JVC harx700 - a poor mans ath-a900!!

yes 170 shipped is a good price for the zero.

you should be fine with the cmoy to. i already had the zero, i only wanted to point out how much better the rx700 sound amped.
 
RX700 are back in stock for 33.99 free ship @ buy.com

I guess I'm biting
 
yeah i bit 2 days ago.. and i got it today! rofl.. i was expecting it next week lol.. package was HUGE.. -__- jvc can market it... nobody told me you could hold your ipod in one hand use the string as a jump rope this thing is long as hell.. So far the headphones are actually pretty comfortable.. Headphones sounds okay.. yet i just recieved it... time for a burn in..

my.php


after reading about spacely's posts.. i just iono had to take a bite lol..
 
I really don't know why there is a big hype on these headphones. I got a pair for my sister back when this thread was on page 3. I've listened to them when they were new and now that they have been used a lot. People say that these are the poor mans ATH-A900's, but they are far from it. I own AKG-k301, ATH-A700's, and ATH-A500's. Both the 500 and 700's sound better in every aspect. The AKG's just lose in bass.

I'm not some guy that listens to 128kbit/sec mp3's on an onboard sound card. I own a OPAMP modded HDA Mystique that I modded myself with much better OPAMPS, as well as a X-Fi Xtrememusic. 85% of the music I listen to is lossless(FLAC, WMA lossless, APE). The rest is 320kbits/sec mp3's because I could not find lossless copies.

I listen to metal(not the newage garbage), hard rock, classical music, and fusion jazz. I also had a hearing test done a few months ago after an ear infection and I had better than excellent hearing.

What did I think of these JVC headphones? I think they were worth $30 bucks. Are they comparable to the ATH900's? Heck no. They are not as good as the ATH-A500's, but they give 70% of what the 500's give. The bass on these JVC's is strong, but it is not as clear and detailed as the 500 or 700's. Some people just like feeling the bump, but I lke hearing the difference in the kick drum sounds because I am also a drummer of 10 years. The mids are pretty good on the JVC's. The highs are probably are the weakest part. I feel that the overall sound lacks a lot of detail when compared to the ATH's or AKG's I've owned. I think they are lacking in bass, but just in detail, not power.

In the end, a great pair for $30-$50, but not to be compared as anywhere near equal to the ATH series.
 
Which HARX did you try?

I thought they (HARX900) were great for the $56 I spent on them. And I don't own but I've listened to a number of ATH headphones.

I think we already did mention that the JVC lacks the highs. As for the bass, I feel the power, as you mentioned, is definitely solid. Sometimes it's too much because there's too much air pressure on my eardrums and I can feel it (my ears are sensitive to pressure/volume, not sure of frequency). The details could definitely get some work done on them, but still, for $56 (Buy.com coupon that anyone can get)?! C'mon. Damn good.

Also, apparently the details can be refined with some minor mods that reduce the resonance of the pieces inside. They aren't super acoustic friendly. At least not as much as some ATH. I'm not sure how the detaisl compare to the 500 though. I have yet to try them.
 
selling my 900 btw. got an offer on some stax and yeah. need a bit of coin lol.
 
Got my 700's last night, and I'm pleased with them, seriously. I'll probably let them play over the weekend and see if it makes a difference at all, if it does great.

For The Beelzebub..... some folks, like me, can't afford a whole bunch of different pairs of headphones, me because of wife, 3 kids, mortgage, car payments, etc, so these fit right with my budget, and simply put, to me they're great. Kudo's to you and anyone else who is able to drop big $$ on headphones, simply put for a lot of people, these are some great cans for the money being spent on them.
 
lol.. i got them in.. sounded okay.. broke them in.. 5 hours in.. right speaker is blown lol.. returning RMA atm and trying the rx900 lol good thing they take care of the shipping lol..
 
BigDov said:
Got my 700's last night, and I'm pleased with them, seriously. I'll probably let them play over the weekend and see if it makes a difference at all, if it does great.

