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 63

post #931 of 3282
Quote:
Originally Posted by YoJinBro View Post


Hey hey hey -- I wasn't blaming anyone! Not at all! I made the decision to buy these because I love the K701, and I want the super special limited edition version!

No harm done by buying them -- I can listen to the K701 and look at the K702 at the same time! Double the fun!

 

Glad you like the K702 Anniversary Edition more; I just wanted to share my experience with them, show a 'on the other hand, this weirdo actually doesn't like them as much'.

 

I didn't want to start a flame war, I was just stating what my experience was like!

Welcome to head-fi; state your incongruent preferences and fanboys get mad.

post #932 of 3282
Quote:
Originally Posted by YoJinBro View Post


Hey hey hey -- I wasn't blaming anyone! Not at all! I made the decision to buy these because I love the K701, and I want the super special limited edition version!

No harm done by buying them -- I can listen to the K701 and look at the K702 at the same time! Double the fun!

 

Glad you like the K702 Anniversary Edition more; I just wanted to share my experience with them, show a 'on the other hand, this weirdo actually doesn't like them as much'.

 

I didn't want to start a flame war, I was just stating what my experience was like!

 

No need to apologize.  You like what you like.  The hype train is out in full force.  Hyperbole is what headfi is all about.  I just so happen to like the K701s as well.  I still would like to try the Annies for myself to see if I like them as well..

post #933 of 3282
Quote:
Originally Posted by YoJinBro View Post


Hey hey hey -- I wasn't blaming anyone!

 

No problem mate my rant was more towards elwappo99. If you are truly excited about something it seems to be always hyperbole rather than enjoying genuinely good product. Well I guess flaming also increases your post count and awards you new fancy statuses. I stand behind everything I have said and now after burn in I love my annies even more. It's been said also in hifiguys review that the treble or mids are slightly tuned down and the bass is increased. Nothing too major, but also the warm signature might create the feeling that some of the sparkle is gone and the annies sound closer to HD650. For me this means more balance. And they still have definitely more sparkle than the HD650. If you don't like these tuning desicions I won't recommend annies. So like I've been saying many many times, these headphones are for people who are not fully enjoying K/Q series either because of the comfortability issues or the lack of bass. I know that there are always people who prefer one model over the other, but what I've been trying to do is give people some idea how these annies differ from the standard editions. I've been even directly comparing K701 vs annies in local hifi store just for you K701 people to do wise desicions. Here I'll quote myself from my previous posts:

 

 

"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.

 

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 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.

 

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 don't mind the bumps and love the sound of your K/Q701/2's, these are probably not worth upgrading."

 

 

All this writing and posting photos for what... being constantly accused of hyperbole. At least madlust was man enough to say he's sorry after testing the annies himself. I respect people like blackmore who carefully read these threads and make wise desicions based on that (not to buy in this case). Holy s**t maybe I'm too old for this forum.

post #934 of 3282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hailin View Post

So I have decided to put my Annies up for sale. On that Canadian audio selling site. If interested please pm for ad address as I don't want to break any head-fi rules.

The comfort is getting to me. The clamp on my jaw bone is killing me! I finally was growing to adore the sound on all music too. 

 

I am really hoping the HE400s I have on order is more comfortable for me personally. I tested my DT990pros again this morning and that fit just welcomed me back like a friend. I wanted to step up to more mids and warmer sound but the Annies aren't it for me as much as I use headphones having a headache at the end of every day was to much for me.

 

So I guess I am the first to fail you all. beyersmile.png


Are you the one in Vernon, BC selling them? I'm interested in these headphones, but the price is just to high for me. I've heard the original 702's and 701's and there is noway this is a 400+ headphone IMO.

post #935 of 3282
Considering I find them superior to the HE400 and HE4 which are $400 and $450 respectively, I'd say you're wrong.
post #936 of 3282

removed


Edited by Cristello - 9/5/13 at 9:42am
post #937 of 3282

I do believe that AKG K702 Anniversary's are exceptional headphones, when driven properly, but also fully burn in, at least 300 hours, however more is better.  I cant spend a lot lately, but also dont have any need to do so, this time is a past, thats why I still not got them, cos I do believe in my present system enough, but also want to improve it a little in the near future , which may make my confidence in it even more.

 

As you all see, there are only few impressions up here that can really help you to get an idea, but even so, I still miss the very good review of them, review where I can find not only the very basic things, but very small things to. Review based on a good system that drives them to their top potentials. Review that based on high quality records that have names, not just blanco mentioned that these are great with almost anything. Review that will not left you with so many questions, which makes you even more confused than before you read any.

 

So, send me your Anniversary's and I will give you that:-)

 

THX

post #938 of 3282
I agree with Salvatore's and Mad Lust Envy's takes on these cans. The Annie's are more of an all-around set than the other 70x models. To me they do well with all genres but are probably not the absolute best of the best at any of them. That is fine by me because they are still going to come within 99% of the best for any genre. I owned the HD 650s for about a month before I tried the Annie's and I felt disappointed in the sound of the 650s, they have a fair amount of bass but I felt like the quality of the low end was lacking, it was plentiful but unrefined if that makes sense. Prior to the 650s I had vanilla K702s and I appreciated the faithfulness of what i heard, but I found the bass was dialed back unnecessarily so I got rid of them. The Annies were the first headphones I stumbled into that had enough bass without using EQ that didn't break the bank or feel uncomfortable to wear for more than an hour straight.
Edited by toschek - 1/27/13 at 2:50am
post #939 of 3282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mani ATH 87 View Post


Are you the one in Vernon, BC selling them? I'm interested in these headphones, but the price is just to high for me. I've heard the original 702's and 701's and there is noway this is a 400+ headphone IMO.


