[XxDobermanxX]

Interesting....ATH-AD900 vs AKG 701
 
[size=small] Beat My AKG Q701's....., October 22, 2012[/size]

[size=small] By 
Jon (Massachusettes) - See all my reviews

 
[/size]

[size=x-small] This review is from: Audio Technica ATH-AD900 Audiophile Open-air Dynamic Headphones (Electronics)[/size]

[size=small]I had recently purchased a pair of AKG Q701's as an upgrade from the AD700 (a step below this model). They were definitely more linear sounding compared to the AD700s, but they lacked something i just couldn't put my finger on. These headphones had whatever it was they were missing, and my music has never sounded more alive and "real" than before. It has a linear, accurate sound with a wide, expansive soundstage, extremely fast transient response, and the ability to pull all sorts of hidden details out of music. These headphone literally leave nothing to the imagination, it's all there, and it's all rendered perfectly and marvelously.[/size][size=small][/size]
[size=small][/size]
[size=small]As far as the bass goes, i've seen many people complaining they have little to no bass. This is simply not true. They seem to do a good job at reproducing tight, accurate bass all the way down to about 30hz, below that they struggle. I won't deny that they aren't a bassy sounding headphone, because they aren't, but they definitely aren't bassless as some have made them out to be.[/size][size=small][/size]
[size=small][/size]
[size=small]I also noticed they seem to perform better with an amp, however the difference is not so huge that they are unusable without one.[/size]

 

[jontornblom]

Oooh, these phones really reveal dynamic compression. I could hear the soundstage shift on I'm A Sucker For A Kind Word by Copeland very very obviously. I could also hear limiting and compression on almost every non-jazz/classical recording I have listened to.

I am going to be even more reluctant to push clients' masters louder now (doesn't happen that often, actually). And I guess when I do, ill be that much fussier about it.

Cool.

 

[chicolom]

Quote:

Interesting....ATH-AD900 vs AKG 701
 
[size=small] Beat My AKG Q701's....., October 22, 2012[/size]

[size=small] By 
Jon (Massachusettes) - See all my reviews

 
[/size]

[size=x-small] This review is from: Audio Technica ATH-AD900 Audiophile Open-air Dynamic Headphones (Electronics)[/size]

[size=small]I had recently purchased a pair of AKG Q701's as an upgrade from the AD700 (a step below this model). They were definitely more linear sounding compared to the AD700s, but they lacked something i just couldn't put my finger on. These headphones had whatever it was they were missing, and my music has never sounded more alive and "real" than before. It has a linear, accurate sound with a wide, expansive soundstage, extremely fast transient response, and the ability to pull all sorts of hidden details out of music. These headphone literally leave nothing to the imagination, it's all there, and it's all rendered perfectly and marvelously.[/size][size=small][/size]
[size=small][/size]
[size=small]As far as the bass goes, i've seen many people complaining they have little to no bass. This is simply not true. They seem to do a good job at reproducing tight, accurate bass all the way down to about 30hz, below that they struggle. I won't deny that they aren't a bassy sounding headphone, because they aren't, but they definitely aren't bassless as some have made them out to be.[/size][size=small][/size]
 

 
 
AD900s are nice, but I can think of something the AD900s are lacking, and I can put my finger on it!  (hint: left side of graph...)
 
 

 

[Sleinzel]

Quote:

The first 2 hours these were the worst headphones in my collection due to severe coloration. The Q701 needs break in, the sibilance will go away, the frequency response will flatten out, transparency will increase, and the midrange will become less forward and sweeter. The sound changes by the hour for about the first 10 hours, then day by day up to about 80 hours of burn in when they finally arrive.

My Q701 has 93 hours so far, and I think the mid bass (around 130hz?!?) increased a little bit, sibilance went away.

 

[jontornblom]

Yes, I'm at about 40 hrs in now (2.5 times overnight with pink noise plus listening) and I can already hear a difference.

The whole debate about break in is weird. I bought two pairs of $100 Sony's a year apart (another pair for my wife), and they sounded identical.

On the other hand, I bought some cheaper in ears for exercising, and then lost them after 6 months, bought another pair and found the old pair. Completely different. Kept listening to the new pair, now I can't tell the difference.

Good enough for me. On some cans break in happens, on others, not really.

Think about bending any material repeatedly. Some have remarkable elasticity, others work themselves into having new properties (or breaking). It seems like its not a question of whether "headphones" break in or not, but whether some particular material does or not.

