[Katun]

Quote:

That's how it is with me right now with my K601 and HD-650. I have a love/hate thing going on with the HD-650. I wish it was just less forgiving of my source files and a little more detailed. It's mids are quite good and I no longer feel it's too laid back. Sometimes I wonder why on earth I have so many headphones because I never find time to listen to all of them.
 
I still hope to get my K601 and HD-598 review up. K601 is looking better in most areas. If I could tame the treble on my K702 I'd probably use that most of the time. I think a new Canare cable will help since it rolls off the highs a bit. Even on the HD-650.
 
HD-598 is a tad better overall for brightly recorded pop music than the K601. Like Utada Hikaru. The more I listen to both the K601 and the HD-598, the more the mids feel so similar. The mids on the HD-598 are so slightly more forward than the K601 mids, but it's barely noticeable. Upper mids on the K601 are definitely more forward though.
 
K601 right now feels like a more clear 598 (not just slightly more clear either, but still a step down from the K702) with better instrument separation, smaller soundstage, more treble and better imaging. Compared to the K601, the 598 feels like it has two blobs on the left and right of you where the music is coming from. Imaging on the K601 is far better too. No contest there and I was surprised.
 
The biggest shocker for me is that the K601 with classical makes the HD-598 look like a joke and I'm not kidding. Yet, the HD-598 is no slouch with classical to begin with and quite good!! Of course the HD-598 has a slight advantage because of the soundstage, but the K601 isn't too far behind. HD-598 has more bass impact too which makes me sad

Neither are bass heavy though of course.
 
I listened and compared both headphones for about 5 hours last night while watching basketball. I loved every minute of it!

I would definitely like to read your HD598 vs K601. Keep us updated on your progress. I'm actually finishing up my HD598 review, and it should be out tonight.
And I will admit, I really do want to try the K601. But I think my urges to try the W1000X first are much stronger. Someday, I'll try another AKG...
 
Quote:

If there was an ortho HD598, I think I'd be right at home. Let me know if it's invented yet or when it is =) A little less treble around the 7-8K frequencies would be appreciated too. I tend to be very sensitive in this region and I tend to recess those frequencies.
 
I don't have a problem with the Hifiman looks. Circles are nice =)

You should see them in person. They are seriously one of the best looking headphones I have ever seen.

 

[Germancub]

Sarcasm just passed you. Instead of attempting to disprove my title, you just complain about it like an infant. "You need to type 'IMO' or I'll tell on you!"
 
You didn't find my review helpful even with the NUMEROUS complaints that I pointed out, then you must have more questions? If you have questions, ask. If you have something to argue, say it. If you have trouble in reading comprehension or understanding sarcasm, then maybe English is not your first language.
 
Considering you've only heard Shures, I don't know how you can argue anything. I'm glad you can ignore considering any other headphone because 'IMO' is not placed in the title. You must be one of those people that keep telling your black friends that they aren't black, but African XXXX.
 
 

  You don't need to apologize.  You are welcome to say what the heck you want... um... like me

  Please don't let this thread make it seem like you need to buy an HD598. Read the complaints clearly. I listed the majority of them so don't expect it to be better in those aspects than it should be for the price.
 

 

Thanks, I don't know why it's so hard to get. I welcome anyone to voice their opinions.

Funny, you say I don't know anything about reading comprehension but yet fail to read my signature which lists all headphones I've had in the past, then you try to make a rather pathetic claim I've only heard Shures.

You're right though, English is not my first language, it's my third (but thanks for the prejudiced comment, it further shows your class!) Additionally, I've been into headphones since the days of headwize and have heard more headphones than you could shake a stick at. You're just angry because I don't blindly subscribe to your ridiculous claims that a mid-tier headphone is better than anything else without telling a reason why other than posting ridiculous quotes from.... Who knows? Thanks for playing, sarcasm heavily implied.

 

[tdockweiler]

Quote:

I would definitely like to read your HD598 vs K601. Keep us updated on your progress. I'm actually finishing up my HD598 review, and it should be out tonight.
And I will admit, I really do want to try the K601. But I think my urges to try the W1000X first are much stronger. Someday, I'll try another AKG...
 

You should see them in person. They are seriously one of the best looking headphones I have ever seen.

 
W1000X has been on my radar for awhile. Kind of a bit expensive since I like to keep my headphone purchases under $450. I'm cheap I guess. W1000X kind of has me worried because of the pads. I couldn't deal with the ATH-AD2000 because of it's pads and the AD700 is uncomfortable and too lose. I think AT finally got it right with the W1000X and I don't think the pads go flat or your ears rest against the drivers anymore. Hope so!
 
If I buy the W1000X and the pads go flat I'm screwed because I probably can't return it. I'm feel guilty a bit if I could. The company would be taking a huge loss I'd imagine.
 
ATH-AD2000 is still one of my favorite headphones, but I couldn't deal with the discomfort and it's mids were slightly too forward to me. I imagine the W1000X sounds somewhat similar, but improved in some areas.
 
