[ai0tron]

"If you want the Nth degree in realism then for 90% of the material in my collection of CDs, the AKG-K501's are absolutely superior. For the other 10%, the Sennheiser HD-600's take the cake. The Senny's advantage is in the bottom octave and the AKG's win for everything else."

I LIKE YOU.

BUT THATS STUPID.

I wish you AKG luver ****s would drop this ****. DanielN's opinion seemed pretty honest to me. GET OVER IT. THE K501's are not as good as the HD600's in most normal people's opinions.

 

[shivohum]

Quote:

We shouldn't hear bass at the same level as midrange anyway, since we don't actually hear that way. Our ears are naturally more sensitive to the midband. So when people say it lacks bass, it's not. They are just hearing"too much" midrange in proportion, which is what they are suppposed to hear.

You're free to prefer whatever amount of bass you like, of course, but I have to argue with your logic.

If there is less bass in real music (which is the way we "actually hear" the music), then accurate recordings will reflect that bass mix already. You don't need a headphone to further reduce the bass.

And regardless of how your ear or brain is structured, whatever colorations your earlobe may produce, those colorations will impose themselves on whatever sound you hear -- whether from live music or from a recording. So even if your earlobe was structured in such a way that the bass was somehow emphasized, you would expect to hear that emphasis both in live music and in recordings, and thus, if a headphone de-emphasized bass, it still wouldn't sound true to the music (if you were easily able to compare between the two).

Of course, there's still the question of preference, which will forever remain up in the air. But on certain points--like frequency response--I think that measurements can and do reflect much of the truth.

Quote:

Measurements don't tell you what you hear.

Are you saying how a sound measures has no relationship to what one hears? That seems like a rather extreme position.

 

[ai0tron]

TEAR HIM DOWN SHIVO!!!!

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

Originally posted by kwkarth I don't know why I let myself get sucked into this....

Quote:

If you want fatter bass, but not necessarily better accuracy or realism, then you may prefer the HD-600's for everything. That's ok with me, that's ok with you. Let's just call a spade a spade.

Kevin knows I disagree quite a bit with him on this. The HD600 may be a bit "fatter" in the bass (actually the upper bass)... but they are definitely less "fat" than the K501 are "skinny"

Quote:

Originally posted by Beagle Definitely not. Not unless those measuring instruments are human ears, which are all different. Measurements don't tell you what you hear.

The testing I did comparing the K501, HD600, Etys, and V6 was using my ears. So I guess that means they were the best kind of measurements

Quote:

I have played a lot of music with low bass information through the K501 and it's there. It may not be as "present" as a V6 or HD600 or Grado, but it is there, and IMO in proper proportion to the rest of the spectrum. [snip] So when people say it lacks bass, it's not. They are just hearing"too much" midrange in proportion, which is what they are suppposed to hear.

Disagree. I don't see how people can say that bass being rolled off quicker than other hi-end cans, and not being reproduced at all in the very low end, is "in proper proportion."

The fact -- and I think it's fair to say this is a fact -- is that the AKG 501 reproduce the mid-bass to lower bass at lower levels than the HD600, Ety ER4P, ER4S, and V6. This is measurable and audible. While some people feel that one, or maybe two of these other cans have "extra" bass, in order to argue that the K501 isn't lacking to some degree, you MUST believe that ALL FOUR of these headphones are "exaggerated" in the bass. That's a tough position to defend.

If we're going to talk about "calling a spade a spade" (as Kevin put it well), let's do it both ways. People who like the K501 like them for their clear presentation and excellent detail -- they are excellent cans. But for some reason those people also seem to like their bass reproduced at a lower level -- perhaps because it opens the presentation up for that clear detail? I don't know. But it continually amazes me that so many K501 fans are so adamant about something that is 1) measurable; and 2) audible. The K501 is a great headphone, but it's not perfect (just as the HD600 isn't perfect).

 

[joelongwood]

Quote:

THE K501's are not as good as the HD600's in most normal people's opinions.

What makes a person "normal?" The fact that they prefer the HD600? I think not. If you want to talk "normal", you won't find too many people that fit that description on this site.

Quote:

BUT THATS STUPID.

Wow......I didn't know that expressing one's preference for a particular headphone constituted being "stupid." I guess if he had said that he preferred the HD600s, he would be considered intelligent. Maybe schools could use that as an intelligence test. Here kid......try these headphones. If you like the AKGs, you're stupid.
I really believe that maybe people should think a bit before they post. I don't usually get involved in these types of disagreements, but I'm not going to stand idly by as people are called names for no reason.

Quote:

I wish you AKG luver ****s would drop this ****.

Now that's stupid.

Quote:

TEAR HIM DOWN SHIVO!!!!

Having a bad day, are we?

 

[ai0tron]

KW didnt say he liked the AKG's and not the HD600's.

