[Andrea]

Sounds like Mastergill and me will wait for the new HDxxx with more peace of mind than others.

 

[Nik]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ That's very interesting. Do you know the output impedance (and possible serial capacitance) of the Linn? I wonder if it's an electrically ideal match. What potentiometer is used? 1 kOhm, 10 kOhm...? Those values would be much too high for a 62-ohm load. 100 ohm would be passably adequate. So how is its attenuation characteristic throughout the regulation range? And how and how good does it sound without amplification, directly connected to the Linn's line-out amp, so to speak? And what exactly is the effect from amplification? .

Hi JaZZ,

this is all I can read on the Linn Sondek owner manual:


Unbalanced outputs RCA

Output level: 2v rms (peak code)
output impedance: 200 ohm
Minimun load: 1K ohm

I don't know which kind of potentiometer is used in the Leben CS-600, may be an ALPS, but a "custom", the knob goes with littles steps... no any owner manual is provided because a new product.

With th 701 the full amplified of the two stadied of the amp is better for airy and quality of the sound.

With the HD 650 ai prefer bypassing the pre-stage of the CS-600.

(The output impedance of the transoprmers of the CS-600 is 45 ohm.).

Best!
Nicola

 

[JaZZ]

Thanks, Nicola!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nik Output impedance: 200 ohm Minimum load: 1 kOhm

Especially the latter point disqualifies it from driving the K 701 with its 62 ohm. But also the HD 650's ~350 ohm are still clearly too low for the direct connection.


Quote:

With the HD 650 I prefer bypassing the pre-stage of the CS-600.

Now I see that I've misinterpreted your indications. It's just the pre-amp stage which is bypassed, the power-amp stage is always active. So the Linn's output impedance has no meaning.


Quote:

With th 701 the full amplified of the two stadied of the amp is better for airy and quality of the sound.

The pre-amp stage is actually an unnecessary complication of the signal path and can just add coloration -- obviously of the pleasing kind in the case of the K 701.


Quote:

(The output impedance of the transformers of the CS-600 is 45 ohm.).

That's a bit much for a 62-ohm load! But still acceptable, although it has some sonic consequences in the form of a slight bass accentuation.
.

 

[Atropos]

does the 650 or the K701 sound better at lower volumes?
with the 650 and the Aria I have always to turn up volume that it really sounds clear.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atropos Does the 650 or the K701 sound better at lower volumes? with the 650 and the Aria I have always to turn up volume that it really sounds clear.

I don't have complaints with none of them at low volumes, neither with clarity nor with the sonic spectrum. Resolution-wise both are suitable for low volumes. [Edit:] Maybe your Aria needs more burn-in time? Quite plausible to me, as I experienced a certain roughness during the first 200 (or so) hours myself.
.

 

[Nik]

JaZZ,

Probably that so good sound for the 701 comes from the full tubey sound, so adopting the CS-600 in a full configuration, even if I can understand that the shortest signal way is from the pre-in.

Not the same for the HD 650 that is very good if listened by the pre-in way.

It is like to have a hybrid or a full tubey amp...

Best!
Nicola

 

[Nik]

And also... is the sound of the CS-600 more depending by the first or the second stage of the amp? I don't know...

Best!
Nicola

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nik And also... is the sound of the CS-600 more depending by the first or the second stage of the amp? I don't know...

...neither do I. But bypassing one of them will make it ~50% more neutral.
.

 

[Nik]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ ...neither do I. But bypassing one of them will make it ~50% more neutral. .

May be, but neutral is not so "natural" (to our ears) sometimes...

The pre-stage of the CS-600 add a touch of life that remember me the beautifulness of the W5000... and even the 701 become more natural and lush (in the HD 650 direction) but still detailed and airy as they are.

Best!
Nicola

 

[Ayreonaut]

I've been lurking in this thread for a while and have noticed that you guys have discussed frequency response (tone) at length. But what about time response (pace, rythym and timing) and dynamics? Can you comment on those?

 

[Mastergill]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Comfy Mastergill, for how many hours did you burn them in? At what volumes? And to what kind of music do you generally listen to?

You guys made me doing something i've never done in my all 'audio life' (23 years so far): burn'in the stuff for 2 continuous days without listening. I've reached a total of maybe 70 hours of use and i listen at fairly loud level, so maybe according to JaZZ's "burn'in standart"

it should be something like a little more than 100 hours of 'normal' burn'in. But the madness had to stop somewhere and i decided it's more than enough for me to form a solid opinion.

