Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › AKG Q701 vs Hifiman he-400
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AKG Q701 vs Hifiman he-400 - Page 3

post #31 of 55
Quote:

 

Calm down and take a cup of tea tongue_smile.gif Perhaps I should have said they were a "no-no" for me. But a normal person would've assumed it was a matter of opinion. And about the soundstage... I was referring to the fact that because many people find the treble fatiguing, there is something unnatural about that because it's difficult to fatigue the human ear with live treble. This by the way is also my impression as well. And not surprisingly, there are sharp treble peaks in that region. If you look at threads like "headphones you regretted the most buying", a very common complaint seemed to be sharp trebles on headphones. Hence, I told TC that HE-400 was a safer choice because its treble was, at least by graphs, more tamed. 
 
"Impossible to argue about subjective thoughts"? Well actually I think just about every philosopher of all ages would argue otherwise. 
 
"There is no need to continuously emphasize the issues you have with the soundstage" Actually I talked about it very briefly. I could go into much greater detail if I wanted, but again it was enough to get the point across to the TC. 
 
"On the other hand it's not OK to go into a HD800 thread..." You're very right about that. That was a stupid move on my part, although you'll always find negative impressions on appreciation threads. 
 
"And then you go on about how the K701 is only good for gaming" I found them interesting for jazz and classical but other than that... 
 

You have NO right, whatsover, to comment on my SUBJECTIVE opinions when you try to defend your SUBJECTIVE opinions. To me, they are detailed, with pinpoint soundstage, and slightly emphasized treble and midrange. To me, they are almost neutral and great headphones. How on earth do you you think you have the right to defend your own opinions when you disgustingly reject the opinions of others? No wonder you got banned.

 

You sound angry. I simply asked you to elaborate on what justified the characteristic "analytical". I even said "please". And you never elaborated at all. I actually do care about others' experiences that back up their opinions, though not much of their opinions themselves.  

Once again, you say "to you" they sound almost neutral but the graphs contradict what you are saying. Someone could say, "I hear a night and day difference after switching cables". Okay that's subjective and in no way could I argue otherwise that's what he is hearing. But I could definitely question whether he is supposed hear it when objectively, there should be a very subtle difference at the most, if at all. Heck researchers did a double blind test comparing a high-end cable with a cable made out of a wire hanger, and listeners found no differences whatsoever between the two. Perhaps what I really want to point out is that due to hype and fanboyism, general descriptions of headphones just don't cut it (ex: headphone X has amazing detail retrieval and sound clarity for the price!") 

 

"When you disgustingly reject the opinions of others" Reject? Is that a bad thing? I already elaborated that some opinions are worthless or not really opinions at all. And wouldn't you say "disgustingly" would be a subjective usage here?wink_face.gif 

 

*And I would like to bring attention to the fact that YOU attacked my point of view first. I find that extremely hypocritical when you are accusing me of being a hate-war starter. 

 

"No wonder you got banned" I told Currawong to delete that account because I like this one better. We all appreciate your assumption though. 

 

 

"a much bolder line between helping people choose by giving them opinions on how a headphone sounds vs criticizing a headphone" 

So you think it's much of a help to say, for instance, that the Q701 sounds slightly analytical while the HE-400 sounds more 'fun'? Usually people use extremely ambiguous descriptions that adds nothing to the discussion. Talking about flaws and criticisms from a group of people tend to be far more informative in helping someone choose a headphone, so once again, your point is moot. Another example: When you recommend a headphone like the HD598, you have to tell the person that bass-light is a common criticism of it but a small minority of people found it to be too much coming from headphones like an AD700. That gives a good idea of what the bass capability of the HD598 is. A person who listens solely to EDM or dubstep can, despite all the strengths of the HD598, find the HD598 to be a less "safer" choice than other headphones around the price range. 


