I know the graphs tell me that there is a huge roll off. But honestly, i don't feel the same
I think Audiodoc has answered this very well already. There are two sides to every story. I'll try to present my thoughts on both sides a bit - the flip side is in italics. May be a bit long to read - Sorry for that!
Usually, when
listening to music, especially in the background, you never feel the same. But, it's the comparisons which show what's present or absent. The only thing you need to have is the right reference. Coming from HM601 could make other sources 'bright' than the other way around. That's why we have so many contradictory views.
The reason why I am not too fond of colored sources is that you are then restricted to certain IEMs. I would ideally like my chain to be clean and flat until the final headphone or IEM. Unlike speakers, you can own few / several of them (less $$$, less storage space), so you can do all the coloration there.
That is ideal - but if you own one great IEM and build a rig around it, the opposite could make sense. After all, it's much easier to have a few portable / transportable rigs than it is to have separate speaker setups in rooms. But this is much tougher to achieve since IEM/Headphone contributes the most to the final perceived SQ.
Technically, HM-602 is said to have a 11 ohm output impedance and 601 is likely to be around that range. They will alter the FR of IEM (which does have it's own impedance). I am not sure I can make an educated guess by listening alone because there's a difference between what can be
measured and what can be
heard. But, I can say it's not very low (as is Sony E353).
There are things that can be measured (Frequency response, impulse + decay plots indicate note decay and thickness of note, isolation, impedance graphs etc.,) and then there's those that can be actually heard. Smaller variations may not be heard at all. What we also overlook is that each of us have our own charts - our sensitivity to certain frequencies, our own hearing graph etc., which also affect the final outcome. On a side note, this OI measurement has become a little rage of late in head-fi after Lord Voldemort (NwAvGuy) posted his Clip+ review. IMO, while it's all good, there's nothing that says that garbled FR may not sound good to the ears. After all, at the end of the day, we still listen to music. That's why it's easier for me to like FX700 out of 601 even if it's the most disturbed of FR graphs.
Clip+ does not do everything right either. But, it does have a flat frequency response, low output impedance and a slightly lusher sounding mid range which slightly enhances perception of timbre. What it misses out on is the output power, bringing out the full range of dynamics in an IEM etc., I never felt that it was 'missing' anything until I heard QA350 Mod V2. Disregarding all it's ancient looks and difficulty with daily use, if we keep the comparison down to SQ alone, QA350 is powerful (may be too much for IEMs as the usable volume dial was much less from 7:00+ -8:30 at most) and also cleaner sounding, better textured. It does lack in sound stage depth and lacks a slight bit of resolution. UHA-6S as a DAC fixes those things, but that meant that I carry a stack of bricks, not so good looking at that, instead of a tiny portable player. After a couple of months of listening to other combos (or bricks
), I find it tough to go back to Clip+. It's not just the amplified loudness or larger sound stage, but cleanliness / relatively better resolution / fullness / dynamics - minor differences that add together. Unless I compare them side by side, I'd still not be knowing where all that money went.
However, consider the costs of getting "better than Clip+" SQ - at least to my ears. My iPod Video 5G -> Arrow 3G rig cost me $400 and QA350 -> UHA-6S cost me $515 excluding shipping costs and these are without including cost of connecting cables and LOD. That's why Clip+ is still nice to keep around, even if it's not the best of the best in overall SQ.
I haven't heard 602 or 801. So, i am not qualified like you to pass the judgement comparing them
No! I haven't either, only AudioDoc has.
My biggest gripe with it is the battery. I am bit lazy to keep the player charged always. So, i keep my Zune/Clip+ as backup
Lucky you! QA350 clocks only 5:30
(not that I can carry it around, but it dies at the unexpected of times... always
). The best way is to add a battery pack, but the rig will become heavier. Worse for me because QA350 needs a 9V power supply and I need to get something like a Energizer XP8000 and a suitable tip.
On the contrary the midrange sounds better on the HM601 even though it is technically (by measurements not a flat signal)
I agree. It's a nice coloration, but matching ear phones is the key to liking HM-601.
If you think it is worthwhile may do do something with the 601.
I am not sure about that. Would replacing components and re-soldering bring about an audible change? Would it make it better? Is it worth the effort? Or is it better to empty the wallet to get a iBasso DX100?
To give an example from the IEM world, I do not like Etymotic MC5. It requires a very nice source to sound at least half way nice. But, instead of dropping $300 on a better source to make MC5 nice, it's better to sell MC5 and drop an additional $50-75 to get the HF2/3/5.
So, I don't know if modding 601 would be worth the effort. Was just curious to know if you have considered it
PS1: Did we thread jack? oh! Never mind... 
PS2: Post #500
clieOS mentioned that 801 has better treble than 601. Is it down to the difference in DAC chips or is it the implementation?
