[derbigpr]

Quote:

I have been heavily considering this can, but the whole "no proper central imaging" thing has me weary. What do you guys think?

 
 
 
Try it n your own. Q701 imaging is sub par for this sort of money.

 

[derbigpr]

Quote:

 
If you've noticed, that's just a ridiculous claim by one person that doesn't like them. How many others say this? Any? Probably zero. If they had no proper center image, nobody would like them! 
 
The Q701 and K601 are never going anywhere.
I guess that's a sign of a good headphone. Many people rave about a headphone and then it's gone in a few months. I sometimes do this a lot too.

 
 
You judge that by Head-fi forum only? I know 6 people who owned or auditioned the K701 / Q701 and hated its soundstaging, or even the sound in general. And those are just people that I know personally,  not on forums. And how many people do you think are there in total that tried them and didn't buy them? More than those who did buy them probably, as with most headphones. So they're not perfect.  Your logic of "if it was really bad, nobody would like them" is not very good.
Someone doesn't mind a bad soundstage. Someone doesn't even notice it's bad.  All headphones have faults, Q701's are no different. And the fact is, for me at least, because I've heard it with my own ears, the biggest fault of the Q701's is that they have a very unrealistic soundstage with very little depth and height and poor imaging. Other than that, they're great headphones, but they can't image properly, because they're soundstage is stretched too far left and right, and you end up with something like a very wide wall of sound, with no depth.  In direct comparison, even the Sennheiser HD438 has a more solid center image, and in direct comparison to something like HFi2400, Q701's sound as if half of the sound between left and right channels is missing.   Their soundstage is impressive at first because it feels so open and everything sounds like its coming from far away, but once you start listening to familiar recordings, and know something that should be just a bit off center to the right, now sounds like its at a 90 degree angle from you, and way too far away, you realize they're not very precise.  Someone doesn't mind that.  And those who use them for games / movies in combination with dolby headphone surround soundcard love them, but for music, as far as soundstage and imaging goes, there are far better choices for same amount of money.
 
The reason why people rave about certain headphones on this forum, which everyone should have noticed by now, is that once headphones get a certain status, it starts a chain reaction, and then the status of those headphones in engraved in stone. Nobody can change it after that, even though out of 10 people who help spread the chain reaction, only 2 heard the actual headphones and can confirm whether the status is justified or not. Its like that on all electronic equipment forums in general. You're not allowed to say anything bad about something that is supposedly very good.

 

[PanamaHat]

Quote:

 
 
You judge that by Head-fi forum only? I know 6 people who owned or auditioned the K701 / Q701 and hated its soundstaging, or even the sound in general. And those are just people that I know personally,  not on forums. And how many people do you think are there in total that tried them and didn't buy them? More than those who did buy them probably, as with most headphones. So they're not perfect.  Your logic of "if it was really bad, nobody would like them" is not very good.
Someone doesn't mind a bad soundstage. Someone doesn't even notice it's bad.  All headphones have faults, Q701's are no different. And the fact is, for me at least, because I've heard it with my own ears, the biggest fault of the Q701's is that they have a very unrealistic soundstage with very little depth and height and poor imaging. Other than that, they're great headphones, but they can't image properly, because they're soundstage is stretched too far left and right, and you end up with something like a very wide wall of sound, with no depth.  In direct comparison, even the Sennheiser HD438 has a more solid center image, and in direct comparison to something like HFi2400, Q701's sound as if half of the sound between left and right channels is missing.   Their soundstage is impressive at first because it feels so open and everything sounds like its coming from far away, but once you start listening to familiar recordings, and know something that should be just a bit off center to the right, now sounds like its at a 90 degree angle from you, and way too far away, you realize they're not very precise.  Someone doesn't mind that.  And those who use them for games / movies in combination with dolby headphone surround soundcard love them, but for music, as far as soundstage and imaging goes, there are far better choices for same amount of money.
 
