New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AKG K812 Pro - Page 28

post #406 of 2805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audio-Omega View Post
 

They cost $2000 in Australia.  

 

As does the HD800's.

post #407 of 2805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audio-Omega View Post
 

They cost $2000 in Australia.  

 

They cost $2,100 in NZ (NZD), $200 more than the HD800. But in all fairness, they come with that Omega stand, which alone I believe costs $200.

post #408 of 2805
Quote:
Originally Posted by 62ohm View Post

HD800 is brighter, but the treble peak of the K812 to me sounds higher (IMO).

T1 is also a bright headphone. Which do you think has more treble peak? T1 or k812?
post #409 of 2805
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedBull View Post


T1 is also a bright headphone. Which do you think has more treble peak? T1 or k812?

 

I don't find the T1 to be a particularly bright headphone, not as bright compared to the K812 or HD800 IMO

post #410 of 2805
Quote:
Originally Posted by 62ohm View Post
 

 

I don't find the T1 to be a particularly bright headphone, not as bright compared to the K812 or HD800 IMO

T1: definitely not bright; HD800 definitely brighter unless driven by a Woo or Manley (or any lush tube amp) headamp.

post #411 of 2805

I find the AKG 812 has in my ears a very smooth treble like the Stax cans. I own the 812 since two days and was listen to it many hours. I have had the T1 and HD800 for a long time on different amps balanced and unbalanced, thats very good cans but there treble was to bright for me. :( 

 

Finally the AKG 812 has more punch, very high resolution and sound much more emotional than any other headphone that i was heared at this time! :k701smile:


Edited by nemomec - 12/21/13 at 11:35pm
post #412 of 2805
Quote:
Originally Posted by figaro69 View Post
 

T1: definitely not bright; HD800 definitely brighter unless driven by a Woo or Manley (or any lush tube amp) headamp.

 

That does not surprise me!

K812 36 Ohms  /  HD800  300 Ohms / T1 600 Ohms

 

And check out the impedance curve of the individual headphones, they form a voltage divider with the internal impedance of the amplifier.

 

http://www.innerfidelity.com/headphone-data-sheet-downloads

http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/AKGK812SN001130.pdf

 

Earlier, many earphones were designed for an output impedance of the amplifier of 120 Ohms - today the most likes near zero Ohms - but we can experiment with this and put an variable resistor in series in the line. I know, some like 68 or 120 Ohms output impedance of the amplifier and AKG K/Q7xx headphones.

 

 

@nemomec

Quote:

 I have had the T1 and HD800 for a long time on different amps balanced and unbalanced, thats very good cans but there treble was to bright for me. :(

 

Give K812 a chance and let them run more than 50 hours and compare again :k701smile: 


Edited by FritzS - 12/21/13 at 11:31pm
post #413 of 2805
Quote:
Originally Posted by DefQon View Post
 

 

As does the HD800's.


*$1590 for the HD800's  - At Addicted to Audio and Headphonic.

 

$2099 for the AKG K812 ~ Marked from an original $2599 pricing I believe. At A2A, and also quoted on as $2599 on Headphonics forum.

 

 

 

post #414 of 2805

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1wi8M-HSeK0JF33P-5ypydQjQ4OshRQhvWM0IX2h0NQ8/edit#slide=id.g25f83b2cd_094

 

Page 18 at AKG K812 conclusions:

 

"Too many engineering trade-offs were made in this design, it could compete at $400-500, but it gets crushed at the kilobuck range."

 

Considering this review was done based on measurements only, it should be taken with a grain of salt.


Edited by ubs28 - 12/22/13 at 6:59am
post #415 of 2805
Quote:
Originally Posted by ubs28 View Post
 

Considering this review was done based on measurements only, it should be taken with a grain of salt.

 

We don't call that a review.

post #416 of 2805

If it was the other way round and the K812 measurements were much better than the HD800s you'd be praising it to high heavens for stellar engineering on AKG's part. However, because it's the K812s being trounced, the goal posts get moved around constantly.


Edited by TenMoonsNorth - 12/22/13 at 8:09am
post #417 of 2805
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenMoonsNorth View Post
 

If it was the other way round and the K812 measurements were much better than the HD800s you'd be praising it to high heavens for stellar engineering on AKG's part. However, because it's the K812s being trounced, the goal posts get moved around constantly.

 

I think we have to be objective here though and in my opinion measurements does not directly translates to superiority. I like the HD800 better than K812, but we have to concede that house sound can play a more important role than that and in that regard the K812 does have a distinct character. The HD800 may measure very well, but in my opinion it lacks that unique character other cans possess. Each to their own, and I don't think we can blame others for preferring the K812 over the HD800.

post #418 of 2805
Quote:
Originally Posted by ubs28 View Post
 

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1wi8M-HSeK0JF33P-5ypydQjQ4OshRQhvWM0IX2h0NQ8/edit#slide=id.g25f83b2cd_094

 

Page 18 at AKG K812 conclusions:

 

"Too many engineering trade-offs were made in this design, it could compete at $400-500, but it gets crushed at the kilobuck range."

 

Considering this review was done based on measurements only, it should be taken with a grain of salt.

 

That's an interesting analysis, despite being a little over critical of the sub-bass  <40hz distortion levels of the K812 while praising everything else and being heavily critical in conclusion.  Also seems to ignore soundstage/imaging characteristic (i.e. time domain response) which can be critical in overall perception.  Otherwise, everyone would buy planars only, but that aspect is still important to many people.  There are going to be engineering trade offs at whatever level.

 

That being said, I'd say the K812 measurements look impressive in what it achieves given it's compromises in ease of drive and being more comfortable than planar flagships.  And I fully agree about HD800 true flagship status and some of the others like the the SRH-1840 that have rather disturbing levels of measured distortion.

 

In the end, headphone producers are going to engineer what they think people are going to buy, even if it's measurements displease a certain portion of the audience.  That doesn't mean though, that what they think people will buy, is what they will actually buy of course.

 

Gotta love armchair engineers though :veryevil:  I'll give Audeze props at least for starting almost DIY and designing and refining what they thought to be a better headphone.  It's easy to criticize what engineers "should" be capable of at a price point, but harder to actually design and build something you think will surpass it.


Edited by JWahl - 12/22/13 at 8:24am
post #419 of 2805
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenMoonsNorth View Post
 

If it was the other way round and the K812 measurements were much better than the HD800s you'd be praising it to high heavens for stellar engineering on AKG's part. However, because it's the K812s being trounced, the goal posts get moved around constantly.

 

post #420 of 2805
Quote:
Originally Posted by 62ohm View Post
 

 

I think we have to be objective here though and in my opinion measurements does not directly translates to superiority. I like the HD800 better than K812, but we have to concede that house sound can play a more important role than that and in that regard the K812 does have a distinct character. The HD800 may measure very well, but in my opinion it lacks that unique character other cans possess. Each to their own, and I don't think we can blame others for preferring the K812 over the HD800.

 

bravo! +1

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: High-end Audio Forum