[troublemaker]

and well i thought i would share some thoughts about them.

I was, quite simply disapointed initially, i thought they sounded thin and bright, without the weight needed for anything other than jass or classical.

However i have put probably 10 hours on them now, and well, they are supremely comfortable and are really starting to get there.

The bass, while lean is certainly starting to fill out nicely, giving way to a balanced but polite sound.

Now anything from Diana Kralls girl in another room to In Utero by nirvana just sounds "right".

I have come from IEM's primarily, through Ety's to Westones, to Sleeks. I think these are a better experience than all of them.

I have a rega ear, however i have bought a cmoy kit off the bay to play with op amp rolling in, and then will build a pimenta i think.

I had Grado SR80's a while back (in the UK SR80's are the same cost as 595's normally as you cant get deals on the grados but senns you can get 30% or more off!) I dont think they are as good. May get some SR225i's at some point as a "chalk and cheese" though

 

[volntitan]

Are you saying the Grado's aren't as good as the HD 595? Or vice versa?

 

[bcpk]

Could you do me a favour and lay off the carriage returns in your sig? Thanks man, netbook screen etc.

 

[troublemaker]

i think the SR80's are not as good as 595's.

more bass but just not the soundstage or depth of sound. the vocals aren't above the mix but in it.

i think the SR80's work well for rock and metal and possbily dance, but for anything more complex i think the higher definition of the HD595's and the leaner but more open and "bigger" presentation just owns it.

 

[bcpk]

Cheers, much tidier

 

[jsplice]

Congrats on the Senns. I had the HD650s briefly but sold them because I didn't like the sound too much, but now I'm regretting it. I may have to rebuy them....just because. But another Senn that I was considering is the 595. Would you describe their sound as "bright"?

 

[krmathis]

Congratulations!

 

[troublemaker]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsplice /img/forum/go_quote.gif Congrats on the Senns. I had the HD650s briefly but sold them because I didn't like the sound too much, but now I'm regretting it. I may have to rebuy them....just because. But another Senn that I was considering is the 595. Would you describe their sound as "bright"?

lean, not bright.

they are not top heavy, but the bass is not heavy in the slightest, but it makes the mids all that much better.

i think if you put compressed rock/pop into these phones they throw a strop - something better mastered they lap up

 

[spinneresque]

Congratulations. These darlings (the 595's) have a sort of unlimited burn in in the sense that they get seem to just keep getting better, year after year. Every time I put them on the head of a friend they are blown away. Every time.

 

[spartan123]

I have the 595 50 & 120 ohm phones. the more you listen to them the better they get. My 50 ohm model has about 3k hours on them and are just superb.

The 595 120's are sensational on tube amps PPX3 SLAM and these cans will amaze you in every way.

Hands down my favorite cans for general listening.

 

[pp312]

Spartan, do you find any difference between the 50 and 120 ohms? I've owned both, though not at the same time, and I wasn't aware of much difference.

I agree also. The best cans for general listening and underrated in this forum.

 

[spinneresque]

Is there a way to tell on the phones which ohms they are? I know, I can't believe I don't already know. But I must have the 50 because they sound so great with so little power.

PS they didn't used to be underrated in this forum. Sometimes I wonder if like 100 AKG workers are posting here every day to sing the glories of the 701 and now the 702, because when I heard the 701's with my own ears they simply and unquestionably... sucked. And everyone in the room when we compared them side by side agreed that the 595's defeated them hands-down.

(To be fair, I think the 701's didn't have enough power for the test. But they were running through a decent portable amp, so they should have sounded better than they did, at the very least.)

 

[pp312]

I had a pair of 702s until just recently. Bought them used, burned them in for about 300 hours, tried them with several different amps and sold them. To my ears they had a metallic colouration in the treble, but even without it they would have been too bright and unforgiving long term. Not a patch on the 595.

 

[Frank I]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pp312 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I had a pair of 702s until just recently. Bought them used, burned them in for about 300 hours, tried them with several different amps and sold them. To my ears they had a metallic colouration in the treble, but even without it they would have been too bright and unforgiving long term. Not a patch on the 595.

I have owned the 701 for about seven months, use a Little Dot MK11 and a Marantz DV5001 as my source and have found that they are the best cans I have heard. I own Denon 1001 and Shure 840, The 701 have the widest soundstage and the best highs I have heard. If you are hearing metallic it must be either your amp or source. The tube amp does a wonderful job of driving them and they are very detailed with good extended bass and there strong point is their highs,

 

[pp312]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank I /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have owned the 701 for about seven months, use a Little Dot MK11 and a Marantz DV5001 as my source and have found that they are the best cans I have heard. I own Denon 1001 and Shure 840, The 701 have the widest soundstage and the best highs I have heard. If you are hearing metallic it must be either your amp or source. The tube amp does a wonderful job of driving them and they are very detailed with good extended bass and there strong point is their highs,

If it were my amp or source I would be hearing metallic with my other phones (Senn 595, 650. I also have a Denon D2000 which, though bright, has no metallic colouration). I just didn't like the highs from the beginning, and though burning in helped a lot, they never came within the orbit of what I would consider acceptable. There is something about their treble. It accounts for much of the 701 bashing that's gone on here but, more sensibly, a couple of people have given more technical explanations for what's going on. However, it appears most people are insensitive to it. As I said, if AKG could refine the treble I'd be prepared to have another listen.