For The Beelzebub..... some folks, like me, can't afford a whole bunch of different pairs of headphones, me because of wife, 3 kids, mortgage, car payments, etc, so these fit right with my budget, and simply put, to me they're great. Kudo's to you and anyone else who is able to drop big $$ on headphones, simply put for a lot of people, these are some great cans for the money being spent on them.
Click to expand...

lol, I bought my AKG's when I was 17, my 500's when I was 21, and my 700's when I was 23. I'm still 23, and I'm in college with a part time job. I don't have much to drop on cans, which is why the best I have is the ATH-A700's which cost $130 on amazon. I saved my pennies to get them. If you think I spend big $$ on headphones, you must be new to this section of the forums. The 500's are usually $90, which is only $30 more than the JVC 900's. I didn't buy the JVC 700's my little sister did. She needed to replace the AKG's I lent her because the AKG's were open, which meant she could not use them too loudly at night. Also, the headband on it broke, so it was stuck at a large head setting, which was not suited for a 16 year old. $90 or $130 may sound like a lot for headphones, but it all depends on how much you use them and how much you are willing to sacrifice to spend that much. There are people who spend $7 a day on cigarettes. That's $150 a month. That
would be more than enough for a pair of Audio Technica's.

I tested the JVC 700's, that's why I said they were a good deal for $30.
 
TheBeelzebub said:
lol, I bought my AKG's when I was 17, my 500's when I was 21, and my 700's when I was 23. I'm still 23, and I'm in college with a part time job. I don't have much to drop on cans, which is why the best I have is the ATH-A700's which cost $130 on amazon. I saved my pennies to get them. If you think I spend big $$ on headphones, you must be new to this section of the forums. The 500's are usually $90, which is only $30 more than the JVC 900's. I didn't buy the JVC 700's my little sister did. She needed to replace the AKG's I lent her because the AKG's were open, which meant she could not use them too loudly at night. Also, the headband on it broke, so it was stuck at a large head setting, which was not suited for a 16 year old. $90 or $130 may sound like a lot for headphones, but it all depends on how much you use them and how much you are willing to sacrifice to spend that much. There are people who spend $7 a day on cigarettes. That's $150 a month. That
would be more than enough for a pair of Audio Technica's.

I tested the JVC 700's, that's why I said they were a good deal for $30.
Click to expand...


In Beelzbub's defense. He's Just saying its better if you opp out the 130 for the ath-700's. These don't replace them or beat them. Its true that the rx700 isn't a ath-700. But they do sound good for the money. Thats why he did recommend them as a "Good vaule for the money."

The only reason this headphone is hyped is cuz its sounds close to an ATH-700/900.. according to most people spread across the forums.. 60%-80% close which is pretty damn nice considering the price ratio. $35 - 130% which is roughly 25% of the price.. to get around 60-80% sound quality of a ath-700/900. Its a bang for your buck. I just purchased to see wat it sounds like and compare it to the ath-700 since my friend has one. Even when i got a broken headphone.. (mother@#$@#$@).. i shall give them another try. wit the rx-900.. lol.. Hell i had to RMA my DFI board when that thing came in the first time.. those.. socket 939 days.. ^_^.. i wonder if this will be broken when sent to me.. (hmmm)..
 
450 said:
What Stax are you buying? 404? Omega II's?!
Click to expand...

No lol. I don't like the 404s and the Omegas are too much $$ atm.

Got a pair of Lambda normal bias, SRD-7 and a Pop Pulse T40i hybrid amp. The only stax I like better would be the Omegas or the Senn 60. Difference in price is $300 vs $2k lol. I paid $300 for the Lambdas and SRD-7 and $140 for the amp.
 
TheBeelzebub said:
I really don't know why there is a big hype on these headphones. I got a pair for my sister back when this thread was on page 3. I've listened to them when they were new and now that they have been used a lot. People say that these are the poor mans ATH-A900's, but they are far from it. I own AKG-k301, ATH-A700's, and ATH-A500's. Both the 500 and 700's sound better in every aspect. The AKG's just lose in bass.