Long story short: started happy and happier by the hour.

 

[demontux]

ill have to agree. i thought i am about to get a "low bass" kind of headphones and the Q701 has a PERFECT and amazing bass ! punchy and not overpowering, just the way it supposed to be!
the details of the Q701 has no match to what i have heard before... its clean clear, and very very musical !!!
 
dont buy everything ppl try to sell ya here, most ppl that say the Q701 dont have them or compare them to K701, they sound different.... get advice from those who do have the Q701 and the K701, those who do say they sound different.
 
also they work perfect ampless

 

[tdockweiler]

It seems people always say it has more bass than the AD700, but probably not that much more.
If you check the graphs on Inner Fidelity there's only a tad more low bass.
 
I didn't buy the AD900 because I was worried it'd sound too much like a slightly improved AD700.
I do have the AD300 and it's pretty good. Very bad low-bass extension (like mostly inaudible) but yet still sounds warmer and fuller sounding than the AD700.
 
Now the ATH-AD2000 is perfect. Too bad Audio Technica gave it such awful pads. They go flat.
I paid $400 for mine and loved it but then the pads kept going flat. I bet some other person on Head-Fi has my pair!
 
Felt the bass was fine and it's a lot different sounding than the AD700. Sounded like a weird mix of the MDR-SA3000 and an HD-600 or something.

 
I used my AD700 for the first time in about a year for gaming. Didn't sound too bad really, but I wouldn't use it for music I think. I actually find it more trebly than my Q701.
Quote:

 
 
AD900s are nice, but I can think of something the AD900s are lacking, and I can put my finger on it!  (hint: left side of graph...)
 
 

 

[Bensen]

Just got mine and like them pretty much so far! Do you guys use and equalizer when using them with a computer?

I didn't try that yet, because as I said overall I'm satisfied - but the bass could have a little more impact for some songs while vocals sometimes sound a little bit too dominant and harsh to me (guess those are the accentuated upper mids), which can make longer listening a bit fatiguing so far...

Using foobar -> wasapi -> matrix m-stage -> akg q701 by the way

Another question: How much do you amplify them? I run them at the hottest level of the M-Stage at +20db gain and at 9-10 o'clock they have a good volume, It is surprising me that I have to turn the knob that "far" because of the relatively low impedance of the cans.
 
Thanks for any answers!
Cheers, Ben
 

 

[jasonb]

EQ is up to you. I'm sure Foobar has or can have a good EQ added to it. I add 2 to 4 db more bass to my Q701 with my E17's built in EQ. They respond well to a slight bass boost and actually become quite fun. 
Quote:

Just got mine and like them pretty much so far! Do you guys use and equalizer when using them with a computer?

I didn't try that yet, because as I said overall I'm satisfied - but the bass could have a little more impact for some songs while vocals sometimes sound a little bit too dominant and harsh to me (guess those are the accentuated upper mids), which can make longer listening a bit fatiguing so far...

Using foobar -> wasapi -> matrix m-stage -> akg q701 by the way

Another question: How much do you amplify them? I run them at the hottest level of the M-Stage at +20db gain and at 9-10 o'clock they have a good volume, It is surprising me that I have to turn the knob that "far" because of the relatively low impedance of the cans.
 
Thanks for any answers!
Cheers, Ben
 

 

[J Bones]

Quote:

The first 2 hours these were the worst headphones in my collection due to severe coloration. The Q701 needs break in, the sibilance will go away, the frequency response will flatten out, transparency will increase, and the midrange will become less forward and sweeter. The sound changes by the hour for about the first 10 hours, then day by day up to about 80 hours of burn in when they finally arrive.

 
 I used a mix of my tunes and BurnInWavGen to break it in, but after listening for the majority of the day for a whole week they had changed quite dramatically to the points you described. I kind of wish I would have listened at points in between to see the steps they took in reaching that difference, but nonetheless they sound more like what I anticipated after giving them some use.

 

[jasonb]

I've had mine for about 3-4 months now, I haven't been running a stopwatch to count the hours on them, but I use them on average about 2-4 hrs a day. They have got to have at least 300-400 hours on them already. I can't say I've really noticed anything hugely different since the first listen. They sound great, but they sounded great when I first plugged them in too. They were purchased brand new in a sealed box with serial # 11,916. 
 
They are definitely the best headphone I've ever heard, that is including the HD650. The HD650 was nice, no doubt about it, but I prefer this type of sound signature more now. 
 
