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 17

post #241 of 3252
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cristello View Post

I seen comments made here on the bass... but what about the highs? biggrin.gif

 

I hope the extra QC and Cherry-Picking actually made a difference...

 

Incredibly smooth, even and fast. One of the few headphones that does this right. There's no sibilance and they're not harsh. Overall, depends on the recording whether these headphones can be regarded as bright or warm. 

 

Foremost, however, I respect the musicality and effortlessness these provide.

post #242 of 3252

Does anyone here own both the k702 and the sennheiser hd800? Im thinking about buying the k702 to have it at my other apartment since its a pain in the ass traveling with the hd800.

 

I like wide soundstage and thats what the k702 has just like the hd800 so I'm just looking for a headphone thats cheap but still has good soundstage. So being used to the hd800 will I still get satisfying sound out of the k702? Anyone that owns them both and can have their say about it?

thanks.


Edited by dolor - 11/18/12 at 1:34am
post #243 of 3252
Quote:
Originally Posted by dolor View Post

Does anyone here own both the k702 and the sennheiser hd800?

 

Ask hifiguy. According to his profile he has them both.

post #244 of 3252
Quote:
Incredibly smooth, even and fast. One of the few headphones that does this right. There's no sibilance and they're not harsh. Overall, depends on the recording whether these headphones can be regarded as bright or warm.

Foremost, however, I respect the musicality and effortlessness these provide.

+1 on what Electropop said here.
post #245 of 3252
Quote:
Originally Posted by electropop View Post

 

Incredibly smooth, even and fast. One of the few headphones that does this right. There's no sibilance and they're not harsh. Overall, depends on the recording whether these headphones can be regarded as bright or warm. 

 

Foremost, however, I respect the musicality and effortlessness these provide.

 

I've been saying that's how my Q701 sounds for the last month since getting the ODAC. It's a bit bizarre and I rarely experienced this outside the DT-880 (not so much with that). My HD-600 on the other hand seems to just add some warmth to many recordings and also make bad/harsh stuff a bit more easy on the ears. Somehow my new HD-650's sound varies between recordings just like the Q701. This is the total opposite of what i've heard about the 650. It's supposed to be very forgiving, not so detailed and not ultra-revealing.

 

I said this a few weeks ago, but I could pick out a bad Jpop song and on my Q701 some will sound almost like I have an AD700 on my head. I wonder how many people blame the headphone when it's just being accurate and true to the recordings? Some of them are just rather harsh, thin and almost like they lack any sort of bass. Sometimes I wonder if my KRK KNS-8400 is the exact same way. I can then take a warm recording (some Pearl Jam stuff somehow) and it sounds like a totally different headphone. On the Buena Vista Social Club cd with the Q701 it almost sounds like an HD-650(!) at times. It's amusing how many songs have bloated bass IN the recording too.

 

I should make a list of recordings that will totally fool your brain when you're listening to the Q701. I could probably find a dozen that make it sound like the worst headphone in the world, yet the fault is the recording.

 

On some headphones you can take a hundred random songs and they all sound good. Not much difference between all of them. Now with the Q701 it's not like this anymore. It's easy to pick out the garbage. I still don't think it's any sort of detail monster, but pretty close.

 

I've yet to get my Q701 sound harsh unless my equipment is causing the issue or it's the recording. The ODAC seems to make bad material sound a bit smoother and easier on the ears.

 

It'll be interesting to have someone measure this 65th Anniversary to the Q701 that's bassier and warmer. Maybe specific Q701s versions have the hand picked K702 drivers. I guess you'd have to get lucky or something with the Q701. Maybe they're ALL picked by hand for the Q701. Nobody will ever know.

post #246 of 3252

Smooth also means detailed. Some CSD's show that they don't have much ringing. It's easy to see an uneven and peaky treble response with a bit of ringing as detail, though in reality it's just highlighting parts of the spectrum. These don't highlight anything, therefore they aren't the best to "pick out garbage" in my opinion. The more accurate, faster and objectively correct gear is, the less prone it is to sound harsh as well. The details or master inadequacies are all laid out for you to hear, but not highlighted in an annoying manner, unless something is seriously wrong with the recording. 

 

For the price, these headphones are very correct. I sort of wish to punch myself for supporting another repaint of the headphone that's been on the market for near 7 years. On quick subjective tests though, the 65's seemed like an improvement on an already well performing headphone, so I plunged in. 

post #247 of 3252
Quote:
Originally Posted by electropop View Post

Smooth also means detailed. Some CSD's show that they don't have much ringing. It's easy to see an uneven and peaky treble response with a bit of ringing as detail, though in reality it's just highlighting parts of the spectrum. These don't highlight anything, therefore they aren't the best to "pick out garbage" in my opinion. The more accurate, faster and objectively correct gear is, the less prone it is to sound harsh as well. The details or master inadequacies are all laid out for you to hear, but not highlighted in an annoying manner, unless something is seriously wrong with the recording. 

