[olblueyez]

It was a comment on the 701 crusaders. I saw a post today were someone called the 650 flabby and rolled off. No biggie.

You can enjoy as many house sounds as you like, the more the better. I have always wanted some AT's but lately the HF-2 has been catching my eye. Its just not a good time just now for that.

 

[scytheavatar]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acix /img/forum/go_quote.gif If the K702 are ''bright'' so, what the RS-1 are? super bright, ultra bright, or just sun bright. Who you will describe the brightness degrees?

Have you missed my argument? Why the heck does the RS1 change how the K701 sounds? The statement that the RS1 is brighter than the K701 or vice verse is an opinion; that the K701 is bright is a fact, not an opinion. If the K701 isn't bright than how would you describe the K701 sound?

 

[Acix]

Quote:

Originally Posted by scytheavatar /img/forum/go_quote.gif If the K701 isn't bright than how would you describe the K701 sound?

Just in the middle, Senn dark, RS-1 bright, and the K-702 in the middle.

 

[scytheavatar]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acix /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just in the middle, Senn dark, RS-1 bright, and the K-702 in the middle.

That is how you describe the K601. The K701 on the other hand leans a lot more to the RS1 than the HD650. The emphasis on the treble is undeniable, although I think many people over exaggerate this emphasis.

 

[rds]

Quote:

Originally Posted by scytheavatar /img/forum/go_quote.gif The emphasis on the treble is undeniable, although I think many people over exaggerate this emphasis.

Apparently it is deniable, as Acix and myself have just denied it in our previous posts.

 

[estreeter]

Just plugged my Cowon into my CA integrated, straight from the headphone out using a cable that couldnt have cost more than $2 to make, plugged the 601s into the headphone jack on the CA and cranked up Deftones' 'Hole in the Earth'. Pure sonic bliss, complete with great separation between the kick drums and cymbals, something I don't get with the MS-1s (not to mention soundstage, something my newbie ears are still coming to grips with). As I've said before, anything less than high bit-rate tunes (FLAC/Lossless/320Kvbr) married with adequate amplification is going to be like listening to a transistor radio 3 doors down. Under a blanket.

A better source and correspondingly better amp would only improve the 601s, IMO. Apologies for not having empirical evidence to back that claim, but I've been pretty hard on AKG of late - maybe I just need to buy the 5K worth of kit that will do them justice and shut the hell up .....

 

[ph0rk]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rds /img/forum/go_quote.gif Apparently it is deniable, as Acix and myself have just denied it in our previous posts.

Not in a convincing or authoritative manner you haven't.

 

[mike1127]

After some more listening, and about 300 hours break-in on the K701, I've decided the following in comparison to the K601:

1. The K601 are warmer and fuller than the K701. Beauty of tone for instruments playing around the middle of the spectrum is much more evident on the K601. Such instruments are very lean on the K701.
2. However, the K701 is "full" in the bass. So bass instruments do not sound lean at all.
3. This kind of surprised me---I feel the treble on the K701 is much smoother and more beautiful. By contrast, there is a bit of hardness in the K601 (for example on piano attacks) and the sibilance is a bit harsh compared to the K701.

 

[Grey Massacre]

Another point probably worth considering, I have read through the forum about the difference in between pads on those headphones and it seems the general consensus is that 601 pads are giving more body and bass as compared to the 701 pads at least installed on the AKG K400!

Please note that I do not own the 601 or 701 but I have noticed in the Beyer line that the pads made significant differences. I am talking about the vented backing vs the non-vented aviation type pads, also despite the fact they all look the same they are not the same internally in between the 770/880/990's. The distance of your ear with the driver also vastly make difference in term of soundstage and perception of the music at least in my experience. Think worn more soft pads as compared to new more firm pads.

That would be cool if you could swap the pads and post your impressions, use those 601 pads on the 701!

Charles

 

[bhanja_trinanjan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acix /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hard to call the K702 bright. especially after you listed to the RS-1, or even the QP-250/240. And I do like the bright sounds.

I haven't heard the RS-1, but to my ears, the K701/2 is very balanced, neither bright nor warm... my PX100, which can be said to have the unrefined Sennheiser house sound, is very very warm with a mid bass hump. It has more midbass than the K701, but it is loose, flabby and dark. The K701 on the other hand has superb deep bass, without the slightest hint of flabbiness. I take quality over quantity anyday... I do not belong to the

club.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acix /img/forum/go_quote.gif lol, if you came from planet Senn, so yes, they are Bright.

Exactly... well said Acix.