Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › AKG K702 65th Anniversary Edition
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AKG K702 65th Anniversary Edition - Page 75

post #1111 of 3188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Lust Envy View Post

http://www.ebay.com/itm/190579040573?ssPageName=STRK:MEBOFFX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1427.l2649

Figured it'd be easier to have a spare cable to keep connected to my Compass 2, while the stock cable stays on my receiver. It gets old constantly unplugging betweern the two.

Anything to justify spending $40 on a cable. rolleyes.gif

Thinking about it...

 

Ooh, sweet, thanks for sharing that!  I'm very strongly considering getting a marantz receiver for my non-chat gaming and movie watching, but I found out last night that the Annies stock cable is a wee-bit short going from my current receiver to the couch, so it dangles a bit in front of the TV.  This will be exactly what I'd need to get some additional length in the cable!

post #1112 of 3188
Just make sure you tell him you want a longer cable. I think the base listing is for a 10ft cable, which I think is the stock cable's length.

I retracted my offer for a 6ft cable... I think it is best to keep it long, unless you dont mind using an extension.

I have a female coupler and a 3.5mm male/male mediabridge cable I use for really long runs.

Couplers to me make more sense than buying a cable with a female end.
post #1113 of 3188

Will do.  I probably only need a few more feet.  Is there a max recommended length for headphone cables, though?  Like would signal strength start to drop or even extra delay come into play at some point?

post #1114 of 3188
Not sure. I've only had one instance where I could hear a signal degrade, but it was with a 25ft rca cable. I think the cable was shoddy to begin with.

Not sure how far you are, but I doubt something like a 15ft cable would noticeably lose sound quality over a 10ft one. Barring slight differences in a cable's sound (if you believe in that), I think you're safe. Personally, I did hear a slight difference when I used the Mediabridge cable to replace the stock one on the Slyr. Might be an impedance thing though. I thought the stock one was better suited. The Mediabridge one was slightly brighter. It was miniscule, but I did hear it.
Edited by Mad Lust Envy - 2/2/13 at 10:53pm
post #1115 of 3188
Quote:
Originally Posted by imackler View Post

Any portable amps you've been using with this? I'm kind of tempted but I'll only funds left to use one amp to power HD600, HD650, DT770 and the Annie between my office and home. So it has to be portable..

 

I'm using E17 in my desktop setting and it works very well with my annies. In portable settings I've only used E17 with my K550s. Works nicely and I think E17 is very good and versatile product. If you are interested you should keep your eyes on the upcoming E18. It should have improved android (flac) support. Recently bought Aune T1, but with 6922EH tube I didn't find it to be any major improvement over E17. Need to find the right tube for my needs I guess.

post #1116 of 3188
Quote:
Originally Posted by talisman42 View Post

 

When I had the Q701 and Sr325is, I felt there were similarities (not same). The K702 Annies are an even bigger departure from the Grado sound. If anything, I find myself splitting hears between the Annies and the HD650. I do like the Grado sound, but these days, I wear the annies almost exclusively. I do like to switch them up from time to time though. I really like the SR325is.


Oh wow, no way. Guess my memories worse than I thought. I just recalled the grado being slightly bassier than the K701 and a tad brighter.

post #1117 of 3188
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2enty3 View Post


Oh wow, no way. Guess my memories worse than I thought. I just recalled the grado being slightly bassier than the K701 and a tad brighter.

 

Well, this is also going by my memory, too :)  - but I agree that the grado could be slightly bassier and brighter than the K701.

post #1118 of 3188
Quote:
Originally Posted by imackler View Post

I posted this in the deal thread but thought there might be followers here interested. RazorDogAudio has the K702 65th Anniversary for $399 after coupon code RazorDog100. http://www.razordogaudio.com/products/akg-k702-65th-anniversary-limited-edition-headphone

 

I got mine from ProAudioStar on ebay for $375 back in December, so you may be able to find it cheaper. I used the "make an offer" feature on the listing. 

post #1119 of 3188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlsan View Post

 

I got mine from ProAudioStar on ebay for $375 back in December, so you may be able to find it cheaper. I used the "make an offer" feature on the listing. 


Just for information, the lowest prices here in Sweden:

 

- k702 65 Anniversary: $790

- k702: $420

- k701: $270

post #1120 of 3188
Quote:
Originally Posted by muxamed View Post


Just for information, the lowest prices here in Sweden:

 

- k702 65 Anniversary: $790

...

that is just insane blink.gif.

post #1121 of 3188
Quote:
Originally Posted by geetarman49 View Post

that is just insane blink.gif.

Artificial price inflation to keep the sense of exclusivity up.

post #1122 of 3188

Just received my pair last Friday. I let them burn in for ~50 hours. SN #740.

 

The K701 was my favorite headphone, I've owned two pairs to date. I can still distinctly remember how they sound considering how much head-time I put on them. In fact, in certain passages in my favorite songs there are noticeable differences. Soundstage is more cohesive, but narrower. Some people disliked the stretched-out soundstage but I actually preferred it that way. The presence boost in the highs seems to have been tweaked- the highs seem to have taken a slight step back. It's smoother and less fatiguing now, but seems to have lost some sparkle/detail. Again, this might appease the more neutral camp. And finally due to the increased bass presence the lower-mid instrument separation isn't as clear.

