[VR6ofpain]

Well my online CC statement shows the correct charge for the K601 on 1/24, with a post date of 1/25. So maybe they were shipped and the site did not update yet (still shows pending)! I hope this is the case, if I got them by Saturday that would be awesome.

 

[markot86]

Quote:

Originally Posted by murrmax Maybe it's not the headphones - they're high end phones and will reveal any flaws in your source etc. I've heard the 501 and they're very nice phones. I don't think partnering the 601's with midfi gear will do them justice. Especially if your musics compressed on the powerbook. If the rest of your gears midfi and your musics compressed you'd probably be better off with akg240's or something less revealing.

Even though this post is probably one of the more snobby posts I've read in a while, I will try to be civil. First of all, I'm using all alac files so there goes your assumption; It's not like i'm throwing 128kbps files at it and expecting them to sound good. Secondly, If head-fi ever gets to a state where spending 540 dollars on a dac/amp isn't considered at least a solid entry level headphone amp/dac source for a 200 dollar headphone, then I'll be one of the first ones to leave. I have found the hd600's work wonderfully in my system while the k601's don't, and I'd venture to say that even If i spent a ton more money on a source/amp, I would still prefer the HD600's to the K601's in the same configuration because I am a fan of the senn sound.

 

[VR6ofpain]

Got a quick response from Todd, they are already on the way to me. I'll post some reviews if I get then by the weekend (i hope!).

 

[layman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by markot86 Even though this post is probably one of the more snobby posts I've read in a while, I will try to be civil. First of all, I'm using all alac files so there goes your assumption; It's not like i'm throwing 128kbps files at it and expecting them to sound good. Secondly, If head-fi ever gets to a state where spending 540 dollars on a dac/amp isn't considered at least a solid entry level headphone amp/dac source for a 200 dollar headphone, then I'll be one of the first ones to leave. I have found the hd600's work wonderfully in my system while the k601's don't, and I'd venture to say that even If i spent a ton more money on a source/amp, I would still prefer the HD600's to the K601's in the same configuration because I am a fan of the senn sound.

Well said

 

[VR6ofpain]

Well my review of them will be with an 'extremely' modest or maybe 'poor' setup by the head-fi standards. mid 90's H/K CD player (no frills) hooked up directly to a Gilmore Lite. No fancy powersupplies. No outboard DAC. Hell even the interconnects are mid/low grade Zu Disco's

 

[3lusiv3]

Quote:

Originally Posted by VR6ofpain Well my review of them will be with an 'extremely' modest or maybe 'poor' setup by the head-fi standards. mid 90's H/K CD player (no frills) hooked up directly to a Gilmore Lite. No fancy powersupplies. No outboard DAC. Hell even the interconnects are mid/low grade Zu Disco's

That sounds like a good setup to me.

 

[VR6ofpain]

FedEx guy was at my doorstep a few minutes before 10am...

With my eyes still not totally focused...and no coffee in hand I open up this box to find a little treat:

Definately a different sound than the HF-1's. The highs are somewhere between my Flats and the Bowls. Straight out of the box they seemed bright and with little to no bass. After buring them in with McCoy Tyner'sThe Real McCoy for about 5 hours they are sounding quite a bit better. They are settling down quite a bit. Not nearly harsh anymore, and decent bass response at lower volumes. I did notice one thing, being a 120 ohm can, compared to my Grado's 32 ohm load...my Gilmore Lite has to be turned up a bit more to equal the same volume level. Surprisingly playing parts of On the Beautiful Blue Danube from my Time Warp disc, I was able to crank the Gilmore Lite to full volume with it only being 'loud'. I probably would have blown out the HF-1's at this level...though probably my ear drums first.

I'll give more comments tonight as they get more burn in time. I swear this disc seemed to turn my HF-1's from decent to pure gold...so I hope it will work again (coincidence...it is just a product of burn in).

 

[zancxia]

I'll definitely be looking forward to your review. I'm trying to decide between these and the DT 880.

Hello everyone, by the way. I lurk no longer.