The reason why people rave about certain headphones on this forum, which everyone should have noticed by now, is that once headphones get a certain status, it starts a chain reaction, and then the status of those headphones in engraved in stone. Nobody can change it after that, even though out of 10 people who help spread the chain reaction, only 2 heard the actual headphones and can confirm whether the status is justified or not. Its like that on all electronic equipment forums in general. You're not allowed to say anything bad about something that is supposedly very good.

Thanks, that's what I wanted to know. Sorry for spurring all this excitement. If they are really good for gaming then I may consider getting them for that sole purpose.

 

[derbigpr]

Quote:

Thanks, that's what I wanted to know. Sorry for spurring all this excitement. If they are really good for gaming then I may consider getting them for that sole purpose.

 
 
 
Yes, they are very good for games because of their physical characteristics. Huge ear cups, large space between ears and drivers, and very open design makes everything sound big and like its coming from far away. In music, that's not always what you want.  But combined with Dolby headphone, in games and movies they can be very very good, maybe the best out there. But again, Dolby headphone is the key. Without it, you wont get very good sound in games with any headphone.

 

[Chris J]

​

I have been heavily considering this can, but the whole "no proper central imaging" thing has me weary. What do you guys think?

The 'phones have a very fine central image, I think they have a great soundstage for headphones!

I should point out that I don't game and I prefer the sound of Open 'phones.

For superior imaging I listen to music over loudspeakers.

 

[chicolom]

The bottom line is:  You have try it for yourself and see. 
 
Other people's impressions will only take you so far.   But yes, people usually agree that they're good for gaming..

 

[MLee]

When I listen to Alone and Acoustic by Buddy Guy and Junior Wells the stage and imaging sounds perfect. Same, for instance, with Dazed and Confused or any number of songs by Led Zeppelin which I've listened to for 40 years. You mileage may vary but I have no problem with the Q701 imaging.

 

[jasonb]

I like the imaging of the Q701. Paired with an E17 the staging is nice, wide but not too wide. Vocals still sound centered to me, where else would they be anyway? Any sound that is in phase and coming from both the left and right at the same time will always sound centered. The question is how focused will they be? The wide staging makes them of course sound wide, so the center will also be a little wide, they will usually not have a razor sharp center. Overall I still like the sound. 
 
I will admit though that soundstage isn't one of the main factors I consider when I look for headphones. I leave that job for my speakers. I do prefer open headphones because they sound spacious instead of boxed in though, and I don't care about isolation at home.

 

[tdockweiler]

Quote:

 
 
You judge that by Head-fi forum only? I know 6 people who owned or auditioned the K701 / Q701 and hated its soundstaging, or even the sound in general. And those are just people that I know personally,  not on forums. And how many people do you think are there in total that tried them and didn't buy them? More than those who did buy them probably, as with most headphones. So they're not perfect.  Your logic of "if it was really bad, nobody would like them" is not very good.
Someone doesn't mind a bad soundstage. Someone doesn't even notice it's bad.  All headphones have faults, Q701's are no different. And the fact is, for me at least, because I've heard it with my own ears, the biggest fault of the Q701's is that they have a very unrealistic soundstage with very little depth and height and poor imaging. Other than that, they're great headphones, but they can't image properly, because they're soundstage is stretched too far left and right, and you end up with something like a very wide wall of sound, with no depth.  In direct comparison, even the Sennheiser HD438 has a more solid center image, and in direct comparison to something like HFi2400, Q701's sound as if half of the sound between left and right channels is missing.   Their soundstage is impressive at first because it feels so open and everything sounds like its coming from far away, but once you start listening to familiar recordings, and know something that should be just a bit off center to the right, now sounds like its at a 90 degree angle from you, and way too far away, you realize they're not very precise.  Someone doesn't mind that.  And those who use them for games / movies in combination with dolby headphone surround soundcard love them, but for music, as far as soundstage and imaging goes, there are far better choices for same amount of money.
 
The reason why people rave about certain headphones on this forum, which everyone should have noticed by now, is that once headphones get a certain status, it starts a chain reaction, and then the status of those headphones in engraved in stone. Nobody can change it after that, even though out of 10 people who help spread the chain reaction, only 2 heard the actual headphones and can confirm whether the status is justified or not. Its like that on all electronic equipment forums in general. You're not allowed to say anything bad about something that is supposedly very good.