Q701 + E17 = WIN!!! For a total of $380 shipped it's definitely a steal.  
Quote:

 
 I used a mix of my tunes and BurnInWavGen to break it in, but after listening for the majority of the day for a whole week they had changed quite dramatically to the points you described. I kind of wish I would have listened at points in between to see the steps they took in reaching that difference, but nonetheless they sound more like what I anticipated after giving them some use.

 

[tdockweiler]

Quote:

I've had mine for about 3-4 months now, I haven't been running a stopwatch to count the hours on them, but I use them on average about 2-4 hrs a day. They have got to have at least 300-400 hours on them already. I can't say I've really noticed anything hugely different since the first listen. They sound great, but they sounded great when I first plugged them in too. They were purchased brand new in a sealed box with serial # 11,916. 
 
They are definitely the best headphone I've ever heard, that is including the HD650. The HD650 was nice, no doubt about it, but I prefer this type of sound signature more now. 
 
Q701 + E17 = WIN!!! For a total of $380 shipped it's definitely a steal.  

I've now had mine since October 25th 2011. Hard to believe. Time sure flies..I now have approximately 20,000 hours on them. Ok, I have no clue. Thousands of hours easily.
I was originally going to return them if they sounded 100% identical to my K702. Ended up keeping the Q701 and selling the K702.
 
Oh and I liked them so much that I sold my K501. Kept the K601 for some reason, but I rarely use it. I love the K501, but it's soundstage is so massive. Yet at the same time nothing sounds too distant. Not vocals anyway, unlike the old K702 I had.
 
I've made only two changes to my setup and I can't imagine the Q701 getting any better. Not going to buy any more gear over $300 for each piece.
 
BTW here's how i'd rank the AKGs i've owned:
 
Q701 > K601 > K501 > K702/1 > K400 > K240 Sextett
 
Most people would rank the K501 higher than the K601, but I liked the warmth of the K601. Seemed a bit fuller sounding than the K702, but not the Q701.
My K400 sounded bad because it was not a good match for the HRT MSII. It's mids were really shouty and i'm about 75% sure it was the HRT MSII's fault.
K400 actually didn't have enough bass for me. How the K501 did and the K400 didn't makes no sense... I think they might even use the same drivers.
K400 was better in this area with K601 pads but was less clear.
 
OH yeah...the K501 I had had a larger soundstage than the AD700..at least with gaming. I think I had Version 1. Playing Fallout 3 with that thing was kind of weird..

 

[Kodhifi]

Quote:

My Q701 has 93 hours so far, and I think the mid bass (around 130hz?!?) increased a little bit, sibilance went away.

It was beyond things like sibilance or grainy. Out of the box it was quite literally like somebody had turned all my equalizer sliders into pretty shapes that had nothing to do with sound. Upper mid range had huge resonances and gaps, the mid range was so loud you couldn't even hear the bass. No highs to speak of, just badly colored midrange. I actually thought I got burned and had fakes. 2 hours later I went back and re-played my initial songs and confirmed the incredible difference. More transparent, the bass started to come out, highs started to crispen up and become present. I'm not talking little subjective "did it really change?" observations either, I'm talking as clearly audible as playing with an equalizer.
 
My 880's changed very little with break in, a sweetening of the sound, more clarity in the highs, but nothing ground breakingly different. I think break in is affected by things like tension in the driver material, how freely the voice coil can move, adhesives that are stiff becoming more flexible, mechanical wear. I mean it is a machine with moving parts, the tolerances are very tight before run in, and things loosen up, friction drops, parts wear against each other and become more cohesive. I think it depends on the driver construction and choice of materials more than anything.
 
I've had my 701's for about 3 weeks now. I have used no burn in waves or tricks like putting in a drawer. I have used them the entire time listening to about 6 hours of music while awake, and another 6 while sleeping every day. There were a few days where I left them amped but not used them so they played without me wearing them as I listened on my other headphones, but I purposefully put my 880's in another room so I wouldn't be tempted to go back to them until the 701's had time to break in. I guess I have about 100 hours into them now. They are in the same league as the Beyerdynamic 880 250 ohm I've had for 3 years. The Q701's seem to be the kings of midrange, great for vocals, jazz, classical. The 880's on the other hand are more neutral, smoother, and they soar to heights of high frequencies effortlessly and musically. I'm glad they have different qualities like that or what would be the point of owning both?

