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

Q701 impressions thread - Page 378

post #5656 of 7696
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasonb View Post
 

I haven't touched my Q701 in about 3 weeks now. I've been back to speakers. Even at low volume I'm enjoying the experience more.

 

Indeed, nothing beats a good 2 or 2.1 channel speaker setup, provided you have a decent room.  I am getting more used to headphones with every hour that passes wearing them, though.

post #5657 of 7696
Quote:
Originally Posted by discombob View Post
 

 

Indeed, nothing beats a good 2 or 2.1 channel speaker setup, provided you have a decent room.  I am getting more used to headphones with every hour that passes wearing them, though.

Headphones and speakers both have their place.  I wouldn't dare get rid of either pair of my 701s, but I listen on speakers much more frequently when just listening to music for pleasure. It is more engaging, you can feel the air move.  It also helps that I don't feel that I am losing much detail with my speakers compared to headphones.

post #5658 of 7696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonichedgehog360 View Post
 


Thanks! That sounds great! I actually also tried the Q 701 over a year and a half ago and so I can't really remember too many details about the experience. I think I'll go ahead and get the FiiO E07K at Sonic Electronix and use their SONICBOWL discount code to get it for $75.95.

 

And nice anime picture there, by the way! I just need to somehow get a Sonic picture drawn up by a friend or do some Photoshopping to get a AKG-i-fied Sonic for a new profile picture.

 

EDIT: Just to ask, how much of a difference in performance should I expect going from unamped to amped with a Q 701? I just sold off my O2 amp (long story) and didn't have any outboard gear to demo the K 702. It goes without saying much that if I loved this unamped, I might be floored by it when it's properly powered.


I think you may or may want to consider your purchase of choosing to underpower the Q701's. I just don't you to be like in the near future "Darn I should have saved the extra $100 and bought the ODAC". I'd like you to be happy with your purchase and not look back. 
My original setup with the AKG Q701's were the E07K and E12, I paid $200 in total. When I could have just skipped that and went straight to the ODAC/O2 which was also $200.
On a sidenote though, I keep my E07K and E12 to pair with my sony walkman. My Vmoda M100's (a much lower impedence headphone), LOVE the bass boost features. +40db basshead heaven!

I'm not going to answer specifically how much of a difference between proper/underamping, because it's up to your ears whether there's a difference or not. Although I can tell you what it sounds like to me when amping vs unamping.

Before I begin though, I'm in no way looking down on the E07K when it powers the Q701's, but I'm just being straightforward in what I found when properly amping vs underamping 

Proper Amping (ODAC/Objective 2)

-DETAILS, every reverb, every bubble of saliva from a properly recorded vocal acoustic track is heard.
-Solid hard bass, although a bit on the lean side.
-Full mids, mids are detailed, forwarded, and all the instruments actually seem to revolve around the vocals.
-Highs are less airy due to the full mids. They're more controlled and textured, if you don't like peaky highs, then the midrange warmth and extra bass will make the Q701's fairly balanced to the point of being fairly flat within a 5db range.
-The AKG Q701's are HUGE, amping the Q701's makes it seem like the drivers take up the entire headphone, the soundstage gets that much bigger. Including depth! Amping the Q701's make them much more worth it for gaming purposes. If a bullet whizzes in front of you 3m away, it will sound like a bullet came from the 4 o'clock direction and whizzes past your face to the 11 o'clock direction. (Battlefield 3)

Underamping

-The Q701's have a narrower soundstage, they actually sound fairly natural and not ultra wide compared to when amped. More like a 2 layered soundstage and a bit compressed feeling.
-Flat soundstage. See, when unamped, the soundstage has less depth, and the mids aren't as forwarded. This is actually a plus in my book, because the unforwarded mids lets the treble resonate and the brush sticks from hi hats sound much more lovelier.
-Less bass, now, I found this subjective. When it came to my salsa, jazz, electronic, rock music, the treble was too emphasized, and the lack of bass was quite underwhelmed.
When it came to my Opera, classical, acoustic music, I lost my airyness, but then I also lost a lot of soundstage depth in which was missing in nice recordings.
-Another benefit of underamping? It's not hard to do and it will save your wallet!