I'm not some guy that listens to 128kbit/sec mp3's on an onboard sound card. I own a OPAMP modded HDA Mystique that I modded myself with much better OPAMPS, as well as a X-Fi Xtrememusic. 85% of the music I listen to is lossless(FLAC, WMA lossless, APE). The rest is 320kbits/sec mp3's because I could not find lossless copies.

I listen to metal(not the newage garbage), hard rock, classical music, and fusion jazz. I also had a hearing test done a few months ago after an ear infection and I had better than excellent hearing.

What did I think of these JVC headphones? I think they were worth $30 bucks. Are they comparable to the ATH900's? Heck no. They are not as good as the ATH-A500's, but they give 70% of what the 500's give. The bass on these JVC's is strong, but it is not as clear and detailed as the 500 or 700's. Some people just like feeling the bump, but I lke hearing the difference in the kick drum sounds because I am also a drummer of 10 years. The mids are pretty good on the JVC's. The highs are probably are the weakest part. I feel that the overall sound lacks a lot of detail when compared to the ATH's or AKG's I've owned. I think they are lacking in bass, but just in detail, not power.

In the end, a great pair for $30-$50, but not to be compared as anywhere near equal to the ATH series.
Click to expand...

thanks for the insights, I guess I'll pass... just waiting for another KSC-75 to appear :D
 
spaceman said:
No lol. I don't like the 404s and the Omegas are too much $$ atm.

Got a pair of Lambda normal bias, SRD-7 and a Pop Pulse T40i hybrid amp. The only stax I like better would be the Omegas or the Senn 60. Difference in price is $300 vs $2k lol. I paid $300 for the Lambdas and SRD-7 and $140 for the amp.
Click to expand...

I'd be interested to know how the Pop pulse T40i sounds, I'm looking at building either an LM1875 gainclone or some version of tripath amp to power my Stax srd-4 after I'm done building my dual mono LM3886 PA100 amp.
 
aZn_plyR said:
thanks for the insights, I guess I'll pass... just waiting for another KSC-75 to appear :D
Click to expand...


Well before you pass I think you should go over to Headfi forums and read more reviews of them there. No offence to Beelzebub, but, you would be mad to pass on these phones on just one person's opinion. Between here and Headfi there are a lot of insights and detailed information. Including a simple mod that makes these headphones sound even better. The majority of opinion is that they are in fact right up there with the ATH's.

My own review? Well, I never really had a really good headset before. My previous headphones were the medusa speedlink 5.1 progamer for games and Senn Hd 280pro for music. The JVC RX900 sounds way better than both of them in music and in games.
 
Further to prove my point:

The other night I used both my ATH-A700 and JVC harx700 while watching a Blu Ray copy of Hell Boy 2 The Golden Army. I used a ps3, Westinghouse 37se(1080p), and my old 5.1 Aiwa 5.1 receiver. I ran an optical line from the ps3 to the receiver, and used just the headphone jack for sound. I used a basic headphone splitter so that I could use both headphones at the same time. I used the ATH-A700's and my girlfriend used the JVC harx700's. Periodically I would switch and listen to the JVC's for a bit. I also listened to each one at the menu screen where they have the same sound clip looping every minute or so.

Both me and my girlfriend agree that the ATH-A700's beat the JVC's by a lot. I let her decide which she thought was better before I told her what I thought and what each headphone cost. Since both are in almost mint condition externally, and they look very similar, there was no way for her to know that the ATH's cost so much more.

If she could tell the difference that easily, I think that anyone who says the JVC's are just as good need to actually directly compare them to ATH-A500/ATH-A700/ATH-A900's. Most of the people saying these headphones are good do not actually have any of these ATH headphones to compare them to. How can people say they are as good as something they do not even have to compare it to?

Again, for $30 they are great. But they do not compare at all to the ATH-A series.

Also, the mods that make the JVC's sound better take don't just take about an hour of your time. You have to go and buy the sound deadening matts and other materials from a store, or order them online. Then, you have to follow the online directions from the forum and take apart/rebuild your headphones. Total time is about 2.5-3 hours, depending on how you get the materials. If you work at your job for 2.5 to 3 hours, you should make the difference it costs to get the ATH-A500's, which are superior and require no modding.

