Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › AKG K240 Studio owners please share your experience
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AKG K240 Studio owners please share your experience - Page 4

post #46 of 210

I bought an SRH440 yesterday after trying about 10 cans in a local SamAsh. Wow, great sound and very flat but with actual HF extension unlike the 280 but nowhere near as trebly and shrill as the K240, and it doesn't have any mid-bass suck-out like the 280 either. I think I'm going to be sending my K240 back to Amazon now. I wanted to like it but in reality the soundstage isn't much better than really good closed headphones upon second listen...I am disappointed. I'm sure the K701 holds its weight better.

 

I tried the M50s against the SRH and it was much worse. Sharpened upper mids, bloated mid bass, and scooped mids. Awful from a neturalist standpoint.


Edited by metal571 - 4/7/14 at 10:46am
post #47 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ishcabible View Post

I mean for $80, there are definitely a lot of other options. While they have an interesting sound signature, they weren't technically that great. If you gave me $80 to spend on a headphone, I'd probably pick the NVX XPT100 over it if I had to buy new, but used there are a plethora of other options, even within AKG. The K271 is a lot more neutral and I actually thought it was more fun for metal and other fast music. Or better yet, an older K240. I just sold a Sextett for $75, for example. And a DF went for $42 last week. A lot of the new sub-$100 bracket is bassy, which I guess does differentiate the K240S from the others, but blow away is definitely an overstatement.
ok then, I'll say on par with other cans at this price, or better. Plus the 10khz spike imo isn't at all bad. I feel no fatigue at all. Its not like its crappy treble. Its fairly decent sounding. I am very experienced with cans 20-160$. These are very nice for 80$. Sound stage is better than the he-300's, treble is equivalent, and bass/mids are a little worse according to a person on the forum who owns both.
post #48 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhiga View Post

I have the k240 mkii and even with burn-in, that 10khz spike is still there and is really annoying, it sounds very bright.
its just 3 db... Lol. Deal with it. Not bad by any means.
post #49 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisCHORDDubstep View Post


its just 3 db... Lol. Deal with it. Not bad by any means.

Makes the treble sound grainy though as that spike makes it harder to make out the even higher frequencies, at least to my ears. It dominates the treble a bit too much. I can only hear until about 15 kHz lol, too much metal back in high school, I'm only 24. hah

post #50 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by metal571 View Post

I bought an SRH440 yesterday after trying about 10 cans in a local SamAsh. Wow, great sound and very flat but with actual HF extension unlike the 280 but nowhere near as trebly and shrill as the K240, and it doesn't have any mid-bass suck-out like the 280 either. I think I'm going to be sending my K240 back to Amazon now. I wanted to like it but in reality the soundstage isn't much better than really good closed headphones upon second listen...I am disappointed. I'm sure the K701 holds its weight better.

I tried the M50s against the SRH and it was much worse. Sharpened upper mids, bloated mid bass, and scooped mids. Awful from a neturalist standpoint.

The Q701 as well as the K612 hold their weight better. They are substantial upgrades sonically from the K240 and sound very different. If you are willing to spend around $200 and are willing to amplify them I highly recommend either. The K612 is linear and neutral, the Q701 is more airy and bright but overall they are about equal sonically just different.

I found the M50 to sound quite bad as well.
post #51 of 210
Interesting... Velour k240 pads sell for 10-20$ on eBay...
post #52 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisCHORDDubstep View Post


ok then, I'll say on par with other cans at this price, or better. Plus the 10khz spike imo isn't at all bad. I feel no fatigue at all. Its not like its crappy treble. Its fairly decent sounding. I am very experienced with cans 20-160$. These are very nice for 80$. Sound stage is better than the he-300's, treble is equivalent, and bass/mids are a little worse according to a person on the forum who owns both.

The he-300 part you heard from me, didn't you?

It's actually true, the soundstage IS better than the HE-300's *talking about both unamped, that is* although the HE-300's shine out on pretty much anything else (but they're also 3 times the price, so what'd you expect?)

