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 101

post #1501 of 3321
Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post

Where you been?  Hows the F3?  Got the F1J back from Nelson.  OMG......  That's all I can say in this thread..biggrin.gif

super busy with work. will post F3 review next weekend. 

post #1502 of 3321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dougr33 View Post


Eager to hear what you think... which model are you putting them on?

 

Going to try them with my Q701 to see if it makes them sound any better or different. If that doesn't work out they might be OK on my new K400.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by LugBug1 View Post

wow.

Can you fit the 65th pads on K701's do you think? Maybe it will affect the sound too much... has anyone tried this?

 

Yes, from what been mentioned so far, they fit perfectly fine. I'm worried that it might make the mids too "shouty". AKG might have made some other internal changes to make them these flat pads not sound so bad.

A few people have tried 65th pads onthe K701 I think, but not the Q701. I might be wrong...

post #1503 of 3321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sophonax View Post

Really liking the K702.65 for electronic and soundtrack music -- bass and dynamics are really good. Check out James Horner's "Plaza of Execution" from The Mask of Zorro soundtrack, or Armin van Buuren's "Waiting for the Night" -- both great tracks with this headphone!

that is sparking my interest. I am into classicalesque sound track music and even some of the electronic stuff. I wonder how the k65 would compare with the HD800 from seen. anyone? popcorn.gifI would love it if it is a contender! 

post #1504 of 3321

HD800 is in a completely different league. The K702.65 are good, but just not that good.

Detail and soundstage are just much better on the HD800.

post #1505 of 3321

Classical = HD800

 

Rap = 65th

 

Jazz = Both

 

Female Vocals = HD800

 

Male Vocals = 65th

 

Electronic = confused_face_2.gif

post #1506 of 3321

Edit:  Deleting comment, I'm being too pissy today.   Apologies all around.


Edited by toschek - 2/22/13 at 6:12pm
post #1507 of 3321

Talking to me?  blink.gif

post #1508 of 3321
I wonder when they'll hit the 3000 mark sometime soon
post #1509 of 3321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cante Ista View Post

that is sparking my interest. I am into classicalesque sound track music and even some of the electronic stuff. I wonder how the k65 would compare with the HD800 from seen. anyone? popcorn.gifI would love it if it is a contender! 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlsan View Post

HD800 is in a completely different league. The K702.65 are good, but just not that good.

Detail and soundstage are just much better on the HD800.

 

Sometimes I think the improvements from the older flagships (i.e. DT880, K701, HD600/650) to the new flagships (i.e. LCD-2/3, T1, HD800) get overemphasized.  While I would agree that the HD800 is better overall (it's one of my two favorite headphones, along with the R10), I wouldn't necessarily say it's "in a completely different league."  The K702.65 has its strengths relative to the HD800, and vice versa -- and I appreciate both headphones for what they are, regardless of their price.  The fact that the K702.65 costs 30% or less as much as the HD800 makes an even stronger case for the AKGs.

 

I'd give the definitive edge to the HD800 for soundstage, since I think that's one of the HD800's main strengths -- these headphones probably have the largest, most open stage of any headphone I've heard.  I think the difference in detail retrieval between the HD800 and the K702.65 is much smaller -- maybe a slight edge to the HD800, but not by much.  The K702.65 is also a very detailed headphone.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post

Classical = HD800

Rap = 65th

Jazz = Both

Female Vocals = HD800

Male Vocals = 65th

Electronic = confused_face_2.gif

 

I agree with this almost entirely.  I'd probably lean towards the HD800 for most jazz, since I think the HD800 opens a more transparent window onto the recording venue.  The only exception I can think of might be something like Mino Cinelu, where the dynamics are important -- might have to tip the hat to the K702.65 for that kind of jazz.

 

As for electronic, for me it's the K702.65 hands down.  The K702.65's extra bass quantity, dynamics, and forward presentation work great for electronic music.

post #1510 of 3321
Glad to see more Impressions about the Annie's bass. Something you definitely wouldn't see about the non-Annies. It really is a noticeable bump, while still remaining incredibly balanced.
post #1511 of 3321
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sophonax View Post

 

Sometimes I think the improvements from the older flagships (i.e. DT880, K701, HD600/650) to the new flagships (i.e. LCD-2/3, T1, HD800) get overemphasized. 