Edited by Lord Voldemort - 11/9/12 at 2:59pm
post #32 of 55

K701 has more technical merit than the HE-400?  How enlightening. 

post #33 of 55
I had the k702 for 2yrs really Love them but now I enjoy the he400 much more they are much more engaging
post #34 of 55

I apologize for attacking you. I have no excuse for being so aggressive, and any comments I made, I will take back. Flame wars lead to no productivity after all. Instead I propose that objective measurements be used instead.

 

1000

measurements @ InnerFidelity.
 

Based off the graphs, the K701 has less bass than HD800. HD800 is the definition of pretty much neutral although a tiny bit bright with very slight rolloff in the bass. HE-400 has superb bass and gentle treble. Square wave (300hz) response shows how quick the headphone will respond to transients, but also how clean it is and the size of the soundstage. Flatter square wave with sight overshoot indicates excellent control and as a result, excellent detail and large, accurate soundstage (soundstage is conveyed though high frequencies). This is because imaging relies on the timing of sound at specific frequencies to arrive at the ears at the right time (e.g. inverting one channel causes the entire image to be shifted to out one side of your head, because the timing is completely out of phase.) Naturally, detail is how "high resolution" the headphone is, dependent on if it can keep up with the signal. Excessive overshoot on the HD800 and K701 indicates slight brightness - a possible reason why analyitical headphones have a bright sound signature. The K701 performs, objectively, almost as good as the HD800. Conclusion: the K701 has more technical merit than the HE-400, but the HE-400 is the safer choice.


Edited by iamthem - 11/9/12 at 5:14pm
post #35 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamthem View Post

I apologize for attacking you. I have no excuse for being so aggressive, and any comments I made, I will take back. Flame wars lead to no productivity after all. Instead I propose that objective measurements be used instead.

 

1000

measurements @ InnerFidelity.
 

Based off the graphs, the K701 has less bass than HD800. HD800 is the definition of pretty much neutral although a tiny bit bright with very slight rolloff in the bass. HE-400 has superb bass and gentle treble. Square wave (300hz) response shows how quick the headphone will respond to transients, but also how clean it is and the size of the soundstage. Flatter square wave with sight overshoot indicates excellent control and as a result, excellent detail and large, accurate soundstage (soundstage is conveyed though high frequencies). This is because imaging relies on the timing of sound at specific frequencies to arrive at the ears at the right time (e.g. inverting one channel causes the entire image to be shifted to out one side of your head, because the timing is completely out of phase.) Naturally, detail is how "high resolution" the headphone is, dependent on if it can keep up with the signal. Excessive overshoot on the HD800 and K701 indicates slight brightness - a possible reason why analyitical headphones have a bright sound signature. The K701 performs, objectively, almost as good as the HD800. Conclusion: the K701 has more technical merit than the HE-400, but the HE-400 is the safer choice.

 

Measurements (especially primitive ones like FR and single squarewave measures at an arbitrary frequency) are not even close to an analytical unbiased auditioning session in terms of judging technicalities; things like transients, soundstage, control, resolution are only rough correlates of specific measurement patterns, not definitive at all. They serve only as an initial gist of roughly how something might sound on the measurement-specific setup. Even more complex measures like CSDs are not close enough to measuring those things (although a few things like looking at specific patterns with -60dB CSDs are correlated with certain things like resolution and airiness, but again, mere correlations).

 

I have auditioned Q701 at a meet carefully (as mentioned in an earlier post) and A/Bd against the HE400s. My impression, again, was that the AKGs had a smoother treble, a faster voicing, overall much more neutral presentation, but lacked vastly in terms of overall texture/resolution, and was more grainy-sounding, lacking in authority in the lower end of the frequency range, and missing 100% of the tactile dynamics that the HE400s (and other planars at the meet) had. Its pros were completely dwarfed by its cons in the A/B comparison in terms of technicality.

 

I do not mean any cynicism, but definitively audition both headphones of a potential comparison before trying derive lengthy interpretations from simple graphs.


