or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Some of the myths associated with K701/2
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Some of the myths associated with K701/2 - Page 10

post #136 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Erik View Post

The biggest myth is that the K-701/2 is a good headphone.

Any devotee of the older AKG models (e.g. K-501, K-1000) usually puts it far below those models.

The only reason the K-701/2 enjoys any popularity is because it costs less than a HD-600 or DT880. If the prices were equal, it wouldn't get half the praise it does.

The K-701/2 mangles the vocal range. Unfortunately, that doesn't jump out until you've heard better headphones or are acquainted well with live performances.


Very, very true, but this is essentially the only thing wrong with it.  It has pretty glorious bass reproduction if the drivers aren't distracted by reproducing the 10-or-so-dB peak at 2khz :p

If you have a k702 and find it has a massive and intolerable bump at 2khz and no low end, please listen to the following.  It's something I've been working on.  It's a corrective model for the k702.

 

Source:

http://soundcloud.com/kylebloss/spiritedawaysource/s-Ufx5U

 

Corrected:

http://soundcloud.com/kylebloss/spiritedawaypsych/s-bED0s

 

I need more opinions on this, please.  I can't continue without a few more sets of ears!

 


Edited by PelPix - 9/11/11 at 5:40pm
post #137 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Erik View Post

The biggest myth is that the K-701/2 is a good headphone.

Any devotee of the older AKG models (e.g. K-501, K-1000) usually puts it far below those models.

The only reason the K-701/2 enjoys any popularity is because it costs less than a HD-600 or DT880. If the prices were equal, it wouldn't get half the praise it does.

The K-701/2 mangles the vocal range. Unfortunately, that doesn't jump out until you've heard better headphones or are acquainted well with live performances.

how dare you spit this none sense, good sir. this is absolutely preposterous at the highest level of stupidity. tongue.gif
post #138 of 164

.


Edited by tdockweiler - 9/11/11 at 10:17pm
post #139 of 164

Just thought I'd jump in and share my K702 experience. I bought them after my Senn HD-25s broke for the second time, and they are the most expensive / high-end cans I've owned so far. As I listen to mostly reggae and electronic music with some reggae lineage, I've always chased "bassy" headphones. On reading the extensive discussion about the K70x here on these forums, I decided to buy them out of a slight sense of perversity, as I wanted to hear for myself what a set of headphones sounded like which were renowned as both "revealing / reference quality" and "bass light". My level of audiophilia isn't at the same level as many of you folks, but I've got a reasonable ear, can tell the difference between the 320k MP3 and a Wav, and have some entry-level training in sound engineering and musicianship. Here's what I found:

 

Bass - the bass isn't forceful like on other, "bassier" cans, they don't blow the air down your ear canal in that way, but so what. They do dig very deep into the sub frequencies, evenly and confidently. Well-engineered electronic music with deep bass (e.g. an artist like Shackleton) is an absolute joy. Music with unconvincing bass will not be flattered by these cans, and unfortunately that includes many records from supposedly bass-driven genres. But on good records - at times the bass has felt physical enough that I've actually put my hand on my hifi subwoofer to check I hadn't accidentally left it switched on. Bass and sub bass are hugely important in my listening, and if I felt the 702s were sub-par I'd have dropped them like a sack of **** and bought something else.

 

Burn in - So far I've clocked up over 150 hours of mostly unattended burn-in, about 75% music / 25% pink noise. There's no doubt to my ears that the bass improved dramatically, and the occasionally painful upper mids were reigned in a bit (still noticeable on certain recordings though).

 

Comfort - I don't know what all the fuss is about. I love wearing mine. I do have hair though (for now).

 

Amping - I'm driving mine straight from my integrated amp, a Cambridge Audio 650A, which I believe has a reasonable op-amp based headphone circuit. The 702s sound great like this but I can tell they'd love more power. I'm saving for a Schiit Lyr early next month (your fault, head-fi.org).