 

[VR6ofpain]

Quote:

Originally Posted by zancxia I'll definitely be looking forward to your review. I'm trying to decide between these and the DT 880. Hello everyone, by the way. I lurk no longer.

I put another thread about about them. They are getting better with more burn in. They have been playing non-stop now for 27.5 hours so far (with about 6 hours on my head). The bass is actually growing in presence and the brightness is settling down. I have noticed a couple details in some tracks I am very familar with that I didn't notice with my Grados. Interesting.

Certain more metallic and airy music is incredible on these. For blues/rock I still think my HF-1's destroy these, but on certain rock the K601's offer a much better picture. Take for instance Dire Straits Brother's in Arms. Playing 'So Far Away', 'Money for Nothing', and 'Your latest Trick'...made me completely comfortable with this purchase. There is something very unique to how these represent this type of music. Clean is the best word to describe it. As I stated in the other thread, classical is so much more 'correct' with these...but to be honest I rarely listen to classical.

My only concern left is bass. They seem to be getting stronger in that sense, but I really enjoy the punch my Grado's give. I am starting to realize though that the bass they give is unreal (though I love it), and these are more "flat" in the lower octaves. With jazz this seems to work equally well to the inflated bass of the HF-1's. I can't say which is better, mostly it is just different. What I do like about these is that they have a lot of the upper end 'crispness' of the Grado's, while being a tad bit more laid back.

Comfort is quite good with these. It is nice not having anything on my ears anymore...though they are heavier than my HF-1s and the headband is a little tighter. Still these are GREAT headphones for the money. A much more analytical headphone than the HF-1's. Not quite a fun, but you can listen to the details a little more intently (though I still think Grado's bring out small sounds and details you might never have otherwise heard).

Take an HF-1 and remove some of it's heart and soul, but replace it with a slightly higher IQ and you have yourself the K601.

I think if I could find a pair of HD-580 jubilee's I would be set for life...as far as headphones are concerned.

 

[Ferbose]

Patience, Brother.
K501's bass is thought to fully develop after hundreds of hours of use plus another 50 hours of forced burn-in with bass-heavy music.
Maybe you can try to play bass-heavy music on K601 at unlistenable levels for a day or two, like what many K501 users have done.

 

[gshan]

Hi VR6ofpain, glad to see that Todd got the phones to you pretty quickly afterall.

Since you're coming from using the HF-1, do you find the K601 mids a little recessed and the highs just as detailed if not more, and less harsh? Haven't tried the HF-1 myself yet...

 

[VR6ofpain]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gshan Hi VR6ofpain, glad to see that Todd got the phones to you pretty quickly afterall. Since you're coming from using the HF-1, do you find the K601 mids a little recessed and the highs just as detailed if not more, and less harsh? Haven't tried the HF-1 myself yet...

The mids aren't as much recessed as much as just not so in your face...you have to kind of listen to them with more concentratoin, to hear the music, where Grado's just give it to you...like a waiter pushing a plate into your face...you can't ignore it. I like both presentations.

With bass this seems to be more of a concern...with upright bass in a lot of jazz you can hear it just fine, but it isn't as strong. I'm hoping they will get a little better in this aspect.

Brightness is interesting...I wouldn't say these are harsh, but they are bright. I would say they fit between the HF-1 with bowls and flats. Not as bright as the bowls, but not as smooth as the flats. With certain music, these can be almost harsh (the same track with bowls would be harsh). Though this gives them a sense of a little more detail than the HF-1's with Flats. So I think if you come from a HD600 or the like, you would probably think these are very bright, but if you come from a Grado you would probably find them welcoming.

I have to disagree with the original posters comment about them not being listenable (lack of bass) at low volumes. I can still hear the bass and drums at lower volumes, but you have to accept they don't present it with the authority that the HF-1's (with Flat's) do. I would say this headphone probably compares to the HF-1's with bowls, but with a tad bit less of each end (highs and lower bass). They are very nice heaphones.

