[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by shellylh /img/forum/go_quote.gif Any recommendations for good quality recording to try?

The only quality needed for break-in: bass, bass, bass, and volume!

The drivers will like it.

BTW: congrats on your decision! The K 701 is still my favorite headphone.
.

 

[listenCarefully]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ph0rk /img/forum/go_quote.gif ...out of the box, anyway. So, I've let them reach room temp and played around with them a bit, and I'm not really sure what to say - I knew they weren't basshead phones, but I never expected them to make portishead so sharp and cold (and lifeless). They even manage to flatten the bass on Radiohead's Karma Police, though it doesn't sound exactly bad.

Have you considered that the concept of a headphone "making" your amp/source sound any way is fundamentally flawed. Your AKGs are, in all likelihood, simply letting you know how your portishead really sounds and this fact can't be "fixed" downstream by the headphone, it can only be "obscured" by coloring the sound. At the very least your amp isn't up to driving the AKGs and, at worst, simply isn't a very good amp. The K701 are one of the most accurate transducers money can buy and aimed at the pro market, where people need to hear what's really on the recording. This is not a headphone for the misguided "sound is subjective" camp that pervades the audiophile world of "voodoo" and "magic" peopled by individuals who don't even know what real live un-amplified instruments should sound like (or, for that matter, understand the realistic potential and limitations of technology).

 

[ph0rk]

Quote:

Originally Posted by listenCarefully /img/forum/go_quote.gif Have you considered that the concept of a headphone "making" your amp/source sound any way is fundamentally flawed. Your AKGs are, in all likelihood, simply letting you know how your portishead really sounds and this fact can't be "fixed" downstream by the headphone, it can only be "obscured" by coloring the sound. At the very least your amp isn't up to driving the AKGs and, at worst, simply isn't a very good amp. The K701 are one of the most accurate transducers money can buy and aimed at the pro market, where people need to hear what's really on the recording. This is not a headphone for the misguided "sound is subjective" camp that pervades the audiophile world of "voodoo" and "magic" peopled by individuals who don't even know what real live un-amplified instruments should sound like (or, for that matter, understand the realistic potential and limitations of technology).

I think I said they made music sound flat, not my source. Both examples include a great deal of amplified only or electronic instruments, so I don't really see how your sassy month-late rejoinder applies. You think they are accurate, someone else finds them cold and anemic - opinions differ. I found them to have more euphonic coloration than k601's, particularly a slightly recessed midrange. I don't really find them to be more accurate than, say, my HD650's with the same material and gear, just different.

Sound enjoyment is subjective - either I think it sucks, or I think it doesn't. Whether or not you agree doesn't change that - individual enjoyment is not determined by consensus.

I don't really care for accuracy in the way you use the term anyway - it seems like such a quixotic ideal.

 

[fureshi]

i agree with you phork. sound really is subjective and all of those out there saying to upgrade your amp or burn them in more are not respecting your thoughts about these cans. i've been through two pairs of the k701 with the second pair recabled but both times i let them go because they sounded really dull to me. my recabled hd650 in comparison sounded much more musical. to each his own. i don't consider myself a basshead either.

 

[hempcamp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ph0rk /img/forum/go_quote.gif IYou think they are accurate, someone else finds them cold and anemic - opinions differ. I found them to have more euphonic coloration than k601's, particularly a slightly recessed midrange. I don't really find them to be more accurate than, say, my HD650's with the same material and gear, just different..... I don't really care for accuracy in the way you use the term anyway - it seems like such a quixotic ideal.

I just don't buy this. To a degree what we hear is subjective, but it's still all coming from a baseline of physiology and physics.

It's far more likely that an anemic source "colors" the sound of a pair of cans than it is that you can fix such coloration with cables, which is what I think listenCarefully was getting at.

Problem is, when you get into the last-10% range on the high end, people begin to "hear" or "not hear" things rather psychologically and arbitrarily, which I guess you could defend as "subjectivity."

--Chris

 

[Exit Pupil]

i just don't get it how some people continuously and boorishly equate a lean bottom end with 'flat' or 'neutral' sound. BALDERDASH!

just my own extrmemly humble oinion of course

i have only heard a well burnt 701 once, and was stunned at its pigeon chested sound. at the same time i confess to being intrigued by a headphone which is so flawed and moaned about yet equally admired. looking forward to another listen.

 

[number1sixerfan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hempcamp /img/forum/go_quote.gif I just don't buy this. To a degree what we hear is subjective, but it's still all coming from a baseline of physiology and physics. It's far more likely that an anemic source "colors" the sound of a pair of cans than it is that you can fix such coloration with cables, which is what I think listenCarefully was getting at. Problem is, when you get into the last-10% range on the high end, people begin to "hear" or "not hear" things rather psychologically and arbitrarily, which I guess you could defend as "subjectivity." --Chris

I think the reason it is subjective is because although we can hear the same things, we can disagree that what we hear is correct or incorrect. A lot of people find the bass of the akg 701 to be perfect and many don't. No one call tell either indefinitely who is wrong and who is right, because in the end only one set of ears matter and that's the individual's.

 

[shellylh]

Nice avatar number1sixerfan!

 

[hempcamp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by number1sixerfan /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think the reason it is subjective is because although we can hear the same things, we can disagree that what we hear is correct or incorrect. A lot of people find the bass of the akg 701 to be perfect and many don't. No one call tell either indefinitely who is wrong and who is right, because in the end only one set of ears matter and that's the individual's.

I'm not sure anyone finds it "perfect."

