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 21

post #301 of 3242

HiFiGuy528 posted this on the other K702 thread

 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/626449/k702-65th-anniversary-edition

 

He wrote that midrange and a little more bass are the 2 most obvious things that are differ compared to Q701

post #302 of 3242
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackmore View Post

 

He wrote that midrange and a little more bass are the 2 most obvious things that are differ compared to Q701

 

I think I'll take my 65's and go to the local hifi store to do the comparison myself. Not sure if they have K702's or Q701's in stock but I'm sure they have K701's. I also found the comfortability changes and overall smoothness to be the most obvious differences between the 65's and K702's (brief comparison).

post #303 of 3242

K701 and Q701 have more upfront sig than K702, which are slightly laid back and this is where some have criticism, cos they found them lacking bass and impact, but this all depends on recording, how it's been made, and I hear this very clear. If your system are not analytical and the record sounds analogue enough then K702 are smooth and do not lack any bass, at least for my taste they don't.

 

 

So, guessing again, but I think that 65s are now more upfront sounding than original version and that's why midrange and lower end are more present.

 

Would be very interesting if you can compare your Ann vs. K702 or maybe even K701 and Q701.

 

THX

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Salvatore View Post

 

I think I'll take my 65's and go to the local hifi store to do the comparison myself. Not sure if they have K702's or Q701's in stock but I'm sure they have K701's. I also found the comfortability changes and overall smoothness to be the most obvious differences between the 65's and K702's (brief comparison).

post #304 of 3242
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackmore View Post

K701 and Q701 have more upfront sig than K702, which are slightly laid back and this is where some have criticism, cos they found them lacking bass and impact, but this all depends on recording, how it's been made, and I hear this very clear. If your system are not analytical and the record sounds analogue enough then K702 are smooth and do not lack any bass, at least for my taste they don't.

 

 

So, guessing again, but I think that 65s are now more upfront sounding than original version and that's why midrange and lower end are more present.

 

Would be very interesting if you can compare your Ann vs. K702 or maybe even K701 and Q701.

 

THX

 

 

Quote:


There is also the burn in issue, and your description remind me how my 702's sounds before the burn in, and after. I mean at first the K702's sounds upfront, and after 300 hours they do open and sounds more balanced and slightly laid back.

 

Comparing a new 65s to 702's with over 350 burn in hours will be a bit unfair, even if the drivers or the pads are different.
 


Edited by Acix - 11/26/12 at 5:55am
post #305 of 3242
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acix View Post

Comparing a new 65s to 702's with over 350 burn in hours will be a bit unfair, even if the drivers or the pads are different.

 

I have to emphasize that my own impressions (posted here earlier) are only for straight out of the box headphones. Can't really comment on how the burn in affects the sound. This should also be kept in mind if I do go and compare my 65's against the 701/702's.

post #306 of 3242

I hope you can compare them soon, come back with more please.

 

THX

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Salvatore View Post

 

I have to emphasize that my own impressions (posted here earlier) are only for straight out of the box headphones. Can't really comment on how the burn in affects the sound. This should also be kept in mind if I do go and compare my 65's against the 701/702's.

post #307 of 3242

I went to the local hifi store this morning and spend around half an hour to do some side by side comparison between the 65's and K701's (they didn't have any other K/Q models in stock).

 

The 701's have kind of spring foam pads which return their shape immediately after pressing them. They are also clearly angled. The pads of 65's are filled with memory foam which retain the shape they are being pressed much longer. The pads of 65's are not angled and the bumps in the head band are now gone. I found the 65's to be noticeably more comfortable and I got better sealing with the 65's. The 65's also isolated ambient noise more efficiently, which is probably due to the more efficient noise damping properties of the memory foam (not huge difference, but noticeable enough). The cups of the 65's felt physically more intimate and the drivers seemed to be closer to your ear. I didn't actually measure the dimensions of the cups but since the pads of K701's are angled it is plausible that the pad thickness differs between these two. Needless to say but the flat head band of 65's is way better than the bumpy one.

