[John Willett]

Interesting to see how this pans out.

In the pro-audio forums I frequent (as recording music is my real passion) there are just three headphones that regularly get recommended for studio monitoring and mastering:- HD 600, HD 650 and K701.

All about equal with the number of adherents.

I don't know what this tells you, as they certainly don't sound the same.

 

[pataburd]

Knowing what I know now, I would classify the HD650 as more "natural-sounding" than the K701, based on driving the HD650 with the Darkvoice 337 and the K701 with the Bada PH-12. The K701 have a discontinuity in their upper midrange/lower treble that negatively affects, i.e. smears/fragments, their entire spectral balance.

But then I would rank the K501, driven by the Bada PH-12, as more "natural-sounding" than either the HD650 or K701. The K501 are seamless in the critical midrange and offer the most cohesive presentation I've heard to date, with excellent timbres and spatial sense.

And with the UP-OCC recable, the K501 are well nigh peerless in their price range for a "natural-sounding" listening experience. : )

 

[uptou2]

the sound from hd650/hd600 are not natural.akg k702 sounds natural. but you may not like it. it is not hifi

 

[lucky]

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Willett /img/forum/go_quote.gif Interesting to see how this pans out. In the pro-audio forums I frequent (as recording music is my real passion) there are just three headphones that regularly get recommended for studio monitoring and mastering:- HD 600, HD 650 and K701. All about equal with the number of adherents. I don't know what this tells you, as they certainly don't sound the same.

It suggests the question people are really answering isn't "which phone is more natural?" but "which phone do I prefer?". Unsurprisingly, I've found most people answer the second question no matter what is asked in the first post of a thread. The rare exceptions occur when people ask objective questions, like those regarding the weight or price of a pair of headphones.

 

[TheMarchingMule]

Quote:

Originally Posted by uptou2 /img/forum/go_quote.gif the sound from hd650/hd600 are not natural.akg k702 sounds natural. but you may not like it. it is not hifi

...Whaaat.

 

[Lil' Knight]

Quote:

Originally Posted by uptou2 /img/forum/go_quote.gif the sound from hd650/hd600 are not natural.akg k702 sounds natural. but you may not like it. it is not hifi

The 701 sound artificial to me.

 

[Kees]

In my experience if you amp them really well they sound surprisingly similar....
Both are difficult to drive really well. I think that most differences discussed here could very well be different manifestations of what (insufficient) amping can do.

 

[rogue]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lil' Knight /img/forum/go_quote.gif The 701 sound artificial to me.

Ditto. I found the K701 to be too bright on the upper end and not having enough weight < 80 Hz, along with a slightly weird soundstage.

 

[intoart]

The 701s only sound natural from the midrange up. The bass is much too thin and weak to be even remotely natural.

 

[Stephen Murphy]

I owned the K701 for several months and never found it to sound natural. I found the sound quite shaped/forced and plastic and it tended toward hardness when driven even a little too loud. I found the HD650 to be a bit bass-heavy and that tended to soften the highs. I would at least say the HD650's sound was more relaxed, if that is natural.

 

[MatthewK]

I agree with a lot of people here that say the HD650 is more natural sounding than the K701. I've owned both at the same time and I ended up selling my K701's.

There was virtually no bass at all, and that's even through my Aphex 204 which enhances bass. No amount of EQ will give you satisfactory bass with the K701's. I don't care what some people say, in real life our ears hear sounds that produce bass, so I say bass is an important part of sound reproduction.

I also found the K701's to sound "plastic" and unrealistic. I really tried to like them but couldn't. I guess I like a more relaxed presentation (I didn't think this was the case originally) because the HD650's sound just right to me.

Also, has anyone ever noticed that the K701's headband has that annoying bump in the middle and the HD650's are exactly the opposite with an indentation? The HD650's are definitely much more comfortable to me.

 

[NiceCans]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lucky /img/forum/go_quote.gif It suggests the question people are really answering isn't "which phone is more natural?" but "which phone do I prefer?". Unsurprisingly, I've found most people answer the second question no matter what is asked in the first post of a thread.

I do prefer the K701 . . . . . because I feel it sounds more natural

Aactually I never heard the HD650, but owned the HD600 for years until the K701 replaced them. The aspects of the K701 I preferred over the HD600 made the HD650 a non-contender.

 

[fishski13]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kees /img/forum/go_quote.gif In my experience if you amp them really well they sound surprisingly similar.... Both are difficult to drive really well. I think that most differences discussed here could very well be different manifestations of what (insufficient) amping can do.

x2. in direct comparison to the K701 with my Bijou, the HD650 has a bit more weight and balls, but falls short in presence, apparent detail, note attack, and transients. the difference isn't huge, and melts away after a song or two. also, the HD650 also has a wonderfully natural speaker-like soundstage with no "veil" to my ears, even with stock cable.

 

[Happy Camper]

K

 

[mudhole]

I currently own k701s, the sound is very natural, even I feel it is kind of boring. My HD650s will be here next week, but I don't think it will more natural than k701s. I expect HD650 has little colored sound for easy listening and pop...