, and stringed instruments), the Senn have a tamer high range. The AKG/SAC tend toward pinched and thin highs (I am hoping this improves over time). For example the woodwinds sound nasally and violins more screechy. A musical phenomenon that I cannot explain electronically is that different headphones present the same instrument at different pitches (frequencies). For instance, the Senn seems to bring some of the violins and woodwinds down almost an octave from that of the AKG. This, I think, explains why the soundstage is more collapsed and "colored" than the AKG.
Because of AKG's thin and pinched highs I decided to lunge into the belly of the beast (for me, string quartets because the sound of the violin can become very irritating if it is pitched too high and thin). I chose the Emerson String Quartet playing Beethoven op. 131. I was pleasantly surprised by how the AKG dealt with this music. It was thinner than the Senn but not irritating. The detail, transparency and especially the PRAT leaped out at me. The texture of the sound, the timbre of the instruments really was greatly improved over the Senn. In all of my listening the AKG was clear a winner when it came to dynamics. It could present the subtlest shades and shifts from pianissimo to fortissimo.
The last two movements of this quartet really generate some heat and speed. To borrow a digital metaphor, the Senn just seemed like the information was streaming too fast for them to keep up, while the AKG snapped up the information and laid it out in a "real-time" stream. The pizzicato and rapid sawing of the bow across the strings were thrillingly presented with the AKG. The rapid-fire cross playing of the four lines undulating from player to player was palpable.
The lows of the cello didn't bloom like the Senn but neither did they get lost with the AKG. They just were plucked and bowed without collapsing into the complex pandemonium of sound. If people like a physical feel to their bass, I don't think that the AKG is right for you. You can "groove" to them but they're certainly not headbangers. It takes some adjustment to get into the groove of the music but when you do, you're "there", right in front (if not on top) of the music. The Senn has a more distanced presentation of the music -- smooth and refined.
I had the hardest time trying to compare the two with vocal music. Just to add suspicion to my views, most people argue that AKG 1000 really shine in vocal music. I am not convinced that they are the hands down winner in this department. I couldn't believe my ears so I tried a few different samples (soprano Susan Graham in Le roi du Thule; soprano Regine Crespin in Berlioz's Les Nuits d'ete, and tenor Ian Bostridge in Schubert's Die Schone Mullerin). I generally preferred the Senn because the voices were more voluptuous and immediately pleasant -- some of the cushion of warmth and color supported the voices and deepened their texture. The AKG was detailed and transparent, but in a way that made the voice seem unsupported, isolated, and "naked" (giving a certain graininess to the voice). I still need to listen more because I'm not convinced that one is clearly better than other, but I'm nonetheless surprised that AKG didn't impress me more.
In the end, my judgement about the 2 combos is similar to that of picking who's better: Vermeer or Rubens, Bach or Beethoven, Proust or Joyce, Batman or Spider Man? They're different, each with the strengths, and at this level, very few real weakness. I can see myself moving back and forth endlessly. Sometimes picking up the AKG K1000 for careful, analytical listening, wanting to hear a crystalline sound of transparency and detail (especially in chamber music). Sometimes relaxing to the musicality of the Senn their immediate invitation to be enveloped in a lusty musical experience.
For additional reviews from more experienced ears than mine, see Jan's initial review of AKG1000:
http://headwize.com/ubb/showpage5.php?fnum=1&tid=2862
Jan's Review of SAC amp:
http://headwize.com/ubb/showpage5.php?fnum=2&tid=1808
An exceptionally detailed and comprehensive review of AKG 1000, including short comparisons using various amps:
http://www.acidhardware.com/reviews/akg/index.shtml
Todd's (from Headroom) review of AKG 1000 with Antique Sound Labs AQ 1005DT tube power amp:
http://headwize.com/ubb/showpage5.php?fnum=1&tid=2447
Harry's review (via Jan) comparing AKG 1000 to other headphones:
http://headwize.com/ubb/showpage5.ph...days=2&stime=0
Jan's subsequent view of the AKG 1000 compared to other headphones:
http://headwize.com/ubb/showpage5.ph...time=0&fpage=2
M Rael's excellent description of AKG's sound comparing it to Sony MDR-F1
http://headwize.com/ubb/showpage5.ph...days=2&stime=0
There are, of course, others but these were the ones that I remembered best for one reason or another.
