Looking to upgrade from AKG K702
May 21, 2013 at 10:11 AM Post #46 of 123

samwell7

Head-Fier
Joined
Oct 21, 2012
Posts
85
Likes
12
The x70x's don't have much in the centre, although after I eq'd mine and boosted the low end a bit (which sounds really good now BTW) the sound does shift to the centre more, as the centre is typically where the bass is in a recording. It really is strange how much the 702s change with a bit of eqing, its not just a simple boost or cut it changes everything about its sound
 
May 21, 2013 at 10:23 AM Post #47 of 123

jasonb

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Sep 14, 2010
Posts
4,462
Likes
1,002
To me when I added 2db of bass from my E17, it seemed to just add warmth and bass. I've spent so much time using the 2db boost though. I never really listened to them much with anything less. 
 
If you are in search of something with more bass and deeper bass extension and don't mind sacrificing some soundstage width maybe try a modded T50rp. My most recent tuning actually sounds really nice. You could try a Mad Dog, or you could buy a stock T50rp for $75 or whatever they can be found for and mod away. Modding them is actually kinda fun and really satisfying when you get them to sound the way you want. They may never be as bright or edgy as the AKG's but even with a smoother top end the T50rp can be just as detailed with the proper tuning. The imaging is actually quite good and accurate, and with angled pads the soundstage isn't really half bad either. There is still some good width and air, and definitely better depth than the AKG's.  
Quote:
The x70x's don't have much in the centre, although after I eq'd mine and boosted the low end a bit (which sounds really good now BTW) the sound does shift to the centre more, as the centre is typically where the bass is in a recording. It really is strange how much the 702s change with a bit of eqing, its not just a simple boost or cut it changes everything about its sound

 
May 21, 2013 at 12:07 PM Post #48 of 123

Acix

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 7, 2008
Posts
6,485
Likes
71
Quote:
That doesn't make any sense. I think what you mean to suggest is that the DT 880s don't have front/rear projection (if that's what you mean by depth), which seems to be a complaint I've read before but am not hearing myself. If you listen to a binaural recording the front/rear projection of the DT 880 is fine. The 701s have a clear left/right bias even in binaural recordings, with no semblance of central presence.
 
It's not a "better" sound stage depth when everything sounds further away than it should be and either to the left or right all the time, even in intimate recordings. The Q701s sound pinched-out. This is great for picking apart things but pretty unnatural for listening.

 
In a round sphere shape sound stage, the sound travel all around and doesn't stack in one place in the middle between L/R and create this huge sensation that all the music sound all the time in the center. Is like you're saying the earth is flat because is make more sense to you, and the others agree because they walk straight and never had the chance to see it from above or just fly around. In other words is 3D Vs 2D, after you're living in a 3D world, is annoying to go back to the 2D life. I can only guess that you probably feel the same frustration going from 2D, to 3D.
 
 
May 21, 2013 at 12:18 PM Post #49 of 123

3X0

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Sep 2, 2006
Posts
3,962
Likes
89
Quote:
 
In a round sphere shape sound stage, the sound travel all around and doesn't stack in one place in the middle between L/R and create this huge sensation that all the music sound all the time in the center. Is like you're saying the earth is flat because is make more sense to you, and the others agree because they walk straight and never had the chance to see it from above or just fly around. In other words is 3D Vs 2D, after you're living in a 3D world, is annoying to go back to the 2D life. I can only guess that you probably feel the same frustration going from 2D, to 3D.
 


Again, that doesn't make sense. You first suggest that "the DT-880 ONLY go left/right", and now you're saying they keep things in the center. The DT 880's relative intimacy doesn't preclude an appropriate sound field performance in terms of left/right and rear/front projection. You seem to suggest that the DT 880s sound "mono" and I think this is severely inaccurate, beyond your several impressions lacking consistently and seemingly contradicting one another (though clarification on your end would be most welcome).
 
What upper-end headphones do you consider to be most accurate and correct? I think the HD 800s do much better than the Q701s at what the latter try to do, because they actually have accurate and precise imaging and possess central projection capabilities as needed. Things that should be in the center of the sound simply are. The Q701s lacked this centrality in comparison, attempting a needlessly cavernous sound field with the fatal flow of a central black hole. Using the HD 800 as a reference, the DT 880s sounded closer to its imaging specificity to me (while obviously lacking the famously diffuse sound field).
 
Let me try to present my impressions in the form of an analogy. Let's pretend for a moment that the sound field is a hard-boiled egg.
 
The HD 800 is a large hard-boiled egg.
 
The DT 880 is a much smaller hard-boiled egg.
 
The Q701 is a hard-boiled egg that is bigger than the DT 880, not as large as the HD 800, but hollow where the yolk should be.
 
May 21, 2013 at 12:47 PM Post #50 of 123

Acix

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 7, 2008
Posts
6,485
Likes
71
Quote:
Again, that doesn't make any sense. You first suggest that "the DT-880 ONLY go left/right", and now you're saying they keep things in the center. The DT 880's relative intimacy doesn't preclude an appropriate sound field performance in terms of left/right and rear/front projection. You seem to suggest that the DT 880s sound "mono" and I think this is severely inaccurate, beyond your several impressions lacking consistently and seemingly contradicting one another (though clarification on your end would be most welcome).
 
