[Andrew_WOT]

Quote:

I mean... seriously? Who puts any headphone, much less a portable headphone, together with GLUE? 

 

Simple, easier to replace logos, this way they can introduce Q267 endorsed by Quincy Jones or whatever rocks the boat at the time.

Big disappointment from AKG after K550, just as bad as Tiesto's music.

 

[Craigster75]

Quote:

Seems like the K267 isn't much of an upgrade over the K167. From what I've read I'm really glad I cancelled the order and got the K167 instead. I saved at least a hundred bucks and got an arguably better headphone for my purposes.

I mean... seriously? Who puts any headphone, much less a portable headphone, together with GLUE? 

For a headphone that costs $350 retail, this is inexcusable and AKG (or rather, their evil overlords Harman) should be ashamed.

Unfortunately, the licensing fee for Tiesto needs to come from somewhere.

 

[Minarets]

Yup, dissapointing. As much as some aren't happy with their M100, there is no way they are worse quality than the K267.

The flexible headband, the carrying case, the kevlar cord, I guess its an easy decision now. The ear pads can be modded if they don't fit well. What's the latest on the XL pads? 3 months or more out? Or do we even know?

 

[Minarets]

Yup, dissapointing. As much as some aren't happy with their M100, there is no way they are worse quality than the K267.

The flexible headband, the carrying case, the kevlar cord, I guess its an easy decision now. The ear pads can be modded if they don't fit well. What's the latest on the XL pads? 3 months or more out? Or do we even know?

 

[DarthUnnamed]

My search for the perfect portable for ~$300 isn't over i guess...

 

[autoteleology]

I still find the K167 to be an excellent headphone at its price point. It may be slightly behind the M-100 in terms of fun, but only because of the fact that it is more neutral. Add in the fact it can be had at less than HALF the price of the M-100, and I really think it deserves more than to be overshadowed by its overpriced big brother.

I used the K167 with my O2 + ODAC for the first time today. To say the least, it really buttered my biscuits. These get a fairly large buff when properly amped. Sub-bass in particular became much more controlled, boosting an already positive aspect of these cans.

Also, the pads have changed a bit again, I haven't found them to be turning into Beats Pros in the last little while.

 

[oblique63]

Quote:

People shouldn't be so quick to judge based on a handful of reviews.  Who knows what other headphones the people that have the K267's own.  It's very possible that many of you might miss out on something that actually is a good headphone.  

Very true. So far, the only two people I've noticed that have been the most critical of the K267's were HD800 owners. So I guess it's probably best to just take what we say with a grain of salt, cause our opinions may have been subconsciously tainted/spoiled 

.
 
Quote:

 
This guy. To sum it up in short, I'd say that the K*67 is more suited for studio applications (I find it to be fairly neutral) while I would probably prefer the M-100 (from what I recall) for pleasure listening.

This seems about right. I'm a neutral headphone nut cause I just like the 'studio monitor' sound, but for a portable I just want something a bit more 'fun'. The K267's actually remind me a lot of my HD600's surprisingly. They have a pretty similar sound, with the HD600 still being better overall in my opinion, but alas, they are no where near as portable or durable feeling as the K267's, so yeah...

 

[gmoney9438]

Here's the thing about Head-Fi:
 
We write about our first impressions. If we even list one con or drawbacks of a headphone, everyone immediately assumes that they are bad and crappy phones. Get out of that yes/no mindset guys. To be honest, I believe they are good headphones for portable use, but not exceptionally great. They are not perfect headphones, but let's be frank, there isn't a 'perfect' headphone. Every headphone has a downside to it. If you are looking for sweet bedtime stories, read elsewhere. Just be thankful that we're reporting to you guys without any BS and sugar coating. We just want to let you guys know what to expect. Is it just me, or are people searching for positive things about them and completely ignoring the flaws?
 
Regarding the cans, I believe they are keeper for those who are looking for a good portable headphone. They are easy to drive and they sound pretty good, but not great. It has slight problems with bass extension, but not quantity. These however, are not basshead cans. They have nice punchy bass, not the fat boomy kind. Spacial awareness and ability to locate instruments in a recording, I believe, is below average. Compared to my Mad Dogs, their portrayal of instruments seems a bit unnatural. They still play electronic music very well. The vocals (male and female) are very clear coming out of these cans. The treble is not too hot, extends fairly well, and is unobtrusive/doesn't drown out the mids and lows. Clarity is great. Bass is nice and punchy even on the 'stage' setting, and has the ability to deliver boomy bass if the track demands it. All in all, I believe they are good headphones for people who are looking for a can for their portable setup. It comes with a coiled cable that is a bit shorter than 1 meter. Great for portability. Style looks sexy. I mean, what else is there to say?Not trying to sound repetitive, but they are good, but not great.

 

[AzureBeat]

I'm really looking at these, because:
 
1) Moderately balanced sound
2) Detachable Cable
3) Nice looks IMO
4) Adjustable sound*
 
Just hoping the price comes down a bit. Then I have to decide between these and other ~300 cans. And the K167s, and MDR-1R, and . . .

 

[autoteleology]

Get the K167. It's half the price and 95% of the headphone.

 

[Eugguy]

After hearing a few reviews as well as users of the 267 stating the sound is 95% of the 167, I'm happy I didn't follow through with my original plans of getting the 267. To me, the 167 was cheap sounding and less than what I expected of them.

 

[AzureBeat]

Well, in my current situation, I either have no money for either, or enough for whichever I want. If go into savings to get some headphones (nope), so I'm going to be waiting anyways. The K167 was $200 when it came out? And now it's $150? So, if the K267 comes down to $250, that's $100 for a detachable cable, improved durability(?), maybe better comfort with the thick headband. . .Hmm. Then there's the M-100's with durability, toughness, and compactness but I worry about the sound signature and listening to my range of music. Momentums, sound like they have good all-round sound and durability, but not compact, and more expensive. MDR-1R seems to be generally unremarkable in all respects, same for the UE6000.
 
Note that I separate toughness and durability. I'm defining "Toughness" here to be the ability to endure short term harsh treatment. Durability is the ability to resist wear for a long time. I like the detachable cable more because cables break and that will make it much easier to replace/or get a different length.
 
*Is a bonus if it actually effects things

 

[autoteleology]

Quote:

After hearing a few reviews as well as users of the 267 stating the sound is 95% of the 167, I'm happy I didn't follow through with my original plans of getting the 267. To me, the 167 was cheap sounding and less than what I expected of them.

 
Really? Why? I find the K167 to be a very good sounding headphone. It beat out the DT770 when I bought both and compared them side to side.

 

[Minarets]

I definitely love my 167s

 

[tino96]

Do the K167 sound better than K550? what about K551?
 
Do K551 have more clamp force than K550 and K167?
 
Glue on a $350 headphone...