I can't believe i'm discussing this now! LOL. You know with experience and ultra-revealing gear you shouldn't need more than 2 to 10 hours to form a valid opinion.
Burn'in is just icing on the cake, you don't need to wait 'complete' burn'in to judge a piece of gear. Recording is another passion of mine, i had a small business in the early '90s. Do you really think that when you demo a mic or another recording gear you really take care about how many hours there's on the stuff?. When you don"t like it it's packed and returned the same day.

Trust me, if i really liked the K701, i would have dumped my beloved HD-650 in a heartbeat...

What's cool with internet forum is that everything you write is "recorded", and myself, i have no problem going back to some of my first posts. Here's below was my very first HD-650's impressions the day i got them (11/26/2003).

http://www6.head-fi.org/forums/showt...650+impression

This has not been edited since. As you can see i don't need 300 hours to form an opinion about a new gear. Of course i didn't spoke in detail about the phone, but i got the main points...don't you think? (Or at least i'm consistent with my finding)

About the music i listen to rock/pop and a little rap. Don't trust me if you're listening only to classical or acoustic jazz, like i don't trust a 'classical' guy when it's about bass response.

 

[blumenco]

well, it really looks like to me, and i have not heard the AKG yet, but it sounds like they simply illuminate the errors of transistorized (or tube made to sound like transistor) equipment. lack of bass, tiny soundstage, harshness...

this is not to say that i am badmouthing transistor stuff. it can be made to sound very good and i have high end solid state stuff and love it. that is not to say there are not problems though...just like the tube or digital stuff

these issues that folks are finding with the akg 701 are no surprise to me given the level of audio IQ around here. I just find it hard to beleive that people do not talk about their entire systems more often. they want to talk about headphone this and burn in that, but never really make a point.

if you do not like a system's sound then change it!!! then come back and post impressions. I feel like even though people take time to burn in a component - a passive excercise - they never get past square one with realizing that componen't full potential by trying to understand what it needs to be given in order to perform its best and conversely what is will contribute to the other components in the system.

i do not like the idea of thinking that an amp that sounds perfect with a sennheiser will also sound perfect with a grado. it will probably sound too forward with the grado, etc. they are mutually exclusive.

I will be using mine when they finally arrive with stricktly SET stuff of the highest refinement. I seriously doubt that i will ever look back...

I also think that synergy is probably the single most important factor with any audio system. I feel that it is why the orpheus system reaches such refinement. they actually took the time to tune the components to EACH OTHER!

here is the thing though: synergy is something that i feel is all too frequently attained by a 50 dollar boom box (within its ability) (the point is that the thing is listenable) but we here on this forum seem to ignore the concept. we want to throw money or love or religion or whatever and think it will solve the problem. I think that given the proper adjustment, tuning and patience that almost any component can be made synergistic within a system. that is the whole point: to compensate and cover up flaws of each individual component by putting it into a system. some people call these things sound systems. do you own one?

I tend to find my favorite systems are those that are highly detailed but chilled out (not shouty) electronics that finally get everything presented by a relatively bright headphone or speaker at the end. then you are not covering anything up.

as for break in, i have to say that i think it is probably somewhat an issue. while i agree that most components can be judged relatively early, one makes that judgement call assuming smoother days in the future. certain components are more sensitive than others. i have found that some of the vintage gear i use really takes a long time to re-break in. paper oil caps, old connections, tubes, etc.

peace out and chill out.

Clark

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nik May be, but neutral is not so "natural" (to our ears) sometimes... The pre-stage of the CS-600 add a touch of life that remember me the beautifulness of the W5000... and even the 701 become more natural and lush (in the HD 650 direction) but still detailed and airy as they are.

There we have it again!
Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ ...there are only few people who can afford this kind of expense. ... And IMO monster amps primarily serve for (euphonic) compensation, not accuracy. That's my personal experience, passably substantiated by corresponding tests.

Nothing against you personally, Nicola! (You're a very sympathetic guy!) But why should I want to pay $5,500 for euphonic effects when I can have the Aria for $450 which is much closer to a wire with gain!

-- Now, of course, if you have the money, why not go for what makes your headphones sound best to your ears, no matter if it's accurate or not, as long as it sounds like it; nothing wrong with that. Well, I have the feeling that among the subjectivist audiophiles I belong to the objectivist wing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ayreonaut I've been lurking in this thread for a while and have noticed that you guys have discussed frequency response (tone) at length. But what about time response (pace, rythym and timing) and dynamics? Can you comment on those?

