[bracko]

Quote:

 
 
Truer? FR says otherwise
 
 

 
 
Also, I'm still not sure where you are getting your information about the K701 vs K501. I dug up and old review I remember carefully reading at the time I was purchasing a pair of K701. 
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/213146/three-way-review-k501-vs-k601-vs-k701
 

What is true sound for you? I am talking about the timbre of the instruments, vocals, dynamics, transparency. You are showing us a very nice FR (a beutifully flat midrange) only, without even bothering to show us the FR of the headphone you are comparing to (k701). 
 
I have also read Asr's review. Have you actually read that whole thread? Why would his review be an objective measure of anything? I can give you a handful of other threads and reviews where k501 and k701 are compared with an opposite outcome. What is your point?? 

 

[bracko]

@elwappo99
 
Here are some:
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/298239/yet-another-akg-k501-v-k701-review
 
http://rockgrotto.proboards.com/thread/4193
 
http://www.headfonia.com/akg-k500-k501/
 
And I can tell you one more thing. Asr's conclusion which you quoted is straight out ridiculous and whole his review should be ignored.

 

[bracko]

@elwappo99:
 
Another thread with comments from Uncle Eric, a person who is far more credible than Asr, and other people:
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/220758/akg-k501-to-k701-worthy-upgrade

 

[DefQon]

lol I was just reading that thread. 

 

[elwappo99]

Quote:

@elwappo99
 
Here are some:
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/298239/yet-another-akg-k501-v-k701-review
 
http://rockgrotto.proboards.com/thread/4193
 
http://www.headfonia.com/akg-k500-k501/
 
And I can tell you one more thing. Asr's conclusion which you quoted is straight out ridiculous and whole his review should be ignored.

 
Using headfonia reviews to back up your point:
 

 
 
Quote:

@elwappo99:
 
Another thread with comments from Uncle Eric, a person who is far more credible than Asr, and other people:
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/220758/akg-k501-to-k701-worthy-upgrade

 
I'm not going to delve into "who's a more reputable reviewer". I could easily take pot shots any anyone on head-fi who's posting reviews. 

 

[bracko]

Quote:

 
Using headfonia reviews to back up your point:
 

 
 
 
I'm not going to delve into "who's a more reputable reviewer". I could easily take pot shots any anyone on head-fi who's posting reviews. 

 
Even David Mahler in his epic thread prefers the sound of k501 to k701/k702:
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/634201/battle-of-the-flagships-58-headphones-compared-update-audeze-lcd-2-revision-2-6-4-13/3990#post_9554098
 
or: http://www.head-fi.org/t/634201/battle-of-the-flagships-58-headphones-compared-update-audeze-lcd-2-revision-2-6-4-13#user_K501
 
He is by many people on this forum regarded as reputable. Go figure.

 

[DefQon]

lol there's a lot more threads out there of endless K50X vs K70X. 

 

[Mad Lust Envy]

Not trying to start anything, but I wonder if these comparison were done when the K701 had that really horrible dry, analytical and cold presentation. I'd pick anything over those old K701s. If the newer K701s have the same sound as the Q701, it's enough for me to say it's a night and day difference. I love the Q701, and hate the old K701 (7 bump, different pad material). So I wouldn't be surprised if another headphone is preferred over that nasty headphone.

 

[bracko]

Quote:

lol there's a lot more threads out there of endless K50X vs K70X. 

 I think I'll stop deranging this thread here.I hope though that k712 Pro would be a "better" headphone than k501. 

 

[bracko]

Quote:

Not trying to start anything, but I wonder if these comparison were done when the K701 had that really horrible dry, analytical and cold presentation. I'd pick anything over those old K701s. If the newer K701s have the same sound as the Q701, it's enough for me to say it's a night and day difference. I love the Q701, and hate the old K701 (7 bump, different pad material). So I wouldn't be surprised if another headphone is preferred over that nasty headphone.

David Mahler's thread is new and he actually reviews k702. Some other links I presented are older. I own both k701 and k501 and as far as I am concerned k501 is the favorite headphone of those I own (HD650, k701, DT660, ATH-M50). I even prefer it to DT880, DT990, k702 Annies or MadDogs to name a few. There are of course headphones that I have heard and which I vastly prefer to k501 (HE500, HD800 for example) but those are much more expensive here in Sweden. 

 

[DefQon]

What it seems the K712 Pro is just a rebrand with a different colour scheme? Am I right?

