[nullstring]

I've never heard a new DT880, but I would also recommend them.

 

[pzm9pzm9]

yes, DT880 for your taste. but, i think K701 gives you more detail.

 

[Acix]

Check the K702 on ebay.

 

[Jazz9]

Thanks for the answers.
Does someone know how the DT880/K601 compare when it comes to speed/instrument separation? (ability to handle complex music, I hated it when I tried to listen to rock/metal with my HD555 and everything turned into a muddy mess)

 

[loopfreak]

K601 is little brother to k701 and it means that separation and mids are their middle name!

Havent heard the dt 880 ......

 

[Ninkul]

DT880 is the least controversial 'phone here.

You'll read the usual:

K701 sound plastic/unnatural/unmusical
HD650 sound bass bloated/veiled

I haven't read many complains on the DT880 except lack of bass which i hear they're more than the K701. I find the K701's bass adequate.


Personally going to pick up a DT880 600ohm in the future sometime.

 

[pzm9pzm9]

make sure your amp or dac to be set on full-body sound when pairing to DT880.
I can easily notice the tonal difference by changing tubes on my amp. It can sound thin and painful if not paired well, I think.

 

[dunski]

I own the HD600 and I've listened to the K701. The 701 is way too analytical for my taste. I'd definitely recommend the 600. It's way more musical. Get the 600s, save up for a cable upgrade and recable them with the Silver Dragon later on. You'll get more detail and clarity while retaining the musicality.

 

[MrGreen]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jazz9 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thanks for all the answers guys, appreciate it! Looks like I'll (again) have to do some more research on the K701 and DT880 (I'm also looking at the thread about the GMPs oqvist mentionned because I never heard about those). From what I gathered both could be what i look for (airy, open, clear and detailled). What i fear about the Dt880 is the sibilance people seem to mention almost in every thread, the 600ohm version is said to remedy the problem but at a premium when it comes to price. And then there's the k701... I've read a ton of threads and I still can't "picture" how they could sound... Some say they're the best thing, some call it a "better" DT880 and some find them just weird sounding. I'll erase both the k601 and HD600 from my list for now (I know the HD600 is really well liked and pretty much a standard around here but I don't think the dark/ultra smooth/laid back signature is for me, I could be wrong though ) 2 down 1 to go...

The DT880 is one of the biggest challenges to amp for dynamics (along with K701, AKG K1k) etc. I actually find that people here are consistently underpowering them: a lot of the people who say they are "too bright" are underamping them and I agree with them. They are bright and thin when they are underpowered. 600 ohm variant is typically paired with OTL tube amp which makes it easier to drive meaning that they are driving it better (which would explain the difference moreso than the difference in ohmage).

The other reason for the 880 being "too bright" is a lot of people are coming from sennheiser; a brand that is typically too dull.

Many of the "too thin" comments are from people coming from the HD650: a headphone that adds body to music through bloaty bass and slow decay-oriented mids.

IMO the 880 are the best of the three phones you list, but its just important to understand why some people do not like them: it's typically a reaction vs what they are used to rather than what they like (because people can and will adapt to just about anything. Remember when we were all on crap headphones and loving them?).

Depending on where you are coming from, they might not be for you.
You might want to pair them with coloured amps and dacs to bring out the extra "body" that they miss (which IMO isnt missing at all if they are amped correctly).
food 4 thought

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrGreen /img/forum/go_quote.gif The DT880 is one of the biggest challenges to amp for dynamics (along with K701, AKG K1k) etc. I actually find that people here are consistently underpowering them: a lot of the people who say they are "too bright" are underamping them and I agree with them. They are bright and thin when they are underpowered. 600 ohm variant is typically paired with OTL tube amp which makes it easier to drive meaning that they are driving it better (which would explain the difference moreso than the difference in ohmage). The other reason for the 880 being "too bright" is a lot of people are coming from sennheiser; a brand that is typically too dull. Many of the "too thin" comments are from people coming from the HD650: a headphone that adds body to music through bloaty bass and slow decay-oriented mids. IMO the 880 are the best of the three phones you list, but its just important to understand why some people do not like them: it's typically a reaction vs what they are used to rather than what they like (because people can and will adapt to just about anything. Remember when we were all on crap headphones and loving them?). Depending on where you are coming from, they might not be for you. You might want to pair them with coloured amps and dacs to bring out the extra "body" that they miss (which IMO isnt missing at all if they are amped correctly). food 4 thought

I have a great tube amp and while I own HD650s, I am primarily a Grado listener and found my DT880s thin and metallic. Many other agree with me. Of your list I prefer the HD650 and the K701s and put the DT880s third (in my humble opinion). Honestly the only way to know what is best for you is to actually listen to all three!

 

[Jazz9]

So I take it the DT880 are likely to sound thin and metallic with my Zero DAC/Amp?
And K601 are said to be even harder to amp...it's getting depressing lol

And MrGreen my last cans were a pair of senns HD555 that I did find dull, lacking transparency and ,well, a lot of things...
I'm not a fan of warm sounding phones. Bass is something that to me is extremely difficult to do right and the "bassy" phones often have the same problem, bass that bleeds into the midrange. So I'd rather have a little less bass than a litlle too much.

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jazz9 /img/forum/go_quote.gif So I take it the DT880 are likely to sound thin and metallic with my Zero DAC/Amp? And K601 are said to be even harder to amp...it's getting depressive lol And MrGreen my last cans were a pair of senns HD555 that I did find dull, lacking transparency and ,well, a lot of things... I'm not a fan of warm sounding phones. Bass is something that to me is extremely difficult to do right and the "bassy" phones often have the same problem, bass that bleeds into the midrange. So I'd rather have a little less bass than a litlle too much.

I would say likely yes with your amp. Sorry, but I think your amp is holding you back. Have you thought about Grado? Great cans and easily amp'd.

 

[Cankin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MacedonianHero /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have a great tube amp and while I own HD650s, I am primarily a Grado listener and found my DT880s thin and metallic. Many other agree with me. Of your list I prefer the HD650 and the K701s and put the DT880s third (in my humble opinion). Honestly the only way to know what is best for you is to actually listen to all three!

x2

I have/had decent SS amps and my K701 is often described as thin and bright by others but I still find DT880 bright and thin

I'd put HD600=K701 > DT880 from the list

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cankin /img/forum/go_quote.gif x2 I have/had decent SS amps and my K701 is often described as thin and bright by others but I still find DT880 bright and thin I'd put HD600=K701 > DT880 from the list

Maybe it' a Toronto thing on our opinion? I still think that the DT880s are great cans and still bring a lot to the table!

 

[MrGreen]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MacedonianHero /img/forum/go_quote.gif I would say likely yes with your amp. Sorry, but I think your amp is holding you back. Have you thought about Grado? Great cans and easily amp'd.

Yes.