Time=Money.
 
Time =/= Money

Sorry to burst your bubble about that idea, but that's just not true. Time at your JOB = Money. Time everywhere else =/= Money. I don't care what theoretical assumptions or hypotheticals you put in. The mods do NOT take 2.5-3 hours to order and follow instructions. Unless you're a dumbass that takes one hour to read 500 words. I could fucking WRITE a 500 word A+ ESSAY in one hour.

Second, I don't know about the HARX700, but the HARX900 DO compare to the AD700 and A900, which I have tried (currently have AD700 being shipped to me). HARX900 certainly doesn't beat them, but it IS comparable. Particularly after the mods have been applied. And try it with an amp. In my opinion, especially when it comes to mids and highs, the amped HARX900 possibly BEATS the AD700 amp-less and almost matches the A900 amp-less. AND that costs MUCH less than the A900, while matching the price of the AD700. Especially for music that isn't all highs.

Of course, for pure gaming, the AD700 is hard to beat of the three purely for the soundstage, but that's largely due to the open nature of the headphones.
 
TheBeelzebub said:
Further to prove my point:

The other night I used both my ATH-A700 and JVC harx700 while watching a Blu Ray copy of Hell Boy 2 The Golden Army. I used a ps3, Westinghouse 37se(1080p), and my old 5.1 Aiwa 5.1 receiver. I ran an optical line from the ps3 to the receiver, and used just the headphone jack for sound. I used a basic headphone splitter so that I could use both headphones at the same time. I used the ATH-A700's and my girlfriend used the JVC harx700's. Periodically I would switch and listen to the JVC's for a bit. I also listened to each one at the menu screen where they have the same sound clip looping every minute or so.

Both me and my girlfriend agree that the ATH-A700's beat the JVC's by a lot. I let her decide which she thought was better before I told her what I thought and what each headphone cost. Since both are in almost mint condition externally, and they look very similar, there was no way for her to know that the ATH's cost so much more.

If she could tell the difference that easily, I think that anyone who says the JVC's are just as good need to actually directly compare them to ATH-A500/ATH-A700/ATH-A900's. Most of the people saying these headphones are good do not actually have any of these ATH headphones to compare them to. How can people say they are as good as something they do not even have to compare it to?

Again, for $30 they are great. But they do not compare at all to the ATH-A series.

Also, the mods that make the JVC's sound better take don't just take about an hour of your time. You have to go and buy the sound deadening matts and other materials from a store, or order them online. Then, you have to follow the online directions from the forum and take apart/rebuild your headphones. Total time is about 2.5-3 hours, depending on how you get the materials. If you work at your job for 2.5 to 3 hours, you should make the difference it costs to get the ATH-A500's, which are superior and require no modding.

Time=Money.
Click to expand...
`

That's your opinion Beelzebub. All that you wrote about showing your girlfriend etc to prove your point only proves it to yourself. Everybody can only have opinions on the forums because there is no way of verifying anything anyone says.

But the majority of the people say these compare to the ATH's and that's on a headphone forum. So you don't think these compare to ATH's, fine, but It's an opinion that seems to be in opposite of most other opinions. And also there are good few people who have the ATH's who also have these. Maybe you just got a bad headset?

As for the mods, well, they really are very simple. I had never done anything like this before, but it only took 20 mins. I only took off the felt ring, but, It would have only taken 10 more minutes to stick the dynamat or foam on if I had them.

Again, I would advise people to read all the opinions on them before choosing.
 
I'm using the closed versions, the A series. The closed series is known to have a smaller sound stage than the open AD series. So if the AD>A, and A>HARX, then AD>A>HARX.

This threads title is talking about the HARX700, not the 900. I never bought the 900's and can't comment on them.

For many people, time = money. I'm not going to get into it, but I'm sure a google search would work. Here is how time = money for the British population. http://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/05/29/time.money/

I still think that if you feel the JVC's give better sound, then you have hearing deficiencies or are listening to low bit rate mp3's.