My opinion?

Properly amp it. All I have to say is that the soundstage and depth is so unrealistic and hard to find in other kinds of cans. Some people on this forum even say that the next reasonable upgrade from the Q701's would be the Sennheiser HD800's.

post #5659 of 7696

Just throwing this out there. Has anyone else noticed how much better the Q 701 appears to sound with crossfeed than most other headphones? As I see it from my short demo session, it seems to sound 100% neutral in outputting crossfeed processed content. With Sennheisers (HD5xx), when the channel extremes disappear in using crossfeed, the treble loses its illusion of sharpness and the veil sticks out like a sore thumb. Beyers (DTxx0) lose what little midrange intimacy they had and get a very peaky sound, clinical sound. The Shure SRH 940 I used to have would expose its midbass hole and just sound like just mids and treble with little foundation or life to the overall sound. In fact, I'm surprised that people say these AKGs have little bass, because they had a perceived better filled, smoother bass to my ears than the SRH940, at least in the overall tone.

 

Maybe it's just me and my music tastes, but I felt that with this love-hate headphone, I really love the frequency response. Maybe the sometimes disregarded wide soundstage can be attributed to the fact that since it's so neutral in a technical sense, it is supposed to use crossfeed or binaural material in order to sound natural. In either case, I really dig these headphones and I can't wait to get them in the mail tomorrow!


Edited by Sonichedgehog360 - 2/21/14 at 12:48am
post #5660 of 7696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bogatyr View Post
 

Found a way to make bumps a bit less annoying, poked a bunch of holes with a sewing needle in them to let the air out and then squeezed and broke them up with my thumbs for about half an hour. They are a lot more softer now.


Wait... the bumps.. that's not solid leather... it's air pockets?

post #5661 of 7696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nec3 View Post
 


I think you may or may want to consider your purchase of choosing to underpower the Q701's. I just don't you to be like in the near future "Darn I should have saved the extra $100 and bought the ODAC". I'd like you to be happy with your purchase and not look back. 
My original setup with the AKG Q701's were the E07K and E12, I paid $200 in total. When I could have just skipped that and went straight to the ODAC/O2 which was also $200.
On a sidenote though, I keep my E07K and E12 to pair with my sony walkman. My Vmoda M100's (a much lower impedence headphone), LOVE the bass boost features. +40db basshead heaven!

I'm not going to answer specifically how much of a difference between proper/underamping, because it's up to your ears whether there's a difference or not. Although I can tell you what it sounds like to me when amping vs unamping.

Before I begin though, I'm in no way looking down on the E07K when it powers the Q701's, but I'm just being straightforward in what I found when properly amping vs underamping 

Proper Amping (ODAC/Objective 2)

-DETAILS, every reverb, every bubble of saliva from a properly recorded vocal acoustic track is heard.
-Solid hard bass, although a bit on the lean side.
-Full mids, mids are detailed, forwarded, and all the instruments actually seem to revolve around the vocals.
-Highs are less airy due to the full mids. They're more controlled and textured, if you don't like peaky highs, then the midrange warmth and extra bass will make the Q701's fairly balanced to the point of being fairly flat within a 5db range.
-The AKG Q701's are HUGE, amping the Q701's makes it seem like the drivers take up the entire headphone, the soundstage gets that much bigger. Including depth! Amping the Q701's make them much more worth it for gaming purposes. If a bullet whizzes in front of you 3m away, it will sound like a bullet came from the 4 o'clock direction and whizzes past your face to the 11 o'clock direction. (Battlefield 3)

Underamping

-The Q701's have a narrower soundstage, they actually sound fairly natural and not ultra wide compared to when amped. More like a 2 layered soundstage and a bit compressed feeling.
-Flat soundstage. See, when unamped, the soundstage has less depth, and the mids aren't as forwarded. This is actually a plus in my book, because the unforwarded mids lets the treble resonate and the brush sticks from hi hats sound much more lovelier.
-Less bass, now, I found this subjective. When it came to my salsa, jazz, electronic, rock music, the treble was too emphasized, and the lack of bass was quite underwhelmed.
When it came to my Opera, classical, acoustic music, I lost my airyness, but then I also lost a lot of soundstage depth in which was missing in nice recordings.
-Another benefit of underamping? It's not hard to do and it will save your wallet!

