or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Q701 impressions thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Q701 impressions thread - Page 302

post #4516 of 9507

Maybe akg realizes that head-fi'ers like to crack their cans open and see how they can tweak the sound haha.

Either way, you shouldn't feel restrained to listen to it in any one way. Its all personal preference maan.

post #4517 of 9507
Quote:
Originally Posted by 62ohm View Post
 

 

The reason why I am still yet to mod my Q701. I kind of have the impression that the 'thing' that supresses the bass of the Q701 is there in the first place because AKG want them to be. I don't know the real objective of AKG by doing it, but I believe they are there for a reason. After all, AKG and any other company does have their own R&D department and I believe no parts in the cans are futile.

 

I may not really like the underperforming bass of the Q701, but I believe that's how AKG meant it to be and the solution of it is not to mod it, but to get a complementary cans. But then again, each to their own.


Do you really believe the bass is underperforming?  See, I'd be very hesitant making this statement as the measurements don't show any lack of bass, well above 60hz anyhow...   If you said the same about the K701, then ok I couldn't really argue the fact that they're indeed shown to have a mid/treble emphasis, but how do you make the leap for the Q701?  If you said that they lacked bass extension, ok...  They definitely roll off.  But I'm still hesitant in calling them bass light and definitely underperforming...   I think they might very well be performing as they should, but people just like and are used to more bass.  Again, where's the reference? 

 

So maybe I'm just not looking at this the right way.  When people say they lack bass or are underperforming... Are we purely talking about extension here or quantity?  Because it looks like to really improve them, as said, you'd need to increase the bass extension <60Hz, but at the same time, reduce the bass from around 80-300Hz, which might very well make them sound worse to many...   I don't know... lol

post #4518 of 9507
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasonb View Post
 

It's definitely more neutral AFTER the mod. I enjoy them more now after the mod. The bass is very pleasant. 

 

I agree with this. Now it's a much better all-around for movies/gaming and music. It was good before but now it's even better. These days my HD-650 doesn't get much use at all.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by GirgleMirt View Post
 

 

Measurements would disagree with you (that they are more neutral after the mod), if the mod indeed adds bass:

 

 

 

Both graphs already shows emphasized bass...

 

Ok, but when you put them on do you hear emphasized bass? No you don't. If anyone went around saying the Q701 has emphasized bass, they'd be called nuts. I doubt anyone would  think this. If you read the previous posts on the mod you'll find that it's mostly in the low bass areas, which would make it more neutral.

 

The extra low bass now is nice and I no longer want to get out my HD-650 for movies/gaming. Of course feel free to pull up a graph for that one too :tongue_smile:

 

BTW the K712 graph is good for a laugh! Yet when you compare the modded Q701 to the K712 with your own ears there is not much of a difference. K712 is a little warmer/fuller sounding but not a huge difference (for me).

 

Not sure if you knew this, but the bass mod doesn't boost the bass by that much. It's totally worth it though.


Edited by tdockweiler - 11/4/13 at 7:37pm
post #4519 of 9507

I just went to audition the HD800 today because I heard its very similar to the Q701. Boy was I dissapointed... for something that cost 4-5x the price of Q701 I expected at least 2x the difference, not even close. I might say the HD800 sounds a BIT fuller, but the price-to-performance ratio is ridiculously low when compared to the Q701 (and my pair is not even properly burned-in yet lol...)

 

The Q701/K701 is truly an amazing pair of headphone for the price!


Edited by gilsont - 11/4/13 at 7:30pm
post #4520 of 9507
Quote:
Originally Posted by gilsont View Post
 

I just went to audition the HD800 today because I heard its very similar to the Q701. Boy was I dissapointed... for something that cost 4-5x the price of Q701 I expected at least 2x the difference, not even close. I might say the HD800 sounds a BIT fuller, but the price-to-performance ratio is ridiculously low when compared to the Q701 (and my pair is not even properly burned-in yet lol...)

 

The Q701/K701 is truly an amazing pair of headphone for the price!

 

What was source and amp for both Q701 and HD800?

post #4521 of 9507
Thread Starter 

Yeah...don't you need a $2000 amp to hear the HD-800 like it's SUPPOSED to sound :biggrin:

post #4522 of 9507
Quote:
Originally Posted by gilsont View Post
 

I just went to audition the HD800 today because I heard its very similar to the Q701. Boy was I dissapointed... for something that cost 4-5x the price of Q701 I expected at least 2x the difference, not even close. I might say the HD800 sounds a BIT fuller, but the price-to-performance ratio is ridiculously low when compared to the Q701 (and my pair is not even properly burned-in yet lol...)

 

The Q701/K701 is truly an amazing pair of headphone for the price!

I am sitting here listening to both right now off my WA22 for the past 2 hours... Still too early to compare.  A few more tracks to go.

post #4523 of 9507
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooko View Post
 

 

What was source and amp for both Q701 and HD800?

For my Q701, I use it with my Fiio E17.

 

For the HD800, I used it with the TEAC HA501.

Quote:
Originally Posted by koiloco View Post
 

I am sitting here listening to both right now off my WA22 for the past 2 hours... Still too early to compare.  A few more tracks to go.

Please let me know what you think, I'm really interested to hear other people's thoughts on this =)

post #4524 of 9507
Quote:
Originally Posted by GirgleMirt View Post
 

Is it the same US majority that believes in angels, ghosts, and all sorts of other nonsense?  :p   Not sure which is your first post...    But yeah, the point is that some find the Q701's bass just fine.   And unless you get acquainted and accustomed to their 'stock' sound, you'll never know if you're one of those people. If you're used to excessive bass coming from other headphones, for sure you'll find the Q701s lacking in bass.  Doesn't mean that after a while with them you wouldn't learn to appreciate them as they are.  And again, if you mod them right away, you miss out on that opportunity...  Unless you reverted to stock, you'd never know if you'd have preferred the stock.

