New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AKG K702 - Page 2

post #16 of 20
Thread Starter 

I still have mine. I haven't noticed any change in sound after several months of regular listening. I'm now convinced that burn in is just imaginary. I had a chance to listen to some higher end comparable headphones like the Beyerdynamic Tesla T1, Sennheiser HD-800, Etymotic ER-4S, Sennheiser HD-650, Sennheiser HD-700, and Audeze LCD-3 in other people's systems. I thought that the AKG K 702 holds its own against almost all of them except the Sennheiser HD-800. It's due to the way that the ear cups are positioned that produces a loud speaker type of sound field inside your head. Otherwise, I thought that the Sennheiser HD-650 was comparable if not a bit more pronounced in the lower bass region and a little bit more evenly paced regarding dynamic contrasts. I found that these current TOTL headphones present more of the music in a more transparent manner, but it was not that dramatic as most ********ters here proclaim as if it were some kind of quasi-religion. I found that I have a preference for accuracy especially tonal pitch accuracy with a more nuanced and relaxed presentation when evaluating reference grade headphones. I also found that bass heavy headphones are not my cup of tea like the Monster Beats Pro.


Has anyone here compared their AKG K 701 or 702 to the current TOTL headphones? What did you discover?

I found that tonal pitch accuracy is high, but tonal balance is merely very good. It's a bit bass shy, but deep bass extension is there to be heard. These are good for studio monitors, but they can feel uncomfortable during the summer time when most men cut their hair shorter. I find the resolution and detail retrieval to be excellent as it reproduces the nuances and textures in music quite faithfully.


I don't understand why these are not considered to be TOTL headphones when they are clearly designed to meet that requirement. I think it has to do with the pricing of these headphones in relation to the current TOTL headphones. For some unknown reason, most people equate price with sound performance when it should very well be personal preferences that bear a relationship to prices. I don't think that more expensive headphones or earphones necessarily mean a better product. In fact, I've heard the reverse to be true.


I think that I'll be auditioning the Sennheiser HD-800 in my personal hi-fi system at my apartment fairly soon. I'd like to listen firsthand to see what if any are the striking differences.

Edited by Leslie Dorner - 7/20/13 at 5:11am
post #17 of 20
I have had a couple years with k701s. They are truly great with vocal music and classical. Many maybe just don't end up finding the best amp combo for em though. They are kind of different sounding having a slight echo effect or cuped hand on the ear sound. It's hard to describe, but they really do have their own sound. Folks either love em or hate em here.
post #18 of 20
Thread Starter 

For the life of me, I haven't found a better priced value than the AKG K 701 or K 702 or Q 701. Unless you want to find a bridge between professional studio monitors and audiophile headphones for listening to music at home and you have the money like I do, it's very hard to find superior grade headphones than the K 700 series. After hearing the Fostex TH-900, I think that I have found a differentiator worth the high price of admission. After I moved into my apartment, I found that I needed to rely on UIEMs or CIEMs to block out traffic and landscaping noises so I use my Etymotic ER-4PT/S more regularly. I also found that I needed sealed closed design headphones which I lack right now. I'm thinking about the Beyerdynamic Tesla T5p because they are 32 Ohms as well. I think that open air headphones are not suitable for me now and I'm leaning in the direction of the Beyerdynamic Tesla T5p for a high end headphone that I can use with portable devices.

post #19 of 20

The 70x have a quite annoying peak around 2 KHz. Does this not bother you? It makes male vocals sound somewhat disjointed. It also makes the midrange sound unnatural. This works well on female vocals, however, and it seems a lot of people like it. I don't, and I don't understand why they are recommended for classical, chamber music and mixing, they just sound wrong. Some audio engineers complain that they can't mix with them, and I agree because you have to take into account that damn peak.


There is also something, for the lack of a better word, "plasticky" about the treble. Doesn't sound natural at all. This is not just my opinion; plenty, if not all, veterans of the hobby agree with this.


Overall, to me the 70x sounds like somebody took a neutral frequency response, then fooled around with the treble sliders in an equalizer.

Edited by Wildstar - 7/20/13 at 7:59am
post #20 of 20
Originally Posted by Wildstar View Post

The 70x have a quite annoying peak around 2 KHz.


Not on my K 701.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home