 

Before analyzing the sound differences, I'd like to quote Hifiguy's impressions from the other thread. "I compared the Q702 vs. K702 ANV, I can't say that they sound "different". The basic signature is the same. I do find the midrange on ANV is slightly smoother with less edge. Bass is a little fuller. Yes, if you like a more comfy fit, slightly smoother sound and you fanboy. Otherwise, go with the lessor cost standard version."

 

My own observations of 65 vs K701 were in some parts pretty much on par with what hifiguy wrote. I also found that the basic sound signature was similar, except that the 65's didn't have so clear and edgy mids/highs and the overall sound was smoother (I would assume the mids and highs of 701's settle after proper burn in, but the 65's have pretty smooth sound straight out of the box). The bass, however, was the part where I found the most striking differences between these two. The bass of 701's was very good, but just not optimal for all the genres I listen. I'm not a basshead but I want my headphones to be versatile enough so I can enjoy all of my music without having to change headphones between listening sessions. Ice Cube's Supreme Hustle, for example, sounded WAY better with the 65's because of the more aggressive bass. This being said, during this listening session the 65's never sounded inferior to 701's or had too much bass (even though I tried several music styles including Ice Cube, Adele, Allan Taylor and Dave Matthews Band).

 

I started the comparison by listening Dave Matthews Band's Mercy and Gravedigger. I started the songs over and over again with each headphones and found the soundstage to be pretty similar. My initial impressions at the HiFiExpo were that 65's lose some of the airness as compared to K702's but now both of these headphones had very airy sound. I did, however, notice some differences and felt like I was listening fully open cans with the 701's and semi-open cans with 65's (this is probably due to the memory foam). The 65's felt louder with the same volume levels but I didn't concentrate on this enough to be sure (if the 65 drivers come indeed closer to your ear in then it explains the louder sound). With this kind of music the bass of 701's is perfectly good. With 65's I got warmer colour to the sound but it wasn't too noticeable. I would even say that the bass line was separated better with the 701's, but the kicks and overall feeling were a bit too cold and distant for my taste. The 65's seemed to have softer roll from low frequencies to midrange which probably helped creating the impression of a smoother sound. I think some people won't like this especially if they feel that the increased smoothness comes with the cost of crispness. With 701's the midrange felt a little bit too bright at times, which is one of the reasons I prefer the sound of 65's. The bright mids and highs gets more justice when there is more action in the bass department IMO. Not too bright not too warm but good balance. Vocals were amazing on both headphones.

 

I changed to Ice Cube's Supreme Hustle and the 65's really shined. The sound was lush, full and packed with detail. The owner of the hifi store wanted to test the 65's and was also impressed with the sound. We did some comparison during the song by changing the headphones on the fly and the differences were pretty obvious. You'd have to be half deaf to not hear the differences. I can't say for sure but for me the differences just feel too big to result merely from the new memory foam non-angled pad design. After a while the owner said that we should actually compare the 65's to the K550's since they are probably closer in sound. This is something I have to agree. I own 550's and have to say that the sound of 65's are pretty close to the sound of 550's (yes closer than 701's). The owner said that the 701's felt a bit thin after returning from 65's and that he would definitely pay 200 euros extra on top of the 550's to get the 65's. The 550's and 65's are similar sounding but the 65's do everything just a little bit better. More comfortable + more balanced, detailed and open sound.

 

I guess in the end it just boils down to what kind of sound you prefer. If you have tried K/Q701/2's and found the sound to be good but somewhat too bright and lacking bass (impact), these are definitely the headphones for you. If you liked the K/Q701/2's but found the head band or the the pads to be disappointing, these are the headphones for you. If you need to wear classes while listening music and don't get proper seal with K/Q701/2's, try 65's (or even better 550's). If you sold your old K/Q701/2's and are now thinking of buying them back again, test these first. If you can get these at around 350-400 euros, buy! (definitely worth the money and are way better cans than lets say HE400's). If you don't mind the bumps and love the sound of your K/Q701/2's, these are probably not worth upgrading. All I can say is that if you have the chance to try these cans I would suggest not to pass the opportunity.

 

This is all I can say at this point. Hope this helps!

post #308 of 3242
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salvatore View Post

If you can get these at around 350-400 euros, buy! (definitely worth the money and are way better cans than lets say HE400's).