 

To me - and I'm not all that experienced with the high-end cans obviously, so don't laugh - the K702 feels like a bit of a connoisseur's choice, in that to really enjoy them you have to allow your aural palate to develop a certain amount of sophistication. Shake off your addiction to obvious, crowd-pleasing phenomena (otherwise you may as well buy these) and the 70x is very enjoyable indeed. I love mine, I love their bass, and I love their intense detail. Jeez, I wish I could leave the office now and go home to listen to them.

post #140 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Erik View Post

The only reason the K-701/2 enjoys any popularity is because it costs less than a HD-600 or DT880. If the prices were equal, it wouldn't get half the praise it does.


If prices were equal, all three wouldn't get much praise compared to current top of the line headphones...

 

post #141 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by rowett View Post

Just thought I'd jump in and share my K702 experience. I bought them after my Senn HD-25s broke for the second time, and they are the most expensive / high-end cans I've owned so far. As I listen to mostly reggae and electronic music with some reggae lineage, I've always chased "bassy" headphones. On reading the extensive discussion about the K70x here on these forums, I decided to buy them out of a slight sense of perversity, as I wanted to hear for myself what a set of headphones sounded like which were renowned as both "revealing / reference quality" and "bass light". My level of audiophilia isn't at the same level as many of you folks, but I've got a reasonable ear, can tell the difference between the 320k MP3 and a Wav, and have some entry-level training in sound engineering and musicianship. Here's what I found:

 

Bass - the bass isn't forceful like on other, "bassier" cans, they don't blow the air down your ear canal in that way, but so what. They do dig very deep into the sub frequencies, evenly and confidently. Well-engineered electronic music with deep bass (e.g. an artist like Shackleton) is an absolute joy. Music with unconvincing bass will not be flattered by these cans, and unfortunately that includes many records from supposedly bass-driven genres. But on good records - at times the bass has felt physical enough that I've actually put my hand on my hifi subwoofer to check I hadn't accidentally left it switched on. Bass and sub bass are hugely important in my listening, and if I felt the 702s were sub-par I'd have dropped them like a sack of **** and bought something else.

 

Burn in - So far I've clocked up over 150 hours of mostly unattended burn-in, about 75% music / 25% pink noise. There's no doubt to my ears that the bass improved dramatically, and the occasionally painful upper mids were reigned in a bit (still noticeable on certain recordings though).

 

Comfort - I don't know what all the fuss is about. I love wearing mine. I do have hair though (for now).

 

Amping - I'm driving mine straight from my integrated amp, a Cambridge Audio 650A, which I believe has a reasonable op-amp based headphone circuit. The 702s sound great like this but I can tell they'd love more power. I'm saving for a Schiit Lyr early next month (your fault, head-fi.org).

 

To me - and I'm not all that experienced with the high-end cans obviously, so don't laugh - the K702 feels like a bit of a connoisseur's choice, in that to really enjoy them you have to allow your aural palate to develop a certain amount of sophistication. Shake off your addiction to obvious, crowd-pleasing phenomena (otherwise you may as well buy these) and the 70x is very enjoyable indeed. I love mine, I love their bass, and I love their intense detail. Jeez, I wish I could leave the office now and go home to listen to them.



I couldn't have put any better myself, I absolutely agree.  First few times I used them I had to check to see if my subwoofer was on. These headphones might be the quality bass Kings.

 

post #142 of 164

I just got my q701's and all these myths had me really worried that I was taking a big gamble on them.  I was afraid that they would sound like my steelseries 5hv2's when they got here and wouldn't make any sound running off of anything less then my integrated amp, and would hurt as much to wear as my HDJ-1000's do.

 

After using them there is a little bit of truth to all of the myths, but not enough to worry about.

 

The Bass:

Playing Live Wire from the beastie boys anthology my car sounds like a helicopter, these don't.  I just have to remember that my car isn't anywhere even close to being accurate and it isn't meant to be, these are.  On Bass I Love You by Bassotronics there is a 7Hz tone that most systems miss, It can just barely be felt with these, but that is impressive enough for me that it's noticeable at all.