I am reallying starting to dig these velour pads. Wow, like a couch for your ears. I wonder if the Headphone 'zeta flats' or whatever sound similar to the Todd Flats? If they do, I might have to invest in them. Though if they sound like the bowls, I will stick with the Flats...because my love for the HF-1's can only be held together by the Flats...they just come alive with those pads. I am convinced if SRV were alive today, he would listen to his rock over an Grado with Flats!

 

[Pioneer31]

Quote:

Having gotten these with my micro dac and micro amp with DM, all I can say is that these headphones have several flaws that in my mind make this headphone not suitable for a mid-fi rig.

Note: These headphones have been religiously burned in now for over 50 hours, and I honestly can't tell any difference between these headphones when they were burned in and when they were not. If my opinion changes as the burn in continues, I will modify this thread accordingly.

List of reasons:
1) These really lack bass, A LOT. I'm not a basshead by any means but boy do these leave something to crave. In many of my jazz tracks, I can barely hear the bass play, let alone distinguish what notes it is playing at comfortable volume levels; this is especially problematic because the micro amp is known for a slight bass boost.

2) Is it just me or are these headphones, well, harsh? Headroom recommends the k601's as an alternative to the k701's if one doesn't want any "scratchiness" in their music, but when listening to these headphones I can't but notice that in my system there is some heavy simbilance, moreso than even my sr-60's

. One possible reason why I feel like this might be the case is because I listen to these headphones at much higher sound levels than I do my grados to cancel out the lack of bass, but other than that, I can't really think of a reason. This leads me to my next point.

3) These are NOT a low volume headphone; period. With the recent scare of hearing damage, I cannot recommend these to anyone that wants to listen at a low volume.

Maybe I'm being a little too hard on these headphones, but I guess I expected way too much from the akg contender to the hd600. I wish I had a k701 to compare these to on hand to tell you if these problems are fixed in the 701, but all i can say is that if headroom describes these as not so "scratchy" I can only imagine how harsh sounding the k701's must be.

First of all, apologies for resurrecting an old thread!
 
You experience the 601's exactly as I do. I was beginning to think I was going mad as plenty of people don't mention things which (to me) are very obvious. A light sound, slightly harsh in the lower treble and a rather unrealistic sound, overall. They are unsuitable for MOST genres IMO. I've been accused of being a basshead, which I certainly am not but you do need SOME bass. These can make heavy R'N'B sound light and airy.
 
Another thing I find odd is the advice of using them "on high end sources/amps". To my ears they sound forgiving on mp3's and anything which had the HF stripped from it. From my CD players, they can sound 'clattery' with some tracks. I've been told that my amp is insufficient, burn them in more etc etc. I'm still 50/50 on burn in and I don't want to run my CD player for 300 hours just to get a headphone to sound 'right'
 
One more thing that I find strange is that with, say a Grado, most people testify to their aggressiveness or brightness..but few do with other headphones.
 
Sadly, I find most AKG 601 reviews to be misleading (I know it's not intentional) but they really have to heard because (present company excepted) few/no descriptions of them bare any resemblance to reality.
 
I've heard a few headphones and each have their flaws but also redeeming features, e.g. Sennheiser veil but no real sonic 'nasties', Grados are forward but have a driving bass which sound great with rock. AKG 601's (and possibly their other models though I havent heard them) have NO features which help to coutneract the negatives, oh well perhaps one, they look OK and are reasonably comfortable.
 
Sorry if this sound like a AKG assasination

 

[pp312]

Totally agree. I've owned both 702 and 601 and could find nothing endearing about them at all. Indeed I found them both unbearably metallic sounding, but I've rarely posted this as no one else mentions it. When you seem to be the only one who hears something you're probably wise not to mention it. (A few people have used the word "plasticky", but that's not quite what I hear). I hate to rain on some people's parades, but this is after all a forum of opinions.

 

[Pioneer31]

It's funny but I read in another thread an interesting comment.
 
Something along the lines of "musicians never wear Sennheisers on their head (it's always Beyer or AKG) so this proves that Senns aren't accurate"
 
Sennheiser also don't make any prestige closed headphones. Did you ever see a musician wearing open backs?