Alright, now that I'm all showered and relaxed...time to post about what I heard.
I'll start with the K501s...I only got to hear these for a very short time, and pigmode (who owns them) was so busy checking them out of every headphone amp jack around that I didn't get to use them a second time
but I did hear them long enough to sum them up in two words:
power hungry. Quite simply, when I ran the K501s out of my JMT Cmoy, they sounded very bland, very boring, very weak, brittle, and bright. Not bad sounding, but hardly up to my Grado SR-325s in sound quality even. Next thing I did was just take them over to my lovely, mighty RKV, and try it out of there. For lack of a better word, they simply
bloomed. The midrange just filled up like crazy, and there was bass that was quite feelable. Not impacting like Grados or Sennheisers, but quality bass that you can feel grinding into your eardrums. The 501s have a pretty clean treble that's nice and clear, maybe even bright, but with the RKV the treble had nice control...not too much, not too little. I also discovered the 501's bass tends to respond to recordings...if the recording has a lot of bass, the 501s will kick that bass out with aplume...but if the recording has weak bass, the bass will be weak and just tight droppings. The 501s naturally have a wide soundstage, but the RKV just pushed it out even more. I do question the soundstage though...as some people put it, it's unnaturally wide. It's so wide that I think of
all the information simply taking place in layer 3 from the listener, rather than 2 or 1, or an ideal mixture of all 3, which would mean the headphone has excellent layering capabilities. Grados would be level 1, Senns being level 2. For lack of a better word, I'd say the K501s qualify for the word "neutral".
Now the RKV against the Earmax Pro...I gotta say, I had my heart set on the Earmax Pro from day one that I saw it online...so small, so cute. But listening to it in person rather disappointed me. I used my R10s strictly to audition with it, and didn't get much of a chance to try other headphones. Both jeremymayf and I agreed that the EMP didn't seem to be driving the R10s properly. But assuming that it was, the RKV simply kicks it all over the place...and I think mostly in part to the much beefier power supply. The RKV has much more bass kick, a much more expansive soundstage, more extended treble, better transparency, and the tubes euphonics was more noticeable with the RKV. On my Bond - Born album, which consists of busy and furious violins primarily, I noticed something today that I never paid attention to before, even though I've heard this CD tons of times by now. Through the RKV + R10, I noticed that I could clearly hear the bow sawing back, and then forth, on the violin, very distinctly...I could actually hear it stopping for that microsecond before sawing back in the other direction. When I switched over to the EMP, I noticed that the microsecond pause was missing, and was smeared away into the bow strokes. This particularly caught my attention, because if I remember, it particularly takes beefy power supplies to be able to push instrument seperations out to their best. At the same time, I also discovered this was part of the R10s capabilities...I immediately switched back over to my Grado 325s, and the bow strokes totally sounded smeared on both the EMP and RKV. All of a sudden I feel much more confident about the R10s as an auditioning headphone...I think it's much, much more revealing than anybody ever gave it credit for.
Comparing the C333 to the Ah! Njoeb 2000 with stock tube...this one was much more subtle, as expected. I still did hear some differences, using my R10s. The C333 particularly had an airy detail to it, which at the same time added to its transparency. And there's no doubt about it...the famous Sony bass was very much there. The treble had a bright sheen to it. The midrange strangely sounded a little drained though...a tad dry. The Ah! sounded similar at first...but off the bat I noticed there was definitely less bass than the 333. And while I thought Sonys were forward sounding before, I now think the Ah! totally takes the cake there. It was so forward with lead singers and players in fact that it actually started covering over background info. I thought the tubes would actually create a warmer midrange, but in reality I think the Ah! had a pretty dry sound to it. I could clearly hear the tubes influencing the treble though as it had the same trademark treble as my RKV...very extended, even more so than the 333, but lacking that extra bright sheen on the extreme top. Strangely though I just couldn't get over my impression that both players had a dry sound to them. Now that I've come home to my 9000ES, I realize why.
The 9000ES takes what the 333 has, and adds even more layering of air between things, and there's particularly a subtle sense of musical warmth to things. This I believe was what I felt was just simply missing from my R10s when I listened to both players; it was as if the R10's wooden cups were only half filled with music, versus being totally, fully filled when with the 9000ES. It was interesting hearing the 333 today, since it allowed me to gauge how much better the 9000ES is for the price increase, and if it was "worth" it. I now know for sure I made the absolute right choice going with the 9000ES.
The last thing I've got to say is about the Grados (again). We had a pretty good representation today however of the levels of Grados most people would be most likely to get...the SR80s for the low end, the 325s for the medium end, and the RS-1s for the absolute top. Now, for any ears that has ever graced a higher end Grado for any amount of time, there is an instantly noticeable
difference: driver matching. To put it bluntly, lower end Grados have horrid driver matching compared to the upper end ones. The imaging and centering is totally off. After that, the next big difference is in soundstage...the lower end Grados have a much smaller soundstage. The treble is also more coarse...NOT harsh (not to me at least), but just more rough and not as smooth. The bass is also not as extended. Between the 325s and RS-1s, the RS-1s have more midbass and lower bass, while the 325s have a tighter bass, with more clearer highs. The RS-1s however are superior in transparency and details...it's instantly noticeable that you can hear "more" with the RS-1s.
And well, that's about all I've got to say. Off to listen more to my 9000ES and R10s, both which I love even more now.
THANK YOU JEREMY!!!
)