 

The Power:

They work fine from just a realtek onboard dac, it's just not $400 fine, I don't even think it's $200 fine. If you have an amp to use these with it's ok to use them without it when you need to, but don't get them if that's the only plan you have.

 

The Pain:

Not even close to hurting as much as the hdj1000's. They are very comfortable phones but the bump does dig, it's just not enough to whine about.  Should they fix it? yup. Does it ruin them? not even close.

 

The Rock:

I was just at Shamrock and Roll on Sunday.  I went to see The Dropkick Murphy's, but I stood for seven hours dead center on the drunk/sober line to see all the bands play.  Here is how the 701's compare, not even close for any of the bands, but far closer than any other set I've heard, for some of the bands.

 

Chuck Ragan:  Awesome, his bubble gravel voice really sounds like he's here on these cans, and the jingle of the metal strings really stands out.

 

Parkington sisters:  Lets see, female vocals, violins, standup bass, tambourine,  Yea these do that well.

 

The Mahones: Nope, way too drum driven and these just don't pop like they need too.

 

Stiff Little Fingers:  Actually yea, they work.  It's mostly mid heavy rock guitar and it does that really well, it misses again on the drums, but not as bad as with The Mahones.  SLF has more bass drum vs The Mahones being tom heavy.

 

The Murphys:  No, not even close, not a little bit right.  The Murphy's live crank so high that you can feel the mids vibrate your blood and the bass drum feels like a bar fight, your not going to get that feeling or excitement in your house no matter what your using.  These tripped on the DKM, flat on their little plastic faces.

 

You really can't expect going to a live show to sound like a set of phones, so if you get the chance, go to the show live,  but these are a practical set of phones with a big open sound that do a lot of things right, so If you know the sound you want the myths really aren't worth the worry, even if they are true.

 

EDIT: forgot about the burn in.  I've yet to hear a speaker that doesn't burn in (with a coil, piezo doesn't count).  If you don't believe in burn in go buy a 1500 to 2000 watt RMS car audio subwoofer, you can physically feel the suspension get broken in by pushing the cone down with your hand, and not a little bit lighter over time either, I mean from having to lean your body weight into it to one finger doing the trick, burn in scales up when you have 2-4 spiders and a thick hard rubber surround, but it's still there when you scale things down, it's just not nearly as big of an effect, and takes much longer with small drivers (because the suspension doesn't flex at as large of an angle). My HDJ-1000 took almost a year to burn in, and they sounded worse after.

 


Edited by sexiewasd - 9/14/11 at 2:59pm
post #143 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by PelPix View Post




Very, very true, but this is essentially the only thing wrong with it.  It has pretty glorious bass reproduction if the drivers aren't distracted by reproducing the 10-or-so-dB peak at 2khz :p

If you have a k702 and find it has a massive and intolerable bump at 2khz and no low end, please listen to the following.  It's something I've been working on.  It's a corrective model for the k702.

 

Source:

http://soundcloud.com/kylebloss/spiritedawaysource/s-Ufx5U

 

Corrected:

http://soundcloud.com/kylebloss/spiritedawaypsych/s-bED0s

 

I need more opinions on this, please.  I can't continue without a few more sets of ears!

 


 

If you've got the means to test this out (Voxengo GlissEQ and some AKG K701 or derivatives), do so, please. It's turned them into my favorite set of cans, over my previous favorites the HD-650 and DT-990, and that's from the Q701's previous position as "I wish I could return these, crap, but at least they do a good job of magnifying certain stuff in the treble, I guess that'll be of use in the studio."