The frequency response on the JVC700's is 8HZ-25,000HZ, the ATH-A700's and AD-900's is 5HZ-35,000HZ. Big difference. Highs are just as important as lows and mids. Recreation of sound in movies and music needs the whole range.

I know that plenty of people in the headfi forums think the HARX700's are amazing and are as good or almost as good as the AD900's. I'd like to know what they listened to, what hardware they used, how they directly compared the headphones to another set, when is the last time they got a hearing test, and how they were able to listen to the 25,000HZ to 35,000HZ range that is unable to be produced by the HARX700's.

The things I just listed I have shown in my past posts. I've gotten a hearing test with excellent results, I've said what I listened to(lossless codec music and a blu-ray movie.) what hardware(X-fi Xtrememusic and modded OPAMP hda mystique), etc etc etc.
 
TheBeelzebub said:
For many people, time = money. I'm not going to get into it, but I'm sure a google search would work. Here is how time = money for the British population. http://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/05/29/time.money/
Click to expand...

My major is political economics. I know economics. And one of the basic assumptions of economics is that people are logical. Which is not entirely true. Therefore, much of the finer details of economics are debunked, in my opinion. And it was my major. Economics is still at the stage of Newtonian physics in the field of physics. It hasn't gotten to the point of quantum physics. You can throw whatever number you want, but you're not making any more or less money watching TV or modding your headphones.

Anyways, I'm not going to argue further than that. That's for other forums.

Regardless, we are talking about different price points. It DOES say "poor mans ad900", not "ad900 killer". Obviously, $35 or $40 headphones (HARX700) aren't going to kill something that costs $100+. However, I WOULD say that the HARX900 certainly come in strongly.

So you're right: killer headphones at $40-ish. Doesn't beat the A(D)900, but I wouldn't doubt it comes close to the A700, particularly when amped. And don't go around throwing frequency ranges because, certainly it helps to have that range, but how far or low a driver can go doesn't single-handedly determine the quality of it's sound production.
 
TheBeelzebub said:
and how they were able to listen to the 25,000HZ to 35,000HZ range that is unable to be produced by the HARX700's.
.
Click to expand...

lol-unless one is a dog the above 20k range cant be heard. wider ranges are usually indicative of less roll off at the extreme highs and lows. some manufacturers debunk these extreme ranges (Goldring), and some ridicule it (Equation)
i made the original post comparing to the a900s-which i still have. i have also had/have the ad500, ad700, and a55. i stand by my opinions. the a900 is still the best, but i like the rx700 over the ad500, ad700, a55, and a500. if they were all the same price i would recommend all with a clear conscience (maybe not the a55 so much)

plz keep in mind that my rx700 -as well as all the cans listed- were well burned in
 
I understand that frequencies over 20kHZ are inaudible, but my JVC's are missing out in the highs severely. How long did it take you to get your JVC's to be well burned in? Mine have over 24 hours in them. I did not blast the music, but I put it at the volume I listen to comfortably. What are you listening to that they sound so good?


Also, it is "Beat me to* it."
 
The highs are rolled off and the headphones are "dark" in the sense that the highs do not extend into the registry of the AT cans.

For the $$, the HARX are excellent for detail, bass, and work well with the bright sound which PCs usually have. They are not giant killers. They do have killer detail but you will always be missing out on the last bit of definition throughout the sound spectrum.

So, if you have the $$, get the AD-700 or 900 for gaming out of a sound card. If not, the HARX series is great too. Better than the SB40 which it replaces.
 
TheBeelzebub said:
I understand that frequencies over 20kHZ are inaudible, but my JVC's are missing out in the highs severely. How long did it take you to get your JVC's to be well burned in? Mine have over 24 hours in them. I did not blast the music, but I put it at the volume I listen to comfortably. What are you listening to that they sound so good?

QUOTE]
i've got at least 150 hrs on the jvc 700. i use them mainly for gaming, but have tried them with rock, pop, and dance music. i also have a few latin tracks i use just for testing cans. they dont have the same highs as the a900 or a hi end senn. but i still get great highs. moving the 16hz slider on my x-fi eq makes a big difference so it doesnt roll off at that frequency- at least not much
thats also one of my too-close-to-an-audio-technica to be real suspicions. the ath-ad500/a500/a55 all take a lot of burn in time to sound decent also
Click to expand...
 