 

My little brother owns the K240 studio (thanks yo DisCHORDDubstep) and absolutely loves them, and so do I. I think they sound AMAZING for only 88 euro's (that's about 105usd). So if you can get them for only 88USD, you can't really go wrong.

The build quality is pretty good by the way, you could even use them as portable if you don't mind them being quite big, and don't mind that they're open.

I never really take my HE-300 with me, afraid that something would happen to the cable or that it might get scratches, but with the K240's you shouldn't really worry about it.

post #53 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by kilspeed111 View Post

The he-300 part you heard from me, didn't you?
It's actually true, the soundstage IS better than the HE-300's *talking about both unamped, that is* although the HE-300's shine out on pretty much anything else (but they're also 3 times the price, so what'd you expect?)

My little brother owns the K240 studio (thanks yo DisCHORDDubstep) and absolutely loves them, and so do I. I think they sound AMAZING for only 88 euro's (that's about 105usd). So if you can get them for only 88USD, you can't really go wrong.
The build quality is pretty good by the way, you could even use them as portable if you don't mind them being quite big, and don't mind that they're open.
I never really take my HE-300 with me, afraid that something would happen to the cable or that it might get scratches, but with the K240's you shouldn't really worry about it.
yep. biggrin.gif
post #54 of 210

I just picked up a pair of these from Guitar Center and so far I am really liking them.  They don't have that super bright and sometimes harsh highs as my ATH M50s.  The bass is good but not in all types of music.  That's ok though because if I want bass, I can simply switch to my ATH WS55 or M50s.  I am wondering how much more of difference in sound it would be to switch out the cable for a better one.  

post #55 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by JabJab90301 View Post

I just picked up a pair of these from Guitar Center and so far I am really liking them.  They don't have that super bright and sometimes harsh highs as my ATH M50s.  The bass is good but not in all types of music.  That's ok though because if I want bass, I can simply switch to my ATH WS55 or M50s.  I am wondering how much more of difference in sound it would be to switch out the cable for a better one.  
I haven't switched it... Yet. But I hear its as clear as night and day the difference when you switch it out. I'd suggest the cable I've been looking at. Here: http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00DWVLSEG/ref=mp_s_a_1_8?qid=1400693356&sr=8-8&pi=SL75
Edited by DisCHORDDubstep - 5/24/14 at 7:34pm
post #56 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by JabJab90301 View Post
 

I just picked up a pair of these from Guitar Center and so far I am really liking them.  They don't have that super bright and sometimes harsh highs as my ATH M50s.  The bass is good but not in all types of music.  That's ok though because if I want bass, I can simply switch to my ATH WS55 or M50s.  I am wondering how much more of difference in sound it would be to switch out the cable for a better one.  

 

Weird I thought the M50s had much less agressive highs. There is a very prominent peak at 10 kHz on the 240 Studio to my ears.

 

Just listening to them again today after a while of using my Shure SRH440s which are my main music, monitoring, and mix referencing headphone.

 

The peak makes cymbals sound lively and the soundstage is great. The sub-bass is very weak and there's another hump in the midbass around 100 Hz giving a warm sound. These sound quite V shaped, the mids are exceptionally smooth compared to some headphones I've heard though the 240s are definitely colored and have a very specific sound sig. I'd say awesome for classic rock and even metal as long as you don't mind the lack of sub-bass but awful for electronic music.


Edited by metal571 - 5/25/14 at 2:41pm
post #57 of 210
500x1000px-LL-738150fb_graphCompare.php.pngdfd0f51db947b6a282a63aa7037ea5c9.pngAudioTechnica_ATHM50_Graph_FRCompare.jpgath-freq.pngI think that's enough of them...
Edited by DisCHORDDubstep - 5/25/14 at 3:14pm
post #58 of 210

http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=-2&graphID[]=2611&graphID[]=2941&graphID[]=2811&scale=10

 

Raw FRs.

