K701 at 500 hrs
May 30, 2006 at 12:41 AM Post #62 of 121
Quote:

Originally Posted by Hendrix
I don't know, I use the koss 75 for my portable cans.


biggrin.gif
biggrin.gif
confused.gif
biggrin.gif
biggrin.gif
 
May 30, 2006 at 12:46 AM Post #63 of 121
Quote:

Originally Posted by CookieFactory
Are we even on the same message board? Where are all these naysayers who fall under 1) or 2) ?
Are you so tunnel-visioned that you willfully ignore the fact that everyone who discounts the 701 burn-in has actually compared an old and a new one side-by-side? Everyone who has made this comparison has attested no little to no changes.

Seriously, reading comprehension: It helps.




Don't write checks you can't cash.
 
May 30, 2006 at 12:57 AM Post #65 of 121
I highly doubt the ability to accurately "remember sound" when users speak of "burn in" after long hours. I find comparing sound difficult enough to accomplish when switching components in real time (by real time I mean under a minute), alone, on my own rig.

I personally don't trust anyone who reports anything on "burn in" unless they have a "unburned" reference, even then I'm skeptical.

Having said that:

Quote:

Originally Posted by varsitypride3
have you compared your burned-in pair vs. a brand-new one?


I did this in real time. I heard very little difference. The old "burned in cans" were a bit more open/airy. That is all I could identify. I heard no difference in bass.

I do hear a significant difference in the bass between different amps using my pair of 701s which now have ~200 hours.
 
May 30, 2006 at 12:58 AM Post #66 of 121
Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt_Carter
Ya PeeeMeS your Hilarious.....
rolleyes.gif



PeeeMeS's posts get much better when they look like this:

1148950118_ignore.jpg
 
May 30, 2006 at 1:13 AM Post #69 of 121
Quote:

Originally Posted by AtheisticFreedom
A weird one! A weird one! Burn him! Burn him!
icon10.gif



Meh, I'm just not much of a basshead. I am somewhat wondering if I should have sprung for the 880s since people say they're leaner, but the K701s have a lot to like elsewhere, and the bass at this point isn't so much that I can't stand it. I tried episiarch's K501, CD3000, and SA5000 on his Gilmore Lite and my PINT and found that the K701s are actually a pretty nice piece of kit.

I'll let you guys know if I notice changes from burn-in. I'm expecting most of what I'll notice is myself getting used to the sound, but I've tried to find some conditions under which I can quasi-measure differences (e.g. there's some sort of distinct element that may be trackable over time).
 
May 30, 2006 at 1:17 AM Post #70 of 121
Quote:

Originally Posted by PeeeMeS
I will sink no lower because I'm a true audiophile. Not too many audiophiles on head-fi nowadays.
rolleyes.gif



And yet you claim the sound from the K1000 is perfectly fine directly out of an iPod.
rolleyes.gif
 
May 30, 2006 at 1:22 AM Post #71 of 121
I think he means its tolerable, not audiophile-quality. I rather have something than nothing, wouldn't you?
tongue.gif
 
May 30, 2006 at 1:30 AM Post #73 of 121
Quote:

Originally Posted by dw6928
having had my set at 500+ hrs and a friend's right out of the box, once again


That's a really important detail to leave out of your original post.
 
May 30, 2006 at 1:31 AM Post #74 of 121
Quote:

Originally Posted by 003
And yet you claim the sound from the K1000 is perfectly fine directly out of an iPod.
rolleyes.gif



I think you missed the sarcasm.

Hey, PeeeMeS, if you ever find the K1000's don't sound right, lend them to me and I'll burn them in for you a bit.
very_evil_smiley.gif
You don't have to thank me.
 
May 30, 2006 at 1:33 AM Post #75 of 121
Quote:

Originally Posted by mypasswordis
Hey, PeeeMeS, if you ever find the K1000's don't sound right, lend them to me and I'll burn them in for you a bit.
very_evil_smiley.gif
You don't have to thank me.



After the last New Orleans meet I had with 2 other head-fiers I think we all agreed the K1000s sounded anything but "not right"
tongue.gif
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top