What kind of equalizer settings (if any) are you guys using with these cans?
 
hey guys..i own an Audio Technica AD700 headphones currently.... i use them with my computer...for music and gaming purpose

Now that i have bought a Cowon D2 MP3 player...im looking for a decent headphone..within 50 $$...how are these JVC Harx700...would they be an alternative to the AD700s?..i mean do they sound nearly as good as the Audio technica AD700s or Grado SR60?

Thanks:D
 
I got my rx-900s in and I broke them in about 35 hours atm. Outside the box. The headphones sounded very harsh.. It sounded worse the Rx-700's straight out of the box side by side comparision. (I used my friend's rx-700s) I put the cmoy amp on the rx-900 and i instantly heard a 35% increase in sound quality. The mid's came out.. the high's were decent and the bass became louder. I hooked up the rx-700 with the amp and i noticed about 10% difference. The mid's and high's weren't quite as muffled and became clearer. After 35 Hours of burn-in the soundstage widened. The mid's became clearer. The high's not quite as "dark" as spaceman would say. I did the "TopPop Mod" but only step one which was the felt ring removal. I didn't have dynamat avaiable so i just took it out. After I took it out.. i noticed a drastic difference in the mid's and high's. I will probably finish the TopPop mod whenever i get some dynamat from my friend but i highly recommend removing the felt. So far i came to this conclusion.

Outa the Box Comparison with cmoy amp.
Rx-700 10% Increase in clairity of Mid's and Highs
Rx-900 35% Increase in clairity of Mid's and high's Not much of a muffle sound.

35 Hours break in with cmoy amp.
Rx-900 20% Increase in Mid's, High's, and Bass Response No muddy at all. (thank god..)
Rx-900 (Modded) Soundstage lifted a bit you start to hear a clearer separation of sounds. (Stage 1)

Probably after antoher 20 hours or so I'll bring it to my friend's house we'll compare the Rx-700's, Rx-900's, Ath-700's and if my friend gets it in time by lan.. the Sen 555's.. =D
 
wow.. toppop mod stage two.. (dynamatting) works bad ass.. mids hella came out clear.. soundstage increased even further.. and we have HIGH's lol.. wowness.. took 10 minutes.. lol..
 
itsukisama said:
wow.. toppop mod stage two.. (dynamatting) works bad ass.. mids hella came out clear.. soundstage increased even further.. and we have HIGH's lol.. wowness.. took 10 minutes.. lol..
Click to expand...

Yeah they improve pretty dramatically. I sold both of mine and both of the buyers love the sound. Totally easy mod too.
 
itsukisama said:
wow.. toppop mod stage two.. (dynamatting) works bad ass.. mids hella came out clear.. soundstage increased even further.. and we have HIGH's lol.. wowness.. took 10 minutes.. lol..
Click to expand...

Where can i get this stuff, and how much is it?
 
if u can get half a square feet get it lol.. i only used like 7 x 3 strip of dynamat. Do only the cup and the magnetic driver. It doesn't add much weight. and the sound improves dramatically. ^___^ love these headphones..

Up*dated.. I modded my friend's Rx-700's which he burned in about 25 hours worth. While my Rx-900 have about 40 hours of burn in.

Side by Side Comparison With Cmoy Amp
Both Headphones Modified with TopPoP Mod without acoustic filling since we are bass heads. =D

Rx-700
Mids hit strong accurately. Extended the current soundstage with modest high's. Bass is improved more compact.
Click to expand...

Rx-900
Mids are a bit clearer. Soundstage a bit bigger. High's a bit clearer. Bass is overwhelming. Certain songs such as some in hip genre makes the headphone cups shake.
Click to expand...
 
Calpis said:
Did try the rx900's w/o the "acoustic lens"?
Click to expand...
Actually I didn't. I took the ear pads off twice now and i'm scared of ripping them. I will probably try later but I read somewhere that it didn't help or do anythign to the sound. The Rx-700's I have to admit, the pads are significantly cheaper quality and will tear very easily if you use too much force. Anyways I did a comparison with all three headphones.