 

For the price, these headphones are very correct. I sort of wish to punch myself for supporting another repaint of the headphone that's been on the market for near 7 years. On quick subjective tests though, the 65's seemed like an improvement on an already well performing headphone, so I plunged in. 

 

Have you gotten a chance to try the Q701 out yet? Maybe they'll sound similar to you.

Nobody knows for sure if all the Q701 drivers are all the same or some pairs sound different.

 

Maybe some 65s sound identical to the bassier Q701s normal_smile%20.gif

post #248 of 3252
Quote:
Originally Posted by tdockweiler View Post

 

Have you gotten a chance to try the Q701 out yet? Maybe they'll sound similar to you.

Nobody knows for sure if all the Q701 drivers are all the same or some pairs sound different.

 

Maybe some 65s sound identical to the bassier Q701s normal_smile%20.gif

 

As I mentioned earlier, the Q701's I tried had this harsh/tizzy quality. Don't know if it was an anomaly restricted to that pair.. The 65's were better though, but I'd have to give them a listen side by side to say any further than I already have. 

 

I'm not so sure it's the driver. They're probably exactly same for all the models throughout. Damping and pad materials do play a big role though and my guess the slight difference in this case comes from the latter.

post #249 of 3252
Quote:
Originally Posted by tdockweiler View Post

 

Maybe some 65s sound identical to the bassier Q701s normal_smile%20.gif

 

I think the memory foam pads would prevent them from sounding identical, even if they would sound the same if they both had the same pads.

post #250 of 3252

Seems that these Anniversary's are on their own, at least from what I read here so far. I would be damn surprised if K702 Ann will not develop during burn in, cos all AKG K/Q models are need that.

From very close K701 vs. K702 comparison test I came to conclusion that they are not the same sounding like many say, where some things are very obvious and other must be heard after many hours of testing. This is not an placebo effect and I am sure what I hear, so, the fact that Anniversary's are not the same, pove my conclusion even stronger.

 

Of course, the pads playing a part, but most probably there are more things involved, such as much accurate drivers matching, which AKG confirms, but maybe the cable to. There was mentioned that Anniversary are louder, well, this is one of the obvious things when I compared K701 vs. K702, where K701 are louder to. The other very obvious thing are the quality of the pads, K701 have the best, K702 just behind and  Q701 are the worse, at least on my head/skin. They must use some differ material by making them. I dont know which material they use to begin with, but K701 feels less warmish and much natural, where K702 have a little warmth in them, but  Q701 feels just synthetic. I am not sure if they will become better after washing them with soft soap or something, but thats how they feel at the moment.

 

One very interesting thing about new memory pads is that they choose for differ system to put them on their place, simply by making not possible to use them on other models? I wonder why AKG does this, however its clear that by making some little changes they create different enough sounding headphones without changing the whole concept, so, in my mind this is simply twicking the headband, pads, probably cable and current drivers, which translated in the results we read up here.

Unfortunately for me, I am not able to get them at current price, otherwise it will be easy to find out, but lucky us, some members have many of them to compare, so, I am waiting for more closer impressions.

 

THX

post #251 of 3252
After spending a few more hours with the anniversary edition this weekend I'm even more impressed with them. I listened to them almost exclusively, then went back to the Q701 for a comparison. I could tell them apart more this time than my earlier A/B attempts. If I try to go back and forth quickly, trying to catch differences, they seem to sound much the same, but extended listening with the K702, and the fact they have another 50 hours on them is adding up to a difference I can hear.

I also spent some time listening to the O2 and ODAC. It was OK, but compared to my Yamaha receiver and the Metrum Octave, let's just say I much prefer the sound of the Yamaha/Octave setup. I'm sure it has more to do with the DAC than the amp. Pairing the Octave with the O2 put the listening experience with both of them pretty close.

Blackmore - if the Octave is any indication of the quality of equipment built in the Netherlands then you live in ear Heaven. It is no doubt one of the best purchases I've made.
post #252 of 3252

 Funny thing, I heard that combo, OCTAVE version with power supply, and while it was pretty impressive, I found Audio Note DAC more my liking, but it was not in my own system, so, you never know. I am not really an DAC expert, but when they say that such thing sounds up to EUR 5000 one, it must be VERY system depending, I guess.

 

THX

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MLee View Post

Blackmore - if the Octave is any indication of the quality of equipment built in the Netherlands then you live in ear Heaven. It is no doubt one of the best purchases I've made.
post #253 of 3252

I'm kind of interested in finding out how many units they have released under this limited edition offering? My serial number is 127.

post #254 of 3252
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salvatore View Post

I'm kind of interested in finding out how many units they have released under this limited edition offering? My serial number is 127.

 

Over 9000!!!!!

 

Just kidding, I'm curious too.

post #255 of 3252

If I can't get them this year, I'll wait for the 66th Aniversary Ed. beyersmile.png

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