[Shoewreck]

I suspect the 501's tested to be the "thin black ringed" ones, known for weaker bass. The most evident differencies on graphs are bass response and some (probably random) irregularities on highs - I mean the dip (if we consider 501 and Orpheus to be the reference) around 4K on 701 and 601. So... why pay more?

I must point to importance of ear coupling for achieving the deepest bass response and good soundstaging - so, shave your head, put well sealed leather cushions on your 501 (i don't care how would you get some), apply some grease and enjoy the perfect bass along with the most beloved by many folks in there highs and mids! No kidding (or may be just a bit) - such morbid deeds will cancel out much of that uncute bass rolloff.

BTW, congratulate me - this post gives me the 100+ status

 

[uzziah]

huh

 

[skyline889]

IDK I've never been too fond of those graphs, I'd rather trust my own ears.

 

[RichardCory]

Quote:

Originally Posted by uzziah huh

I second that.

 

[Shoewreck]

Quote:

Originally Posted by skyline889 IDK I've never been too fond of those graphs, I'd rather trust my own ears.

You are absolutely right, I wouldn't believe much of what these graphs show - actually, only the midrange response is so-so thrustworthy - there will always be ear coupling-caused LFR rolloff issues (until you're a shaved greasehead) and high frequency divergences due to unique shape of any human auricle. Anyway, reffering to the resemblances between different models' frequency responses, measured in the same conditions is pretty reliable, isn't it?