 

 

Big statement here.  Have you listen to the HE-400s?  If so give us your impressions on both.

post #309 of 3242
Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post

 

 

Big statement here.  Have you listen to the HE-400s?  If so give us your impressions on both.

 

Yes I have but not really in-depth side by side. It was at the same expo where I first listened the 65's. There were full line of Hifimans present and I tested them all starting from the cheapest model moving my way into the most expensive ones. What I remember is that the HE500's were the first model that I considered to seriously compete against the 65's. The HE400 sound seemed to be in good balance but didn't inspire me too much so I skipped them relatively fast. They were also heavy and didn't seal very well. They just kind of hanged on your head without any support and left leakage points to the bottom of the earcups. Nothing in their sound really striked me in negative way but they didn't wow me either. The best headphones in the expo were definitely HE500's, HE-6's, T1's, 65's and HD800's IMO. The HE400's and 65's are in the same price range and for that money I would definitely recommend 65's. Maybe I overstated when saying that the 65's are way better but from my experiences they are definitely better. Sorry for not being able to give more detailed impressions, but I promise if I ever come in contact with them again I sure do will take more time with them.

post #310 of 3242

That's cool.  Good looking out.

 

However, If your looking for the WOW factor.  I'll say the 400s would give it to you before the 500s will.  Why?  The 400s are tilted towards the bass region and the 500s are not, more flat across the board.  Well, I guess if you seek out mid bass and deep sub bass response the 400s will give you that.  

 

I agree, I like the 500s better anyway, and the 5LEs better than the 500s, and the HE-6 better than allbiggrin.gif

 

I would like to get my hands on a pair of the HE-4s.  My next headphone will be the 65s though..   If I don't find a pair of K501s first..

post #311 of 3242
Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post

That's cool.  Good looking out.

 

However, If your looking for the WOW factor.  I'll say the 400s would give it to you before the 500s will.  Why?  The 400s are tilted towards the bass region and the 500s are not, more flat across the board.  Well, I guess if you seek out mid bass and deep sub bass response the 400s will give you that.  

 

I agree, I like the 500s better anyway, and the 5LEs better than the 500s, and the HE-6 better than allbiggrin.gif

 

I would like to get my hands on a pair of the HE-4s.  My next headphone will be the 65s though..   If I don't find a pair of K501s first..

 

It's hard to pinpoint where I get the WOW feeling but sometimes you just listen something and immediately get charmed by the sweet sounds. Of course personal preferences play major role, but to some extent you can definitely say which headphones are good and which are not. I'm always looking for the natural and easy to listen kind of balanced sound. The music that I listened with the HE400s was some blues in medium tempo. I love blues but for detailed impressions I would like to listen familiar songs and do the possible comparisons in same amplifier. I hope you get the chance to test 65s before buying (if you haven't already). I don't want to hype too much, but the 65s are very light and comfortable cans which sound pretty damn awesome. The replaceable cable and pads are also big plus. I already bought akg mini xlr 5m cable to use in the living room since the 3m cable doesn't reach the couch :)

post #312 of 3242

Don't worry about any hype - I don't subscribe to that much.  I'm an AKG fan already.  So I'm cool buying the 65s before testing.  I like the 601s Q701s enough to do so..  I like to get my headphones hard wired - I have all balanced amps anyway..

post #313 of 3242
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salvatore View Post
 I already bought akg mini xlr 5m cable to use in the living room since the 3m cable doesn't reach the couch :)

 

Where'd you get it? Been meaning to get one to reach my av-system as well.

post #314 of 3242
Quote:
Originally Posted by electropop View Post

 

Where'd you get it? Been meaning to get one to reach my av-system as well.

 

St. Paul's Sound. Don't know the quality of the cable but it was akg cable for sure. 5m coiled and cost around 20 euros. Actually had to straighten it up for a while to reach the coach. Too bad they didn't have straight cables in stock back then.

post #315 of 3242
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salvatore View Post

 

St. Paul's Sound. Don't know the quality of the cable but it was akg cable for sure. 5m coiled and cost around 20 euros. Actually had to straighten it up for a while to reach the coach. Too bad they didn't have straight cables in stock back then.

 

Checked them out and they still don't. I don't really like coiled cables.. Heavy and tend to pull light headphones off your head. Well, it's mini-xlr so I'll probably find something :)

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