 

Honestly I've heard all 3 numerous times, and I own both that Shure and the AKG which I'm listening to right now. I'd say the mids and highs are dead on for that graph, but the bass on the SRH440 had to have been measured incorrectly both because innerfidelity's graph doesn't agree with headroom's SRH440 graph at all and also because I know for a fact that A/Bing them you can hear a much more balanced bass response on the SRH440 with more sub-bass present. Either that, or the midbass is so overwhelming on the 240 that I hardly notice the sub-bass. That is probably more likely. The M50s are definitely like that, slow sloppy midbass and they also have a weird flat-ish peak around 2k in the midrange making distorted guitars sound strangely unnatural compared to actually being in front of those amps (I've played metal guitar for over 10 years now). Lastly it is painfully evident the extra treble spike on that graph in the 240s. The more you listen to them the more you get used to it though. It's happening to me right now...lol

 

The soundstage is far better on the K240s than either of these headphones though, as it should be.

 

Just some thoughts from my end, from personal experience with all 3 cans. It's always fun to compare impressions with you guys since we all hear differently.


Edited by metal571 - 5/25/14 at 3:26pm
post #59 of 210
As with all response graphs, give them a +/-3 db variation. The ath-m50 definitely seems to have a vicious 10-12 db jump from 6 or 7khz to 9.5khz. The akg k240 graph looks about 2-3db off on the lower frequencies 498d0c0095e2dd82ee1aaea0a357d86e.png and the srh-440 is from goldenears too, so its the same setup for both the picture I just posted and the k240. They are both about the same level of "neutrality" but with emphasis on different frequencies. Metal, I'm guessing the reason you find them to be more flat is because of the different emphasis points. They are very similar in bass roll off, but the lower midrange has a v curve on the srh440's, and has a gradual downwards response on the k240's. The srh-440's have a point of emphasis on 6-10khz, and the k240's at 10-12khz. Other than that, they are both neutral, and just have different portrayals of it.
post #60 of 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisCHORDDubstep View Post

As with all response graphs, give them a +/-3 db variation. The ath-m50 definitely seems to have a vicious 10-12 db jump from 6 or 7khz to 9.5khz. The akg k240 graph looks about 2-3db off on the lower frequencies 498d0c0095e2dd82ee1aaea0a357d86e.png and the srh-440 is from goldenears too, so its the same setup for both the picture I just posted and the k240. They are both about the same level of "neutrality" but with emphasis on different frequencies. Metal, I'm guessing the reason you find them to be more flat is because of the different emphasis points. They are very similar in bass roll off, but the lower midrange has a v curve on the srh440's, and has a gradual downwards response on the k240's. The srh-440's have a point of emphasis on 6-10khz, and the k240's at 10-12khz. Other than that, they are both neutral, and just have different portrayals of it.

 

Yeah they definitely all have a very specific sound sig is essentially what you're saying. I still find the 240s brighter than neutral and warmer than neutral. I also heard an HD600 recently and was shocked how close it sounded to my SRH440 side by side. My 280 Pro, K240, and two different M50s I've heard all deviate further from what I heard on an HD600 (properly amped btw) than the 440, and when I tested the 440 in a store before buying it it just sounded the closest to what I defined with my own ears as "right." It's not that the K240 is far off, or the M50 for that matter. They are transparent enough to hear what's going on in the mix. But still, if there's anything I've learned from all the research on those FR plots it's that they are never going to fully prepare you for what you will actually hear the moment you put the cans on and pump your music through them.

 

EDIT: yeah different emphasis points indeed. Emphasis points close to the sound sig of an HD600 is what I prefer as far as I've heard so far. The 600 defined the meaning of "treble extension" to me. I've never heard treble that clean and that far-reaching in my life, even from speakers. The 600 is awesome. Anyway...

 

EDIT2: one more thought. I also heard a DT990 Pro recently and the treble in the 240s reminds me of them. A little too grating up in the higher registers, but at least the spike doesn't have a second spike right in at 6 kHz like the 990. That was the most painful headphone to listen to I've ever heard. I would never buy that thing, and it almost scares me from trying a DT770 which I'm infinitely curious about.


Edited by metal571 - 5/25/14 at 3:42pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › AKG K240 Studio owners please share your experience