[dizzyorange]

Thanks for the informative, fair, and honest review. Helps me convince me that I wouldn't like the K701 sound.

 

[d-cee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RatFarm /img/forum/go_quote.gif From what I read of the K701's, after 300+ hours of break-in the bass issue resolves itself nicely and the midrange enjoys further goodness. Still waiting patiently for mine to show up!

actually that's true, 300 hours was so long ago, I nearly forgot all about the K701's burn in process

burn in will indeed help the bass, don't expect it to become a DT770 or anything though...

 

[carlosgp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dizzyorange /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thanks for the informative, fair, and honest review. Helps me convince me that I wouldn't like the K701 sound.

I do not like the highs at all. They sound unnatural to me, a bit metallic and dry. And if you like rock, K701 are not the headphones for you. There is not enough bass in them.

 

[jtizzle]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RatFarm /img/forum/go_quote.gif From what I read of the K701's, after 300+ hours of break-in the bass issue resolves itself nicely and the midrange enjoys further goodness. Still waiting patiently for mine to show up!

Good point. I realize I have a ways to go before these things are all the way broken in, and they have showed major improvements across the board in just the first 50 or so hours, but a tiger can't change its stripes, ya know?

 

[jtizzle]

Quote:

Originally Posted by khbaur330162 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have to reiterate, however, it was a very nice read; extremely insightful. How long were you into speakers before moving on to headphones? I ask because you seem very well articulated, in an audio sense. (Far better than I at least ) I came in here thinking I was going to read some newb telling me what headphones sound like with a long rant about how burn in is the second coming of Christ Himself. Breath of fresh air.

Glad you enjoyed the review. I made the mistake of falling in with a couple of bad characters who were into hi-perf stereo equipment back in about 1991 or so. I bought my first set of speakers and amp around that time and its been upgradeitis (and downhill for my bank account) ever since. I'm not sure why I never got into headphones until now...I guess what forced that issue was two-fold...I had kids, and, sadly, my wife really doesn't like music as much as I do (that is actually understating it by a lot). So it finally occurred to me that if I wanted to hear music the way I want to hear music when I wanted to hear it, I needed to conceal it from her and the kids. So here I am.

 

[daltonlanny]

Personally, i like the sound of the Sennheiser HD600's better than the 650's.
To my ears, the 600's sound less dark, bass heavy, and rolled off than the 650's. To my ears the 650's also sound slightly more closed in than the 600's.
To my ears the 600's sound more balanced than the 650's, and this is using the Equinox and/or the Cardas on the 650's and the stock cable on the 600's.
Midrange and treble-wise I like the 701's alittle better than either Sennheiser.
Just my 2 cents.

 

[jesse_w]

Good read! I've got nothing to add, but its nice to see a writeup like this every once in a while.

-jesse

 

[alpha80]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jtizzle /img/forum/go_quote.gif Through headphones the sound that is designated to the right channel is never heard by the left ear before it hits your brain, and as such, the sound of one channel never "mixes" with the sound of the other channel before "going in" which completely destroys the imaging of a lot of music.....depending on the mix of particular pieces of music, it may even make what you are listening to undigestable. Sennheiser HD 650's ...and anytime they were required to venture up into the higher frequencies, the impression was that it was against their personal preference; it was almost like they'd give up the high notes only because that's what they had to do to call themselves full range headphones, but then they'd return back down to where they were most comfortable, asap. On the other hand, the bass to low mids on these things is incredible....it always seemed just right. AKG K701's For me, they seem to do the best job of presenting a balanced, natural sound and in dealing with the imagery problem that IMO is the biggest problem with headphones. Imagery. That's what they do right. On a side note, the bad side to all of this revealing detail, of course, is that it cuts both ways; if you have crappy source material, there is no hiding it. The fact that they are as revealing as they are will definitely give you a headache if your source material sucks. More than once I have turned off whatever I was listening to thinking, "wow, no way I can deal with that with headphones; that sounds horrible." If you have music files with a lot of compression artifacts, you may begin to view these cans as the enemy. I stated in another thread that I wish you could combine the middle to highs of the K701's with the killer treatment of the down low stuff of the HD 650's. What a wonderful can that would be!

Wow, this is EXACTLY how I felt about both cans.

The problems on each of these cans is the same(over-restriction of fringe frequency decay time), only inversed.
Hopefully, Sennheiser lets more treble into the HD-700.
Or AKG lets the 801 be more loose & flabby down low.
Maybe even slightly less prominent dips thru the high teens & 20's than the 701 on both Senn & AKG future flagship, but without the shrill peaks like Beyer(too much treble, IMHO).

Thorough review Tizzle.

 

[alpha80]

BTW, how much dough would either one of those companies rake in, if they actually pulled it off ?

Quest for the perfect phones is individual...
...but not by all that much.
We all know excellence when we hear it.

Paging capable Headphone manufacturers.....

 

[Aaron Friedman]

My compliments Chris on your great review of the aforementioned headphones; I agree with you that K701 is better than the 650’s or 990’s. As I mentioned recently if you look at a graph on headphone.com of the frequency response of the 650’s you can see that is has a bass boost and rolled off highs. In fact that’s why I could not live with mine. In regards to the k701 the original does not have a lot of bass but it is placed right and in proportion of the projected soundstage. Presently it is my headphone of choice although I also sometimes use Grado 325i (not very comfortable) , AKG 271s (for recording purposes) and on Monday I am receiving Denon AH-D5000.