He sideways trashed the HD600's.

!!!!!!!!


I have nothing else to say on this subject.



Live in ignorance you AKG luvERS, its funny how far your minds will go to preserve your delusion.

 

[joelongwood]

Quote:

Originally posted by ai0tron I have nothing else to say on this subject. Live in ignorance you AKG loving fools, its funny how far your minds will go to preserve your delusion.

 

[Neruda]

don't try and understand him joe, he thinks that by acting like a spoiled 2-year-old it'll make him a better artist. Let him live in his own world of delusion if he wants.

 

[Nosferatu]

You can only imagine the impact a thread like this has on newcomers or visitors. Sounds like a bunch of immature kids (maybe that is the reality).

 

[Xander]

It looks like maybe one or two of you guys are taking this AKG vs Senn thing a little too seriously...

kwkarth was only stating his opinion, which for the most part I tend to agree with. I think the AKG's superb midrange allows them to shine with just the specific types of music that kwkarth mentioned, which is clearly superior in comparison with the Senns on this same type of reproduction material. I agree, no matter what you power the AKGs with, although the low end respone does improve with better amplification, the bottom end does indeed roll of quite quickly. Faster then the Senns, obviously.

I'm in no way bias, though. I like the Senns as well as the AKGs, clearly each phone has something over the other -- theres no real direct comparison over which is better.

 

[shivohum]

Quote:

TEAR HIM DOWN SHIVO!!!!

Sorry, but I'm not trying to tear anyone down. I'm trying to have a civil discussion. I think you're overreacting. The vast majority of what Kwkarth said was just the normal opinionated stuff. He made perhaps only one genuinely questionable statement which was:

Quote:

If you want fatter bass, but not necessarily better accuracy or realism, then you may prefer the HD-600's for everything. That's ok with me, that's ok with you. Let's just call a spade a spade.

Here Kwkarth is implying that anyone who's disagreeing with him is basically being somehow obfuscatory. But really, on this site, statements like these should just be taken as the subjective opinionated stuff which they are. It's a bit inflammatory, true, but I think you're taking this too personally. These are, after all, only some headphones.

Anyway, let Kwkarth and others express their opinions. Many other people prefer HD600s and are willing to state as much. The HD600's enormous popularity among audiophiles, its superb reviews, and, most importantly, its sound, speak for themselves. Let them. Simple.

 

[joelongwood]

Quote:

Originally posted by Nosferatu You can only imagine the impact a thread like this has on newcomers or visitors. Sounds like a bunch of immature kids (maybe that is the reality).

My apologies, Nosferatu. I do believe I've been teaching junior high a bit too long.

 

[legoman]

Quote:

Originally posted by joelongwood I do believe I've been teaching junior high a bit too long.

I admire you for teaching that tough age bracket. I just had to give a talk to 2 x 2 classes of junior high kids, and that was enough for me. I prefer to teach college. Of course, I have much less of an impact than you, who reach them at a critical stage.

 

[BZERKCHIKIN]

id just like to point out that the v6s are a great value at 60$ while the HD600s are at around 300 and the akgs are like 130-200$

i just think that for the price, the v6s are a good deal.

 

[ai0tron]

I apologize for Kwkarth and the ensemble of psycho-fanatic AKG lovers who incessantly butt in with their uniquely wrong opinon that the AKG even competes on the same level as the HD600. And I apologize for everyone who sympathizes with their uniquely wrong cause for reasons of free expression and the continuation of long overdrawn arguments. If they consider themselves free to bash the HD600's then consider me free to trash the AKG's until it's quite apparent that I despise them with every last drop of my living blood.

I will never buy the AKG K501, IMO it has very little bass, it has an extremely colored spatialized kind of sound. This is not a soundstage in my opinion, it's like a reverb filter or somekind of effect. It is also thin and tinny sounding. I much prefer the full bodied liquid smooth presentation of the HD600's. And the HD600 is far more natural and realistic on 100% of my recordings. There is not a single recording that I can think of where the AKG is more natural, or more realistic in any way shape or form.

I would buy the AKG to use a chew toy for my dog but I would never place it upon my noble brow.

You know what drives me up the wall, the incessent stupidity and recurrence of this argument. In which KWkarth continually reasserts his wrongly held opinion that the AKG K501 does something even remotley close to what the HD600 does. IF he considers this his preference then I consider his opinion invalid. The argument that the HD600 is better at bass and thats it is INCREDIBLY DENSE. I cannot fathom the foolishness of KWkarth, or his tin ears. Whatever it is that drives him to these insane presumptions. I can only imagine him sitting on his subwoofer with his BASELESS K1000's dreaming of hearing good bass from a headphone then coming online and preaching his blasphemy about the K501.



Thank you have a nice day and go to hell.