 

Agreed. I've owned the LCD-2 (Rev1) and currently own the HE-500, and I'm quite happy listening to my DT880 most of the time. Frankly, the difference for most people just isn't as great as is commonly made out, especially if the mid-price phone and amp are well matched.

 

But even where it is significant, not everyone needs that degree of clarity or refinement, and its absence isn't always missed even after you've lived with it.

post #1512 of 3321

Yesterday, the postman was really nice and deliver them to my place, so, here are my first impressions compared to original K702.

 

In stock configuration, mean stock pads and cable, Anniversary impressed me with electronica / trance music only. Classical and Jazz were not my liking, their midbass umph I was afraid of is there, but also the whole signature have kind of coating, which makes them sound like many already described, more forgiving, warmer and upfront.

While they still kept the detail, they turn in the air and clarity, which, at the end, translated in less linearity with much more "fun" instead. But if I have to be critical, they just lost their balance.

 

For example, when you listen to orchestral and trio jazz, you just hear it, there is no natural sparkle of string tone or deep and tight acoustic bass, even piano, while still have that typical tone, but because of already mentioned coating and upfront umph in sound, makes it sound like you put your head inside piano and not just sitting in front of orchestra. The whole specturm is more compact and do not deliver the natural feeling to be in concert hall, but just direct or inside the orchestra. Also, because of prominent lower end, they sound clearly louder with the same volume settings. I found them sound like closed back with some tracks than open air one.

 

Another story guys when you put normal pads on Anniversary model, they just become normal K702, so, basically and based on my first session, I conclude that pads make them sound like this. I did put Anniversary pads on normal K702 and here we go, Anniversary were back. To make the final call, I need more time. What I mean, is, if they sound fully identical when you switch pads, but right now, I would say, try Anniversary pads on your K702 and you will get very close sound to the original Anniversarys. Less exciting news is, the Anniversary pads seem to be not cheap and this may be the reason why, cos guys at AKG/Harman knew this will show up sooner or later, so, if you want Anniversary sound with your normal K702, you must pay the bill.

 

THX

post #1513 of 3321
Been mentioned various times, the Annie is warmer and smoother. I don't understand why people would ever expect it to be on the same level of crispness and air as the non-Annies. You can't just add bass and expect the rest of the spectrum to sound the exact same. Sound doesn't work that way.

There is give and take. You should know, that going into it, the Annie was not gonna be as hyper detailed, by the many impressions on this thread. That means in a direct comparison, they aren't gonna be as clear and airy. You would probably hate the LCD2. It's even smoother, and less detail oriented than the Annie. Not to mention closed sounding and congested in comparison.

I can appreciate the smoother, more musical, more forgiving sound on the Annie, over the more clinical, less engaging sound on the non-Annies. Different strokes for different folks. Kind of like HD600 vs HD650, or DT990 vs DT880. That being said, I find the Annie's voicing to be very well balanced, even moreso than the non-Annies which had a lack of bass and peaky upper mids. The Annie is more linear, IMHO.

As for them being identical pads aside, l'll hold out until more people I personally trust compare them (tdock, chicolom). So far one person has stated they sound different even when swapping pads, the other says they are the same. At least you proved that changes between the Annie and the others aren't limited to just the bass.
Edited by Mad Lust Envy - 2/23/13 at 2:59am
post #1514 of 3321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackmore View Post

 

Another story guys when you put normal pads on Anniversary model, they just become normal K702, so, basically and based on my first session, I conclude that pads make them sound like this. I did put Anniversary pads on normal K702 and here we go, Anniversary were back. To make the final call, I need more time. What I mean, is, if they sound fully identical when you switch pads, but right now, I would say, try Anniversary pads on your K702 and you will get very close sound to the original Anniversarys. Less exciting news is, the Anniversary pads seem to be not cheap and this may be the reason why, cos guys at AKG/Harman knew this will show up sooner or later, so, if you want Anniversary sound with your normal K702, you must pay the bill.

 

THX

 

Thanks for your comments on this.

post #1515 of 3321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackmore View Post

 

Thanks, interesting comments. Keep us posted 

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