Thou I found the midrange warm and even slightly euphonic my gripe with the K701 is that it is not very crisp sounding. Admittedly it is hard to get something to be both warm and crisp. Also I never found the background contrast very black but rather light grey; which means the instruments never very clearly stood out like white letters over black paper rather more like white letters on light grey paper. Also the weight of the sound is a bit thin and light and could have used a little more weight or body. I wonder if you agree with these impressions.

 

[Moloko]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aaron Friedman /img/forum/go_quote.gif As I mentioned recently if you look at a graph on headphone.com of the frequency response of the 650’s you can see that is has a bass boost and rolled off highs.

If you competently compare Headroom's graphs you'll find that the K701 has a roll-off in the highs as compared to the HD650 which evidently has them more extended up top; that the K701 has a higher bass boost, if anything; and lastly, that the K701 has a upper midrange peaking problem (=> false sense of detail/space) that is completely absent from the HD650.


That being said, I don't really hear what you're saying about the HD650. I guess I would find the K701 light and shrill. (edit: I just read the second paragraph of your post. Glad to see that you agree with me

)

 

[Moloko]

*ops*

 

[Moloko]

Also, since the issue is so much overlooked: like Rodolfo of Rudistor repeatedly observed (and laboratory measured himself), the K701 has a pretty restrained dynamic headroom for a high-end headphone, significantly more restrained than that of, say, the HD650, again according to Rudi.

 

[jtizzle]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aaron Friedman /img/forum/go_quote.gif My compliments Chris on your great review of the aforementioned headphones; I agree with you that K701 is better than the 650’s or 990’s. As I mentioned recently if you look at a graph on headphone.com of the frequency response of the 650’s you can see that is has a bass boost and rolled off highs. In fact that’s why I could not live with mine. In regards to the k701 the original does not have a lot of bass but it is placed right and in proportion of the projected soundstage. Presently it is my headphone of choice although I also sometimes use Grado 325i (not very comfortable) , AKG 271s (for recording purposes) and on Monday I am receiving Denon AH-D5000. Thou I found the midrange warm and even slightly euphonic my gripe with the K701 is that it is not very crisp sounding. Admittedly it is hard to get something to be both warm and crisp. Also I never found the background contrast very black but rather light grey; which means the instruments never very clearly stood out like white letters over black paper rather more like white letters on light grey paper. Also the weight of the sound is a bit thin and light and could have used a little more weight or body. I wonder if you agree with these impressions.

Thanks for the nice PM and I am glad you enjoyed the review. I do agree with your comments for the most part. I think the thinness and the lack of weight or body you describe with the sound of the K701's is a function of the suppressed lower frequencies that I refer to in my review, which, if present in greater quantities would give their sound that punch and contrast that is what makes music more interesting and more enjoyable. I find there to be plenty of definition with respect to the sound, even at elevated volumes, but it just lacks that little bit of emphasis and contrast that would make them better to my ear.

Since you and I are basically on the same page with respect to the K701's, I am most interested to hear your impressions of the Denons. Please don't forget to follow up in some way with your thoughts on those.

I think one point you make deserves a bit of further clarification from me, however. And that is that the K701's are better. I really don't think they are better. I think that I simply prefer them over the other two. I am pretty sure that this is what you meant with your comment, anyway, but I want to remake the point. All of this comes down to personal preference. I mean, sure, not many people are going to argue that such and such bottom of the line can from a manuafacturer such as these "is better" than their reference flagships in absolute terms. But on a comparison of apples to apples, as here, which is flagships to flagships, the only real differences are what you like. And many people who have given all of these headphones just as much (or more) time than I have reach completely different conclusions that are just as valid as mine. Who am I to say they are wrong? The latin phrase De gustibus non est disputandum comes to mind. There is no disputing taste.

Quote:

Originally Posted by daltonlanny /img/forum/go_quote.gif Personally, i like the sound of the Sennheiser HD600's better than the 650's.

Your points regarding the HD600's are well-taken. I was tempted to grab a pair of HD600's before moving on to the K701's, and even started haggling with a guy to buy a set used (see audioasylum.com classifieds, they are still for sale as of this writing), but at the very last minute decided that they probably were close enough to the HD650's that looking elsewhere was likely to be more fruitful. I am still curious to hear what they sound like, and one of these days I will get around to pulling the trigger on a set.

 

[daltonlanny]

Jtizzle,
Hello my friend.
I really enjoyed your review. Great job!
I absolutely agree with your findings.
The 650's do sound relatively close to the 600's, but the 600's are not quite as dark and bass heavy as the 650's. To my ear, the 600's are still alittle laid-back, but not as severe as the 650's.
They also seem alittle more open in the upper mids and treble than the 650's.
Simply better balanced to my ears.
The 701's still have slightly better mids/highs, but the bass is fuller on the 600's by quite a bit, IMHO.
If you ever get a chance, I would recommend trying out a pair just to see what you think of them.
Have a great day.