[rhythmdevils]

I just got a ksc35 used after buying the 75 at radioshack last week. I was pretty impressed with the 75's when i got them. i thought they lived up to their reputation. the only thing i found offensive in them was the grainy highs and mid-highs. this annoyed me after a while.

so i just got the 35's in the mail. they exhibit none of this grainy-ness! they seem more detailed, more balanced and natural, and there is more and deeper bass. the soundstage seems better as well. and they also fit way better than the 75's

these really are 80 % of the orpheus.

i just thought i would share my impressions because there are so many back and forth comparos between the two. seems like a nobrainer to me. the 35's all the way!

 

[TheMarchingMule]

^ See folks, THIS is what happens when you take too much of that powder

No, seriously...calling them 80% of an Orpheus...n.o. dude, but isn't that a bit...extreme?

I also read that 35 and 75 use the same drivers, but I thought not...clarification here please.

 

[Tachikoma]

Especially considering that you've never (correction: owned) an orpheus before =/

 

[3805]

They don't use the same drivers. The 75's are coated with something (makes them look metallic) and the 35's are nearly transparent. Other than that, they are identical, but i guess it (the coating) does affect the sound of the phones. I thought the same exact thing before also( ksc 35's being > than 75/50/55), but I could not do an A_B comparison of the two. I guess my mind wasn't lying to me after all.

There are threads here with images to prove the fact, too.

 

[TheMarchingMule]

Yes, iirc the 75s are lightly coated with Titatium (sp), right?

 

[Asr]

You lost me when you mentioned the Orpheus. No way in hell a $30 clip-on from Koss can be even 50% of the legendary Orpheus that I've only read about!

 

[Meyvn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asr You lost me when you mentioned the Orpheus. No way in hell a $30 clip-on from Koss can be even 50% of the legendary Orpheus that I've only read about!

All right, I'm going to say it: while I believe his statement of 80% is an exaggeration, I believe wholeheartedly that, beyond the initial upgrade from a standard crap headphone to a KSC75/35, there is NEVER a sound jump in quality as big as that first one, at any price. I'd say even the jump from the KSC75 to the OII is not as big as from crap to KSC75. Perhaps it's the whole, going from a 0 to a 1 is infinitely more valuable than from 1 to any other number in terms of multiplication, since there is no way to multiply a zero into a one.

 

[catscratch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhythmdevils these really are 80 % of the orpheus.

Um, no

At least not how I hear it. The Orpheus is a musical experience, while the 35's are merely good headphones.

But, I only heard the HE90 out of the HEV90 and a seriously awesome source, while the 35's were out of an X5. It really would be quite interesting to hear the 35's out of a really great source.

 

[noiseunit]

I haven't heard the orpheus, but the whole comparison-by-percentage thing (regardless of the hardware involved) always seemed a bit ridiculous. I mean, what's the point?

 

[Carl]

Calling the HE60 80% of the HE90 : A fair enough statement

Calling the KSC35 80% of the HE90 : Umm, what?

 

[Ferbose]

Do most people actually agree that KSC35 is better than KSC75?

 

[jagorev]

Quote:

Originally Posted by noiseunit I haven't heard the orpheus, but the whole comparison-by-percentage thing (regardless of the hardware involved) always seemed a bit ridiculous. I mean, what's the point?

Yeah. I seriously wish people would stop using arbitrary numbers like this when talking about audio.

 

[smooth_boarder]

As if!!!

 

[creyc]

I believe it.

In this world of high end and higher end, you pay premium for EVERYTHING. And the higher up on the metaphorical scale of "quality" you go, the less and less of a bargain it becomes. As Meyvn mentioned, going from 0 to anything is going to be the largest jump you can find, mathematically speaking and even relative to the headphone world. Moving up from utter crap to some KSC75's gets you started. We'll say..."60%". That was $20 to move up from horrendous sound.

Now if you want to have the same ear-opening experience don't expect to dish out another $20 and call it a day. No way my friends. It's the law of diminishing returns in full swing. To gain a few more "points" on our made up scale you're going to need to spend hundreds, upgrading wires, amps, etc.. Then to move up a bit more plan on dropping thousands. New source, new headphones, the list goes on.

Next comes the Orpheus and the $300 power cables.

Ahh...life as a head-fi'er.

 

[lan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferbose Do most people actually agree that KSC35 is better than KSC75?

I think they are drastically different. I wouldn't even bother with the KSC75. I think the KSC35s are pretty good. You can stick them into a high end rig and they are even better.

As for being 80% of the Orpheus it's entirely plausible. This is a subjective hobby and is system based. These are just headphones which are just one part of the puzzle. A high end front end can give high quality KSC35 listening. I myself wouldn't bother with the Orpheus on what I'd consider a "lesser" front end.