[bracko]

Quote:

 
Ehhhh, I'd spare yourself on the K501. 

Ok.... Why? I really liked them compared to my HD650.

 

[vid]

People were paying $150 for mint K 501s not long ago. Then they went on sale due to discontinuation, and people were paying $100 for them mint. $300 for a mint pair today is just hype.

 

[bracko]

Quote:

People were paying $150 for mint K 501s not long ago. Then they went on sale due to discontinuation, and people were paying $100 for them mint. $300 for a mint pair today is just hype.

It is probably a hype but I've got a feeling that most of the things in the audio business are. How can we actually "know" how much a product is worth? What determines a price of a product? The emotional value? Perceived value? Comparision with other products? What really says that a headphone is worth 300 bucks or 1500 bucks for that matter? What is the distinguishing factor? I don't know. I just know that I would be happy to pay 250-300 dollars for a k501. I know many people who refuse to sell their own for that price 

 

[vid]

You left unspecified (but alluded to) the important part - determines the price for whom? The answer to that answers your questions; the proper price is determined by what you're willing to pay, which in turn is up to you to reason out given all you know about the context. I gave my personal reasoning for finding $300 a high price for the K 501: when there was enough supply, they were valued at $150. No improvement in audio quality has occurred in them due to discontinuation; what you now propose to pay 100 % extra for is simply to have them in the first place. Which might be a valid reason except that, at least in terms of mids, a well-placed $20 can get you comparable performance.

 

[bracko]

Quote:

You left unspecified (but alluded to) the important part - determines the price for whom? The answer to that answers your questions; the proper price is determined by what you're willing to pay, which in turn is up to you to reason out given all you know about the context. I gave my personal reasoning for finding $300 a high price for the K 501: when there was enough supply, they were valued at $150. No improvement in audio quality has occurred in them due to discontinuation; what you now propose to pay 100 % extra for is simply to have them in the first place.

 
That is true but it is also how pricing in many contexts work. It is hard to know what really determined the price of k501 when there was enough supply. Is it the sound quality or is it the availability and access to newer models and people thinking that everything new is better?
 
I have a more realistic approach than you for estimating a value of a headphone

 (at least I beleive it is). We can compare the performance of mint k501 to other cans costing $300 to estimate their value. Listening to different headphones in the same price range and comparing their performance would give us a clue. Then we can also try to figure out what the general consensus is about the performance of k501 and how it relates to other headphones in the same price range. There is a very good thread by David Mahler comparing 57 different top headphones, including k501. There is a lot of discussion there. There are many other sources on the Internet comparing k501 to other headphones. And last but not least: How do I intend to use the specific headphone? Is it worth to buy that specific model in that price range or is there another model capable of giving me the same pleasure with the specific music I intend to use them for? There are many parameters and nothing is so simple as it seems to be.
 
Quote:

Which might be a valid reason except that, at least in terms of mids, a well-placed $20 can get you comparable performance.

 
I would be happy if you could give us a valid example on how anyone can get anything near k501 in terms of mids for $20? An older used headphone perhaps? Or a trashed k501 from 1996?

 But then there is no reason to buy any other brand new headphone at all

 

[vid]

First, start your sampling of competition at $0 (or otherwise the lowest point reasonably attainable), otherwise you make the unfounded assumption that there's none for less than $300 (which would bias you towards a high estimate). Second, don't rely on a general consensus since most likely you'll find the one most conforming to your own opinion.

 

[bracko]

Quote:

First, start your sampling of competition at $0 (or otherwise the lowest point reasonably attainable), otherwise you make the unfounded assumption that there's none for less than $300 (which would bias you towards a high estimate). Second, don't rely on a general consensus since most likely you'll find the one most conforming to your own opinion.

 
It is impossible to act like that on a market. You can never, and I repeat ever, have that sort of overview of a market, no matter if it is headphones or bikes or anything else. Your proposal implies that you have to test every available haedphone on earth to make a simple decision. It will cost you more than what you can earn on buying a cheap headphone.

 

[obobskivich]

It is impossible to act like that on a market. You can never, and I repeat ever, have that sort of overview of a market, no matter if it is headphones or bikes or anything else. Your proposal implies that you have to test every available haedphone on earth to make a simple decision. It will cost you more than what you can earn on buying a cheap headphone.

