Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › AKG Q701 Vs. AKG K702 | Comparison & Review
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AKG Q701 Vs. AKG K702 | Comparison & Review - Page 26

post #376 of 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ahzari View Post

The Q and the K sound different. The Q fills in that lacking midrange and bass warmth - I found it to be a excellent headphone (liked it better than the HD650 - haven't tried the HD600).

 

As far as the sound card I looked into it - it might suffice but if you can get your hands on a dedicated headphone amplifier for testing purposes there is a nice chance you'll hear something you like with the dedicated amp compared with the sound card.

Agree

post #377 of 391

Disagree... not sure if you guys may be listening to some early run, low serial K702's, but I A/B the Q701 and K702 extensively today and I heard absolutely no difference whatsoever. And my K702 have hundreds of hours of "burn in" time while the Q701 has about 5 hours on it. So maybe I need 100 hours to hear some kind of change??

 

Such is head-fi. rolleyes.gif


Edited by dxanex - 5/22/13 at 9:02pm
post #378 of 391
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dxanex View Post

Disagree... not sure if you guys may be listening to some early run, low serial K702's, but I A/B the Q701 and K702 extensively today and I heard absolutely no difference whatsoever.

 

And my K702 have hundreds of hours of "burn in" time while the Q701 has about 5 hours on it. So maybe I need 100 hours to hear some kind of change??

 

Such is head-fi. rolleyes.gif

 

 

I believe you.

 

The pair I compared were clearly different though, way outside the realm of placebo.  You could spot the difference immediately.  I have no clue why, but they were. 

Other pairs seem to sound the same though.  It's a mystery that will probably never be solved.
 

I put very little stock in "burn-in."

post #379 of 391

The K702 are by far my favorite headphone, and I've owned them with the K701 and listened extensively to both as an avid and interested fan.  They are definitely different headphones.  (My amp used to test the cans was the Glow Audio One).

 

The K701's flaws (to me) were uncomfortably soft and fuzzy(!) pads, too tight of a head clamp (at least in the pair I owned), very light bass impact and a distant vocal presentation - i.e., the vocalist sounded farther away than the rest of the band.  The K702 pair I owned, at the same time, addressed all of those four issues admirably, and I sold the K701.  (Importantly, the K70x series' classic soundstage and airy treble presentation were the same in both units, and yes, I found that with 'around 100 hours' of burn-in, the sound was less harsh and 'plasticky' and mellowed out. Newly out of the box, both pair were unlistenable).

 

Needless to say, I am really looking forward to my new pair of Q701s!  The T1 is on my wishlist for a K702 replacement, but until I have that kind of cash to blow (in one place!), the Q701 sound like a great K702 replacement / improvement!  And who knows, I may like it even better than the T1, thus a whole lot of money saved for beer!

 

Thanks so much chicolom for this awesome post!!!!  :beerchug:

post #380 of 391
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kouzelna View Post
 

The K702 are by far my favorite headphone, and I've owned them with the K701 and listened extensively to both as an avid and interested fan.  They are definitely different headphones.  (My amp used to test the cans was the Glow Audio One).

 

The K701's flaws (to me) were uncomfortably soft and fuzzy(!) pads, too tight of a head clamp (at least in the pair I owned), very light bass impact and a distant vocal presentation - i.e., the vocalist sounded farther away than the rest of the band.  The K702 pair I owned, at the same time, addressed all of those four issues admirably, and I sold the K701.  (Importantly, the K70x series' classic soundstage and airy treble presentation were the same in both units, and yes, I found that with 'around 100 hours' of burn-in, the sound was less harsh and 'plasticky' and mellowed out. Newly out of the box, both pair were unlistenable).

 

Needless to say, I am really looking forward to my new pair of Q701s!  The T1 is on my wishlist for a K702 replacement, but until I have that kind of cash to blow (in one place!), the Q701 sound like a great K702 replacement / improvement!  And who knows, I may like it even better than the T1, thus a whole lot of money saved for beer!

 

Thanks so much chicolom for this awesome post!!!!  :beerchug:

 

 

Interesting that your K701 had less bass than your K702.


Edited by chicolom - 9/18/13 at 3:55am
post #381 of 391

Huh.  I thought that was pretty much established knowledge with both K70x fans and haters alike.  Yes, I found the K702 improved both the vocal presentation (moved it much closer) and the bass (made it more audible, period) over the K701.  All things considered, I would be perfectly happy using the K702 as my primary cans for the rest of my life.  However, I'm hip on trying both the Q701 and (when I'm rich and famous) the T1 when I get the chance.

post #382 of 391
Thread Starter 

Err, I meant: "Interesting that the K701 has less bass than the K702." 

 

I thought the K702 was supposed to be the bass-light one of the bunch.  I've only heard one K701 though and I didn't compare it to my Q701.

