I can't tell if you are being serious or sarcastic! If sarcastic, well, all I meant is while I do think the 702 is a superb headphone and my personal favorite (so far), I know it has defects like the plasticy mids, non present bass (not just light), and an over exaggerated sound stage. I do think amping fixes all of these though, at least besides the wide sound stage which doesn't really bug me (the can never sounds distant to me, unlike others I've heard like the Senn 595 or Beyer 770). And I know others simply don't like it (like I don't like the 595's) and I'd be happy to find a superior can around the same price and admit the 702 is not as great as I thought it was, for then I would be enjoying another can even more!
I don't know much about the ATH 2000, but that's probably because it is over $300 or so retail. I have a self imposed limit I'll spend on any can: $300 (so far I'm only at $266 with the 702's). I just can't personally justify paying more for a bit of plastic and metal, especially because I think the law of diminishing returns kicks in around this price point ($300-$500 retail) from everything I've read, such as some posts itt comparing this "mere" $300 retail phone to those 2 to 3x it's price. Remember that I also only listen to headphones about 20 to 30% of the time anyway; otherwise I vastly prefer speakers in every conceivable way and have spent some money on those (relative to their diminishing return price points as well).
So I bought the 770's because they were cheap-ish and I only "have to" listen to closed cans about 10% of the time anyway, if that. They were my first decent pair of closed cans however and I was surprised by their wide sound stage in that I never feel closed in. So thus I'm not against other closed cans even if I don't really need them. It's always nice to know I'm not bugging my gf with any leakage or to have the privacy of closed cans anyway.
Well, they are both very different headphones, not easy to compare, but this is what I can say about it.... I once owned the K701's and I must say that in terms of clarity, detail, resolution, treble, musicality and bass the 940's win (considering both headphones have been well amplified). The K701 win on soundstage, this is where they excelled, perhaps exaggerated... but for a closed headphone the 940's are surprisingly open. So yes, If you want an closed can that is somehow near to the detailed nature of the K701, the 940's are the ones, but if I had to choose, I would got with the 940's, I would prefer to sacrifice the enormous soundstage and looks for a more musical and detailed can.
Again, the 940's NEED TO BE AMPLIFIED!
Thank you! That helps. If the 940's could trump the 701/02's in terms of overall clarity and detail that's what I'm looking for. My only problem with the 702's is that they can have a kind of "mid range "haze". Not a dark "veil" like Senns, or anything recessed or distant like the 770's (and I've heard of Denons), but something that makes something in the overall sound signature not as clear as I like (at least with some recordings). This makes them non-fatiguing for long periods, but I'm not fatigued easily anyway (I can listen to bright-in-your-face metal on the 225i's for hours and be just fine...and yes I can hear up to 18hz at least).
I know what you mean by "musical" yet detailed btw, it's how I would describe my Matrix M-Stage amp which is one reason it does well with the 70x series. I don't like distortion and prefer analytical over warm any day, but I also like the sound to not be dry, flat, boring, or lifeless either. To sound resolving and clear yet also emotionally engaging.
I'm also looking at the FA 003's. They are cheaper of course and said to be detailed/analytical/resolving/etc. as well. Anyone have any thoughts on those either?
Edited by Pratt - 6/25/11 at 6:59pm