[trellus]

I've tried various amps, including portable, and I couldn't get to sound revealing. It's probably one of the most unrevealing headphone I've heard. That is a big disappointment in my books. I value transparency highly. I mean we are suppose to be expecting 'high fidelity.'

Strange, to my ears in some short comparison listening I did casually yesterday between the K712 and the R70x, I did find the K712 to be “more revealing” generally than the R70x, but I attribute it to the wider sound and increased instrument separation. The timbre seemed more natural on the R70x, on the other hand.

 

[SilverEars]

Strange, to my ears in some short comparison listening I did casually yesterday between the K712 and the R70x, I did find the K712 to be “more revealing” generally than the R70x, but I attribute it to the wider sound and increased instrument separation. The timbre seemed more natural on the R70x, on the other hand.

That's what Lachlan was saying in his video as well, but that's problematic for me since K712 isn't all that revealing to me compared to many headphones I've tried in the past.

 

[trellus]

That's what Lachlan was saying in his video as well, but that's problematic for me since K712 isn't all that revealing to me compared to many headphones I've tried in the past.

Right on, I'm not saying that the K712 is revealing compared to generic ____, just to my ears, at least in a casual listening session yesterday, to the R70x specifically. What other many headphones specifically would you say are more revealing than the K712, I'm curious to know your reference points on that?

 

[Sonic Defender]

A general definition of what people mean when they say revealing would be useful for the discussion.

 

[trellus]

A general definition of what people mean when they say revealing would be useful for the discussion.

To me, it's just an English word -- you hear more sounds distinctly, as opposed to sounds being more muddled and indistinguishable from each other, i.e., "less is revealed." I don't think it's a technical term, I'll grant you that.

 

[SilverEars]

A general definition of what people mean when they say revealing would be useful for the discussion.

It's a term that can different meaning for a lot of people. I think of it in terms of transparency, bringing out the details/nuances in the recordings. Various levels of this revealing-ness. In the range of excessive to not musich noticeable, and the K712 is in placement of very low reveal. I don't hear things I hear with other more revealing headphones. Sennheisers are definitely more revealing.

 

[trellus]

It's a term that can different meaning for a lot of people. I think of it in terms of transparency, bringing out the details/nuances in the recordings. Various levels of this revealing-ness. In the range of excessive to not musich noticeable, and the K712 is in placement of very low reveal. I don't hear things I hear with other more revealing headphones. Sennheisers are definitely more revealing.

which sennheisers? I certainly expect the HD 800/800S to exceed the K712 in this aspect but do you also mean even the HD 6__ line?

 

[SilverEars]

which sennheisers? I certainly expect the HD 800/800S to exceed the K712 in this aspect but do you also mean even the HD 6__ line?

Yup, most definately the HD6 line. I would also take the 58X over the K712.

 

[hippotas]

I always think that my k701 is much more detailed and revealing than my hd600.

 

[SSandDigital]

A general definition of what people mean when they say revealing would be useful for the discussion.

Just another BS term that has no real meaning since it varies from person to person, it's BS, just like grain or any other idiotic term audiophools come up with. Why is it a BS? Cause if the headphones aren't revealing per it's actual definition, then it's dogsh**... so it's a idiotic BS term.

Personally believe the only way to guage if you'll like a headphone by someone's review is just listening and being exposed to different headphones and finding reviewers who have similar preference for headphones. Otherwise it's just a gamble, and hope you don't abuse Amazon's return policy too much.
- Example, I couldn't care less what a reviewer says if they think Grados are good. Just gotta filter out and find who has similar preference, and even then it's a gamble. If I see an interesting review, definitely go back through and see what other headphones they praised.
- As can see I'm a fan of AT sound. So I look for others who enjoy that sound. Or I see some reviews that seem legitimate from say Gearslutz, soundonsound, sweetwater etc, then it may pique my interest and I'll just give them a try. I'm interested in the Neumann NDH20 based on those reviews, just to try. Especially since I don't mind the Sennheiser sound and Neumann is Sennheiser. A closed HD650 with improvements to the mids? Intriguing.