Edited by jerg - 11/9/12 at 5:28pm
post #36 of 55

You should have used thd+noise for both the AKG and Hifiman to compare against the Sennheiser to just show how bad they are in comparison to the HD800, which is the god of technicalities. biggrin.gif

 

The csd plots of the HD800, especially Purrin's modded HD800, are the most shocking of all.

 

 

Tyll may need to revise his square wave article and include a new category called 'HE-400 wave,' it's literally the only headphone I've seen with that specific type of 300hz square wave shape.


Edited by TMRaven - 11/9/12 at 6:13pm
post #37 of 55

The point I am trying to get across is that objectively, the K701 is a great performer. Objective measurements tell you how close a headphone is to neutral. Subjective opinions tell you how much a person will like a headphone. The problem is, subjective analysis is clouded by bias, placebo and personal preference and so when discussing a headphone, it is useful to make objective measurements to keep us honest. The K701 outperforms the HE-400 on the high end of the frequency spectrum, in the treble and detail. The HE-400 outperforms the K701 on the low end of the spectrum, in the bass, the tactile low notes. You can see this in the measurements, whilst the K701 doesn't have a chance with keeping the texture of bass (in the 30hz square wave response), the HE-400 punches with planar authority, and yet in the 300hz response the K701 can keep up with transients almost to the level of the HD800. When technicalities are mentioned, I am referring to the overall detail which is much more plentiful in the treble region. The K701 has the ability to break down music to a microscopic level of detail like no other headphone in this price range, but it sacrifices the low end texture found in the HE-400. It is a worthy compromise for me but perhaps it is not your cup of tea. I'm not going to try to convince you otherwise.

 

@Lord V: If anyone wishes to read my subjective review, it is here. I'm not going to post a detailed description on the sound when anyone can just click on the link and read it. http://www.head-fi.org/products/akg-k701-studio-headphones/reviews/7088.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Voldemort View Post

And I'd like to make this clear that I don't hate the AKG Q701, or any other inanimate object for that matter. My goal here is to help the TC out with various problems that me and others have encountered with the Q/K701 series, and helping him pick the safer choice. If you look at the "headphones you regret the most buying" thread, you'll easily see the AKG series top the list. 

"My goal here is to help the TC out with various problems that me and others have encountered with the Q/K701 series, and helping him pick the safer choice." I can see you, and many others, have had problems with the K701. Personally, I enjoy them, and there's no reason why you should question what I think. I am not a hypocrite. I simply stated that I disagreed with your opinion of the K701 as an overpriced gaming headphone, I did not question how you found the headphones to sound. I did not state that your opinions were worthless. That is your experience and I'm not going to try convince you otherwise. I think the K701 is a detailed, slightly analytical headphone. Read any review (such as the highly regarded mega IEM reviews) and you'll find analytical refers to a headphone with sightly emphasized mids and highs with excellent detail. The K701 fits this description, and by adding the word tilt I meant to say that it still has some degree of warmth. It's a great all rounder because it doesn't have any serious flaws to me.


Either way, I think more people would prefer the HE-400 because it is more fun. That was the point I was trying to get across. I don't think it's necessary to write an essay on the sound when a simple paragraph explaining why is enough.

Your point on cables: there's an almost negligible difference in electronic properties between two cables. On the other hand, headphones CAN be measured. And the K701 measures very well.


Edited by iamthem - 11/9/12 at 7:28pm
post #38 of 55

I'm not just seeing treble performance/detail in the fr graphs and 300hz square waves.  CSD plots would be the closest indicator of detail and treble performance, but even that has limits compared to very good reviews.  Neutrality according to the fr graphs can be misleading too.  Tyll's graphs need to be interpreted a bit because the compensation he uses isn't the most ideal.  In his square wave article he notes the ideal frequency response for neutral is along the lines of the HE-500.

