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 28

post #406 of 3233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Lust Envy View Post

A subtle boost in the bass, though it may as well just be the pads.
i think so too.
post #407 of 3233
removed

Edited by Cristello - 9/5/13 at 9:37am
post #408 of 3233
I haven't heard them yet so I can't say, but FWIR on here, the difference in bass isn't big, and the K702 65th is still not a bassy headphone by any means. Considering the Q701 was JUST shy of being neutral in the bass, IMHO, I feel like the 65th is probably right where bass is considered neutral, which is a very good thing for what I felt the Q701 was trying to achieve. The pads don't seem to be as breathable as the non 65th AKGs, which is more than likely why the bass is fuller.

The only thing that scares me, is that people are saying the soundstage is smaller, which is something I didn't want touched from the Q701. The Q701 already lost just a hint of soundstage compared to the OLD K701, so I'm hoping the K702 65th isn't going to sacrifice a noticeable amount from the Q701.

This is all hearsay and speculation. I definitely need to hear them to truly say what's what.
Edited by Mad Lust Envy - 12/12/12 at 10:20am
post #409 of 3233

One thing I liked about this headphone is that I thought kick drums sounded nice and textured. The bass response was not intense, but it was detailed. 

post #410 of 3233
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq70 View Post

The bass response was not intense, but it was detailed. 

 

How it should be. ;)

post #411 of 3233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Lust Envy View Post

I haven't heard them yet so I can't say, but FWIR on here, the difference in bass isn't big, and the K702 65th is still not a bassy headphone by any means. Considering the Q701 was JUST shy of being neutral in the bass, IMHO, I feel like the 65th is probably right where bass is considered neutral, which is a very good thing for what I felt the Q701 was trying to achieve. The pads don't seem to be as breathable as the non 65th AKGs, which is more than likely why the bass is fuller.
The only thing that scares me, is that people are saying the soundstage is smaller, which is something I didn't want touched from the Q701. The Q701 already lost just a hint of soundstage compared to the OLD K701, so I'm hoping the K702 65th isn't going to sacrifice a noticeable amount from the Q701.
This is all hearsay and speculation. I definitely need to hear them to truly say what's what.


How you heard the Q701 is about the same as I did. The only problem is that you said the Q701 was just shy of neutral bass. You lie! Just kidding. I agree with this, but what's funny is that on graphs it has low bass that's similar to the HD-600 and everyone in the world claims it's perfectly neutral. Despite it's slight mid-bass hump. I do think the Q701 might have slightly elevated mid-bass, but not enough to annoy me.

 

What's your idea of a headphone with neutral bass? Mine is the DJ100 (very slightly above it) and this bizarre HD-650 I have. This 650 I have has better controlled bass than the HD-600 and less mid-bass. Totally weird considering most people seem to say otherwise.

 

I always felt the Q701 had a slightly smaller soundstage than the K702. I think it's just due to our brains being fooled due to the smoother treble and a the warmer sound. This always happens.

 

Sadly I can't afford the 65th anytime soon. Even if I could I wouldn't buy it for over $400 I think. Not when I have a perfectly good Q701. Maybe if it's some serious competition to my HD-650. I hope AKG never tries making the K702 as warm sounding as the HD-650. Probably impossible! Might be nice though.

post #412 of 3233

Maybe I'm crazy and I should be hanged for my blasphemous and treasonouss thoughts, but I think the Q701 is bass neutral.  I've heard lots of headphones that have less bass than it, and some of them might be called "neutral" too (HD5xx?).  Plus it's open with a big 'ol soundstage.  I think it's freakin good for an open can, considering so many other open cans I've tried have had wimpier bass.  I was expecting AD900 or slightly higher levels of bass when I bought it, but the Q701 crushes those on bass.

 

Maybe it's because the genres I listen to don't require bass, and are even sometimes ruined with extra bass.  A headphone with neutral bass probably isn't enough for a lot of genres.

 

 

Of course "neutral" is completely relative.  But going off all the headphones I've tried in my sig, the Q701 falls in between with some having less bass but others having more bass - thus I would have to call it "neutral."

 

I've always had a bias towards headphones that excel in soundstage, so my scale may be slightly skewed, as many of the great soundstage-performing cans (ATH-ADxx, Senn HD5xx, etc) can be light on bass.

 

For reference I think the DT880 had a nice amount of bass.  It's been so long since I heard it I can't remember too well, but I remember thinking the DT880 bass quantity was about perfect, and any more was unnecessary or my listening.

post #413 of 3233
Whats neutral in bass to my ears? The DT880. I know its ever so slightly emphasized, but it sounds like what I picture bass to sound like, natural. The problem with the 880 is that the treble is Beyer'd up, so the midrange is pushed back ever so slightly, giving it a mild v shape. If the treble was pushed down, the 880 would be pretty neutral, IMHO.

