[vid]

Here's my comparison:
AKG K 14 P, use daily, then switch to...
AKG K 501, hear noticeable bass.

In conclusion, these can't possibly be bassless headphones. The 14 P are almost bassless, the 501 have bass. They're not for bass-heavy music, that's for sure, but even AKG says that.

They're not hard to drive, either.

 

[spike33]

Quote:

Originally Posted by spaceconvoy Thanks for the input - from another thread, I think the brown pad version is the one selling at the moment on Headroom. I'm thiiiis close to canceling the K701s and "downgrading". I think they might be actually better for me because of their supposedly closer soundstage. Does this translate to a more forward sound? - some people describe them as laid-back, so I'm a little confused. Can anyone compare the presentation of the two?

Where are you getting all this incorrect info? K701 is more forward and punchier. K501 is laidback with wider but flat soundstage.

 

[Superpredator]

Isn't the K501 (at 120 ohms) harder to drive than the K701 (62)? I could be mistaken, but I recall reading here that the 501 was notoriously hard to drive well. On a lesser system might not the 701 be a better bet? I think the 601 is 120 as well. The only AKG I've heard is the 26P, so I have no clue myself.

 

[jjcapurro]

Quote:

Originally Posted by warpdriver I would not trade my 701's for a dozen 501's....there I said it

I would! ...But then I'd sell them each for $90, buy a new pair of 701's and pocket the difference.

Cheers,
Jeremy

 

[jagorev]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjcapurro I would! ...But then I'd sell them each for $90, buy a new pair of 701's and pocket the difference. Cheers, Jeremy

Better yet, get a K1000 with the revenue from the dozen K501s.

 

[chris719]

Given the same sensitivity, lower impedance is harder to drive than higher impedance.

 

[spaceconvoy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by spike33 Where are you getting all this incorrect info? K701 is more forward and punchier. K501 is laidback with wider but flat soundstage.

From RnB180 in this thread:
"501s have a front row in your face sound stage that is wide but flat,
601s have distant sound stage, a treble more recessed then the 501's and larger bass presence."

I couldn't find any direct comparisons between the K701 and K501 soundstage, so maybe I'm totally off base, but I'm assuming the K601 and K701 are more similar than different in terms of presentation.

 

[White Fox]

Do the 701s have better (more realistic) dynamic range than the 501s? The main reason I stopped using the K501s as my main cans, was not lack of bass, but because of their possibly over-damped sound - dynamic peaks are flattened more than any headphone or speaker I've heard, let alone live acoustic music. The K501s also don't scale well at high volumes in my experience.

 

[spaceconvoy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by spaceconvoy I couldn't find any direct comparisons between the K701 and K501 soundstage, so maybe I'm totally off base, but I'm assuming the K601 and K701 are more similar than different in terms of presentation.

Tried out some different search terms and found some new info - turns out there might be significant differences between the presentation of the K601 and K701. From this post:

"With the K 601, I'm just a spectator in the xth row. In front of me the stage with the orchestra, well structured, but it doesn't allow me a look into the orchestra, whereas with the K 701 I'm in the position of the conductor with insight into the rows of my orchestra, with good scaling. For me as a classical listener this makes a huge difference."

Very exciting for me at least. I hope they're worth the wait.

 

[fewtch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by spaceconvoy From RnB180 in this thread: "501s have a front row in your face sound stage that is wide but flat, 601s have distant sound stage, a treble more recessed then the 501's and larger bass presence."

For what it's worth I don't agree with RnB's observation on the 501, unless it's simply comparative to K601/K701. To my ears (compared to HD580 and DT880) the K501 has a very distant soundstage/headstage that sounds similar to the back row of the concert hall. It's not that wide because it is so distant... soundstages get wider the closer you get to the stage. I do agree that it doesn't have a lot of depth, except for the aforementioned distance.