First, an apologia. I'm a novice at explaining what I hear. I know next to nothing about electronics or its terminology so I can't offer any mega- or killo- talk (which would help me better explain some things that I hear). I'll also say that at age 43 my hearing is more discerning than in earlier years, but at the price of some loss in the upper frequencies -- not enough however to affect most musical listening. I'm sure there will be other, more experienced and eloquent commentaries on this particular combo. And I anxiously await their views because I have learned a lot from this and other audio forums. (At the end of this post I include links to reviews in the past 6 months on AKG K1000 and/or SAC amp.) However, I decided that an early, initial-impression post might be warranted because I have received a few e-mails asking me for my views of this combo from people wanting to act on Jan's current sales-action before it's too late. This is not really a review, just my listening notes, so take it with a grain of salt.
Equipment: Arcam Alpha 5
ART Di/O DAC
Dimarzio ic w/ radioshack 1/4" adapters to connect to ART Di/O
Getting Started: The AKG take some fussing to get the right sound. I fiddled a little with adjustments on AKG K1000. I first tried to turn the ear-grilles out. My head's pretty skinny so I lost too much bass. I returned them parallel to my ear for better bass and tilted the headband toward the front of my head to improve the bass still more. After quite a while of listening (each time having to find the best spot), I've settled on tilting them the headband toward the back of my head to pick up a clearer and stronger bass signal. This has become my standard listening position which means quiet, fairly still listening in a chair -- no boogying on the dance floor or the headphones will fly who knows where! I find the AKG very comfortable. There is a slight pressure on your temple with no pressure on your ears. I prefer this to the conventional headphone feel.
For my first audition I listened to Mahler 4th Symphony, 2d movement. This is a scherzi, a demented and rusticated parody of a waltz. It is a nice audition piece because of the wide palette of instruments (horns, flutes, woodwind, a full complement of strings--including harp, and percussion). In addition to the more common symphonic tutti it also has many moments in which these instrument groupings play against one another in small ensemble roles, with ample opportunity to hear instruments playing solo. Mahler in general is good for listening to a wide array of instruments in combination with one another.
Here are my initial impressions.
The AKG/SAC combo is extremely transparent with gobs of detail and a very precise and expanded soundstage. I thought the Sennheiser's were transparent when I compared them to Grado 125 but compared to the AKG the Senn show signs of coloration and warmth with a relatively squished projection of instrumental separation and difference. A discernable "silence" is etched between instruments with AKG. Instrumental separation and placement is very audible and nicely imaged. It does an amazing job of allowing the various layers and intensities/dynamics of instruments during complex tutti moments.
The potential down-side of AKG's transparency and detail is that it tends toward an analytical presentation, which may be fatiguing for extended listening. The Senn have a smooth (even soothing or "laid-back") balance across the sound range. However, compared to the AKG, the Senn's lows on bass instruments sound tubby and puffy (i.e., they lose more focus than the AKG) Where the Senn may make the stroke of a contrebass sound like a puff or glug of sound, you can hear the attack of the bow to string in the AKG. Again, I found this an interesting lesson in relativity because in my earlier comparisons of Senn and Grado, I clearly thought the Senn had better detail.
In contrast to my preference for the AKG in presentation of the bass sounds (percussion, lower brass, and stringed instruments), the Senn have a tamer high range. The AKG/SAC tend toward pinched and thin highs (I am hoping this improves over time). For example the woodwinds sound nasally and violins more screechy. A musical phenomenon that I cannot explain electronically is that different headphones present the same instrument at different pitches (frequencies). For instance, the Senn seems to bring some of the violins and woodwinds down almost an octave from that of the AKG. This, I think, explains why the soundstage is more collapsed and "colored" than the AKG.
