[hsubox]

Yes. They are power hungry, but not as much as some people on head-fi claim (semms every headphone ever needs a power plant here :rolleyes. They do require some decent power.

I think it's a matter of scaling. Yes, you can drive these headphones straight from an iPod, and you can get decent sound from it, but when you do feed it a lot more power, it sounds significantly better. And once you've tasted the fruit and heard what these can really do, it's hard not to want to hook them up to a nuclear reactor.

 

[Chris J]

Quote:

I think it's a matter of scaling. Yes, you can drive these headphones straight from an iPod, and you can get decent sound from it, but when you do feed it a lot more power, it sounds significantly better. And once you've tasted the fruit and heard what these can really do, it's hard not to want to hook them up to a nuclear reactor.

 
Tasted the fruit?

Nuclear Reactor?

 
Sounds kind of doomsday and ominous to me!   LOL! 

 

[Soundfreak33]

Q701 owners, do u think these headphones are, or would be good for movies ?

 

[Hawaiiancerveza]

I will find out but MLE can give some inside on this topic.  

 

[Mad Lust Envy]

Yeah, I actually use them a bit for movies, because it's a bit easier listening to what the actors say with these.

The Q701 doesn't have a whopping amount of bass. It can be weak, and it can be good. It really depends on the specific range of bass. If you're looking for a lot of bass for explosions and stuff, the Q701 may not satisfy you at all times. "May" being the word, because there are times when the bass is perfect. Sometimes the bass surprises me with how good it is, but sometimes I feel left wanting more.

As for scaling, yeah, that goes for any headphone that requires amping. What I meant is that the Q701 doesn't need as much power as people claim for them to 'shine'. My NFB5 has a LOT of power, but even the E9 which is a mere fraction of the NFB5's power at 64ohms, sounds very damn good.

 

[Soundfreak33]

Thanks for your reply, they sound like there not going to be really good on movies.  I think im finding i need 2 sets of cans, one for music, and one for movies.  Im still very interested in these for music, i like 80s music, Plimsouls, Blondie, Queen, Stones, Depech Mode, etc.
 
I did own the AKG 550s and found myself wanting more bass, but sold them off because of bad fit and sealing.

 

[chicolom]

Quote:

 
 
I did own the AKG 550s and found myself wanting more bass, but sold them off because of bad fit and sealing.

 
Those sound correlated. 

 

[Hawaiiancerveza]

Ya I hear they are seal dependent... Other than that ttyl said they are the best sealed can's out so far.  He doesn't really count the Denons as sealed because they leak a lot of sound.  
 
Just got my Q701 and I'm burning it in with my LAvry Da11.  Sounds pretty good so far.  

 

[troymadison]

Just got my Q701. Just want to say WOW!!! AKG really nailed this one. Makes me not miss my K1000 at all and sounds more neutral than the GS1000 I just got. Definitively sounds less cold and more neutral than the K501s I used to own. From now on, whatever headphone AKG releases, I'm buying ASAP.

 

[Magick Man]

Thank you for helping to Bust The Myth of The Q701 Needs An Expensive Amp to Sound Any Good.
Like you, I have had good results with an el cheapo headphone amp and the Q701.
In my case, the lowly, low current, iBasso D12.
And welcome to the Q lovers club!

The Q701 sounds great out of my cheap Little Dot 1+, how they got the reputation for needing a lot of power is beyond me.

 

[Mad Lust Envy]

To be clear, it wasn't the Q701 that got that notorious reputation, it was mostly the K701.

Having heard both, I can somewhat understand why people would say that of the K701, though I still think it's an incorrect statement. The K701's innate sound signature is dry, analytical, and somewhat thin. Of course, with an amp that pervades it's sound signature over the dry, unassuming signature of the K701, it would it change to something a bit more pleasureable and full sounding.

The Q701 doesn't have that problem, because it's already a fuller sounding headphone vs the K701. I don't think it's 'easier' to drive. It's just that tonal shift in signature that made it 'appear' so.

All this has shown me is that people want to justify getting an amp that 'corrects' a headphone's flaw and immediately dismiss anything less as inadequate amping, instead of the headphone just not having a sound signature that is to their liking.

Like I mentioned earlier, I really liked the K701 with the E5 with Bass Boost On. It immediately made the K701 sound full and warm, though the bass boost did change the K701's sound to a non-neutral state.

 

[Chris J]

Just got my Q701. Just want to say WOW!!! AKG really nailed this one. Makes me not miss my K1000 at all and sounds more neutral than the GS1000 I just got. Definitively sounds less cold and more neutral than the K501s I used to own. From now on, whatever headphone AKG releases, I'm buying ASAP.


What!
That's awesome!
Makes me re-think my "need" ( or maybe my desire?) for a pair of Grados!

 

[AxelCloris]

Quote:

 
Those sound correlated. 

I can say from my experience that they exactly are. I was originally looking at the 550 to be my pick for a closed set for isolation. I got to listen to them down here in Cinci at the Best Buy around the corner and the fit on them was far too loose for me. When I pressed the cups to get a better seal, the bass and even some of the lower mids came in much better. So the seal will definitely leave much to be desired in the low end/sub bass for people like myself. I'd venture to say if they AT wing headphones don't fit properly, you'll find the K550's seal weak. Which is a shame, as I quite liked the feel and sound they presented.

 

[Soundfreak33]

I agree with you on the K550S.  Does the Q701 have more, or less bass than the K550s ??

 

[Magick Man]

I agree with you on the K550S.  Does the Q701 have more, or less bass than the K550s ??

Less, but it's more accurate.