 

These are pre-burnin impressions, of course. So far I'm really liking these, at least as much as the K701 and SRH1840s. This one's definitely a keeper for improved comfort/styling, and out of my respect for the K701. To be frank, though, I'll have to take the non-FOTM side of this thread. Not bashing anyone's impressions, but as I don't listen to bassy songs I'm not as wow'ed by the bass presence (although it is a nice plus). Everything else seems... very similar. If anything, the K702/65 is a gentleman's version of the K701- everything sounds more "polite." I actually liked the K701 with its harsh grainy treble, stretched-out soundstage, and deep, restrained bass.

 

TL;DR: I like the Annies, but ambivalent about the changes.


Edited by viralcow - 2/4/13 at 4:25pm
post #1123 of 3188
Quote:
Originally Posted by viralcow View Post

Just received my pair last Friday. I let them burn in for ~50 hours. SN #740.

 

The K701 was my favorite headphone, I've owned two pairs to date. I can still distinctly remember how they sound considering how much head-time I put on them. In fact, in certain passages in my favorite songs there are noticeable differences. Soundstage is more cohesive, but narrower. Some people disliked the stretched-out soundstage but I actually preferred it that way. The presence boost in the highs seems to have been tweaked- the highs seem to have taken a slight step back. It's smoother and less fatiguing now, but seems to have lost some sparkle/detail. Again, this might appease the more neutral camp. And finally due to the increased bass presence the lower-mid instrument separation isn't as clear.

 

These are pre-burnin impressions, of course. So far I'm really liking these, at least as much as the K701 and SRH1840s. This one's definitely a keeper for improved comfort/styling, and out of my respect for the K701. To be frank, though, I'll have to take the non-FOTM side of this thread. Not bashing anyone's impressions, but as I don't listen to bassy songs I'm not as wow'ed by the bass presence (although it is a nice plus). Everything else seems... very similar. If anything, the K702/65 is a gentleman's version of the K701- everything sounds more "polite." I actually liked the K701 with its harsh grainy treble, stretched-out soundstage, and deep, restrained bass.

 

TL;DR: I like the Annies, but ambivalent about the changes.

 

Thanks for the mini-review. I like comments like this and this is kind of what I expected from the 65th. I figured the changes would not be for everyone.

 

Except for low bass extension, I do feel like the Q701 I have (with my setup) is pretty dang close to being neutral. With good music nothing stick out too much.

 

It sounds like the Q701 is like a perfect balance of the K701 and 65th edition's sound signature. That's assuming everyone gets a Q701 that's warmer than the K701/K702.

 

I don't think I would require less treble than what my Q701 has. The Q701's treble is perfect as it is. The Q701 DID fix the minor issues I had with the K702/K701.

 

I don't find the Q701 "polite", but it's not as unforgiving as the K702, DT-880 or KRKs. I'd still like to hear the 65th eventually.

 

The problem with making the Q701 even warmer is that it fools your brain into thinking the soundstage size has shrunk (the HD-650 does this to me sometimes). Sometimes this is ok, but it depends again on preferences. Then you have people thinking they're less accurate or more muffled sounding with the wrong setup.

 

Have you tried the Q701 yet? If not maybe you'd prefer that to the 65th? It's always possible.

 

There is also the K601 that's warmer than the K701 (IMO), but not the Q701.

post #1124 of 3188

Comparing my Q701 with the K702 Anni, I find them to have a lot in common, but, as has been noted, the Anni's have more bass extension, fuller bass and bass impact. I also find the Anni's to be a bit more detailed, and generally have a better SQ. But all of this, except for the bottom end, is really minor. I posted my comparisons in another forum earlier, where I thought the difference was only that the Q701 were 95% of the Anni's, but its probably closer to 90%. Still, considering the price difference, that makes the Q701's quite a bargain.

 

I should add that I was never a big fan of the K701 and K702, yes they were neutral or close to neutral, but they were also too bass light. The Q701, to my ears anyway, makes up for it with a better bass response, and the K702 Anniversary goes further with a richer bottom end and slightly better sound in general.

 

Just my comparisons.


Edited by Carlsan - 2/4/13 at 5:52pm
post #1125 of 3188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlsan View Post

Comparing my Q701 with the K702 Anni, I find them to have a lot in common, but, as has been noted, the Anni's have more bass extension, fuller bass and bass impact. I also find the Anni's to be a bit more detailed, and generally have a better SQ. But all of this, except for the bottom end, is really minor. I posted my comparisons in another forum earlier, where I thought the difference was only that the Q701 were 95% of the Anni's, but its probably closer to 90%. Still, considering the price difference, that makes the Q701's quite a bargain.

 

I should add that I was never a big fan of the K701 and K702, yes they were neutral or close to neutral, but they were also too bass light. The Q701, to my ears anyway, makes up for it with a better bass response, and the K702 Anniversary goes further with a richer bottom end and slightly better sound in general.

 

Just my comparisons.

 

Would you say it's redundant to own both the Q701 and anniversary?  Or not?

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 65th Anniversary Edition