 
(EDIT: How the heck did this reply turn out to be so long winded? Guess I got too engrossed in talking about a favorite headphone. I hate discussions like this that usually turn out to be about who's right and who's wrong. We can agree to disagree. I should have just said that and not posted all that crap I just did)
 
You're clumping the Q701/K702 all together as one headphone. Sure they're very similar, but don't sound exactly the same at all. Even when it comes to soundstage size/imaging. You can check other reviews of people finding the Q701 to be more accurate than the K702 and having a slightly smaller soundstage. Some have found the soundstage to be the same size. I don't and never have. Have you owned the Q701? (edit: I see you do. About time someone complained about it and actually OWNS it) Have you heard it with multiple amps and DACs? All you've said would apply to the K702 I had, but somehow not with the Q701 at all. It's soundstage is never abnormally huge. It certainly doesn't sound like you're listening to music in an airplane hangar. Nothing for me has ever sounded way too far away as you've described. I had this issue only with the K702 and the Asgard. If you heard the Q701 this way, then OK.
 
I mentioned that nobody would buy them if the center image was so bad because people blow it way out of proportion and make it worse than it really is (which you're kind of doing). I mean, people earlier came on here and said it practically had NO center image! What the heck..this is impossible and who would want such a crappy headphone like that? Certainly not me.
 
There's no doubt the sound of the Q701 can vary a lot between equipment. I just know that mine is perfect is most areas (trust me, I'm very critical of many of my favorites actually!), but I'm not afraid to admit it's imaging is not as good as maybe the HD-650 or K601. I have no doubts it's better than the 598 though. I compared the K601 to the 598 and the K601 was way better. Like pinpoint accuracy and perfect for gaming.
 
If someone wants an interesting test, compare the Q701's imaging with flat and angled pads. You'd be surprised at the differences. Yes, imaging differences between pads. Hardly possible right? Try it! Maybe something is fooling our brains.
 
If people really did find the Q701 to have such a poor center imaging, more people would mention this. They haven't yet. Just with the K702. I've listened to the Q701 and compared them to other headphones enough to know it's fine IMO. I think some people are just nit-picking.
 
BTW I think I mentioned this, but the old K702 (IMO) wasn't that great for vocals. It often seemed to place them a tiny bit further back then they should be. Still fairly accurate, but not quite there. With the Q701 I have, it's as accurate as any other headphone I have. HD-580, 600 and 650. Vocals don't ever sound distant and instruments never suddenly go missing due to a massive soundstage. If people check my old posts I complained about this many times about the K702/K701.
 
Then again, nobody has found out for sure if there's any differences between Q701 drivers between pairs. Not that this would matter at all. It does appear that some have describe it as 99% like the K702, which is bizarre. Without owning 20 pairs of each, there's no way to know if there's variations.
 
I don't really care if people disagree, but so far in here it certainly seems the general consensus is that the Q701's soundstage and imaging is quite good. Best thing to do is try them with your own ears. Most places have a good return policy if you have issues with them. I do think it's a bad idea to read up on the K702 and expect the Q701 to sound exactly the same or have any similar issues. People can read my first post in here to hear my impressions against the K702. In a whole year my opinion of the Q701 hasn't changed much.
 
BTW I wonder if it's possible for an amp or dac to artificially boost the soundstage size of a headphone. Sometimes I feel my E9 does this with many headphones. My Asgard certainly seemed to do with the K702. I actually preferred the K702 with the E9 over the Asgard(!). Maybe there is an amp/dac combo that would make me dislike the Q701. Highly unlikely, but I guess it's possible.
 
I do remember a few days ago switching from the HD-600 to the Q701 and the center image on the Q701 was much more present. This is after hearing the non-sense about it lacking so much. Maybe I should be stupid and analyze the differences between the Q701, 598, 580, 600, 650 and K601! I bet the K601 will beat them when it comes to soundstage accuracy and imaging. I kind of stopped over-analyzing my headphones 6 months ago.
Kind of ruins the fun of it.
 