 

 

[wind016]

Quote:

Funny, you say I don't know anything about reading comprehension but yet fail to read my signature which lists all headphones I've had in the past, then you try to make a rather pathetic claim I've only heard Shures.

You're right though, English is not my first language, it's my third (but thanks for the prejudiced comment, it further shows your class!) Additionally, I've been into headphones since the days of headwize and have heard more headphones than you could shake a stick at. You're just angry because I don't blindly subscribe to your ridiculous claims that a mid-tier headphone is better than anything else without telling a reason why other than posting ridiculous quotes from.... Who knows? Thanks for playing, sarcasm heavily implied.

Um. No. I'm just annoyed by your preoccupation with my title. If you did any reading whatsoever, you would see that I never considered them the best headphones in the world. That would be ridiculous.
 
I just mention that English may not be your first language because you clearly aren't getting it. No where did I mention that this headphone comes close to the technical abilities of higher priced, higher end headphones. In fact, I keep putting down it's weak bass and it's prominent midrange congestion, that someone would even believe they wouldn't have bass or any midrange resolution which isn't the case. Do I need to point out the problems I had in the treble? Or how about upper midrange? Again read and once you get it, take care.

 

[eron]

How does a HD598 compare to HD650 in terms of comfort?

 

[WhiteCrow]

Quote:

I never considered them the best headphones in the world.
 

 
Direct Copy paste from the title.
why-the-sennheiser-hd598s-are-considered-the-best-headphones-in-the-world-sennheiser-hd598-review

 

[wind016]

 
Quote:

 
Direct Copy paste from the title.
why-the-sennheiser-hd598s-are-considered-the-best-headphones-in-the-world-sennheiser-hd598-review

It didn't say, I did.
 

 

[scompton]

I thought right from the start that wind016 was being sarcastic.  Either that or a junior Patrick82.  Of course, I always wondered if Patrick was for real.

 

[Mad Lust Envy]

Seriously, if you can't detect sarcasm at low levels, you best leave the internet. It was obvious to me he was being sarcastic. o_O

That said, if it were true, it's his opinion and he'd be entitled to it.

I think we should all be aware that 99% of things said on here is opinion....

 

[wind016]

Due to the HD598's non-sibilant and smooth sound signature, even low resolution music files will sound good with them. Once again another thing to like about them.
 
Slight update.

 

[tdockweiler]

You lie! I just converted all my Lossless files to 64kbps mp3 and they sound like garbage!
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
.... kidding of course.
 
Actually yesterday I was listening to a song on my Ipod Touch and was actually enjoying it...on closer inspection it was marked as [96kbps]!!!!!
Wow. I think that was one I marked as junk and forgot to re-rip. Awhile back I was ripping a bunch of CDs and my encoder somewhere encoded them all to 96kbps?! Luckily I caught them.
 
Quote:

Due to the HD598's non-sibilant and smooth sound signature, even low resolution music files will sound good with them. Once again another thing to like about them.
 
Slight update.

 

 

[Katun]

Quote:

Actually yesterday I was listening to a song on my Ipod Touch and was actually enjoying it...on closer inspection it was marked as [96kbps]!!!!!

 
Really? I honestly have never heard a song encoded that low. I was usually 128kbps back then.
But it must have been a really good song, because you obviously were too lost in it to notice it's lack of quality.

 

[tdockweiler]

Quote:

 
Really? I honestly have never heard a song encoded that low. I was usually 128kbps back then.
But it must have been a really good song, because you obviously were too lost in it to notice it's lack of quality.

Well, it still sounded bad, but I could still enjoy it. I even once listened to my DT-880 600 ohm straight from an Ipod Touch for like an hour. I don't know how on earth people can get any volume or decent sound with that combination. Yes, I had an amp downstairs, but was just curious. Very few of my headphones sound absolutely horrible without an amp. K601 is pretty close. Hate the DJ100 too without an amp and I don't know why it sounds so weird without one.
 
Hahah I still remember my first experience with the MP3 format. I had a 486 66mhz PC with 8mb of ram...played an MP3 and the sound would skip non-stop. Back in those days people were mostly still dialing into BBSs (text based online service) or using AOL. We only had 2 internet service providers in my area at the time. The idea of full movies viewable online didn't even exist back then. I still remember upgrading from a 2400 baud modem to a 14400 and being so thrilled I could download a ZIP file in half the time. I think this is back during the Windows 3.11 days when you almost always needed to quit to DOS to play most games. Best of all, my hard drive was 450mb (!!!)
 
I also still remember thinking that the Ipod was the worst idea in the world and would never catch on. Was I ever wrong!
 

 

[wind016]

I dunno about you guys, but my 128 kbps sound great and so do my 192 kbps files. The annoying artifacts and whirling noises from low res files just aren't that noticeable on these headphones. From an technical point of view, it may not be so good, but I'm not doing any records any time soon

 
I really can "just enjoy the music" with these.

 

[scompton]

I've never been able to pass an ABX test with 128 vs lossless, so I keep a lossless archive and listen to 128.  That allows me to have around 75% of my library on my 160GB iPod.