[ematthews]

All true. I am leaning towards liking my AT MSR7's better than my new T5P gen 2 headphones. I just enjoy the music better on the AT. You would think at almost 700 more for the Beyer's you would get a better sound. Maybe better build quality.

 

[jinxy245]

That's an excellent explanation, thank you (no sarcasm).
 
I was mostly responding to your saying "The mids are laid back, that is just a fact", when that is an interpretation. One that I agree with BTW. If Dephezz doesn't  hear it that way, that is his opinion...we can't know what he hears...what his sources are, what tracks, bitrate, what volume etc.  The reviews I cited (attempt) to illustrate that. Calling the vocals "forward", and saying the vocals "stand out in the mix" doesn't sound laid back. When you say "dt1770 objectively does have less mids than the msr7" I'd say you're right on the money (from imperfect memory of a brief audition of the msr7). So if you were saying 'The mids are laid back (in comparison to the msr7) that is just a fact', I get it. There is a measurable difference, but that doesn't mean it audible (although I think so). Of course one can argue what the measuring procedures were, the calibration etc. as well (where did you get the graph? Very informative.) But I'm not doing that. I'm just trying to keep this subjective.
Thanks for clearing that up, though.

 

[akg fanboy]

  That's an excellent explanation, thank you (no sarcasm).
 
I was mostly responding to your saying "The mids are laid back, that is just a fact", when that is an interpretation. One that I agree with BTW. If Dephezz doesn't  hear it that way, that is his opinion...we can't know what he hears...what his sources are, what tracks, bitrate, what volume etc.  The reviews I cited (attempt) to illustrate that. Calling the vocals "forward", and saying the vocals "stand out in the mix" doesn't sound laid back. When you say "dt1770 objectively does have less mids than the msr7" I'd say you're right on the money (from imperfect memory of a brief audition of the msr7). So if you were saying 'The mids are laid back (in comparison to the msr7) that is just a fact', I get it. There is a measurable difference, but that doesn't mean it audible (although I think so). Of course one can argue what the measuring procedures were, the calibration etc. as well (where did you get the graph? Very informative.) But I'm not doing that. I'm just trying to keep this subjective.
Thanks for clearing that up, though.

Yeah you are pretty much on point with everything you said, one of the reviews was weird how he referred 1.5khz and above as treble? This is probably another subject that causes some disparity. Generally speaking for reference, I refer below 1.5khz as the mid bass, 1.5-3khz as the "mids", and 3-4khz as the "upper mids", but I usually just clump them all together as 1 term just for vocals if I don't want to get into the specifics.

 

[akg fanboy]

  All true. I am leaning towards liking my AT MSR7's better than my new T5P gen 2 headphones. I just enjoy the music better on the AT. You would think at almost 700 more for the Beyer's you would get a better sound. Maybe better build quality.

What did you not like about the t5p and what kind parts of the music does the msr7 convey better for you? 
I felt the same way when I went from my Q701 to the much more expensive T1 expecting big changes but ended up in disappoint which is probably why I rated them lower than they really are capable of

 

[kman1211]

The mids are laid back, that is just a fact. Check the frequency response measurements, that's how my ears heard them when I first got them and that's how I still hear them. The dt1770 is by no means a balanced/serious sound compared to the msr7, the dt1770 are more of a "fun" sounding headphone than anything else. Still has exaggerated bass, dip in the mids, and a treble peak. Not saying the dt1770 is bad because I do like them. But you are being very misleading

It also depends on pad wear, my velours on the DT 1770 are very compressed so this bring the stage closer to my ears making the sound more intimate bringing the mids forward, I don't find the mids laid-back on those pads but did on the pleathers, but there is a couple dips which does some oddities mainly to deep male vocals(a bit muted sounding). Have you had a chance to hear the DT 1990? In regards to the T1 and Q701, I do think the T1 is better but it takes a beastly amp to get them happy, preferably tube due to their high impedance and that impedance swing to 1400 ohms in the lower regions. The Q701 and K7 series are underrated by many, though honestly the K7 that stood out to me was the K712, something was different about it compared to the rest, more refined and seemed to scale better with gear. The Austrian K612 is very nice, but good luck finding one, the chinese one's done sound the same nor as good. Honestly won't touch chinese akgs after my experience with the K7XX and K612(chinese). Seems like your a big fan of the K601 based on your profile. What about it do you like so much? 

