Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › AKG K702 vs AKG K240 MKII
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AKG K702 vs AKG K240 MKII

post #1 of 10
Thread Starter 
Hi I'm new here and I was wondering what headphones would be better to get. I am debating between the AKG K702s or the K240s MKII can you guys that have had either pair give me the pros and cons of the headphones thank you
post #2 of 10

Heya,

 

The K240 MKII is a lot like the K702, but a bit more bassy, it's only semi-open, and over $100 less.

 

What's your budget?

 

Very best,

post #3 of 10

The K-702 are the extended version, but maybe you should get them both. You'll need a good DAC and hps amp as well.

post #4 of 10
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acix View Post

The K-702 are the extended version, but maybe you should get them both. You'll need a good DAC and hps amp as well.


I was thinking about getting the 702s now and in like a month get the 240 MKIIs
post #5 of 10


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Acix View Post

The K-702 are the extended version, but maybe you should get them both. You'll need a good DAC and hps amp as well.



I listened to the AKG 240 MKII at a local shop last week. The comfort is impressive, but the frequency response is all over the place. The mid-bass is around 10dBr, it goes down from there to around 5khz and then spikes from there to the high frequencies. 

 

Considering that the 702 have a flatter frequency response, I am curious as to why someone would want to buy both of them. Could you elaborate on your recommendation?

 

Right now the only reason I can see is : Using the 240 to listen to Electronic music while keeping the 702 for everything else. Is that close to what you had in mind?

post #6 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by KimLaroux View Post


 



I listened to the AKG 240 MKII at a local shop last week. The comfort is impressive, but the frequency response is all over the place. The mid-bass is around 10dBr, it goes down from there to around 5khz and then spikes from there to the high frequencies. 

 

Considering that the 702 have a flatter frequency response, I am curious as to why someone would want to buy both of them. Could you elaborate on your recommendation?

 

Right now the only reason I can see is : Using the 240 to listen to Electronic music while keeping the 702 for everything else. Is that close to what you had in mind?


At the beginning I thought you got confused with the K271. But I've checked the headroom graphs and you're right they do boost the new MKll with 8-to-9db on the 100hz.  Sorry man, is very strange for me... this is not who I remember the 240MKll. The sound that you've described at first remind me the old K-240 studio. Also the K271 have a strong lower mid presentation. But now maybe is time for you to check out the K-702.

 

BTW, for electronic music I prefer the K702.

 


Edited by Acix - 8/27/11 at 4:02pm
post #7 of 10

Both have very different presentations and signatures. They sound nothing alike.

 

The K702 having a pretty bright signature with the treble being smooth on good material and downright strident on modern music. The midrange is slightly recessed but detailed and resolving and seems to make guitars and acoustic guitars stand out more than vocals.The bass is very tight and controlled but does not offer much in terms of impact or deep bass as it rolls off early. The K702 soundstage is very wide but does not have much height or depth. The K702 has very nice transients and nice attack, but not fantastic or top notch. Now the K702 does require a bit more power than it's impedance would suggest. I nice solid sate amp with about a voltage swing of 20V to 30V would be just fine for it.

 

Now the K240 is the very opposite. It have a smoother and I'd say darker signature. Dark might not be appropriate but I felt the K240 sounded very similar to a HD600 or even a HD650. The treble is smooth and not that articulated with not much extension (rolls off) and there is no peaks. The midrange is a ton fuller than the K702's but not nearly as resolving or detailed. I'd say it's a tubey, slurred type of midrange where it emphasizes voices and guitars equally. The bass is entirely different from the K702. It's punchy yet not extended nor very tight. It's can be somewhat flabby or ill defined on bass heavy music but anything with less bass sounds great. It's just that if you pump something bass heavy, such as rap, the bass becomes sloppy. The soundstage is quite small and doesn't offer anything special in terms of depth, width, or height. I will say it has nice separation of instruments but not great as they can blend together. As for powering it you won't need much. Even a simple Bravo amp would be more than enough for it.

 

Hope this little comparison helps you out a bit ;)

post #8 of 10
a friend of mine just got k702 the other day and love them and that's been raving about them so I thought about giving them a listen. I went to audition them but the only thing in stock were the K240 studios which sounded OK but then I put on some beyerdynamic 770´s and I like the sound of a whole lot more. now I'm actually looking at a pair of 990 pros are premiums instead as I typically like open headphones
Edited by Phishin Phool - 9/19/13 at 7:26pm
post #9 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phishin Phool View Post

a friend of mine just got 70 Tuesday other day and love them and that's been raving about them so I thought about giving them a listen. I went to audition them but the only thing in stock were the K240 studios which sounded OK but then I put on some beyerdynamic 770´s and I like the sound of a whole lot more. now I'm actually looking at a pair of 990 pros are premiums instead as I typically like open headphones

 

 

You mean T70, right?

post #10 of 10
oops I meant k702 damn autocorrect typing on phone. above fixed
Edited by Phishin Phool - 9/19/13 at 7:27pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › AKG K702 vs AKG K240 MKII