Because of AKG's thin and pinched highs I decided to lunge into the belly of the beast (for me, string quartets because the sound of the violin can become very irritating if it is pitched too high and thin). I chose the Emerson String Quartet playing Beethoven op. 131. I was pleasantly surprised by how the AKG dealt with this music. It was thinner than the Senn but not irritating. The detail, transparency and especially the PRAT leaped out at me. The texture of the sound, the timbre of the instruments really was greatly improved over the Senn. In all of my listening the AKG was clear a winner when it came to dynamics. It could present the subtlest shades and shifts from pianissimo to fortissimo.
The last two movements of this quartet really generate some heat and speed. To borrow a digital metaphor, the Senn just seemed like the information was streaming too fast for them to keep up, while the AKG snapped up the information and laid it out in a "real-time" stream. The pizzicato and rapid sawing of the bow across the strings were thrillingly presented with the AKG. The rapid-fire cross playing of the four lines undulating from player to player was palpable.
The lows of the cello didn't bloom like the Senn but neither did they get lost with the AKG. They just were plucked and bowed without collapsing into the complex pandemonium of sound. If people like a physical feel to their bass, I don't think that the AKG is right for you. You can "groove" to them but they're certainly not headbangers. It takes some adjustment to get into the groove of the music but when you do, you're "there", right in front (if not on top) of the music. The Senn has a more distanced presentation of the music -- smooth and refined.
I had the hardest time trying to compare the two with vocal music. Just to add suspicion to my views, most people argue that AKG 1000 really shine in vocal music. I am not convinced that they are the hands down winner in this department. I couldn't believe my ears so I tried a few different samples (soprano Susan Graham in Le roi du Thule; soprano Regine Crespin in Berlioz's Les Nuits d'ete, and tenor Ian Bostridge in Schubert's Die Schone Mullerin). I generally preferred the Senn because the voices were more voluptuous and immediately pleasant -- some of the cushion of warmth and color supported the voices and deepened their texture. The AKG was detailed and transparent, but in a way that made the voice seem unsupported, isolated, and "naked" (giving a certain graininess to the voice). I still need to listen more because I'm not convinced that one is clearly better than other, but I'm nonetheless surprised that AKG didn't impress me more.
In the end, my judgement about the 2 combos is similar to that of picking who's better: Vermeer or Rubens, Bach or Beethoven, Proust or Joyce, Batman or Spider Man? They're different, each with the strengths, and at this level, very few real weakness. I can see myself moving back and forth endlessly. Sometimes picking up the AKG K1000 for careful, analytical listening, wanting to hear a crystalline sound of transparency and detail (especially in chamber music). Sometimes relaxing to the musicality of the Senn their immediate invitation to be enveloped in a lusty musical experience.
For additional reviews from more experienced ears than mine, see Jan's initial review of AKG1000:
http://headwize.com/ubb/showpage5.php?fnum=1&tid=2862
Jan's Review of SAC amp:
http://headwize.com/ubb/showpage5.php?fnum=2&tid=1808
An exceptionally detailed and comprehensive review of AKG 1000, including short comparisons using various amps:
http://www.acidhardware.com/reviews/akg/index.shtml
Todd's (from Headroom) review of AKG 1000 with Antique Sound Labs AQ 1005DT tube power amp:
http://headwize.com/ubb/showpage5.php?fnum=1&tid=2447
Harry's review (via Jan) comparing AKG 1000 to other headphones:
http://headwize.com/ubb/showpage5.ph...days=2&stime=0
Jan's subsequent view of the AKG 1000 compared to other headphones:
http://headwize.com/ubb/showpage5.ph...time=0&fpage=2
M Rael's excellent description of AKG's sound comparing it to Sony MDR-F1
http://headwize.com/ubb/showpage5.ph...days=2&stime=0
There are, of course, others but these were the ones that I remembered best for one reason or another.