 

But anyhow he's not going to mod them for now so I win and you lose.  :tongue:  ;)

 

And btw, I wouldn't disagree with you that they might be a tad bit lean on the bass side.  But my question is this.  How do you know that they are indeed lean?  what is your reference?  I guess you could always listen to tones, but then again, that would be subjective as it would be as it sounds to you...  So again, what is the reference to state that stock they might be a tad bit lean on bass?  "a little rolled off and not neutral" as you've stated?  Other headphones?  Recordings?  Your ears?

 

If you like winning that much, then sure you won...And I do believe in angels and ghosts.

post #4525 of 9507
Quote:
Originally Posted by GirgleMirt View Post

Measurements would disagree with you (that they are more neutral after the mod), if the mod indeed adds bass:





Both graphs already shows emphasized bass... 

I'm not sure if I'm understanding correctly, but are you suggesting that a flat line in the freq graph would be neutral? I was under the impression that a flat line would be undesirable because it doesn't correct for the effects of the ear canal... But I could be making this up? rolleyes.gif
post #4526 of 9507
Quote:
Originally Posted by manbear View Post

I'm not sure if I'm understanding correctly, but are you suggesting that a flat line in the freq graph would be neutral? I was under the impression that a flat line would be undesirable because it doesn't correct for the effects of the ear canal... But I could be making this up? rolleyes.gif

It depends if the graph is corrected or not. If it's not, you are absolutely right, but I don't think we got that information with those graphs.
post #4527 of 9507
Quote:
Originally Posted by GirgleMirt View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasonb View Post
 

It's definitely more neutral AFTER the mod. I enjoy them more now after the mod. The bass is very pleasant. 

 

Measurements would disagree with you (that they are more neutral after the mod), if the mod indeed adds bass:

 

 

Both graphs already shows emphasized bass...  Now you can claim that it sounds more neutral to you, but when you're objectively stating that the mod makes it more neutral, and at the same time claim that it adds bass, I don't know but that seems self-contradictory.  Unless the mod only adds bass extension and doesn't affect >60Hz, adding bass in the 60-300Hz region will create more bass emphasis, which would not be more neutral...

 

 

 

Without a graph of the modded sound using graphs to discuss anything is immaterial. However, if the mod increases bass it's unlikely the added bass will "level" out the bass response to make it more neutral like an LCD-2 for example. The drop off in the bass is typical of a dynamic driver. 

 

To my ears the mod made the headphones less neutral overall. I was comparing it to a pair of Mad Dogs I have on hand, which I do consider to be a fairly neutral headphone.

post #4528 of 9507
Quote:
Originally Posted by gilsont View Post
 

I just went to audition the HD800 today because I heard its very similar to the Q701. Boy was I dissapointed... for something that cost 4-5x the price of Q701 I expected at least 2x the difference, not even close. I might say the HD800 sounds a BIT fuller, but the price-to-performance ratio is ridiculously low when compared to the Q701 (and my pair is not even properly burned-in yet lol...)

 

The Q701/K701 is truly an amazing pair of headphone for the price!

 

How long did you get to audition them?


What else was disappointing? How did you find the imaging, soundstage, speed, genre bandwidth and all that stuff?

post #4529 of 9507
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saren View Post
 

 

How long did you get to audition them?


What else was disappointing? How did you find the imaging, soundstage, speed, genre bandwidth and all that stuff?

I auditioned them for about 20 minutes through the songs I know very well.

 

I am not going to pretend I know the audiophile terminologies very well, so I'll just explain what I felt about it.

 

First, it didn't "wow" me. I expected a headphone with a price that high coupled with an amplifier that was so expensive would simply amaze me and open my eyes. It did not do that for me.

When I first listened from Bose QC2 and compared it to the AKG K167, the "wow" factor was instanteous. There was no excuse, there was no mistake, I was instantly impressed. I didn't have to close my eyes, I didn't have to audition them at the most comfortable environment, the difference in sound quality was quite evident. The jump from the Q701 and HD800 just didn't do that for me.

 

Second, I love instrument separation and soundstage in my headphones. I used to play in bands and what was crucial about band setting was distinguishing each other's instruments, especially if you have two overdrive/distortion guitars and a bass player that likes his bass grainy. My ears develop to a point where I can imagine the instruments really well in my head. If not, I can always tweak it to make sure everything is separated and clear, and mostly, precise. The Q701 for me was a little lacking in instrument separation, and I heard amazing things about the clarity of instrument separation from the HD800. So when I auditioned the HD800 to my favorite songs, I just imagined I could hear a lot of differences, and to my honest listening ability, there was not a whole of differences.

 

Third, was the part where I talked about, I could hear the HD800 was a BIT fuller, but not THAT much compared to the Q701. In that instance, I meant, the HD800 add a bit more bass, a bit more mid, so the entire song seems to come alive just a BIT more than the Q701, where the Q701 sounded more withdrawn. Again, a little difference, but not much.

 

Lastly, the price-to-performance ratio was pretty much a summary of all of the above. With the jump from QC2 to K167, the price-to-performance ratio was quite amazing. They are both valued at similar prices yet, one of the cans outperformed the other by a huge margain. Of course, one could make the argument that the QC2 was a poor can to begin with, but again, to my first point, it was quite evident there was a big leap.

 

Hopefully all of that makes sense.

Please do not get me wrong head-fi community, I am not bashing the HD800 in any regards, of course I enjoyed the sound quality of the HD800, but I guess I am just saying the Q701 is such a bang-for-the-buck kind of headphone.

post #4530 of 9507
I really appreciated your honest opinion.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Q701 impressions thread