My opinion?

Properly amp it. All I have to say is that the soundstage and depth is so unrealistic and hard to find in other kinds of cans. Some people on this forum even say that the next reasonable upgrade from the Q701's would be the Sennheiser HD800's.

OK. I owned the O2 twice, having built it both times. In my first go, I found amping was quite beneficial to DT990s, such as a massive extension boost (from 30 Hz to 20Hz depth) in a frequency sweep test like before. A little later on, with my second one for SRH 940s, the improvements were subtle and the bass frequencies didn't respond much to amping. I also had a HiFimeDIY Sabre USB DAC as a source in the second go which benefitted the overall system more than the O2 in the amping part of signal chain, at least to my ears. 

 

If need be, I'll build one again, but I wish it were more portable than just transportable. I'd rather have a amp/dac combo in a FiiO E17 or E07K form factor but I'm saving up for various things at the moment, so I think only an E07K fits my budget for now unless I can snag an E17 for $90 used.


Edited by Sonichedgehog360 - 2/20/14 at 8:24pm
post #5662 of 7696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonichedgehog360 View Post
 

OK. I owned the O2 twice, having built it both times. In my first go, I found amping was quite beneficial to DT990s, such as a massive extension boost (from 30 Hz to 20Hz depth) in a frequency sweep test like before. A little later on, with my second one for SRH 940s, the improvements were subtle and the bass frequencies didn't respond much to amping. I also had a HiFimeDIY Sabre USB DAC as a source in the second go which benefitted the overall system more than the O2 in the amping part of signal chain, at least to my ears. 

 

If need be, I'll build one again, but I wish it were more portable than just transportable. I'd rather have a amp/dac combo in a FiiO E17 or E07K form factor but I'm saving up for various things at the moment, so I think only an E07K fits my budget for now unless I can snag an E17 for $90 used.


I think I'm exaggurating when I mentionned the benefits of amping/underamping.

You're right, it's subtle improvements. Although I sit at the computer 7-12 hours a day when I ever get the chance. Most of those hours are spent listenning to music, and those subtle differences mean a huge difference to me.

But hey, enjoy the E07K ;)

post #5663 of 7696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nec3 View Post
 


Wait... the bumps.. that's not solid leather... it's air pockets?

 

There's foam inside those bumps, poking holes makes it easier to break them up and make them softer.

post #5664 of 7696
Quote:
Originally Posted by 62ohm View Post
 

 

This. I used to feel content with Spotify premium. But at one day, I feel like listening to Led Zeppelin again, and at that time Spotify doesn't have Led Zeppelin. So I open up my foobar and have a listen to my lossless collection. When U2's "With Or WIthout You" got randomly selected, it sounds sort of different to what I used to listen it on Spotify. Then I open Spotify again, and one conclusion was certain for me. It was easier to "get in" to the music with lossless, than 320kbps.

To compare 16/44 with 320kbps, you need to encode your own 16/44 rip into 320 Vorbis (or whatever) yourself - then you're sure to be comparing like with like.

 

When you use Spotify, you have to ask whether the master they ripped is the same master you used for your local rip. Often it is, but sometimes it's not - this explains a lot of the differences in experience on the forums. See dr.loudness-war.info for the variation between different (re)masters of the same albums.


Edited by darrenyeats - 2/21/14 at 2:49am
post #5665 of 7696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bogatyr View Post

There's foam inside those bumps, poking holes makes it easier to break them up and make them softer.
but that cheap leather is super hard on mine too, the bumps don't feel at all soft, they're just horrible hard bumps that basically have no give... Maybe indeed breaking them down by massaging them helps, but you don't massage your enemy, you destroy him.
post #5666 of 7696

after having Q701 for so long, I have decided to get it's sibling, the Q460, in green too, and maybe later in couple months down the line. maybe the kid, in ear haha

post #5667 of 7696

Can anyone tell me how the Q701 compares to the K240?

 

I've been using the K240 with my Little Dot III amp for many years now but I got bitten by the bug to upgrade again.

 

Unfortunately I can't audition the Q's so I'm hoping for some input here.