 

[Ferbose]

Those nth role analogies are just analogies, don't take them seriously.
The sound from any headphone will only sound like they come from a few inches away, even K1000. If you play binaural recording properly with headphones, that may actually change.

K701 has a normal bass and K501 has too little. There is no way you can miss that. Especially because K501 is harder to drive properly.

 

[fewtch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferbose K701 has a normal bass and K501 has too little. There is no way you can miss that. Especially because K501 is harder to drive properly.

Yep, it's a fact that the K501 has "less than neutral" bass, particularly lower bass. Of course so do most headphones lack in lower bass. To my ears, the mid and upper bass of the K501 are still slightly lacking, but much closer to flat.

IMO it's the combination of lacking low bass + (more-or-less) flat mid/upper bass that result in the perception of "lack" with K501. Most cans that lack lower bass "make up for it" by boosting midbass. I personally find the K501 refreshing, and for the genres I enjoy most it's a great can. I'd much rather listen to that than a headphone like the K240S which has bass that walks all over the midrange.

 

[Rob80b]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fewtch For what it's worth I don't agree with RnB's observation on the 501, unless it's simply comparative to K601/K701. To my ears (compared to HD580 and DT880) the K501 has a very distant soundstage/headstage that sounds similar to the back row of the concert hall. It's not that wide because it is so distant... soundstages get wider the closer you get to the stage. I do agree that it doesn't have a lot of depth, except for the aforementioned distance.

I agree with Fewtch, I do find the K501’s have a wonderful depth, bettering my Senns, but then I also find my Grado Sr325i’s to have good depth.
It may be that after years of listening ones learns to automatically pick out the cues which relate to depth and sound stage but things like bass and treble are fairly obvious to the novice.

If you are accustomed to mini monitors without a sub or haven’t gotten into HT the 501’s probably sound about perfect.
When I got into this whole Head-fi thing I thought the K501’s had adequate bass after coming from the K240DF’s. I was also initially comparing them to my speaker set only to find that my sub was turned off, a bit of water under the bridge and we all hopefully get a bit wiser.

 

[fewtch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob80b I agree with Fewtch, I do find the K501’s have a wonderful depth, bettering my Senns, but then I also find my Grado Sr325i’s to have good depth.

Well... what I hear from the K501s is more like a distance from the stage (as if there were a lot of dead air between the ears and performers), but the presentation is far back enough that actual front-to-back imaging isn't very good to my ears. Imagine being in a concert hall in the very last row, it's gonna be hard to tell where the instruments are on the stage from the front to the back.

I find the K501s soundstaging very enjoyable, but I wouldn't say it 'betters' (or is worse than ) Senns, just different. IMO my HD580s were more upfront, and also had excellent front-to-back imaging. It seems like Sennheisers really have the whole front-to-back depth thing sewn up, the Orpheus I heard at a meet a few years ago was just amazing in that department (and also both HD580/600). Might be something to do with the earcup design (?) which seems more conducive to that sort of imaging vs. round earcups. My DT880s have a very wide soundstage, but rather shallow.

 

[spaceconvoy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferbose Those nth role analogies are just analogies, don't take them seriously. The sound from any headphone will only sound like they come from a few inches away, even K1000. If you play binaural recording properly with headphones, that may actually change.

Inches might as well be feet as far as I'm concerned. One of the (many) reasons I didn't like the K240s is because the sound came from ~3 inches away from my head. It was so tangible you could measure it, and it was really distracting and unnatural. For me, the best soundstage I've heard was my A900LTD. There was definite space between the instuments, but it was still inside your head, like you were in the middle of the action. So it sounds like I'd hate the K501, but I'm still holding out hope for the K701.

Also, I'm with fewtch on this one - I don't understand posters who claim x's soundstage is "better" than y's. Just because it's deeper? So if the music sounded like it was coming from a block away, would that be even better? It's just a difference in presentation and really comes down to personal preference. It's a shame soundstage isn't discussed more on head-fi, though, because it can make or break a headphone for me.