 

[SHAMuuu]

  It also depends on pad wear, my velours on the DT 1770 are very compressed so this bring the stage closer to my ears making the sound more intimate bringing the mids forward, I don't find the mids laid-back on those pads but did on the pleathers, but there is a couple dips which does some oddities mainly to deep male vocals(a bit muted sounding). Have you had a chance to hear the DT 1990? In regards to the T1 and Q701, I do think the T1 is better but it takes a beastly amp to get them happy, preferably tube due to their high impedance and that impedance swing to 1400 ohms in the lower regions. The Q701 and K7 series are underrated by many, though honestly the K7 that stood out to me was the K712, something was different about it compared to the rest, more refined and seemed to scale better with gear. The Austrian K612 is very nice, but good luck finding one, the chinese one's done sound the same nor as good. Honestly won't touch chinese akgs after my experience with the K7XX and K612(chinese). Seems like your a big fan of the K601 based on your profile. What about it do you like so much? 

I'm not being cheeky, but what is a beastly amp, because we're talking milliwatts right? I've had oldschool MADE IN USA amps pushing 1000-2000 watts RMS. Those i call beastly
 
There has to be more than just beastly, like consistency of power delivery etc. Quality of components within amp.
 
I don't know much about headphone amps, still learning as to why some are so insanely expensive since headphones take so little power

 

[kman1211]

  I'm not being cheeky, but what is a beastly amp, because we're talking milliwatts right? I've had oldschool MADE IN USA amps pushing 1000-2000 watts RMS. Those i call beastly
 
There has to be more than just beastly, like consistency of power delivery etc. Quality of components within amp.
 
I don't know much about headphone amps, still learning as to why some are so insanely expensive since headphones take so little power

I guess it would be better to say pretty much they take a substantial desktop amp to sound their full potential, preferably tubes. What I mean by beastly is that all the amps I've heard the T1 at their full potential are quite large in physical size and are able to put a good amount of power into higher impedance headphones.

 

[SHAMuuu]

  I guess it would be better to say pretty much they take a substantial desktop amp to sound their full potential, preferably tubes. What I mean by beastly is that all the amps I've heard the T1 at their full potential are quite large in physical size and are able to put a good amount of power into higher impedance headphones.

Fair enough. I have a measly little Bravo Ocean, but its surprisingly powerful.i dont turn it more than 25% (9 o clock) for 250ohm versions.
I read on one of the posts for 600ohm mid beyers (maybe 880/990) the power required was similar for the 250 and 600, but i have my doubts
 
anyway im sure those larger more intimdating multi tubes probably provide better sq... hopefully anyway
 
it seems the better the amps/dacs, the less you notice them (less system noise)
 
which is nice.

 

[kman1211]

 
Fair enough. I have a measly little Bravo Ocean, but its surprisingly powerful.i dont turn it more than 25% (9 o clock) for 250ohm versions.
I read on one of the posts for 600ohm mid beyers (maybe 880/990) the power required was similar for the 250 and 600, but i have my doubts
 
anyway im sure those larger more intimdating multi tubes probably provide better sq... hopefully anyway
 
it seems the better the amps/dacs, the less you notice them (less system noise)
 
which is nice.

The T1's aren't super hard to drive, the problem is that impedance spike. They are easier to drive than the 600 ohm traditional Beyers volume wise. They aren't as hard to drive as say the old K240 Sextett, that thing is incredibly hard to drive. 
 
They do provide better SQ, better components, etc. They do, I found the DT 1770/1990 actually quite sensitive to system noise despite being 250 ohms.

 

[akg fanboy]

  It also depends on pad wear, my velours on the DT 1770 are very compressed so this bring the stage closer to my ears making the sound more intimate bringing the mids forward, I don't find the mids laid-back on those pads but did on the pleathers, but there is a couple dips which does some oddities mainly to deep male vocals(a bit muted sounding). Have you had a chance to hear the DT 1990? In regards to the T1 and Q701, I do think the T1 is better but it takes a beastly amp to get them happy, preferably tube due to their high impedance and that impedance swing to 1400 ohms in the lower regions. The Q701 and K7 series are underrated by many, though honestly the K7 that stood out to me was the K712, something was different about it compared to the rest, more refined and seemed to scale better with gear. The Austrian K612 is very nice, but good luck finding one, the chinese one's done sound the same nor as good. Honestly won't touch chinese akgs after my experience with the K7XX and K612(chinese). Seems like your a big fan of the K601 based on your profile. What about it do you like so much? 