post #39 of 55
Hi there, I need your advice.
I've been listening to my AKG k701 for nearly 5 years and I find them to be amazing, especially mids and hights, however I should say that before that I was listening to speakers I bought for $10. And about two weeks ago I bought a fiio e17, that made them sound quite a lot better, which made me very happy. However, I'm tired of soldering the broken(because of low temperature and the fact that mine came with fixators instead of screws and I kinda damaged them when I opened them for the first time) cable every couple of months and the plastic cover is partially broken, so I decided to purchase new cans. I thought I should buy Q701, because I thought of them as k701 with detachable cable and better color scheme, but after reading this thread it looks like I'm wrong.
So I don't really know what to do. You say that hifiman is "safer" purchase, what do you mean by that? I won't haeve chance to taste different headphones before the purchase, so I'd like to know, what would you prefer? Because to tell the truth, this thread only empowered my confusion.
Sorry for bad english and thank you for attention.
post #40 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eichhorn View Post

Hi there, I need your advice.
I've been listening to my AKG k701 for nearly 5 years and I find them to be amazing, especially mids and hights, however I should say that before that I was listening to speakers I bought for $10. And about two weeks ago I bought a fiio e17, that made them sound quite a lot better, which made me very happy. However, I'm tired of soldering the broken(because of low temperature and the fact that mine came with fixators instead of screws and I kinda damaged them when I opened them for the first time) cable every couple of months and the plastic cover is partially broken, so I decided to purchase new cans. I thought I should buy Q701, because I thought of them as k701 with detachable cable and better color scheme, but after reading this thread it looks like I'm wrong.
So I don't really know what to do. You say that hifiman is "safer" purchase, what do you mean by that? I won't haeve chance to taste different headphones before the purchase, so I'd like to know, what would you prefer? Because to tell the truth, this thread only empowered my confusion.
Sorry for bad english and thank you for attention.

Safer as in it's more enjoyable for most people, since it has a significantly more robust and balanced lower end (bass and lower mids) relative to the AKGs (K/Q701/2). It's typically easier to like a warm musical sound signature than a colder more analytical one.

post #41 of 55
Thank you, now it makes a lot more sense to me. But I should say, that rather "cold" sound is what I like about them, however I have never actually compared them to more "warm" alternatives from the same price category, only with lower-mid closed ones and I didn't enjoyed them at all, but it may be due to the fact that higher sounds are more pleasing to my ear.
Hope you were able to understand me. What would you recommend in such case? My budget is somewhat around $500. Guess if there's nothing better for this case I'll just go and buy a new, more flexible cable.
post #42 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eichhorn View Post

Thank you, now it makes a lot more sense to me. But I should say, that rather "cold" sound is what I like about them, however I have never actually compared them to more "warm" alternatives from the same price category, only with lower-mid closed ones and I didn't enjoyed them at all, but it may be due to the fact that higher sounds are more pleasing to my ear.
Hope you were able to understand me. What would you recommend in such case? My budget is somewhat around $500. Guess if there's nothing better for this case I'll just go and buy a new, more flexible cable.

 

You will probably hate cans like LCD2 or HE500 then (they are quite warm with somewhat subdued treble); however I'd say HE400 or HE6, or alternatively electrostats in general (such as Koss ESP950 in your price-range) have enough upper frequency responses that you might not miss the AKG's treble detail at all. Think your current AKG's treble amount, but adding onto that some solid extended bass, that is what you'll get with the above options.

post #43 of 55
Okay, I'll research these options and try to find the way to listen to them somewhere.
post #44 of 55
I used the k702 for 2yrs tried the he400 and love them have a much deeper soundstage are better with more types of music and more fun
post #45 of 55
Thread Starter 

Hifiman he-400 paired up against the HD 600? I know how the he-400, sounds but i haven't had much listen to the HD 600. Can someone do a comparison between the 2. I know the hifiman he-400, sounds so addicting when listening to jazz. and tha'ts mainly what me my cousin/family all listen to. Paul hardcastle, Acoustic Alchemy, Chris botti

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › AKG Q701 vs Hifiman he-400