I just got in the HD-650, so i'll be listening to that for the next week. Taking a break from the Q701, which is rare! Don't think I've done that for more than a week. I usually alternate between the Q701, HD-580 and DJ100. Everything else is rarely used.
 
If someone ever wants to take one for the team, compare the imaging and soundstage accuracy of the 65th anniversary K702 vs the Q701. Remember that the 65th has non-angled pads. This would be interesting..

 

[jasonb]

Listening to stuff like Yes, and Rush is pretty impressive with the Q701. Such good clarity and instrument separation. Imaging and staging seems spot on here also to me. 
 
If you don't like the stage of the Q701 that is fine, but most people do including me. I've owned the HD650 and had it paired with the full size HeadRoom desktop amp/DAC. I never owned both at the same time, but going from memory I prefer the Q701. HD650 is to dark for my tastes now. 

 

[lostmage]

If I wanted fuller low-mids and bass, would I be better off amping the Q701s more (coming from an E10) or getting something like a ZO2? I feel like they're missing something down there compared to the HE-300s I used to have, which are very warm, veiled sounding cans from what I remember, nothing like the 701s I know, but they had some incredible sounding bass and mids.

 

[rrwatch]

I like the sound stage of the Q701, it is huge and detailed. There is central imaging....... no worries. I find the Q701 reminds me of some of the small detailed high end speakers  I own, it doesn't have that everything cramped together sound stage that many Headphones have. Some people like that and are used to it, perhaps that is why the opinion  "no central imaging " exists. One point I would like to express is for those who bring up charts of other HP's and say they are better or the Q701 sucks look at this notch or bump, just take a listen of HP's first. I dont notice any huge deficit in the 2k range when I listen to the 701's. If all we had to do was post a few measurements to base which HP's we liked there wouldn't be many posts on this Forum would there ? Every listeners review or opinions would be discarded and every review would consist of only a few charts.

 

[jasonb]

Electric guitars sound sooooo good with these. I dont know why anybody would say these aren't suited for rock or metal. 
 
Why do guitars sound so good and stand out like they do on these? It really is quite something.

 

[tdockweiler]

You guys are going to think I'm nuts, but this HD-650 I got in doesn't sound that dramatically different than the Q701 I have. Perhaps I have the most neutral sounding HD-650 ever made. You can listen to some songs on each and they sound very similar. On bass heavy material, it's a totally different story. I actually find both accurate and true to the recording. The bass on the HD-650 seems to be hiding when it's not required. This pair doesn't magically add bass to anything when it shouldn't be there.
 
The 650 sounds like a Q701 with the treble chopped off VERY slightly. So this also mean it's lower mids are a tad more forward and it's slightly fuller sounding (yes, I really did say "slightly"!).
 
Most people will say they're total opposites if you didn't own both.
 
This HD-650's bass is weird. It has slightly more presence than my Q701. A tiny bit better low bass extension, but not by much. I would say the quantity is similar to my DJ100. It doesn't have a mid-bass hump that sticks out like a sore thumb. The 650 definitely isn't bass heavy to me.
 
Obviously the HD-650 is a bit fuller sounding (that has it's negatives sometimes), but the Q701 has better treble and often sounds clearer.
 
The HD-650 I have is totally different than the version I had in the past. That one had bloated mid-bass, a muffled sound and was too dark.
 
Maybe there really are some Q701s that are quite bassy (not bass heavy!).
 
I actually find the Q701 smoother than the HD-650 (pre burn in). The HD-650's lower mids are kind of too forward with some music.
 
It seems that both of these headphones can sound totally different between recordings. Sometimes the HD-650 puts me to sleep with bad recordings. My Q701 can often sound like either an HD-650 or AD700 depending on the recording. This is so very bizarre...never had a headphone do that. Of course I don't get that effect with the HD-650, but the sound does vary a lot. Maybe the Q701 is just more accurate. Not sure.
 
Loving both right now. The HD-650 isn't too dark at all for me yet and that's coming from the Q701 (which also isn't treble happy at all IMO).
 