The problem is no one seems to have a moderated, explained opinion on the matter. They just have wild and brief proclamations like "K701 has NO bass" "K701 is highly colored" "K701 sucks" "650 is veiled" etc etc etc and they come to these conclusions not having thoroughly considered source/amp/etc.

The physical characteristics of the cans will produce a sound that will be awfully darn similar no matter who listens to it. That won't account for the exaggerated and drastic differences it seems people have for the very same set of cans.

It's puzzling to me that so many people can't or don't want to hear the lower end of the K701. It's physically there in the tests! So how is there so much disagreement about it?

--Chris

 

[number1sixerfan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hempcamp /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm not sure anyone finds it "perfect." The problem is no one seems to have a moderated, explained opinion on the matter. They just have wild and brief proclamations like "K701 has NO bass" "K701 is highly colored" "K701 sucks" "650 is veiled" etc etc etc and they come to these conclusions not having thoroughly considered source/amp/etc.

Good point. This is probably the thing that gets to most people as it starts to feel like a personal attack against a can you or I may see as perfect. It is hard to read something negative about a phone that we like; especially when it seems like it may be a misinformed opinion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hempcamp /img/forum/go_quote.gif The physical characteristics of the cans will produce a sound that will be awfully darn similar no matter who listens to it. That won't account for the exaggerated and drastic differences it seems people have for the very same set of cans.

The sound is not similar enough to not notice the differences between various cans. In regard to the same cans, I can perceive to hear different from those who hate the k701 because I may have different sonic taste if you will. I can like a brighter phone, a darker phone, neutral, colored, wide soundstage, etc. For example, if I find a phone doesn't have as much bass as I like it, I describe it as a bass light, or when I feel it is not neutral enough, I can describe it as colored. Someone who listens to the same exact can, can have taste opposite of mine and find that the phone has perfect bass and is as nuetral as can be.

*edit* thanks shelly for the props on the avartar.

 

[TheMarchingMule]

I used to have a K701 that I drove with an iPod 5G - ALO Jumbo Cryo - Hornet. I always knew I wasn't getting the most out of it, so when I went to Head Fest 2007, I listened to a K701 (I can't recall if it was balanced or not; could have been) through a tube amp and high-end home source.

Oh gosh. Everything was so airy on the jazz album; even the tenor sax had no weight to it. Trying not to cry, I carefully took them off and wandered away to try out the Sennheiser HD 650 for the first time.

...I stayed by the HD 650's side the rest of the day.

 

[Roee2807]

I used the next setup : Imod->Hornet->K701
and I can't listen to it more than half hour,the K701 to my ears is too harsh on the high's.
With the HD650 replacing the K701 I could listen to music for hours .

 

[listenCarefully]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ph0rk /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't really care for accuracy in the way you use the term anyway - it seems like such a quixotic ideal.

Of course you don't. You've clearly never been around live unamplified music and don't have any standard by which to judge.


Quote:

Originally Posted by ph0rk /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sound enjoyment is subjective - either I think it sucks, or I think it doesn't. Whether or not you agree doesn't change that - individual enjoyment is not determined by consensus.

Blah blah blah blah...
I've heard it all before. How much time have you spent with live acoustic (unamplified) instruments. I've spent hundreds of hours playing with acoustic bass, piano, sax etc etc. and that gives me a baseline. It's not a matter of opinion and your argument is as idiotic as claiming that there is no such thing as an objectively accurate video monitor. Clearly video images are judged based on precisely defined measurement standards... not whether some people prefer a green or red tint to their picture or the contrast jacked up or whatever... The reason the debate even exists in the audio world is because nobody listens to live music any more (and even when they do it's amplified) hence they don't even knows what the sound should have been to begin with. That doesn't mean the issue is subjective, it just means people are too ignorant to make an informed judgment. What nonsense.

Ps Just because you listen to "electronic" music doesn't mean there is no "standard" of accuracy. It just means that if you really want to assess a headphones capabilities (even on electronic music) you are still going to need to use acoustic music such as Jazz or classical and be deeply familiar with the live sound (otherwise you are just guessing).

 

[Drumonron]

I'm loving my K701s-all the instruments actually sound the way they would live, it's crazy. A cowbell sounds like a real cowbell, a cymbal crash sounds as it would if I was hitting it myself, the bass is oh so there. You know, I sometimes wonder if some people were there in a studio right next to the artist as he takes his stick and strikes the cymbal would explain this too as sounding unrealistic and colored or too high or as the bassist plucked his string if this would seem to unbassy and harsh-some people probably would say it was muddy or etc.

...And you know what, that's alright too.

But, I'm loving my AKG K701s, to me they just deliver what the artist wants me to hear-no games.

If they're not for you then simply sell them and move on-no trash talking is necessary.

But you'll pry my k701s from my cold dead hands....unless they come out with a k801...hmmm...now that's worth a countdown.

 

[listenCarefully]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drumonron /img/forum/go_quote.gif You know, I sometimes wonder if some people were there in a studio right next to the artist as he takes his stick and strikes the cymbal would explain this too as sounding unrealistic and colored or too high or as the bassist plucked his string if this would seem to unbassy and harsh-some people probably would say it was muddy or etc.

Dude,
You totally nailed it. Try sitting next to a sax or a trumpet. Bottom line, you are using real instruments to make your judgment, not some arbitrary " I know what I like" nonsense. That's why these cans are designed for studio use where professionals, who make their living with their ears, use them as tools, not magical fantasy world "toys".

Ps I don't consider debating the intellectual rationalizations people use to defend half baked audio "philosophies" trash talking. I just enjoy poking holes in widely accepted and idiotic notions.