[dogwan]

I just spent a good 3 hours with my AKG K-401's powered by the ASL MG Head-OTL. Bottom line....I liked them better than the 701's.
 
Normally I use the 401's with my portable rig. I don't know why it took me so long to A/B against the 701's in the main system. I guess I just assumed they wouldn't stack up. But the bass was more present and a lot tighter, great midrange, and less sibilant highs. AND (this is a big and) the soundstage was just as big!
 
Maybe what I should take away from this revelation is that the ASL is just not a good match for the 701's and I really need to find a better match. Then that will free up the ASL for bedside listening instead of the portable AMB Mini^3. Haha, now I have a plan.
 
-Dogwan
 
BTW- I know that any of the AKG's will not work in OTL mode, I only use them in transformer mode. I save the OTL setting for my Beyer's

 

[kn19h7]

Nothing wrong with that imo, I enjoy k24x more than k70x too..

 

[rhythmdevils]

many people feel that way.  The K401 and K701 should have very similar amping requirements.  The only difference is that the K701 has a bunch of problems that need very specific synergy to improve. 
 
It is interesting that the K401 even bested the 701 in bass and soundstage.  I thought that might be 2 areas where the 701 would at least win just in terms of quantity/size even if it lost in terms of quality. 
 
It would be interesting to compare the 401 to the 601. 

 

[Proglover]

Yes, that's far from strange
 
K240/K340/K500/K501/K601, I enjoyed all of them more then 701

 

[Acix]

Quote:

Maybe what I should take away from this revelation is that the ASL is just not a good match for the 701's and I really need to find a better match.

The K70X are not a great match with tubes. You'll need to try out some high end SS amps,  just to get right what the K-70X are made for (studio use).
 
BTW... I've tried the whole AKG hps line back in 2000, and only the K-400 stand out for me, they are more balanced even compare to the DF. But I'm not sure I'll buy them today.

 

[CFabian]

My experience was almost identical to yours, Dogwan. I owned the K400 and K701 side-by-side with the same amp (MG-Head) and preferred the K400. Instrument separation was slightly better with the K701, but the K400 had a more balanced sound and the K701's soundstage was smaller than the K400's, contrary to my expectations. I could EQ the K701's and get the two to sound pretty close, but the midrange presentation of the K400 remained preferable for me.

 

[rhythmdevils]

Quote:

The K70X are not a great match with tubes. You'll need to try out some high end SS amps,  just to get right what the K-70X are made for (studio use).
 
BTW... I've tried the whole AKG hps line back in 2000, and only the K-400 stand out for me, they are more balanced even compare to the DF. But I'm not sure I'll buy them today.

 
So Acix, did you like the K400 better than the K701?

 

[misformatt]

I found my K701 to be more technically proficient, but I ultimately spent most of my time with my K400 and K501.  The K501 was fantastic for classical, and the K400 was solid with every genre I threw at it.  The detail retrieval on the K701 (mine had the ALO JenaLabs recable) was outstanding, but the overall presentation could become fatiguing.

 

[Acix]

Quote:

 
So Acix, did you like the K400 better than the K701?

They're different, The 702s have a better resolution, and more bass.
 

 

[Uncle Erik]

What's there to be ashamed of?

People who have experienced pre-Harmon Kardon AKGs usually prefer them to the newer ones.

I'm sticking with my K-240DF, K-340 and K-1000. And I'm mourning a once great company that now thinks day-glo is a substitute for quality.