Headphone Review: DT48 VS K501 .....
Apr 15, 2009 at 8:52 PM Post #16 of 80
Great review! Thanks for that. I've always wanted to try a dt48 and comparing it with the k501 which I know well gives me a good idea of what to expect.
 
Apr 15, 2009 at 8:52 PM Post #17 of 80
Quote:

Originally Posted by moonboy403 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
The lower treble emphasis of the K501 bothers me the most.


The K501 had some issues - everything sounded far away, lower treble peak, somewhat rolled-off in the bass, could sound harsh at times - but I still thought they were decent and liked them way more than the Sextetts.
 
Apr 15, 2009 at 9:04 PM Post #18 of 80
With the UP-OCC recable, the K501 sound more integrated, rounded and 3-D than with the stock cable, IMHO. That said, I would like an opportunity to audition the DT-48, but alas, I recently lost my job, so such musings must wait! : )
 
Apr 15, 2009 at 9:07 PM Post #19 of 80
Quote:

Originally Posted by Adda /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I wonder how the K240DF compares to the DT48 and K501, they seem to be very similar kinds of bests.


I may write about K240DF only by memory, but compared to that K501 has: Quote:

Originally Posted by Shoewreck
midbass hump and smoothed out highs


It also has a high midrange peak, wider and slightly more defined headstage (but not detail) and cleaner but leaner bass. Skip it if you want neutral.
 
Apr 15, 2009 at 9:20 PM Post #21 of 80
Quote:

Originally Posted by Shoewreck /img/forum/go_quote.gif
It also has a high midrange peak, wider and slightly more defined headstage (but not detail) and cleaner but leaner bass. Skip it if you want neutral.


Thanks, I'm starting to think the K501 is not for me.
Everything I have hired about the DT48 seems pretty good to me, maybe it's just because they are kind of hyped these days?
 
Apr 15, 2009 at 9:27 PM Post #22 of 80
Quote:

Originally Posted by dcpoor /img/forum/go_quote.gif
to the OP, what amp did you test the k501 with?

k501 with no amp = sad times.


No amp , straight from sound card .. using an small adapter.
The juli@ outputs 100 ohms and lots of volume.

Whilst I'll admit it is not an optimal situation, that's all I have right now...
frown.gif


Take the review with a grain of salt if you think the k501 without an amp
doesn't perform anywhere near it's potential, but IMO it sounds fine
just like how i remembered it sounding when I was using it with the xdac v3 and nva ap10 amp or with the Lavry da10 dac/amp.
smily_headphones1.gif
 
Apr 15, 2009 at 9:39 PM Post #24 of 80
Quote:

Originally Posted by rhythmdevils /img/forum/go_quote.gif

do you seriously think the K501 has rolled off highs? Do you mean because there is a valley in the Frequency response after the huge peak, when you would prefer the whole treble region to be a peak? Or do you just mean that in comparison to the DT48, it has rolled off highs. Either way, it's kind of a scary statement
eek.gif



Ah sorry about that , I typed that in a hurry as I was running out the door.
confused_face.gif


I meant it is smoothed off in the highs detail wise .
It is not rolled off volume wise as the tone sweep confirmed it is quite strong to till end.
 
Apr 15, 2009 at 10:07 PM Post #25 of 80
Quote:

Originally Posted by adanac061 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Ah sorry about that , I typed that in a hurry as I was running out the door.
confused_face.gif


I meant it is smoothed off in the highs detail wise .
It is not rolled off volume wise as the tone sweep confirmed it is quite strong to till end.


No worries! Thanks for taking the time for the review, nice work. I am beginning to react quickly to head-fi's love for treble, so I apologize for jumping on ya.
biggrin.gif


Interesting, I have never thought about treble detail roll-off. How does the DT48 compare to the K501 in terms of bass quantity (volume) and treble quantity (volume) ?
 
Apr 15, 2009 at 10:23 PM Post #27 of 80
Quote:

Originally Posted by Adda /img/forum/go_quote.gif
To OP.

Would you describe the DT48 and K501 as slow or fast and punchy or soft?


The K501 is quite fast but not that punchy.
 
Apr 15, 2009 at 10:26 PM Post #28 of 80
Quote:

Originally Posted by Adda /img/forum/go_quote.gif
To OP.

Would you describe the DT48 and K501 as slow or fast and punchy or soft?


I would love to answer that question, but I'm just a layman...
I have no real training in the subject at hand , and no in-depth knowledge of the terms slow and fast. So rather than attempt to answer and potentially mislead someone .... I will leave that question to be answered by someone else.

...Perhaps Uncle Erik can answer that question with authority, he has both .

Sorry.
 
Apr 15, 2009 at 10:32 PM Post #29 of 80
Quote:

Originally Posted by adanac061 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
...Perhaps Uncle Erik can answer that question with authority, he has both.


I'm still waiting him to compare DT48 vs. K240DF
popcorn.gif
 
Apr 15, 2009 at 10:37 PM Post #30 of 80
Quote:

Originally Posted by adanac061 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I would love to answer that question, but I'm just a layman...
I have no real training in the subject at hand , and no in-depth knowledge of the terms slow and fast. So rather than attempt to answer and potentially mislead someone .... I will leave that question to be answered by someone else.

...Perhaps Uncle Erik can answer that question with authority, he has both .

Sorry.


No worries I'll try and explain these terms for you.

Punchy means that a phone has a tight and impactfull slaminess to it, especially with snares and beats, softness is the lack of these properties.

A phones speed is harder to explain, en example could be music with many drums, if the phone can deal with this and make it fun and engaging to listen to, I'd call it fast.
A fast phone is just more fun especially with fast and busy music it makes you rock in your seat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Back
Top