closed cans!

[SonicDawg]

Ok, sorry for turning this thread OT.

Back on topic. Who has listened to both the R10 and K340? How do they compare?

[ojnihs]

Ok, sorry for turning this thread OT.

Back on topic. Who has listened to both the R10 and K340? How do they compare?

Reminds me of the threads at the other place that annoy me so much:

Who has listened to both the SR-60 and SR-80? How do they compare?

[postjack]

Reminds me of the threads at the other place that annoy me so much:

Who has listened to both the SR-60 and SR-80? How do they compare?

Anyone heard both Quad 12L actives and the HE-1.2b? How do they compare?

[Smeggy]

Anyone heard both Quad 12L actives and the HE-1.2b? How do they compare?

Well the HE1.2 is definitely lighter on your head when wearing them but the Quads have more impact when they fall off.

[SonicDawg]

I don't quite get the sarcasm here (maybe that is what distinguishes this place from "the other place..").

I asked a question that is qualifiable because of the general accolade both headphones command. And as far as I know, they are both known for their resolution, sound stage and mid range. Also the SR-60 and SR-80 analogy is obscure because the K340s and the R10s are not really made with a graduated performance in mind by the same maker. Arguably, they both were the flagship models of their respective maker. And don't even get me started on their respective fanboyism that really muddles up their distinctions.

[laxx]

I don't quite get the sarcasm here (maybe that is what distinguishes this place from "the other place..").

I asked a question that is qualifiable because of the general accolade both headphones command. And as far as I know, they are both known for their resolution, sound stage and mid range. Also the SR-60 and SR-80 analogy is obscure because the K340s and the R10s are not really made with a graduated performance in mind by the same maker. Arguably, they both were the flagship models of their respective maker. And don't even get me started on their respective fanboyism that really muddles up their distinctions.

Take a chill pill.

Who has listened to both the K340 and A250? How do they compare?

[SonicDawg]

Sorry to come off like that. I am not used to the hold-no-bar vibes here.

On the other note. I have both the K340s and the A250s. They are very different phones. One require almost a behemoth of amp, while the other is more genial with lesser power. The K340s when amped properly have very romantic gusto and muscles. Think of them as a very well nurtured Stallion with the grace and beauty of fine blood. The A250s on the other hand is more of a wild horse that is flawed with the imperfection of a rather thin mid range. But their speed, agility and absolute in your face tonality can easily rock out when called upon.

[swt61]

I don't quite get the sarcasm here (maybe that is what distinguishes this place from "the other place..").

The sarcasm is free over here, so it's served up hot and heaping! Oh and you can ask for seconds without having to stand in line again!

[deepak]

Ok, sorry for turning this thread OT.

Back on topic. Who has listened to both the R10 and K340? How do they compare?

I believe Vicky (boomana) owns or owned both. Maybe send her a PM.

[aerius]

Back on topic. Who has listened to both the R10 and K340? How do they compare?

I have. R10's don't have enough bass, plus they sound like ass when I want to play metal, like Manowar or Cradle of Filth. I thereby conclude that R10's suck. The K340 doesn't suck nearly as much with metal, but it still can't rock out like my Grado 225 or RS-1. Rocking out rules.

[catscratch]

Who has listened to both the K340 and A250? How do they compare?

Going from memory...

About as different as headphones get. Now, K340s are also different from each other, esp. in tonal balance, but some things about them are universal. The A250 is tilted up in the upper mids and is recessed in the lower mids, giving the midrange a thin and distant quality. The K340 is bumped up in the lower midrange, with some pairs also being recessed in the upper midrange (though not my pair). That gives its midrange a very full and lush sound. Instrument tone is warmer than it should be but it is still a bit more realistic than the A250 and a lot more pleasing.

The A250's highs have a peak in the lower treble that makes them sound metallic and steely with certain instruments. The K340's treble is either very recessed with bass-heavy pairs, or very upfront and very good with bass-light pairs - and it can be anything in between. In any case, it's a lot more linear, and thanks to the electret tweeter, it's much faster as well. Cymbal texture tends to be better portrayed on the K340. I should note that electrets, and to a lesser degree electrostats, have a certain glassy quality to their highs, and the K340 definitely suffers from this. Throw in its echoey resonance, and you get highs that aren't quite realistic, but still manage to dig up a lot of detail from the recording.

The 250's bass is very linear and reaches very deep. It's easily the best feature of the headphone. It is a bit recessed and needs a bassy amp to bring it out, but when you do so, it shines. The K340 on the other hand is very lacking in deep bass. Bass-heavy pairs can have a bit of a midbass bloom, while my bass-light pair has a very good, tight and snappy bass, very linear through the mid and upper bass, but rolled-off in the deep bass.

A250 tends to have a very wide soundstage, but so does the K340. It's up to the system really as to which one wins. Imaging is a bit crisper on the K340, but the A250 is no slouch.

Both headphones are very dynamic. Bass-light K340s tend to appear even more dynamic due to the more present highs. The K340 needs a lot of volume in order to shine, though, while the A250 is more comfortable at lower volumes (and can get pretty nasty at high volumes with some recordings due to the lower treble peak).

I prefer the K340 by miles. The A250's steely treble and midrange coloration are two of my biggest sonic turn-offs. I do like its bass though.

I've got an A250 a K340 lying around though, so I can do some real listening and give more detailed comparisons. The above, as I said, is purely from memory so it may not be valid.

[Smeggy]

I liked the A250, bouncy and fun if a bit bright, but it wasn't getting any real airtime so I gave mine away.

[CD44hi]

So got the ATH-W1000 in the mail early this week. They do have a lot of the characteristics of the W2002 sound, but a lot less finesse and resolution IMO. They are airy, yet their highs have that "je ne sais quoi" AT flavor. From memory, I found the L3K had less of it, and that is a good thing.

So, the W1000 are not the holy grail in combination with the m902, but not terrible either. I am open to trying something else in the future, but as a close can they are doing the needed job at work...