[wordfool]

As I search for new headphones and throw these AKG's into the mix of suggestions no-one seems to recommend them above any others -- they're always the also-rans in shortlists as far as I can tell. There are also not many reviews of them, either good or bad, here or elsewhere. Is it because anythign other than the "M" version is considered inferior?

Is there anything glaringly wrong with them that I've missed, or are they just mediocre? If you could pick up a pair of K240 MkII's for about $110 (or the older K240s for about $100) to use as general un-amped all-rounders (rock to etectronica to classical) would these fit the bill?

 

[Commanderloochy]

I tried my friends out and I thought they were pretty good, as far as I know there's nothing glaringly wrong with them. I'm not too experienced so take this with a grain of salt, maybe someone else could confirm.

 

[rhythmdevils]

all I can offer here is that when a company has a history of making their products worse each time they revamp them, eventually the "cry wolf" phenomenon would seem to take hold, where their newly revamped (repainted) K240 just isn't very exciting. Especially since it means that getting a cheap, dirty, 30 year old used pair on flea bay will yield better sound... low-fi works as a concept for music, but for technology, I'm not shure it's a selling point.

I should add though, that I listened to an S version, and thought it sounded good.

 

[Scott_Tarlow]

I love how the brand "Shure" makes us spell sure shure.

 

[wordfool]

Ah, now I'm seeing a picture... a company cheaping out with each upgrade and losing respect in the head-fi world. Perhaps that's why the MkII's are so heavily discounted right now, although AFAIK they have the same drivers as the earlier S version.

 

[D4R]

I have the 240s but I usually end up listening to its sister, the 271mkII more. I'm not saying that its anything less than its sibling, just that I do prefer the sound out of the 271 more than that of the 240. It's cleaner or more transparent than the 240 to my ears. I can also listen to music at lower volumes.

 

[rhythmdevils]

I'm sorry if i sounded negative. I haven't heard the mkII so I can't say, I'm just going off what I've read and heard from the studio veriosn and sextett version. But I was surprised by the studio version- it's no sextett, but it was very balanced sounding. I'd like to hear the Monitor version and DF version.

 

[Cankin]

K240 MKII is certainly worth its price. I prefer it to MS1, SRH840 and others at that price range.

 

[Rad Librarian]

K240s has a VERY nice liquidity for its price range. My only problems with it are the boosted vocal range, which can emphasize sibilant vocals, which is a bit ironic considering its generally a pretty mellow and dark phone. It has a nice amount of bass, but its not a tight "hard hitting" bass, which a lot of folks don't like as it tends to bleed into the rest of the music.

I have kept my pair, they are nice and sturdy so I "let" my wife use it for her computer hulu and movie viewing, and for the rare occasion my 3 and 1/2 year old wants to listen to music on them.

They offer very good detail and comfort in their price range. As always YMMV

 

[rmjacksn]

I have a pair of K240 Monitors that I bought 25 - 30 years ago. Although I think they still sound great, I've been reading a lot about cable upgrades. My various searches have not yielded much in the way of replacement cables from Cardas and the like. Am I just missing something, or are there no cable upgrades offered for this "old" model?

 

[Acix]

I like the DF, the MKll are great too, but the K-702 in the studio are the best.