 

I know GlissEQ isn't free, but it's probably the most powerful tool around for EQing headphones thanks to the tunable dynamic behavior (static EQs, even parametrics, can cause more issues than they fix because of the way they sort of wrestle the driver into reproducing things differently - GlissEQ is more like a reactive, input-sensitive, sophisticated but persistent nudge in the right direction that adapts as it acts - hell, it's one of my favorite EQs in my DAW, I just never thought to try it in FooBar and so I ended up with a lot of headphones that are now largely gathering dust).

 

PelPix has put a lot of effort into getting this right. If you're an AKG K701/702/Q701 owner, this puts them on the same plane as very neutral studio monitors for reproduction accuracy and cures any bass leanness that you might find undesirable as well. I've contributed my ears but my ears don't change, the more people who can help, the better.

post #144 of 164

"massive bump at 2K"? Vocals would be intolerable to listen to with anything like a 'massive' bump there. I always thought they were pretty neutral in that area. Will have to listen again more critically. They are definitely a bit too bright for my taste, but I thought the upper mid's bump was higher up....some claim it's around 7K which would make more sense. That '10dB peak' is obviously an exaggeration.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PelPix View Post




Very, very true, but this is essentially the only thing wrong with it.  It has pretty glorious bass reproduction if the drivers aren't distracted by reproducing the 10-or-so-dB peak at 2khz :p

If you have a k702 and find it has a massive and intolerable bump at 2khz and no low end, please listen to the following.  It's something I've been working on.  It's a corrective model for the k702.

 

Source:

http://soundcloud.com/kylebloss/spiritedawaysource/s-Ufx5U

 

Corrected:

http://soundcloud.com/kylebloss/spiritedawaypsych/s-bED0s

 

I need more opinions on this, please.  I can't continue without a few more sets of ears!

 



 

post #145 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by lejaz View Post

"massive bump at 2K"? Vocals would be intolerable to listen to with anything like a 'massive' bump there. I always thought they were pretty neutral in that area. Will have to listen again more critically. They are definitely a bit too bright for my taste, but I thought the upper mid's bump was higher up....some claim it's around 7K which would make more sense. That '10dB peak' is obviously an exaggeration.
 



 


It's about 10-15dB before correcting for the HRTF, and it starts at 1K, peaks at 5K, and ends at 7K

 

post #146 of 164

If you had a simple graphic eq what would you cut at 2K, 5K, 7K to give them a 'flat' eq?
It can't be anywhere near 10dB at 2K that's for sure. Maybe I misread you , but that's what I thought you were implying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PelPix View Post




It's about 10-15dB before correcting for the HRTF, and it starts at 1K, peaks at 5K, and ends at 7K

 



 

post #147 of 164

It's impossible to correct with a simple graphical EQ.  That's why I used GlissEQ.  It has content-adaptive strength.

-6dB, -22dB, -5dB, -5dB in GlissEQ, but keep in mind that GlissEQ is ENTIRELY different from any other EQ that exists

post #148 of 164

Ok now I'm not understanding, 10db?  That is fraking HUGE!  and at 2K!!!  I'm sorry but really?  I can't be just overlooking that, I don't hear it.

post #149 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by sexiewasd View Post

Ok now I'm not understanding, 10db?  That is fraking HUGE!  and at 2K!!!  I'm sorry but really?  I can't be just overlooking that, I don't hear it.


I didn't hear it either until I equalized it out!

 

Here's an example file.

Source:

http://soundcloud.com/kylebloss/felttippensource/s-aUhHs

 

EQ:

http://soundcloud.com/kylebloss/felttippeneq/s-V9xPX

 

It takes some getting used to, but you can't go back to the stock sound after you do.

post #150 of 164

Why would the frequency response before HRTF correction be important to you? If you look at those, almost all headphones share the same bump at 2k+. I'm looking at the LCD-2 measurements now, and their peak at 3k, uncorrected, is 9dB, almost 10dB, but nobody hears that as a peak. The 701 does appear to have a small bump in the FRF at around 2k after correction, but we should be talking about a ~2dB reduction at that point if you want to EQ it out.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Some of the myths associated with K701/2