A few excerpts from previous comments:
Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ The bass is light and airy. Nevertheless, I perceive it as very substantial in the sense of control and definition. That's where electrostats don't excel IMO, although their low-frequency resolution is excellent. Sounds like an antagonism, but that's how I perceive it. And the K 701's bass goes very low, 25 Hz without noticeable drop-off, judged by ear with test tones. It resembles the DT 880 in this regard, also with respect to the airiness. But the K 701's bass seems to «breath» more than the DT 880's, most likely a consequence of the open design (the DT 880 has just a small vent for breathing), and shows better impact and higher dynamics (judged from memory). In terms of texturing quality it reminds me of the SA5000's bass, but it is better integrated to the midrange than with the latter and reaches farther down. ...there are moments of almost revelatory experience when I feel to be very close to my sonic ideal: There's a breathtakingly high quality of definition and precision of the tone. I suspect that there's a very slight midrange recession barely perceived as coloration which helps to convey the impression of sharp transients and a certain snappiness as well as an accentuation of contours -- of course combined with really good transient response and cleanness of sound. ...It also is closest to the ER-4's definition and transient accuracy, especially in the bass.

So I really think the K 701's dynamic behavior and transient response are exemplary. The HD 650 is just a small step behind in the latter aspect, IMO.

And for those interested: today -- after 160 hours -- I find the K 701 a little bright again...

I don't know if it's my mood or a break-in effect, but I don't think it's permanent. Anyway, those who have a K 701 on order, hurry to cancel it!

[Edit:] The HD 650 sounds bright as well, so it must be contaminated power or the like.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mastergill You guys made me doing something i've never done in my all 'audio life' (23 years so far): burn'in the stuff for 2 continuous days without listening. I've reached a total of maybe 70 hours of use and i listen at fairly loud level, so maybe according to JaZZ's "burn'in standard" it should be something like a little more than 100 hours of 'normal' burn'in.

No, sorry, that's still just 70 hours, as break-in is usually done at «slightly above listening levels»!

Quote:

But the madness had to stop somewhere and i decided it's more than enough for me to form a solid opinion.

Maybe it's my 35-year audio career which has taught me to be more careful? And it has paid off.

Quote:

Trust me, if i really liked the K701, i would have dumped my beloved HD-650 in a heartbeat...

After say 35 hours of my heavy break-in I wouldn't have chosen the K 701 as the «better» headphone.


Quote:

About the music i listen to rock/pop and a little rap. Don't trust me if you're listening only to classical or acoustic jazz, like i don't trust a 'classical' guy when it's about bass response.

That changes perspective quite a bit. As you rate the headphones' qualities from the point of view of a rock/pop/rap listener. Note: That's in no way meant to disqualify your opinion.
.

 

[Ayreonaut]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ So I really think the K 701's dynamic behavior and transient response are exemplary. The HD 650 is just a small step behind in the latter aspect, IMO.

Sorry, somehow I missed that back on page 6. Thanks, JaZZ. That's good news, since I have a k701 on order. I hope it trounces this HD555 in the transients.

 

[Nik]

"Nothing against you personally, Nicola! (You're a very sympathetic guy!) But why should I want to pay $5,500 for euphonic effects when I can have the Aria for $450 which is much closer to a wire with gain! -- Now, of course, if you have the money, why not go for what makes your headphones sound best to your ears, no matter if it's accurate or not, as long as it sounds like it; nothing wrong with that. Well, I have the feeling that among the subjectivist audiophiles I belong to the objectivist wing".

Wrote by JaZZ
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing against you too...
but your discuss is too simple... how can you speak of "euphonic effect" without listening that amp... or you are telling that ALL the tube amps are just for those who like "euphonic effect", not agree !!!

So speaking of cans, (for example) the W 5000 o a L3000 they are "colored" respect to the 701 or even you loved HD 650 that is colored too, are just for those who do not understand what hi-fi is?

All the amp exept the Aria, all the tubes amps like SDS, Supra EAR, Cary and many others are not for experts... mmmmmmmmmmm ... too simple. I don't buy gear just because their price, the PS Audio is cheaper respect to the Leben, many Rudistor I had was not so expensive...

So were is your EarMAx, is so bad respetc to the aria? I have many doubts... I also think that in this passion (hifi) LISTEN to the gear is all...

Juat my two cents...

Best!
Nicola