Actually, I do agree on the Q701 midbass. There are times that I found it to pack a wallop, but I feel it was rare, and its such a narrow area where the bass hits hard to my ears. The rest of the time, it lacks body and presence to my ears. This is why I say a subtle broad range bass boost would make the Q701 pretty damn appealing sonically. It does take a subtle bass boost like a champ. It doesnt need much, just a hint. The 65th may as well do that.
Edited by Mad Lust Envy - 12/12/12 at 7:29pm
post #414 of 3233

I should point out that the only reason I don't think the Q701 has neutral bass is due to it's very low bass. When I say it's not neutral, I should have said very, very VERY slightly away from neutral (bass) overall. It's not even anywhere near MY category of bass light. I would say the most bass light headphone I've heard is the AD700. Then the first Hifiman RE0. The K702 did sound fairly bass light compared to the Q701.

 

I almost never expect many open headphones to have good low-bass. Even the HD-650 only has a tad more than the HD-600/580.

 

I do remember the DT-880 having very good neutral bass. I like that headphone, but could never live with it as my main headphone. Loved it for ambient electronica though...but who keeps a headphone just for that.

 

I don't think the Q701 has any low bass that goes missing, it's just not as present as on my HD-650, DJ100, KRK KNS-8400 and maybe the DT-880. Then again, who knows which one is being more accurate to the recording...

 

The 8400 is weird. It's sub-bass is very, very good and seems flat down really low, but yet outside the lower bass is sounds almost bass light except for the upper bass. Must have a dip somewhere that makes it sound that way. I think i've read that the DT-770 Pro 80 (way different than the regular one) emphasizes mostly sub-bass and not so much mid-bass. Maybe that's why I was OK with it..that sub-bass sure the heck wasn't neutral though. Felt like it could give my head a massage if I cranked it up too loud.

 

I was watching "The Dark Knight Rises" and was surprised at what the Q701 is capable of. I was in the mood for the HD-650 so I used that mostly. The Q701 easily has the 650 beat when it comes to sounstage size. Well duh. The Batman soundtracks are so muffled sounding though..

 

Oh yeah, I had a DT-770 600 once that had perfectly neutral bass. Weird. I won't go there and I know theres that bass monster version. I think they must have accidentally put DT-880 drivers in mine!

post #415 of 3233

I honestly have always thought that they have tuned the drivers differently to match the new pad design. If you think about it, wouldn't it be stupid to just change the pads to completely different material and not tune the drivers properly. This is their celebration model and should sound like some changes have been made (especially for that price). They definitely tried to create headphones for those people who found the standard editions to be either uncomfortable or lacking bass impact. For me the bumbs in standard editions were the main deal breaker really. In that regards the 65s are a clear winner. Also the warmer sound complements better my listening preferences. I have listened the 65s and 702s side by side and decided to buy the more expensive 65s. For me the changes were definitely worth that extra 100 euros.

 

I think the new pad design will divide people. The pads are certainly different than what K/Q people are used to. Comfortable but generate more heat and feel slightly heavier. You will also get a warmer sound which makes these headphones quite versatile. I would say more casual and perhaps not so analytical. What I'm afraid of is that the careful side by side comparisons may reveal that you lose some qualities with the new design. Slightly diminished soundstage (drivers are closer to your ear and the pads are thicker and isolate better) and less presicion in some frequencies (I felt that in some songs the K701 separated bass lines better, but 65s had more impact. Didn't really notice too much differences in the mids and highs. Maybe less sparkle with 65s, but that might be just my mind doing tricks due to the warmer signature).

post #416 of 3233

All we need is direct comparison to K/Q models, but ALL of them must be fully burn in, imo.

 

THX

post #417 of 3233
And I believe burn in faeries don't exist, even having owned the K701 and Q701.

Just compare them to the new K702, anyone. Dont care about magic smoke, just the goods.
post #418 of 3233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackmore View Post

All we need is direct comparison to K/Q models, but ALL of them must be fully burn in, imo.

 

This exactly. Too bad we have overpriced postal services here in Finland. Otherwise I would send my 65s for your evaluation and keep burning in my K550s for a week or two ;)

post #419 of 3233

Thanks, very kind of you, but I am sure we will be getting more information soon, at least if HiFiGuy528 don't forget about his promise:-)

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Salvatore View Post

 

This exactly. Too bad we have overpriced postal services here in Finland. Otherwise I would send my 65s for your evaluation and keep burning in my K550s for a week or two ;)

post #420 of 3233
I bought these headphones and they have arrived but I am afraid of opening them because l feel that the HE-400s would suit my tastes more. I like 70s rock, blues and jazz. What do you think because I have a chance for an exchange?
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