If buying headphones used, then stick to headphones that sell well on the used market.

 

[Sonic Defender]

Just another BS term that has no real meaning since it varies from person to person, it's BS, just like grain or any other idiotic term audiophools come up with. Why is it a BS? Cause if the headphones aren't revealing per it's actual definition, then it's dogsh**... so it's a idiotic BS term.

I'm not entirely sure that is true. The term need not vary from person to person, it does because people don't often enough ask others what they mean when they use term x, or term y. The term may actually have a definition and utility when used in the audio lexicon. All words are meaningless until we attach meaning to them and agree upon the meaning. I also don't think people who are really into audio and pursues it with passion and pleasure are fools. I do agree that sometimes people get way out there with claims, but even so that doesn't make them fools. I will guarantee you that some of the audiophools here and elsewhere who say things that make you want to do a faceplant are probably extremely intelligent.

 

[llysender]

Who knows there isnt a standard defination for detail as far as i can tell. What i define as detail some others define as texture or microdetails and what some people define as detail i define as musicality or volume contrast.

@SSandDigital does the k712 have the same characterisic as the im02 extreme forward female vocals? Thats the preference lachlan likes so im just guessing its coloured the same way.

 

[SilverEars]

Who knows there isnt a standard defination for detail as far as i can tell. What i define as detail some others define as texture or microdetails and what some people define as detail i define as musicality or volume contrast.

@SSandDigital does the k712 have the same characterisic as the im02 extreme forward female vocals? Thats the preference lachlan likes so im just guessing its coloured the same way.

After trying out the K712, I would be vary surprised if Lachlan considers it for well suited for female vocals because I'm into vocal in general and have a FR in mind that works well for vocals. Vocals vary by headphone to headphone, but it's difficult to perfect. Kman1211 and I discussed the less presence of the upper-mids to obscure details, and this is the strong female vocal region. This has me perplexed.

 

[Hooster]

I am loving these cans, currently using these genuine sheepskin pads
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/4000185083813.html?spm=a2g0s.9042311.0.0.27424c4dENvzNe

I am using this after market cable which I can give the highest recommendation.
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32961118970.html?spm=a2g0s.9042311.0.0.27424c4dENC2X5
They are a clear step above the cable supplied with these cans.

 

[descloud]

Just another BS term that has no real meaning since it varies from person to person, it's BS, just like grain or any other idiotic term audiophools come up with. Why is it a BS? Cause if the headphones aren't revealing per it's actual definition, then it's dogsh**... so it's a idiotic BS term.

I disagree with this as well. There are terms used to describe objects, situations or sensations that are accepted by a large number of people because the english dictionary lacks the terms for it. That being said, there are words that attribute to physical objects (i.e. smooth, grainy, transparent, coloured) which link to the physical and visual sensation. There are people who misinterpret or misuse the words - causing confusion for others in using the terms. Just like how "AI" is being misused nowadays that different people will define it differently. But that doesn't mean it has no real meaning nor is it a BS term.

What is smooth to the eyes, is not generally the same as smooth to the touch. But what else can be used to describe the sensation? You tell me. But it is accepted that there are terms that can be used to describe different sensations - which is accepted by a large group of people.

In your example, grain is the closest term to describe a sound quality as not being smooth to the ear. It's akin to sliding your finger between wood that had varnish and one that does not have varnish. It's a sound quality that's caused by a combination of the driver capabilities along with the frequency response it generates. This is more apparent when doing side-by-side comparisons of headphones.

As to the term 'revealing', it generally means being able to decipher the different instruments played in a song. Some headphones do it better than others.

So I don't know why you're calling it an 'idiotic BS term' when it does in fact have a definitive description. Just because you do not understand how it's used, doesn't mean it's an idiotic term. That's a very shallow type of mentality.

Lastly, headphones are not by definition 'revealing', if you had that idea in mind.