OK. o2smile.gif Following that reasoning there is no way HD650 is a 400+ headphone either IMO. wink.gif

post #940 of 3282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cristello View Post

If you check the product page, preproman, you might notice that even AKG says the ANV model has a warmer tuning.  

 

--> K702 ANV ed. - product page

 

 

The product page doesn't say anything about "warmer tuning". It only says "New sound tuning for improved performance at low frequencies". Improved sound at low frequencies doesn't necesserily mean "warmer sound". Actually even if there is more bass from a headphone it doesn't mean that the particular headphone by definition sounds warmer. I have heard many bassy headphones that sound "cold" and many bright headphones having wonderful warm glow in the sound. The warmth in the sound actually comes from the midrange, not from the bass.


Edited by muxamed - 1/27/13 at 3:05am
post #941 of 3282
Quote:
Originally Posted by YoJinBro View Post


Hey hey hey -- I wasn't blaming anyone! Not at all! I made the decision to buy these because I love the K701, and I want the super special limited edition version!

No harm done by buying them -- I can listen to the K701 and look at the K702 at the same time! Double the fun!

 

Glad you like the K702 Anniversary Edition more; I just wanted to share my experience with them, show a 'on the other hand, this weirdo actually doesn't like them as much'.

 

I didn't want to start a flame war, I was just stating what my experience was like!

 

 

 

Alright. Like you said, different strokes for different folks...

What if I enjoy the analytical sound? I must be doing something wrong.

 

Welcome to Head-fi. Some people here on Head-fi see everything in black and white. Exaggeration here on head-fi is very common and you should not trust anyone but your own ears! I have heard (burned-in) k702 Annie and k701 and compared them side by side. The difference is absolutely not that large as many people here want it to be. A little different sound balance but nothing extreme. It is still a k70x headphone with AKG house sound. Believe me, there is no "plastic" sound, harsh mids, disturbing fr peaks and so on, from a k701, more than from any other headphone. It's just nonsense.

Enjoy your music!!

post #942 of 3282
Lol, ok guy. The old K701 was sterile, cold, highly analytical, and lacking in bass. All the things the K702 Anniversary is NOT. There is hyperbole, and there is blatant BS.

They do share their similarities, but the addition of bass, warmth, and smoother frequency response is anything but minor.

Disturbing peak is EXACTLY what the K701 has. Are you kidding me? Its been documented and proven. There is an obnoxious midrange bump that sticks out like a sore thumb on the K701.

Funny thing being that I complained about the mid range long before I ever saw the K701 graphs or that forum. The mids are so out of place, it sounds fake, shouty, and plasticcy.

Keep in mind, when I say old, I mean the 7 bump version. I don't know how the newer K701 sounds, but if it's anything like the Q701, then yes I do agree that there wouldn't be much wrong with them. I simply basing this on the older K701 which was definitely known to have some glaring mids that were fatiguing and out of place.
post #943 of 3282

Just ordered a pair of these -- my first open headphone as normally I'd only use headphones when I either need to block out noise or don't want do disturb my surroundings (often both ;-) Simply could not resist to own a headphone manufactured in my direct neighborhood... Nevertheless I hope they are not too disturbing, i.e. leaking, as some called them semi-open in this thread. Btw. many thanks to Mad Lust and Salvatore for their impressions, very helpful in my decision.

 

Though I mainly listen to EDM when using headphones I'd not call myself a basshead, leaning more towards deep and well structured bass than boomy, overwhelming performances. I'm really interested to see how these stack up against my T5p, which more or less obsoleted my K550 as it does not have that slight edge in the upper mids and presents an even more convincing bass and overall much better resolution.

 

I'm using the Leckerton UHA-6S.MKII with a 209 OP amp and am contemplating the Musical Fidelity M1 HPA or the Rega EAR V1. Any comments on these possible pairings?

post #944 of 3282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Lust Envy View Post

Lol, ok guy. The old K701 was sterile, cold, highly analytical, and lacking in bass. All the things the K702 Anniversary is NOT. There is hyperbole, and there is blatant BS.

They do share their similarities, but the addition of bass, warmth, and smoother frequency response is anything but minor.

Disturbing peak is EXACTLY what the K701 has. Are you kidding me? Its been documented and proven. There is an obnoxious midrange bump that sticks out like a sore thumb on the K701.

Funny thing being that I complained about the mid range long before I ever saw the K701 graphs or that forum. The mids are so out of place, it sounds fake, shouty, and plasticcy.

Keep in mind, when I say old, I mean the 7 bump version. I don't know how the newer K701 sounds, but if it's anything like the Q701, then yes I do agree that there wouldn't be much wrong with them. I simply basing this on the older K701 which was definitely known to have some glaring mids that were fatiguing and out of place.

Ok. Maybe you should learn how to control your feelings a little bit and your urge to persuade everyone here that your personal preferences are right. Enjoy your headphones and your music and dont try to make me or other people here look like idiots just because we dont share your convictions. No hyperbole here. Calm down.

Edit: Besides, your link doesn't support anything of that you say. Maybe the opposite.
post #945 of 3282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cristello View Post

If you check the product page, preproman, you might notice that even AKG says the ANV model has a warmer tuning.  

 

--> K702 ANV ed. - product page

 

early on, I had called BS in a similar fashion. Now, I have fewer doubts as to the subjectively perceived FR.

 

However, any real improvement in detail over the HD650 is somewhat dubious, as the K702's have always had higher THD in the upper-midrange and lower-bass regions. The only way I could justify that is better QC in AKG's Vienna factory and the cherry-picked drivers.

 

 

I'm sorry Cristello..  My reading skills must be off.  I can't for the life of me find where it says "the ANV has a warmer tuning"  Can you be so kind and point to where it says that.wink_face.gif

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