*Note: TopPop Mods were done to the Headphone cup, Magnetic Driver, and the the felt removal. No acoustic filling was used."

RX-700 30+ Burn In
Out of the package, this headphone sounded okay but everything had a nice "muffled" sound to it. After burn-in and the TopPop Mod. The Mid's came out and became clearer along wit the High's. The bass became more compact but didn't increase much. The Soundstage was increased with the Mod but this headphones doesn't even touch the ATH-700's in gaming. Padding felt cheap and making the headphones decent to wear but as not "comfortable." Powering by a cmoy amp didn't help much. It did the same effect as the ATH-700's but overall probably helped about 5% difference in sound quality.
Click to expand...
RX-900 40 Hours Burn
Out this package, the headphones sounded like ass. Everything was really "muffled" or "cloudy" at first compared to the Rx-700's. After the TopPop Mod. The Mid's really came out and was a decent amount clearer then the Rx-700's. The High's became less dark and came out. The bass was the most improved thing imo. The headphones produced the nicest bass out of the three headphones. Hell it even shook my ears on some songs. In gaming, this did a bit better then the RX-700's since the soundstage is a bit bigger and the mid/bass response was a bit better, but still didnt' hang wit the ATH-700's massive soundstage. Padding felt nicer then the other two headphones and made this headphone more comfortable out of the three. This one was the only one that benefited from the cmoy amp better then any of the others. It helped the over all sound become clearer and the bass hit HARDER.. =D. I say improvement was about 15% to 20%.
Click to expand...
ATH-A700 1XX Hours Burn In
Soundstage complete blew away the JVC series. You can hear a clear separation of the instruments. Classical just completely blew me away on these headphones. In gaming the Soundstage made the directional feel come so easy to the player. Hell in COD4 I Could hear through walls. Mid's were way more detailed compared to the RX-900's. The High's were a bit clearer then the Rx-900 but wasn't to a point that you would be stoked about. Bass was around the same level as Rx-700's but was way more accurate and clearer. The head band adjustment was nice but the padding still felt cheap and didn't feel good as the Rx-900's but better the the Rx-700's. This one didn't benefit from the cmoy amp. At most it helped about 5%-10%.
Click to expand...

Overall I would pay the extra 20 for the better comfortable pad's and the stronger bass. Then again, I'm a bass head so yeah lol. The amp makes the RX-900 go into the 100 dollar range but then again these headphones sound bad ass without an amp. I totally recommend the Rx-900 but Modding them is essential to bring out the "goodness" of the headphones.. =D If you not a bass head I would buy the ATH-A700's because their overall sound quality beats the RX-900 in everyway except for the bass.. thats one thing.. RX-900 Has them beat in.. =D.. But for 60 dollar headphones.. You GOTTA love these heaphones.. :D

THere's my two cents.. lol Cheers..
 
A bit off-topic but has anyone had problems with Buy.com? I ordered a pair of HA-RX900s last night for $58.99 from Buy.com using GoogleCheckout when they were showing "Very Few Left in Stock" and now they're "On Order". After reading through Reseller Ratings it seems that dealing with their customer service is a nightmare and I'm kind of dreading it.
 
I like Buy.com. No complaints so far and I have three orders from them.
 
FoxhoundOp said:
A bit off-topic but has anyone had problems with Buy.com? I ordered a pair of HA-RX900s last night for $58.99 from Buy.com using GoogleCheckout when they were showing "Very Few Left in Stock" and now they're "On Order". After reading through Reseller Ratings it seems that dealing with their customer service is a nightmare and I'm kind of dreading it.
Click to expand...

That may mean that they went out of stock around the time you ordered. If that happened, basically you won't get the shipping email until they get more in stock, but they will ship it when they get more. If you get a shipping email you're fine. I ordered a SD card on sale last February, and didn't get the shipping email for 9 days because it went OOS. Still, I did get the card. So if you don't mind waiting, you shouldn't have to deal with customer service.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top