or Connect
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 5

post #61 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by metal571 View Post

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

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.
yeah, I hear that 10khz spike, but I'm used to it. I love the way cymbals sound because of it... And, the k240's are more upper bass and lower through middle midrange focused. Its not mid-bass that's being boosted. If that boost was mid-bass, it would sound a lot more boomy. Mid-bass is around 60-140hz, with the point of boominess at 125hz. I hear the boost start at around 160-170hz. One things for certain is that sub-bass is DEFINITELY rolled off. Its not the boost overpowering the bass. Its the sub-bass being rolled off so much. That was discovered after a 20hz-20khz sweep.
post #62 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisCHORDDubstep View Post


yeah, I hear that 10khz spike, but I'm used to it. I love the way cymbals sound because of it... And, the k240's are more upper bass and lower through middle midrange focused. Its not mid-bass that's being boosted. If that boost was mid-bass, it would sound a lot more boomy. Mid-bass is around 60-140hz, with the point of boominess at 125hz. I hear the boost start at around 160-170hz. One things for certain is that sub-bass is DEFINITELY rolled off. Its not the boost overpowering the bass. Its the sub-bass being rolled off so much. That was discovered after a 20hz-20khz sweep.

Sorry, yeah upper bass/low mids. My ear-to-brain translator just isn't working today.

 

Okay good I almost thought my K240s were broken looking at some of those graphs showing such awesome sub-bass extension. No clue how they came out that way. The sub-bass is very weak. It's there but you have to really concentrate to even hear it from what I'm hearing.

 

I agree with that take completely, it's a sub-bass recessed, upper bass and low mids exaggerated, flat mid through upper mid, low treble recessed, treble boosted kind of a sound sig. That's what I'm hearing.


Edited by metal571 - 5/25/14 at 3:46pm
post #63 of 257
URL
post #64 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by metal571 View Post

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.
the dt770 is pretty bassy from what I've heard. Also, iirc what i read, the 770 and 990 are completely different.
post #65 of 257

That's what makes buying headphones on the internet so hard for me.  I purchased the ATH M50 based on reviews and dare I say hype.  Overall I don't regret my purchase, and really enjoy listening to them.  I have found that I either have to bring down the 8k band on my eq by 5db to make them more palatable to my ears.  I am using the Sound Blaster X eq.  Or I bring up the 62k and 125k band up 5k. I also bring the 31k band up by 3db.  This setting seems to work pretty well for my hearing across all of my headphones.  I agree that for rock, metal, and funk music from the 70s k240s are awesome.  Also good for a lot of techno.  Lindsey Stirling sounds awesome on the K240s.

post #66 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisCHORDDubstep View Post


the dt770 is pretty bassy from what I've heard. Also, iirc what i read, the 770 and 990 are completely different.

 

Yeah me too, I am only worried because the treble signature between those two didn't look all that different when I compared some graphs though.

 

An example of what can push the treble in the 240 into the slightly out-of-hand range:

 

http://youtu.be/wCFO6BIFpNk

 

Soundstage is pretty though and if you don't crank it too loud, it's really not that bad. The 240s are so...unique.


Edited by metal571 - 5/25/14 at 3:51pm
post #67 of 257
Headroom seems to have done their measurements terribly. It shows the general curve of the cans, but its often off by upwards of 6db.
post #68 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by JabJab90301 View Post

That's what makes buying headphones on the internet so hard for me.  I purchased the ATH M50 based on reviews and dare I say hype.  Overall I don't regret my purchase, and really enjoy listening to them.  I have found that I either have to bring down the 8k band on my eq by 5db to make them more palatable to my ears.  I am using the Sound Blaster X eq.  Or I bring up the 62k and 125k band up 5k. I also bring the 31k band up by 3db.  This setting seems to work pretty well for my hearing across all of my headphones.  I agree that for rock, metal, and funk music from the 70s k240s are awesome.  Also good for a lot of techno.  Lindsey Stirling sounds awesome on the K240s.
40% of my Library is funk, pop, rock, etc from the 70's-80's, 50% electronic music, and 10% miscellaneous. J-pop, orchestra, jazz... That is why I love them so much.
Edited by DisCHORDDubstep - 5/25/14 at 3:55pm
post #69 of 257
Thread Starter 

Glad to see this thread is still alive... too bad I sold my K240S long ago...

post #70 of 257

Interesting discovery.