Check out this graph:
 

 
I rarely ever trust or agree with graphs, but the Q701 graph is pretty close to what i'm hearing.
The 650 does sound a tiny bit bassier, but maybe it's due to having less treble. The lower mids on the 650 definitely seem more forward too.
I honestly don't find the 650 to have recessed sounding upper mids at all like some do.
 
BTW right now I prefer this (weird) HD-650 to my 580/598 and HD-600. Never would have said that with my last pair!
The Q701 isn't going anywhere. The HD-650 and Q701 is a pretty nice pair to have depending on mood and music genre.
 
Oh yeah.. there's another guy (NA_Blur) with a recent post that said he said the Q701 and HD-650 had some similarities. I would have said he was nuts until I compared them.
Maybe he has the same setup as me

I'm using the ODAC to Headroom Micro Amp (quite neutral IMO) with a DHC DIY interconnect and stock HD-650 cable.

 

[wazzupi]

Quote:

You guys are going to think I'm nuts, but this HD-650 I got in doesn't sound that dramatically different than the Q701 I have. Perhaps I have the most neutral sounding HD-650 ever made. You can listen to some songs on each and they sound very similar. On bass heavy material, it's a totally different story. I actually find both accurate and true to the recording. The bass on the HD-650 seems to be hiding when it's not required. This pair doesn't magically add bass to anything when it shouldn't be there.
 
The 650 sounds like a Q701 with the treble chopped off VERY slightly. So this also mean it's lower mids are a tad more forward and it's slightly fuller sounding (yes, I really did say "slightly"!).
 
Most people will say they're total opposites if you didn't own both.
 
This HD-650's bass is weird. It has slightly more presence than my Q701. A tiny bit better low bass extension, but not by much. I would say the quantity is similar to my DJ100. It doesn't have a mid-bass hump that sticks out like a sore thumb. The 650 definitely isn't bass heavy to me.
 
Obviously the HD-650 is a bit fuller sounding (that has it's negatives sometimes), but the Q701 has better treble and often sounds clearer.
 
The HD-650 I have is totally different than the version I had in the past. That one had bloated mid-bass, a muffled sound and was too dark.
 
Maybe there really are some Q701s that are quite bassy (not bass heavy!).
 
I actually find the Q701 smoother than the HD-650 (pre burn in). The HD-650's lower mids are kind of too forward with some music.
 
It seems that both of these headphones can sound totally different between recordings. Sometimes the HD-650 puts me to sleep with bad recordings. My Q701 can often sound like either an HD-650 or AD700 depending on the recording. This is so very bizarre...never had a headphone do that. Of course I don't get that effect with the HD-650, but the sound does vary a lot. Maybe the Q701 is just more accurate. Not sure.
 
Loving both right now. The HD-650 isn't too dark at all for me yet and that's coming from the Q701 (which also isn't treble happy at all IMO).
 
Check out this graph:
 

 
I rarely ever trust or agree with graphs, but the Q701 graph is pretty close to what i'm hearing.
The 650 does sound a tiny bit bassier, but maybe it's due to having less treble. The lower mids on the 650 definitely seem more forward too.
I honestly don't find the 650 to have recessed sounding upper mids at all like some do.
 
BTW right now I prefer this (weird) HD-650 to my 580/598 and HD-600. Never would have said that with my last pair!
The Q701 isn't going anywhere. The HD-650 and Q701 is a pretty nice pair to have depending on mood and music genre.
 
Oh yeah.. there's another guy (NA_Blur) with a recent post that said he said the Q701 and HD-650 had some similarities. I would have said he was nuts until I compared them.
Maybe he has the same setup as me

I'm using the ODAC to Headroom Micro Amp (quite neutral IMO) with a DHC DIY interconnect and stock HD-650 cable.

I agree with what ur hearing except on hd650 mids>>>>>>q701's. the soundstage of the hd650 is way better in height and depth to the q701 except width but it isn't small but nothing like the monsters of 70X's.  and of course the bass is way better in quantity and quality.