 

Will there be noticeable improvement over the 240's?

If, yes...where?

 

I'm also considering the HD600

 

 

 

Cheers

post #5668 of 7696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koukol View Post
 

Can anyone tell me how the Q701 compares to the K240?

 

I've been using the K240 with my Little Dot III amp for many years now but I got bitten by the bug to upgrade again.

 

Unfortunately I can't audition the Q's so I'm hoping for some input here.

 

Will there be noticeable improvement over the 240's?

If, yes...where?

 

I'm also considering the HD600

 

 

 

Cheers

I used the K240 for about 10 years exclusively, and another 3 after I had my K701s.  When my son destroyed the cable on the K240, I replaced it with a Q701, so now I just have Q and K 701s. The difference is very noticeable.  While the K240 is a great set of headphones, the 701s improve almost across the board. Detail, resolution, and sound staging are all much better with the 701s. Some may find the bass slightly lacking in the 701 compared to the 240, I don't. The bass is there provided the 701 is amped correctly, but it is not emphasized, and seems more accurate. I use my 701s for both listening, and composition/mixing.  Music styles range from orchestral soundtracky type stuff to Industrial and EDM, so I do love my bass, but I need it in proper proportion. I think the Q701 is better in that regard, but a lot of others prefer some bass emphasis and the K240 has a little bit (not too much) of that.

post #5669 of 7696
Sonic,
Ah, I guess they improved on the amp section from the E7 to the E07k. Sorry about the mis-info. Still... The E07k is designed as a kind of all-arounder, but still not going to have amping at an E12, E9, or better level. I was alluding that it won't be a bad place to start, and a good portable, but something like a Schiit Vali would probably have better synergy and bring out the best of the Q701.

I liked how Nec3 set expectations for what amping does, it sounds good straight out of most players, but power-amping brings clarity and finesse that are small changes which may bring big value. I really like messing around with Tube hybrids, I use a simple Class A tube amp with 6DJ8-type tubes, and they make nice subtle changes to other aspects besides just Frequency (so do more than EQ), I have ones that make music more fluid and euphoric, expand soundstage, or make bass more meaty... Just an idea. I have an E12 for simplicity & portability.

Quote:
Originally Posted by noobandroid View Post

after having Q701 for so long, I have decided to get it's sibling, the Q460, in green too, and maybe later in couple months down the line. maybe the kid, in ear haha

Let us know how these sound! Maybe link to your review? Thanks!
post #5670 of 7696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iostream View Post
 

I used the K240 for about 10 years exclusively, and another 3 after I had my K701s.  When my son destroyed the cable on the K240, I replaced it with a Q701, so now I just have Q and K 701s. The difference is very noticeable.  While the K240 is a great set of headphones, the 701s improve almost across the board. Detail, resolution, and sound staging are all much better with the 701s. Some may find the bass slightly lacking in the 701 compared to the 240, I don't. The bass is there provided the 701 is amped correctly, but it is not emphasized, and seems more accurate. I use my 701s for both listening, and composition/mixing.  Music styles range from orchestral soundtracky type stuff to Industrial and EDM, so I do love my bass, but I need it in proper proportion. I think the Q701 is better in that regard, but a lot of others prefer some bass emphasis and the K240 has a little bit (not too much) of that.

As a K701 and K240s owner I agree with these findings.  The K701 scales up much more with better amplification than the K240s.  The K240s is more "curvey" in its freq response, with more bass bloat and more energetic mids.  The K701 is overall more dry and flat sounding across the spectrum, although with the right amp bass is there in spades.  Its also brutal with the wrong amp.  I have plugged into a couple amps (millet hybrid, M^3) that were purpose built/tweeked for HD650 synnergy and it was a bad pairing, that excited the weird upper midrange harmonic content so many complain about in the K701.   Conversely the K240s does not have these characteristics and I think sounds really good no matter what amp I plug it into.   I think in a certain sense the K240s is a more "fun" headphone... just plug it in and groove out to the tunes.

 

The Q701 I think addresses  much of the "fun factor" with its more bass heavy colored presentation.  Its just not as dry and analytical as the K701... and because of this I think its not as amp finicky as the K model. 

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