[Gradino]

There are man fanboy sennheiser here

Andrea, canarino, silent please. You in www.videohifi.com are a BAD TROLL..

S.

 

[Comfy]

I have no experience with really high end cans (not before I receive the backorderered K701s, that is), but people saying burn-in is not real shoud compare a pair of new Grados to a burnt-in version of the same headphone.

My burnt-in MS-1s were much more involving, quicker and smoother than my HF-1s straight out of the pizza box. Grados sound compressed when out of the box. Little separation, little air. There is a major change with 50-100 hours of burn-in.

Now that the HF-1s have been burnt in, they are MUCH better than the MS-1s in every way.

In my opinion it's quite easy to understand that the driver gets quicker when it relaxes a little. It's simple physics. You don't need a degree in electronics to understand that. Chewing gum, for example, is often quite hard, 2-dimensional and compressed before you start chewing it. Then it turns smooth, 3-dimensional, warm, and the mouthstage increases dramatically. Something similar happens to some headphone drivers.

 

[Andrea]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Comfy In my opinion it's quite easy to understand that the driver gets quicker when it relaxes a little. It's simple physics.

Sure it's not hard to understand. But I feel it's to be understood correctly -- headphone drivers' diapraghms have a large and very elastic "suspension" area around the inner dome, which it is inappropriate to assimilate to the suspension of speaker drivers, much more liable to improving its mechanical properties within the first operating hours. The physical "relaxation" involved feels much less dramatic on phones (by experience).


Now, better leave it to the wisdom of actually perceived burn in effects

 

[NotJeffBuckley]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Comfy In my opinion it's quite easy to understand that the driver gets quicker when it relaxes a little. It's simple physics. You don't need a degree in electronics to understand that. Chewing gum, for example, is often quite hard, 2-dimensional and compressed before you start chewing it. Then it turns smooth, 3-dimensional, warm, and the mouthstage increases dramatically. Something similar happens to some headphone drivers.

That's bad science, amigo. You're talking about a diaphragm built specifically for stiffness and a voice coil built specifically for quick transient response. At the most, the diaphragm can loosen, but that wouldn't improve the sound at all, it would instead introduce phase variances as the outside edge catches up to the interior at extension. It would be awful.

On an unrelated note, I could really go for some chewing gum right now.

 

[Nik]

No any burnin can change the opinion if the listener has olready DECIDED do not change his cans, and I read this in the Mastergill's words so evident.

Best!
Nicola

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NotJeffBuckley You're talking about a diaphragm built specifically for stiffness and a voice coil built specifically for quick transient response. At the most, the diaphragm can loosen, but that wouldn't improve the sound at all, it would instead introduce phase variances as the outside edge catches up to the interior at extension. It would be awful.

In contrast to some speaker membranes headphone membranes are not built for a piston-like movement, but for flexible, partial vibration; the membrane has the function of suspension and membrane at the same time. In both cases break-in consists of loosening and possibly distressing, i.e. evening out, of inhomogeneities in the suspension's/membrane's elasticity, theoretically making for lower harmonic distortion and improved transient response.
.

 

[Andrea]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nik No any burnin can change the opinion if the listener has olready DECIDED do not change his cans, and I read this in the Mastergill's words so evident. Best! Nicola

Ain't it your own self you're telling about? Making one-way decisions...

 

[Nomad]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpelg While I do believe in burn in, I also agree with your statement. However, I also think you should cleanse your ear palate, so to speak, before assessing a headphone whose signature is so different from your standard.

I used to think the same until I tried the L3000. When I received the a brand new L3000G around 2 months later I couldn't believe how different they were. Two different headphones. Now they sound almost the same. I shouldn't have performed the burning on the L3000G and wait for a Head-fi Meet so people could test it by themselves. It really was remarcable.

I owned a fair amount of cans before. I never found such a drastic different. The next one (on my book) could have been on my K501 but it was far, far behind this one.

 

[NotJeffBuckley]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ In contrast to some speaker membranes headphone membranes are not built for a piston-like movement, but for flexible, partial vibration; the membrane has the function of suspension and membrane at the same time. In both cases break-in consists of loosening and possibly distressing, i.e. evening out, of inhomogeneities in the suspension's/membrane's elasticity, theoretically making for lower harmonic distortion and improved transient response. .