 

So my "audiophile" on the cheap rig that I decided to try out is the following:

 

Xonar DG S/PDIF -> Optical TOSLINK cable -> Pioneer VSX-D514 headphone out @ -35 dB -> FiiO E6 pink LED -> stock K240S

 

There is a distinct change in the bass when I switch between using the headphone output alone on the receiver vs. going through the E6 in that the big hump in the upper bass flattens considerably when using the E6. Something to do with impedance maybe? I don't know. I have a degree in computer engineering but am not that well versed in how the dynamic drivers in headphones work yet.

 

EDIT: okay, it might just be an issue with the headphone out of the receiver, because plugging directly into my Xonar DG's analog out at the back also is devoid of the bass "inflation" if you will, with the 64 ohm exciter mode enabled in the internal headphone amp. I've never had headphones react like this, these are pretty sensitive to changes in source. The E6 is really that good at "correcting" imperfections with impedances maybe?


Edited by metal571 - 5/25/14 at 5:16pm
post #71 of 257

I ordered MkII because II, and 2 is ALWAYS better than one, right? Merely a day after it was shipped, I learned of the treble problem, and had them shipped back. Got Studios instead, and those do not have the issue.

 

I've been using mine without an amp mostly (because aside from my speakers I cannot afford one at the moment), for a month. And I must say, the sound gets B++ or A- with just my laptop audio-out.

 

Judging from what I listened to (sadly, never owned), A+ would go to Senn HD800 and such, A for AKG K702 and B for Koss clip ons (forgot the number).

 

A friend of the family promised to lend me one of his amps for a while, and I cannot wait. 

 

 

As for "experience" as in wisdom, I learned that they require one month of active listening to break in.

post #72 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by KlarkKentThe3rd View Post
 

I ordered MkII because II, and 2 is ALWAYS better than one, right? Merely a day after it was shipped, I learned of the treble problem, and had them shipped back. Got Studios instead, and those do not have the issue.

 

I've been using mine without an amp mostly (because aside from my speakers I cannot afford one at the moment), for a month. And I must say, the sound gets B++ or A- with just my laptop audio-out.

 

Judging from what I listened to (sadly, never owned), A+ would go to Senn HD800 and such, A for AKG K702 and B for Koss clip ons (forgot the number).

 

A friend of the family promised to lend me one of his amps for a while, and I cannot wait. 

 

 

As for "experience" as in wisdom, I learned that they require one month of active listening to break in.

 

Yeah really long break in.

 

The treble "problem"? Is that isolated to the MK II or is it just a defect?

post #73 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by KlarkKentThe3rd View Post

I ordered MkII because II, and 2 is ALWAYS better than one, right? Merely a day after it was shipped, I learned of the treble problem, and had them shipped back. Got Studios instead, and those do not have the issue.

I've been using mine without an amp mostly (because aside from my speakers I cannot afford one at the moment), for a month. And I must say, the sound gets B++ or A- with just my laptop audio-out.

Judging from what I listened to (sadly, never owned), A+ would go to Senn HD800 and such, A for AKG K702 and B for Koss clip ons (forgot the number).

A friend of the family promised to lend me one of his amps for a while, and I cannot wait. 


As for "experience" as in wisdom, I learned that they require one month of active listening to break in.
depends on what you like. If you like hd800's, it might be an A+. If you don't like them, then... Less than A+. It all depends on what you like... That difference in treble you heard was just the ear pads. The headphones themselves are the same. Mk1=mk2. The mk2 included a softer, thicker pad, and an extra cable and a velour pad. The pad made the sound difference you heard.
post #74 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisCHORDDubstep View Post


depends on what you like. If you like hd800's, it might be an A+. If you don't like them, then... Less than A+. It all depends on what you like... That difference in treble you heard was just the ear pads. The headphones themselves are the same. Mk1=mk2. The mk2 included a softer, thicker pad, and an extra cable and a velour pad. The pad made the sound difference you heard.

Sonic Sense Pro Audio. Check for yourself on their soundcloud.

post #75 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by metal571 View Post
 

 

Yeah really long break in.

 

The treble "problem"? Is that isolated to the MK II or is it just a defect?

There is a gap somewhere in the lower treble, which makes higher trbl fatiguing and ear-piercing. Somehow it is only on Mk II. I say it was less of a defect and more of a derp on AKG's part.

 

Also, unrelated to your post, but related to the thread. I tried amping my k240S with my Bose speakers, and it worked. I even did half of the burning in on them. Big problem – it changes the sound for the worst, as well as making the bass too bloated and taking away 75% of the imaging, making the sound almost mono.

 

So, the question is: what is wrong with my speakers and why cannot Bose build them to not alter the signal?


Edited by KlarkKentThe3rd - 5/25/14 at 6:42pm
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