That's the whole point. I took the liberty to underscore that part of your post. My remarks regarding the boomier bass of the DX1k is when I compared it to the DX700. As I said at first listening DX1k the bass was very delighting and the sound reproduction in general was very pleasing. And it still is, in a way, but when you switch on the DX700 you will hear what I am talking about. As I said, it's not a day and night difference, but it's audible, it's there.
My listening tests were conducted during ONE DAY (pretty much the whole day) on Foobar, O2/ODAC. Both headphones were with stock cables and I have used the following albums (FLAC/APE, 16 - 44.1khz rip):
The thing I regret the most is that I didn't do blind tests. Someone could have just put the headphones on my head from behind so I wouldn't see which one was on my ears. Next time I will try it, though.
And one last thing: It might seem that I just stormed into the DX1k thread bashing the older bro and praising its younger sibling (DX700) but it's not the case. Both are excellent headphones but just b/c the DX1000 carries a higher figure in its name than the DX700 and more expensive it doesn't necessarily mean that it is better sonically.
We are here on the biggest forum dedicated to headphones on earth, yet, there's not a single thread dedicated to the DX700. My aim with my posts here are not to talk s**t about the DX1k but to bring some attention to the improved model based ON the DX1000, namely the DX700.
As per DX2k, correct me if I'm wrong, but Luckbad here and Mach3 on the DX2000 thread confirmed that they are sonically identical to the DX1k.
Piece,
Peter