 

If you for sure want more bass and warmth, you may want to check out the K712 pro.  That's what I'm using now.  It's warmer and bassier than the Q701 (and the Q701 was warmer and bassier than the K702 I tried in this comparison).

post #383 of 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kouzelna View Post
 

Huh.  I thought that was pretty much established knowledge with both K70x fans and haters alike.

 

 

Really? I thought the two were identical. The only difference is between older 7-bump headbands vs 8-bump, which supposedly sound more like the Q701's.

post #384 of 391

No offence meant whatsoever, but most (if not all) of the reviews I've read here where the member thought the two were identical, came from people who weren't really fans of the K series in the first place.  In other words, not avid listeners of the headphones in general.

 

The K702 is my favorite headphone, of some 20 or so $600 and under cans I've tried, including the HD650 and 600, some really high end AT cans, the DT880, D2000 Lawton Mod, etc.  It's not like it "blows those others away," but the sound signature of the cans really suit my tastes and needs as to musical styles.

 

I have owned and compared both the K701 and K702 side by side, including swapping pads.  (The swap made both sound worse).  I assure you they are different.  The K702 is simply everything the K701 is, but improved.  They are more comfortable in that (at least with my pairs) they have a better head clamp, (looser), and far more comfortable pads.  And soundwise, the bring the vocals forward to match the distance of the rest of the instruments (the K701s make the vocals sound too distant), and they improve the bass presentation, all-important on these cans as we all know.  These were both very necessary and welcome improvements.  At one point I had simply given up on the K701s, which led me to buy and try all these other great mid-end cans.  Always disappointed, when I finally gave the K702s a try, I knew I had found my babies, and I sold everything else (including the K701, gladly).

 

They are obviously brother and sister.  If you don't like one, you won't like the other either.  But the differences are far more than slight or subtle.  They are noticeable even to a casual listener.  They are obviously different headphones.

 

I have no doubt whatsoever that the K712 is simply an even better improvement, most especially in the bass response.  However, given their $450 price in the USA compared to the $225 price of the Q701, which I hear are even an improvement on the K702 bass response, I'm going with the Qs for now.


Edited by Kouzelna - 9/19/13 at 12:05am
post #385 of 391

I owned a pair of K702 and K701 that were produced at very similar times and I could not find any audible differences. I sold the K702, and later compared the K701 to a pair of Q701 and found they did sound different in a few noticeable ways. 

post #386 of 391
Huh. Now you have me wondering if controlled substances might have been involved in my particular listening test? All the disembodied voices around me agreed with my, I mean our, findings...

But really, I thought the difference was profound enough to really celebrate. It's like after all my searching, I found the K701 with the bass extension and the midrange vocal presentation I was dreaming about. :-) the K702.

I greatly look forward to the Q 701.
post #387 of 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicolom View Post
 

Err, I meant: "Interesting that the K701 has less bass than the K702." 

 

I thought the K702 was supposed to be the bass-light one of the bunch.  I've only heard one K701 though and I didn't compare it to my Q701.

 

If you for sure want more bass and warmth, you may want to check out the K712 pro.  That's what I'm using now.  It's warmer and bassier than the Q701 (and the Q701 was warmer and bassier than the K702 I tried in this comparison).

WTF... someone has to be wrong here, what's the deal? 

post #388 of 391

 I have had my k701s for a long time and have put thousands of hours on them. I have to say that they do take a very long time to settle in fully. They also need a powerful amp to get the best out of them. The bass performance also improves with a more powerful amp.  While my lcd2 v2 has more powerful bass the bass from the k701 is very well defined. I also found that as I progressed to more powerful amps that k701 broke in further. I thought that was rather unique as far as headphones go because even after I had over a thousand hours on the headphone they broke in even further when I paired it with a more powerful amp. I am presently using a recapped concept 16.5 vintage receiver and the k701s sound better than they ever sounded with any headphone amp that I have heard my k701s with. I guess horsepower does make a difference with the k701s.

post #389 of 391

I know this is way off topic, but what do you guys do for your leather headbands? My Q701's leather band is now approaching 4 years and it hasn't been cared for once. I was told to apply some cetaphil moisturizing lotion on it so I did (I know.. weird). But just wanted to know what others have been doing. Lexol? (haha, Meguiares? Mothers????)

post #390 of 391
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kwangsun View Post
 

I know this is way off topic, but what do you guys do for your leather headbands? My Q701's leather band is now approaching 4 years and it hasn't been cared for once. I was told to apply some cetaphil moisturizing lotion on it so I did (I know.. weird). But just wanted to know what others have been doing. Lexol? (haha, Meguiares? Mothers????)

 

Hmm...I assume some kind of leather lotion would be good.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › AKG Q701 Vs. AKG K702 | Comparison & Review