I'll check my facts on the construction issue - for now, I'll take your word for it; it makes sense, I guess, given the peculiar requirements placed on such a small driver. Even with that in mind, though, I don't think that stepped loosening and distressing is something that occurs over the period spoken of in this case... Although the AKG driver differs notably from most headphone drivers in its design and function.

 

[chamix]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nomad When I received the a brand new L3000G around 2 months later I couldn't believe how different they were. Two different headphones.

I find the L3000 really extreme in this regard, too. I haven't any problems with poeple who doesn't notice/belief to a remarkable different from burn-in. But I think it's an egocentric point of view if some of those poeple assume that people who notice a bigger different from burn-in to succumb basically to their wishfull thinking.

The K701 change IMHO a lot from the first hour to hour 300. At the beginning it sounds dull and artifical to my taste, the bass wasn't there and if there hasn't been any change of the beginnings sound quality, I wouldn't like to kept these phones, that's for sure. The HD650 is equally in this regard to me.

 

[Mastergill]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nik No any burnin can change the opinion if the listener has olready DECIDED do not change his cans, and I read this in the Mastergill's words so evident. Best! Nicola

It's not a secret that i really love the HD-650 (and HD-600 before). In my opinion they are as good as headphones can be. They refined the already excellent HD-600 in a way that i truly find mind-blowing. Ultra low harmonics distortions, really flat frequency response resulting in a transparency and bass reproduction that i believe have no equal for headphones. You know i could have bought R10, Qualia, Orpheus...etc, i have the money, but i'm not interrested. I know deep inside me that the HD-650 in a carefully tuned and tweaked setup just smoke everything, including Orpheus...for rock and pop. I know that. But this is just ONE opinion, mine.
Because to my ears i've found the Holy Grail of headphone sound reproduction, i can be over-enthusiastic, but man, when you found something really good you want to share, you want and almost need to talk about it!

All this to tell you that i wasn't looking for another phone, but i think i'm open minded, i'm not a stupid fanboy. If tomorrow there's an headphone that seems to show better potential than the HD-650 i'll try it and eventually buy it. So when the Bozeman boyz, that were huge HD-650's fan, say there's something better, i was very curious about it.

As you can read i have absolutely not trashed the K701. This is an excellent headphone. I was really surprised with the neutrality. They're getting in Sennheiser territory, heh!. But SO FAR this is not an HD-650 killer, no, not to my ears. Deep, subterranean bass is missing. And other little things. They (K701) still have that AKG 'sound'. This certainly come from the earcup shape, you know, the same since K240 days...

But both are very close sound-wise. The K701 is slightly bright and the HD-650 slightly dark.
You got a very good clarity in the midrange with K701 but i suspect they cheated a little, the brightness can give a sense of clarity. The HD-650 is ultra smooth in comparison and i think that's because they are a little more neutral, but i'm not 100% sure, again they are very close about neutrality.

I think if you really like your HD-650 you don't need K701 and vice versa. Both seem to crave for power, i think the K701 needs even more juice than HD-650.

 

[Andrea]

Will Mastergill's last post appear if I try posting a reply...

edit- hooray!

 

[Andrea]

Mastergill,

like you, I've also come to a "zenith" with those two Sennheiser phones you see here on the bottom. Plain and simple, thus I don't think any fanboyism is implied, really, nor a mind less than open.

 

[Patu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gradino Do you have you drunk champagne????????????? The 650 is to the 701 as a mouse it is to a KING... s.

Man this guy is one serious fanboy.

I must say also that K701 definitely has better soundstage and positioning than 650s.

What I liked better with 650s and what made me keep them after all was the smooth and warm sound which never fatigues you. There's no time when you couldn't pick up 650s and just let the music flow into your ears. It's always so pleasent experience. And soundwise K701 had this sibilance effect with my equipment and 650s bass was slightly better to my ears.

 

[sean-xenos]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patu Man this guy is one serious fanboy. I must say also that K701 definitely has better soundstage and positioning than 650s. ...

Yes, I have absolutely the same impression.
I compared the HD650s and K701s so often, with three different kinds of headphone amps,
but I really can't imagine how someone using approriate amplification could not notice the bigger soundstage and more precise positioning of the K701s.