[davidhunternyc]

... and the truth is, very few people can rebuke your claim, David. You are one of the fortunate few who have both the R10 and HD800, plus the associated equipment to make them shine. That, coupled with your intelligence and sensitivity make your argument persuasive indeed. There are others here on this forum who have a vested interest in pushing the glories of the HD800. Not you. You are a musician who forms his opinions on the sidelines. Very Credible.

 

[Acix]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidMahler /img/forum/go_quote.gif Some people would argue that the HD800 are no better than the HD600 or D5000 or the K701......there is a valid argument there, but it would probably be a very small minority of people who would make this argument. In my opinion the HD800 are a world better than the HD600 and K701. But it is very hard to explain what it offers which other cans at a lower price do not. It's something that you really need to hear. And more than just hear, it's something you really need to get accustomed to. I didn't realize how special the HD800 were right away. In fact my initial impression were that the R10s were a good step above of them. I don't feel this way anymore.

Why you have hard time to explain the differences between the HD-800 and the K-701?

 

[DavidMahler]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acix /img/forum/go_quote.gif Why you have hard time to explain the differences between the HD-800 and the K-701?

No, not at all........but I can't make someone feel a certain way about a headphone. I've heard a few people say they prefer the HD600 to the HD800, and as well all know, plenty of people have prefered the K701 to the HD600, therefor by deductive reasoning, i think one can conclude that since sound is totally subjective, it is possible some people would prefer the K701 to the HD800.....it wouldn't be a majority opinion obviously, but it could exist.

 

[Acix]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidMahler /img/forum/go_quote.gif No, not at all........but I can't make someone feel a certain way about a headphone. I've heard a few people say they prefer the HD600 to the HD800, and as well all know, plenty of people have prefered the K701 to the HD600, therefor by deductive reasoning, i think one can conclude that since sound is totally subjective, it is possible some people would prefer the K701 to the HD800.....it wouldn't be a majority opinion obviously, but it could exist.

I'm curios about your opinion or experience, and not others.

 

[majkel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidMahler /img/forum/go_quote.gif This is not the case.....but I do specify that the HD800 is as CLOSE TO perfectly neutral as I've heard in a headphone....I didn't say the HD800 ARE perfectly neutral, nor do I think that.

One thing is absolute proximity to the so called truth, another thing is direction from which you approach this truth. The problem is that the HD800 approach to it from the damped (dead?) side of things. So you hove very high sonic correctness but rather low emotional truth about the music at the same time. Music is emotional, keeping your head bobbing and your feet tapping. It's sometimes like a hurricane to blow your mind. The HD800 keeps me calm and analyzing, I don't feel like after a live concert. So I analyse, taste each phrase and timbre of each sound because the whole image doesn't do it for me. I explained why in my previous posts. So, I can probably accept even higher distance to the "truth" but starting from the position of fun and being on the emotional side of things. I would say at the end the K1000 is a bit more correct regarding the sound disassembly and far more correct regarding the emotional involvement.

 

[DavidMahler]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acix /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm curios about your opinion or experience, and not others.

Ah, ok.......I no longer own the K701s so I can not do a head to head comparison. But I spent a good year with them, actually I have owned two pairs after regretting selling my first pair. They're an interesting pair of headphones....because they feel somewhat neutral, but they feel somehow colored. In addition they feel wide, but somehow not three dimensional. I was always appreciative at how the reproduced classical music. They were about as bright as the DT880 (but with a stronger midrange), they feel brighter to me than the HD800. But the midrange and bass are just lacking in comparison to the HD800. I'm always stunned by those who say the HD800 sounds like an improved K701. They don't sound alike to me at all.....the ONLY thing which you can compare is that the K701 and HD800 are both for those who appreciate a soundstage. But the HD800 soundstage is far more circular rather than the K701s more linear space (which is why I comment that it is one dimensional).......

I sold my K701 about 2 weeks after getting my HD800 in the summer of 2009. I remember doing one single head to head comparison for about 20 minutes. There is ABSOLUTELY no genre, nor any sonic benefit which the K701 can do even 90% as good as the HD800. When I put those two headphones head to head it truly devalued the K701s to me, whereas I still greatly appreciate the HD600 (still have a pair). This is all my opinion....could there be someone who prefers the K701? Probably, but I'm not sure I'd ever understand why, unless they LOVE white things

 

[Acix]

Hehehe, You don't need the white things to understand better, you just need to spent some time with the K-702 in the studio and to gain knowledge, you know what I mean.