I don't think "earn" is a fair word here - this isn't an investment, it's more of a "toy" thing. I do agree with vid's point though - a lot of headphones that were popular or considered good a few years ago have skyrocketed in price, partly because a lot of newer models cost a lot relative to their build or sound quality (for example the Sony X10, which aren't all that fantastic, but cost a lot anyways). There are a few inexpensive wonders out there (the Koss KTX Pro as an example), but otherwise you're basically left doing research to find a suitable candidate and then trying to find a good price. But spending a lot of money just on "the name" is kind of silly. Sure, marking up of discontinued items does happen, especially in the age of eBay, but it's on the buyer to make an intelligent decision and decide if they're okay dolling out a lot of money (more or less for the sake of dolling out a lot of money).

For example the Sony F1 - they were ~$300 right before they were discontinued, and I've seen them (in the last month or two) going for between $150 in good shape used, to $450-$500 (!!!) claimed new in box or like-new. The former is a fair used price, the later is just ridiculous - unless you absolutely want the F1 and nothing else will do. And I think that's more or less what vid is getting at - if you want the specific model, then you basically pay what the market asks, but if you just want "good performance" (however that's qualified), you probably can get a better deal by shopping elsewhere. Personal preference and tolerance and so on come into play - if you're extremely wealthy this obviously isn't as important a discussion as if you're on a very tight fixed budget (for example).

 

[bracko]

Quote:

And I think that's more or less what vid is getting at - if you want the specific model, then you basically pay what the market asks, but if you just want "good performance" (however that's qualified), you probably can get a better deal by shopping elsewhere. Personal preference and tolerance and so on come into play - if you're extremely wealthy this obviously isn't as important a discussion as if you're on a very tight fixed budget (for example).

 
Of course, I agree, even if I think that vid hasn't put it that way.

  In my case I am interested in this specific model and it's sound signature, no matter what opinions other people have. The requested attributes are impossible to find in any other headphone in that price range for the music I intend to listen and thus the reason why I am ready to pay $300. Quite simple

 

[obobskivich]

Of course, I agree, even if I think that vid hasn't put it that way.

  In my case I am interested in this specific model and it's sound signature, no matter what opinions other people have. The requested attributes are impossible to find in any other headphone in that price range for the music I intend to listen and thus the reason why I am ready to pay $300. Quite simple

Oh yeah, and I think that's completely reasonable (sometimes you just want White Castle...), I think that a lot of Head-Fi'ers aren't to that point though, so they try to help people save money by suggesting "alternates" - at least that's my interpretation.

 

[Chris J]

wow,
this thread has taken some interesting detours
great mids
then
the K701 anniversary phase
now
the supply and demand economic theory phase ( worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize!)

 

[bracko]

Quote:

I think that a lot of Head-Fi'ers aren't to that point though, so they try to help people save money by suggesting "alternates" - at least that's my interpretation.

 
Great

. Then, I guess, that would be the only audiophile forum on the Internet where the (economical) reasoning prevails

. On most other Internet audiophile forums it is usually about endless buying and selling (mostly) expensive audio equipment, loosing lots of money in between and never being happy with the sound of what you have. In addition, many people are raving about the stuff they currently own and bashing the products they have sold or cannot afford. A constant discontent leading to more consumption.
 
OK, I really think this is off topic

Let's go back to the great mids (which I guess was the topic)

 

[Mad Lust Envy]

Some interesting comparison for the K702 Annie and Q701.

I tried swapping the pads on the q701/annies. And the annies still sounded noticeably fuller and warmer than the q701 with the q701 pads. I'm not sure who said these were just repackaged q701's but it would be hard mistake one another side by side in any state. Even days apart I could blindly label the q701 and annies regardless of which pads are used imo. They're similar sounding ofc but, at least my pairs, are distinctly different. And for my tastes the annies are a true upgrade to the q701. It's worth noting that I preferred the q701's with the annies memory pads to the stock q701 pads, but I wouldn't pay more than 40 usd for them.

Seeing as I agree with this person in that the Q701 and Annie are different, and the Annie does improve quite a bit from the older models, I again mention that the Annie has some truly juicy mids paired up with a warm, balanced sound, and still large soundstage.

 

[nicholars]

HD650 has a sweet midrange... Best I have heard.... shame the bass is not as good

 

[Mad Lust Envy]

I dont have a problem with its bass. I just wish it was more energetic. But yes, the HD650 has awesome mids.