What upper-end headphones do you consider to be most accurate and correct? I think the HD 800s do much better than the Q701s at what the latter try to do, because they actually have accurate and precise imaging and possess central projection capabilities as needed. Things that should be in the center of the sound simply are. The Q701s lacked this centrality in comparison, attempting a needlessly cavernous sound field with the fatal flow of a central black hole. Using the HD 800 as a reference, the DT 880s sounded closer to its imaging specificity to me (while obviously lacking the famously diffuse sound field).

 
 
Yes, is the same...if the DT-880 only go L/R is mean the sound will be very focus in the center, because don't have the space of the depth to spread in front of you. 
 
In my experience the Sony Qualia have the best/correct treble. The HD-800 is treble hyped, as the HE-500. The headphones companies increase the treble to try to create a false sensation of a better sound resolution.
 
May 21, 2013 at 12:55 PM Post #51 of 123

davidsh

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 4, 2012
Posts
5,593
Likes
180
^You think the HE-500 has too much treble?
 
May 21, 2013 at 4:11 PM Post #52 of 123

Acix

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 7, 2008
Posts
6,485
Likes
71
Quote:
^You think the HE-500 has too much treble?

 
Compare to my K-702, yes!
 
The HE-500 have a beautiful upper mids, but less then average soundstage, I mean the HE-500 drivers have a huge potential, but I got the impression the company didn't invest much time in the sound development, or the hps comfort .
 
BTW, maybe with tubes the treble can be rolled off a bit.
 
May 21, 2013 at 4:22 PM Post #53 of 123

davidsh

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 4, 2012
Posts
5,593
Likes
180
Quote:
 
Compare to my K-702, yes!
 
The HE-500 have a beautiful upper mids, but less then average soundstage, I mean the HE-500 drivers have a huge potential, but I got the impression the company didn't invest much time in the sound development, or the hps comfort .
 
BTW, maybe with tubes the treble can be rolled off a bit.


Ohh, it's because you used velour pads, right? The sound stage is not spectacular, that is true, though. But I do love them anyway, never really liked the dt880 or k702 very much, they have never really pleased me.
 
Not to sound like some kind of fanboy, but pad modding can really help fixing some serious flaws in the sound...
 
May 21, 2013 at 5:01 PM Post #54 of 123

RustA

Aka: Banned member MHOE/MetalHOE.
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Posts
656
Likes
22
Quote:
The HD-800 is treble hyped, as the HE-500. The headphones companies increase the treble to try to create a false sensation of a better sound resolution.

 
LOL, simply LOL!
 
May 23, 2013 at 11:43 AM Post #55 of 123

samwell7

Head-Fier
Joined
Oct 21, 2012
Posts
85
Likes
12
I've ordered some 65th anniversary pads, will report back with my findings when they come, also is the difference between the dt880 600 ohm and the 250 ohm huge? The price difference is pretty big here
 
May 23, 2013 at 1:08 PM Post #56 of 123

davidsh

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 4, 2012
Posts
5,593
Likes
180
Go for the cheapest one. What did the pads cost?
 
May 23, 2013 at 1:14 PM Post #57 of 123

RustA

Aka: Banned member MHOE/MetalHOE.
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Posts
656
Likes
22
May 23, 2013 at 7:05 PM Post #58 of 123

samwell7

Head-Fier
Joined
Oct 21, 2012
Posts
85
Likes
12
Go for the cheapest one. What did the pads cost?

Gonna do a proxy post so $29 each plus whatever shipping is gonna be (should be around 20) much better than the $200+ I was quoted here
 
May 23, 2013 at 7:37 PM Post #59 of 123

samwell7

Head-Fier
Joined
Oct 21, 2012
Posts
85
Likes
12
May 23, 2013 at 8:03 PM Post #60 of 123

RustA

Aka: Banned member MHOE/MetalHOE.
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Posts
656
Likes
22
Quote:
Thanks! Wasn't really a huge conclusion of the differences between the 250 and 600 I'll have to do a bit of research

 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/BeyerdynamicDT880250ohm.pdf
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/BeyerdynamicDT880600ohm.pdf
 
Look at those two sheets and compare - especially look at:
 - FREQUENCY RESPONSE (no peak around 3.5khz with 600ohm version suggesting a little bit smoother sound in that department = highs)
 - 30HZ SQUARE WAVE (significantly more square-like look of 600ohm version suggesting a littel bit tighter bass)
 - 300HZ SQUARE WAVE (reduced ringing with 600ohm version suggesting a bit smoother and precise sound overall, could image a bit better)
 - %THD+noise (significantly lower with no significant inconsistencies with 600ohm suggesting cleaner sound overall)
 - IMPULSE RESPONSE (let's say they are the same so both will be equally "fast")
 
Those differences will be definitely small but expect a bit cleaner and tighter bass response along with cleaner and smoother highs... A LITTLE BIT, not much!
 
Depends on how much you want to spend... But 600ohm version is better, definitely. Drivers seem to be better controlled, simply.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top