 

[Sleinzel]

Quote:

It was beyond things like sibilance or grainy. Out of the box it was quite literally like somebody had turned all my equalizer sliders into pretty shapes that had nothing to do with sound. Upper mid range had huge resonances and gaps, the mid range was so loud you couldn't even hear the bass. No highs to speak of, just badly colored midrange. I actually thought I got burned and had fakes. 2 hours later I went back and re-played my initial songs and confirmed the incredible difference. More transparent, the bass started to come out, highs started to crispen up and become present. I'm not talking little subjective "did it really change?" observations either, I'm talking as clearly audible as playing with an equalizer.
 
My 880's changed very little with break in, a sweetening of the sound, more clarity in the highs, but nothing ground breakingly different. I think break in is affected by things like tension in the driver material, how freely the voice coil can move, adhesives that are stiff becoming more flexible, mechanical wear. I mean it is a machine with moving parts, the tolerances are very tight before run in, and things loosen up, friction drops, parts wear against each other and become more cohesive. I think it depends on the driver construction and choice of materials more than anything.
 
I've had my 701's for about 3 weeks now. I have used no burn in waves or tricks like putting in a drawer. I have used them the entire time listening to about 6 hours of music while awake, and another 6 while sleeping every day. There were a few days where I left them amped but not used them so they played without me wearing them as I listened on my other headphones, but I purposefully put my 880's in another room so I wouldn't be tempted to go back to them until the 701's had time to break in. I guess I have about 100 hours into them now. They are in the same league as the Beyerdynamic 880 250 ohm I've had for 3 years. The Q701's seem to be the kings of midrange, great for vocals, jazz, classical. The 880's on the other hand are more neutral, smoother, and they soar to heights of high frequencies effortlessly and musically. I'm glad they have different qualities like that or what would be the point of owning both?

 
I did 5 hours burn in without listening to them, because I heard that they sound wrong in the first few hours. From 5 Hours to 93 its the mid-bass increase and the missing sibilance as far as i can tell.

 

[J Bones]

Quote:

I've had mine for about 3-4 months now, I haven't been running a stopwatch to count the hours on them, but I use them on average about 2-4 hrs a day. They have got to have at least 300-400 hours on them already. I can't say I've really noticed anything hugely different since the first listen. They sound great, but they sounded great when I first plugged them in too. They were purchased brand new in a sealed box with serial # 11,916. 
 
They are definitely the best headphone I've ever heard, that is including the HD650. The HD650 was nice, no doubt about it, but I prefer this type of sound signature more now. 
 
Q701 + E17 = WIN!!! For a total of $380 shipped it's definitely a steal.  

 
 
I bought mine brand new as well, hence why every time I listen to them they sound better and better (funny how that works isn't it?) I'm still taught inbetween the E17 and DigiZoid though but this has got me leaning more towards the E17 now...
 
 
Quote:

Q701 > K601 > K501 > K702/1 > K400 > K240 Sextett
 

 
 
I like the look of this considering these are the first AKG's I've owned although they probably won't be my last!
 
 
Quote:

I've had my 701's for about 3 weeks now. I have used no burn in waves or tricks like putting in a drawer. I have used them the entire time listening to about 6 hours of music while awake, and another 6 while sleeping every day. There were a few days where I left them amped but not used them so they played without me wearing them as I listened on my other headphones, but I purposefully put my 880's in another room so I wouldn't be tempted to go back to them until the 701's had time to break in. I guess I have about 100 hours into them now. They are in the same league as the Beyerdynamic 880 250 ohm I've had for 3 years. The Q701's seem to be the kings of midrange, great for vocals, jazz, classical. The 880's on the other hand are more neutral, smoother, and they soar to heights of high frequencies effortlessly and musically. I'm glad they have different qualities like that or what would be the point of owning both?

 
 
I listen to alot of R&B with more pronounced vocals and mid bass and I love how these Q701's perform with them. When it comes to any type of electric/EDM music or something that extends further down into the lower bass ranges they don't fair so well, but that's also why I'm looking into finding a portable amp for them. Either way, their midrange from what I can tell after testing a few other headphones is quite superior and I couldn't complain one bit about it.
 
 
Quote:

 
I did 5 hours burn in without listening to them, because I heard that they sound wrong in the first few hours. From 5 Hours to 93 its the mid-bass increase and the missing sibilance as far as i can tell.

 
 
I have noticed that there is still quite a bit of sibilance in the higher frequencies at certain points but hopefully this will go away with more burn-in and the proper amping source at soem point.