I like the 800 bass, but NOT the upper mids or the high mids and obviously not the sound stage. If you need hps for studio the K702 with a nice cable are the way to go. Maybe you can find your way around with the 800 too, but also you can easy get confused with this emphasis on the upper bass/mid, they just have to much body to sound to be natural. The high mids sound laid-back in relation with the bass/low mid. Remind me of the 650 just with better resolution. I guess Sennheiser need some HD headphones too.

 

[aimlink]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidMahler /img/forum/go_quote.gif In my opinion the HD800 are a world better than the HD600 and K701. But it is very hard to explain what it offers which other cans at a lower price do not. It's something that you really need to hear. And more than just hear, it's something you really need to get accustomed to. I didn't realize how special the HD800 were right away. In fact my initial impression were that the R10s were a good step above of them. I don't feel this way anymore.

I can certainly understand this since it took me a while to really appreciate what my ALO K702's had to offer. You, as you say, need to grow accustomed to the offering, especially if it's different from what you're already accustomed to.

 

[aimlink]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong /img/forum/go_quote.gif Back on topic (I hope). I was contemplating an irony the other day about how equalisation is shunned here, yet in a great sense we are equalising our music via our choice of headphones. In a meet thread someone commented, when trying an amp designed to be dead-neutral that they had been expecting to be wowed, yet weren't. I think to a degree, people are expecting exciting flavours and are disappointed when they don't get any. On the other hand, those people that appreciate gear that brings out the beauty of what an artist or artists convey in their playing appreciate the HD-800 much more. The difference is, in a sense, whether people like to listen to gear or listen to music.

That neutral sound is certainly not for all.

Or it's an acquired taste based on an initial conviction that it's the right way to listen to one's music. Another right way, is the way that gives one pleasure and a way that brings across the emotion in the music.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong /img/forum/go_quote.gif The other thing is, if the HD-800s don't offer something radically different to their cheaper cans (K701s and DT-880s come to mind here) they will see the HD-800s as being over-priced, as they may not seem to be $1000 different compared to what they already own with the music they listen to, especially if they aren't tonally very different.

Some may feel differently when in the realm of diminishing returns than others. Relative differences may be considered small to some, while it's big to others. As a result, price differences may seem excessive to some and very reasonable to others. There is no right here.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aimlink /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hmmm. I guess we all see the various colours differently since our eyes are different. However, with time, we point out colours appropriately based on consensus and labeling. Do you think the same is possible with hearing?

The point is that headphones can't simulate free-field listening (as with speakers), there's a high degree of interaction between earpiece/driver and ear, and since ears vary in shape, the sonic result will vary accordingly.
.

 

[Acix]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif The point is that headphones can't simulate free-field listening (as with speakers) .

Well...@ SPL they made the Phonitor, and this is the close as it can get.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acix /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well...@ SPL they made the Phonitor, and this is the close as it can get.

Maybe, but it doesn't address the earpiece-ear interaction, which is the crucial point in this context. (BTW, there's also the «Smyth Realiser».)
.

 

[aimlink]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif The point is that headphones can't simulate free-field listening (as with speakers), there's a high degree of interaction between earpiece/driver and ear, and since ears vary in shape, the sonic result will vary accordingly. .

Doesn't this variation in ear shape also make a difference with free-field listening?

Isn't the ear shape important in free field listening as well? Don't we have the same issues with free listening where one listener likes a particular sound while another listener doesn't? One thinks it's neutral, while another thinks it's coloured?

 

[majkel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aimlink /img/forum/go_quote.gif Doesn't this variation in ear shape also makes a difference with free-field listening, doesn't it? Isn't the ear shape important in free field listening as well? Don't we have the same issues with free listening where one listener likes a particular sound while another listener doesn't? One thinks it's neutral, while another thinks it's coloured?

Hearing is an adaptive sense, adjusting to your ear shape as well to compansate for it. This is why you can get accustomed to a bass-headvy headphone and perceive a flat sounding one as bass-light shortly after, or the opposite. There is also a built-in echo cancellation filter in the brain enabling you to not to hear the sounds caused by walking or running reflected from the direct surroundings.

 

[aimlink]

Quote:

Originally Posted by majkel /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hearing is an adaptive sense, adjusting to your ear shape as well to compansate for it.

Indeed, this is no doubt true. I may well get me an HD800 for Christmas (if I can hold out

). I had ordered the T1 and cancelled it on a whim. I got an ALO K702 instead to hear something different and controversial. Turns out that it was a great decision and I now much better understand the sound that's most natural to my own ears. Most comfy and leading to less restlessness and wondering if it could be better.