No I have not been able to hear the dt1990, I personally think they are the most well designed beyerdynamic headphones in existence but the general consensus says they aren't a huge departure from the beyerdynamic house sound and I am really just interested in better mids/soundstage/comfort at this point (the three most important aspects of a headphone to me).
I got the dt1770 because it was a closed back and I don't know of many high end closed backs that won't cost you a small fortune, and I am not interested in fostex headphones due to the v shaped sound signature. The only headphones i'm truly interested in are the k1000 (soundstage)/esp950 (mids), or the upcoming mysphere 3.1, other headphones are just out of pure curiosity rather than a strong desire to actually own them.
 
I love my k601s because they did exactly what I thought was missing with my q701s... add a bit more mids at the 2khz region and retain the same bass quantity. Sometimes I found the q701 a bit too bright for long term listening (5+ hours) as they were my long term daily drivers. My hd800 has since replaced them because they do clarity and soundstage better. But my k601 gives me the smooth and vocal centric experience I've long desired in a headphone, and it does all this without being dark which I absolutely abhor, and they soundstage better than any other mid centric headphone I've heard. If I'm looking for a bit more engagement and clarity, I just give them a slight 2-3dB boost at 3.8khz and they are really unmatched in musicality in my experience. Every time I put on my k601s I am just floored by how musical and engaging they are without being boomy in the bass or shrill in the highs like many headphones. Did I also mention they are supremely comfortable, the earpads are slightly softer than my q701s.

 

[jinxy245]

  Yeah you are pretty much on point with everything you said, one of the reviews was weird how he referred 1.5khz and above as treble? This is probably another subject that causes some disparity. Generally speaking for reference, I refer below 1.5khz as the mid bass, 1.5-3khz as the "mids", and 3-4khz as the "upper mids", but I usually just clump them all together as 1 term just for vocals if I don't want to get into the specifics.

I usually go by this for reference...
 
http://www.teachmeaudio.com/mixing/techniques/audio-spectrum
 
it lists the mids as 500 Hz to 2 kHz, so that kinda jives, but yes, I think it's subjective.
 
 
a little off topic here...I don't want to hijack...
 

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

(And BTW...I haven't had a chance to check out the K601 yet...I've enjoyed my Q701, but ow you have me curious...)

 

[wordfool]

 

 
Good to see a chart that kinda confirms what I'm hearing. I would certainly not call them "fun" or "V-shaped". The mids definitely hold their own in the mix, but the bass sounds a little less substantial than the curve would suggest in my experience. That mid-bass dip can make some rock music sound a bit thin, and I've tried to EQ it out a bit. The dip in the upper mids does ensure they don't get too "shouty", however. 
 
Interesting to see there's so little difference between the velour and pleather pads at the bottom end. 

 

[akg fanboy]

I usually go by this for reference...

http://www.teachmeaudio.com/mixing/techniques/audio-spectrum

it lists the mids as 500 Hz to 2 kHz, so that kinda jives, but yes, I think it's subjective.


a little off topic here...I don't want to hijack...

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

(And BTW...I haven't had a chance to check out the K601 yet...I've enjoyed my Q701, but ow you have me curious...)

Hmmm... I think we can all agree 2khz is the midrange though! That's my favorite frequency and usually the part I EQ with most headphones with the exception of the k601 and w5000s. My w5000s are definitely more upfront but to the point where it gets unnatural. I will probably EQ the dt1770 soon so maybe I will enjoy them a lot more afterwards (I already pick my dt1770 if I'm in the mood for hard hitting bass over my he560)

 

[akg fanboy]

Good to see a chart that kinda confirms what I'm hearing. I would certainly not call them "fun" or "V-shaped". The mids definitely hold their own in the mix, but the bass sounds a little less substantial than the curve would suggest in my experience. That mid-bass dip can make some rock music sound a bit thin, and I've tried to EQ it out a bit. The dip in the upper mids does ensure they don't get too "shouty", however. 

Interesting to see there's so little difference between the velour and pleather pads at the bottom end. 

By mids I usually mean 2khz and above, those who are familiar with AKG headphones would know that this is where they excell at while the beyers get a dip in that area. I actually like that dip in around 250hz which helps bass sound clean (sometimes cleaner than he560) while still having tons of hard hitting bass that exceeds the he560 purely on quantity. And for the record, my dt1770s are my bass head headphones and I wouldn't go any further than that in bass quantity

 

[jinxy245]

   
I got the dt1770 because it was a closed back and I don't know of many high end closed backs that won't cost you a small fortune, and I am not interested in fostex headphones due to the v shaped sound signature.

If you want a cheap experiment, I'd  recommend the AT MX 40x... for the price, I find them to be awesome...The 1770 is MUCH bassier to my ears, better sound stage, too but the AT has a descent slam, and cleaner than the 50x (IMO). Love hearing vocals with them, too. Apples & oranges I know...just thought I'd throw it out there