or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

akg k612 vs Q701 - Page 2

post #16 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by kraken2109 View Post
 

I'm assuming you think the HD600 are better overall then? Are they worth 50% more money?

Thanks, and sorry for hijacking the thread.


It all comes down to your preferences, the system, and your hearing. The only way to know for sure which you think is better is to compare the two for a good amount of time. I thought the K612 sounded better than the HD 600 on the system I compared the two on(Woo Audio WA6SE with the Bifrost Uber) but then again the AKG sound also agrees better with my ears than the Senn sound.


Edited by kman1211 - 12/16/13 at 12:32pm
post #17 of 52
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaffer View Post

I own both, as well as K702. The 612 sounds more forward with relatively mellow highs and slightly veiled mids. The HD600 are much more detailed, more resolving, sound more balanced with a back/mid-hall presentation. The 612s come across as more exciting, initially, depending on what sort of thing you're looking for. Both benefit from a good amplifier. Good luck.
can you post a review on 612's?there were only few reviews i could find on this headphone.
post #18 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by lsamod View Post

can you post a review on 612's?there were only few reviews i could find on this headphone.

It's very nice of you to ask, but I'm a very limited descriptive writer. Simply not that good at at. It's almost ironic, as my home forum has a rather larger reviewer population (the actual kind) who often post rather intricate pieces, so I refer to my comments about gear as "impressions." lol

Edit: some comparative impressions - ie. 612 vs other cans I own that can be had for similar money

AD900x: less full on the bottom, but with similar articulation, very clear mids - no contest, really - and slightly peaky highs. More forward sounding, a lighter, happier (if you will) tonal balance
DT990pro: More full on the bottom with somewhat loose bass in comparison (especially without an amplifier), relatively recessed, but very clear mids. IME, the top end greatly depends on the partnering amplifier. Fed direct from my laptop, for example, it's overly bright. Not the case with something as inexpensive as a BCL clone from China. Partnered with a good amplifier, these would be my personal choice for ~$160.
Edited by Shaffer - 12/16/13 at 9:49pm
post #19 of 52
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaffer View Post

It's very nice of you to ask, but I'm a very limited descriptive writer. Simply not that good at at. It's almost ironic, as my home forum has a rather larger reviewer population (the actual kind) who often post rather intricate pieces, so I refer to my comments about gear as "impressions." lol

Edit: some comparative impressions - ie. 612 vs other cans I own that can be had for similar money

AD900x: less full on the bottom, but with similar articulation, very clear mids - no contest, really - and slightly peaky highs. More forward sounding, a lighter, happier (if you will) tonal balance
DT990pro: More full on the bottom with somewhat loose bass in comparison (especially without an amplifier), relatively recessed, but very clear mids. IME, the top end greatly depends on the partnering amplifier. Fed direct from my laptop, for example, it's overly bright. Not the case with something as inexpensive as a BCL clone from China. Partnered with a good amplifier, these would be my personal choice for ~$160.
thanks for the tip!the only thing that I'm concerned about Q701's is bass! I have to do more research on that.
post #20 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by lsamod View Post

thanks for the tip!the only thing that I'm concerned about Q701's is bass! I have to do more research on that.

I have the K702, very close to the Q-series. The quality (not quantity) of the bass is excellent, but if one is expecting bass on every track, it just won't happen. They'll only reproduce what's fed into them. Though the low-end is extended, its presence is somewhat subtle in comparison to the 612. On an audiophile level, the 7xx scale extremely well, meaning, the better the partnering equipment the better they'll sound. Same goes for the HD600, albeit with an almost opposite presentation. The 612, however, can only be taken so far before it runs out of resolution, if you will. All this being said, the 612 is a very good sounding product that won't make you wait hundreds of hours before its bass is fleshed-out.
post #21 of 52

I had the Q701 for a while. I was expecting it to have less bass than it really does, based on what people say about it. The bass is decent, but it's not basshead level. It's very deep, very tight, and very accurate. What it lacks is impact, especially in the midbass. So it doesn't do any favors to songs recorded without deep bass. You often just hear the bass instead of feeling it. If a song is recorded with huge bass though, you'll definitely feel it. 

post #22 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaffer View Post


I have the K702, very close to the Q-series. The quality (not quantity) of the bass is excellent, but if one is expecting bass on every track, it just won't happen. They'll only reproduce what's fed into them. Though the low-end is extended, its presence is somewhat subtle in comparison to the 612. On an audiophile level, the 7xx scale extremely well, meaning, the better the partnering equipment the better they'll sound. Same goes for the HD600, albeit with an almost opposite presentation. The 612, however, can only be taken so far before it runs out of resolution, if you will. All this being said, the 612 is a very good sounding product that won't make you wait hundreds of hours before its bass is fleshed-out.


Actually to bring out more resolution and texture in the K612, the K612 needs a good tube amp. I don't know why but they absolutely love tubes. The HD 600/650 sound better on SS amps imho.


Edited by kman1211 - 12/17/13 at 12:04pm
post #23 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by kman1211 View Post


Actually to bring out more resolution and texture in the K612, the K612 needs a good tube amp. I don't know why but they absolutely love tubes. The HD 600/650 sound better on SS amps imho.

FWIW, I recently sold my LDIII with upgraded bottles.
post #24 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaffer View Post


FWIW, I recently sold my LDIII with upgraded bottles.


Ah I see. It's just my findings with the headphone. If someone is a tube lover they are a great choice in my opinion. I also noticed the most positive reviews of the K612 were from those who used them on tube or hybrid amps. And the more neutral and somewhat negative reviews seem to come from those who use ss amps.

post #25 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by kman1211 View Post


Ah I see. It's just my findings with the headphone. If someone is a tube lover they are a great choice in my opinion. I also noticed the most positive reviews of the K612 were from those who used them on tube or hybrid amps. And the more neutral and somewhat negative reviews seem to come from those who use ss amps.

I'm not really sure what to say, having owned my share of both. I did listen to the 612 with the LDIII, in case that wasn't clear. Where is this going?
post #26 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaffer View Post


I'm not really sure what to say, having owned my share of both. I did listen to the 612 with the LDIII, in case that wasn't clear. Where is this going?


I was just noting that they seem to be favored on tube amps from what I gathered from listening and reading. I wasn't try to start anything or anything of the like.

post #27 of 52
Thread Starter 

I think it's almost a perfect bass boost for Q's,although the mid bass is stronger by 1 or 2dbs.
Edited by lsamod - 12/17/13 at 8:30pm
post #28 of 52
Thread Starter 
Just ordered Q701!
post #29 of 52

Be sure to let us know what you think!

post #30 of 52
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kraken2109 View Post

Be sure to let us know what you think!
I will!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home