 

[chicolom]

I had the K400 and thought it was alright but the Q701 did everything better IMO.

 

[Ze_Blitzkrieg]

Quote:

about variations among the same line of drivers... 
I think this is where quality control comes in to the discussion.
 
I purchased a K702.65 last month from and the L & R chennels have different loudness level.
I am a experienced music producer and i noticed it right away.
however, if i keep using the headphones, 
the "mind" game will take effect and the imbalance will go away soon in about 5-10 minutes.
to be sure, just listen to the headphones with the opposite side and see if you have a headache. (R<->L)
this is clearly defected and no material can cause this kind of loudness difference.
 
I exchanged it with a new set and this time its perfect.
 
again, lets not go that far about differences with the same line of drivers.
because if i were you, i will consider my headphones defected

 
Quote:

One personal example I can share pertaining to my reasoning would be this:
My K701's seemed to have an imbalance between the R and L channels when I initially received the pair.  Now the engineer in me had to rule out all possible factors and see if I could determine the root cause.  After hours and messing around, and thinking I had exhausted all possible causes, I was just left sitting there staring at them resting on my computer desk.  Then, almost chuckling, I thought, "well, I've not tried swapping ear pads between L and R."  Sure enough, it was some sort of variation in the thickness/density of the mesh material in the middle of the pads.

 
You missed the entire point of the 2nd half of my post. . .it wasn't a variation in the drivers in my case, but instead variation in the manufacturing of the ear pads.  The ear pads had enough difference in them to create the perception of a channel imbalance, due to how they "colored" (if you will) the sound.  After mix-matching the new and old ear pads to create sonically matching sets, one set produces the more "sterile" sound while the others produce the "newer" sound. . .the two supposed variations in the K701's everyone talks about.
 
In addition, I know for 100% fact that it was the ear pads which created this as I tested all 4 of the K701 pads on my K601 and was able to reproduce the exact same results (original pads vs new pads vs mix-matched pads).  Both original and new sets created a perceived channel imbalance (actually tweaked frequency response to the ears).  Now in the engineering world, reproduction of results is everything. . .you can't claim anything without being able to reproduce the results of a test.

 

[zkkzkk32312]

Quote:

 
 
You missed the entire point of the 2nd half of my post. . .it wasn't a variation in the drivers in my case, but instead variation in the manufacturing of the ear pads.  The ear pads had enough difference in them to create the perception of a channel imbalance, due to how they "colored" (if you will) the sound.  After mix-matching the new and old ear pads to create sonically matching sets, one set produces the more "sterile" sound while the others produce the "newer" sound. . .the two supposed variations in the K701's everyone talks about.
 
In addition, I know for 100% fact that it was the ear pads which created this as I tested all 4 of the K701 pads on my K601 and was able to reproduce the exact same results (original pads vs new pads vs mix-matched pads).  Both original and new sets created a perceived channel imbalance (actually tweaked frequency response to the ears).  Now in the engineering world, reproduction of results is everything. . .you can't claim anything without being able to reproduce the results of a test.

i got it,
but it should only alter sound frequencies not volume,
if it makes enough changes that it creates volume imbalance it is 100% defected.
and why any fabric material/pads can create volume imbalance is beyond me (i'm skeptical),
but it sounds like terrible quality control.
 
 
Note that my first K702.65 is like 3db off and no way altered frequencies can create this kind of imbalance.

 

[Ze_Blitzkrieg]

Quote:

i got it,
but it should only alter sound frequencies not volume,
if it makes enough changes that it creates volume imbalance it is 100% defected.
and why any fabric material/pads can create volume imbalance is beyond me (i'm skeptical),
but it sounds like terrible quality control.
 
Note that my first K702.65 is like 3db off and no way altered frequencies can create this kind of imbalance.

 
I was never saying this is what was causing your issue that you had. . .was just point out that variances in manufacturing can create these issues, and that they are not limited only to variations in the drivers.  Everything that is over your ear can alter/tweak the sound from a headphone. . .whether it be from resonances, reflections, dampening, etc. . .I was simply sharing my personal experience as an specific example of this in general.  Oh, and yes, it was enough to create a perceived imbalance. . .not sure if I can stress that word enough.  Technically, however, I suppose if you were to break it down into various frequency ranges, such as that of an EQ, it was in fact creating an imbalance.  It was something around 1 db (my estimate) of the overall perceived imbalance though. . .so obviously it was easily noticeable.
 
And why is a variation in fabric density creating a difference in sound hard to imagine?