[Me x3]

I have noticed this with other headphones, but mostly they were due to aging to pads. Sometimes when pads get old they tend to get softer changing the sound. unless they were bought at the same time used for the same hours, for the againg of pads, spund can be different

I'm talking about brand new K702 sn. 102.xxx vs brand new K702 sn. 129.xxx
Right out of the box I've compared both with my trusty DT880 Pro.
K702 sn. 102.xxx had less bass and was drier overall (vs DT880) while K702 sn. 129.xxx was slightly fuller sounding (vs DT880)
 
I've also noticed that using K712 pads on K702 sn. 129.xxx I get pretty much the same frequency response. I haven't listened to K702 with K712 pads, ony speak for the measurements.
So there's a chance AKG tuned the driver somehow for K712 and then started using it for newer K702 as well. Just a guess.
 
Quote:

  123332  (China)

Well that's a very late K702, almost as late as mine (129.xxx) keep in mind that back then when K702 born it was probably closer to the K701 in terms of sound signature.
 
Quote:

Was the K702 that was made in Austria actually far better built?

No. Anyway I don't find the K702 to be a luxury product but a purpose-based product. If you take them with some care they will surely last a decade or more.
Fidelios (X and L) for instance are built like jewelery, sound worse and parts are not replaceable.

 

[terry parr]

I think most people who have these h/p's will be using them only at home, and most users of this phone will be handling them with much more care than a more casual user handles their h/p's while at the gym while working out.  they weren't built with AKG having to consider them being thrown into a travel bag and being jostled about and carried from place to place by the crowd that embraces portable h/p's.  
 
I wouldn't consider either my 702's or 701's to be "ruggedly built", but this was never something that overly concerned me.  I felt the money for these h/p's were spent by AKG in the design and implementation of the driver, (including the flat-wire voice coil, and two-layer diaphragm, etc.)
 
the only aspect of the build that ever concerned me was the elastic bands on either side, which is part of the self-adjusting mechanism, but these have lasted for years now on my 701's with no problem.  the elastic bands perform just as well as they ever have, with no signs of wear.    

 

[geoffroyi]

To be honest, the build quality / materials used is the one thing I'm somewhat disappointed in as well. If I compare it to the 40-year-old(?) K240 Sextett, there is simply no comparison. But I suppose that's the way things go. And, to be fair, it's not like these are hugely expensive. And I wasn't any more impressed by the Sennheisers either.

 

[terry parr]

  To be honest, the build quality is the one thing I'm somewhat disappointed in as well. If I compare it to the 40-year-old(?) K240 Sextett, there is simply no comparison. But I suppose that's the way things go. And, to be fair, it's not like these are hugely expensive. And I wasn't much more impressed by the Sennheisers either.

 
 
so goes most things, these days, geo.  i'm currently  using a SONY STR-6055 receiver (circa early 70's) as a headphone amp.  want to talk about build quality in comparing this receiver to modern-day receivers?  there's no contest.  these days you're looking at cheaper circuit boards, cheaper op-amps, etc.  (and, never mind that the newer receivers are not "voiced" for how they sound and contribute to the reproduction of music, whereas with the equipment from this era, some of the amps and receivers actually were).   
 
still, though...I think AKG still built these K-series phones where they could re-coup the money in the area that mattered most as to how the h/p actually sounded and was voiced, while still keeping the phone reasonably priced. 

 

[interface95]

Didnt you find the midbass to be lacking a bit? I found it to be almost flat, but felt the midbass to be thin.

It doesn't have that midbass hump like most headphones used to have.
 

Even the hd600 does have that midbass hump but falls fast and deep afterwards.
The k702 has a much more linear bass response which is also very clear and that makes it that good I think.

 

[astralpen]

Very nice detail and top and. Very lacking in low end.  It's there...it's just not impactful. 

 

[interface95]

 
Very nice detail and top and. Very lacking in low end.  It's there...it's just not impactful. 

Well you have to look at the scale since i made the steps smaller.
It has more subbass than the hd600 and it's -3db-frequency is 50Hz which is very good for an open dynamic headphone.
So imo not much lacking.

 

[astralpen]

Measurement does not tell the whole story. How are low end transients handled? Is decay accurate.

 

[terry parr]

   
Well that's a very late K702, almost as late as mine (129.xxx) keep in mind that back then when K702 born it was probably closer to the K701 in terms of sound signature.
 
 

 
that could very well be.  if AKG was making subtle tuning changes to the voicing of this h/p (or simply making a change with the internal wiring that was used, say) AKG wouldn't have reported any of that, as they have never announced whether (or what type of changes, if any) they made or didn't make with certain models. 
 
headphone listeners noticed changes between similar models (witness the discussion threads comparing the Q models to the K models here on head-fi) and were sometimes left to guess as to what accounted for the perceived differences that they were hearing. 

 

[thelonious58]

that could very well be.  if AKG was making subtle tuning changes to the voicing of this h/p (or simply making a change with the internal wiring that was used, say) AKG wouldn't have reported any of that, as they have never announced whether (or what type of changes, if any) they made or didn't make with certain models. 

headphone listeners noticed changes between similar models (witness the discussion threads comparing the Q models to the K models here on head-fi) and were sometimes left to guess as to what accounted for the perceived differences that they were hearing. 

K702 and K701 have generally been described as bass-shy, but I wonder how much of that is based on people not driving them with a reasonably powerful amp. I have the K612, known to have +3Db of bass boost built in, but I found the bass overpowering when I used a Fiio A5 to drive it, whereas with the E17K the bass is just about right for me. Harman seem to enjoy keeping their AKG buyers in the dark about many subtle changes, or is it simply sample variations?

 

[ekvilibrijum1]

Hello everyone! I am considering my first pair of good headphones! I am using Audio Technica ATH M40x, and I consider them to be very good for the money.
 
Now I have a budget of 400 euros, and here in Germany I can get Beyerdynamic DT 880 600 Ohm Manufaktur and AKG K 702 for 199 euros, which leaves me with 200 euros for AMP/DAC.
 
 
I am classical musician and I listen to classical music 90% of the time.
 
10% is progressive rock and movie soundtracks.
 
 
What do you think would be a better choice for my preferences and why?
 
 
My library is FLAC and SACD, so hopefully, quiality of the recordings would not be an issue.
 
 
 
Symphonies, chamber music and concertos are my main choices.
 
 
Thank you in advance, sore for bumping in this thread and sorry for my English!

 

[Me x3]

  Hello everyone! I am considering my first pair of good headphones! I am using Audio Technica ATH M40x, and I consider them to be very good for the money.
 
Now I have a budget of 400 euros, and here in Germany I can get Beyerdynamic DT 880 600 Ohm Manufaktur and AKG K 702 for 199 euros, which leaves me with 200 euros for AMP/DAC.
 
I am classical musician and I listen to classical music 90% of the time.
10% is progressive rock and movie soundtracks.
What do you think would be a better choice for my preferences and why?
My library is FLAC and SACD, so hopefully, quiality of the recordings would not be an issue.
Symphonies, chamber music and concertos are my main choices.
Thank you in advance, sore for bumping in this thread and sorry for my English!

 
Both are nice picks, with the Beyer you get more brillance and sharper attack/lower decay in the treble region that's also more extended a prone to show background noise.
With the AKG you get a more opaque presentation that's still not dark, just a tad less trebly. On the AKG the mids are more upfront in the presence region, so instruments like cellos and piano stand out more relative to the more laid back Beyer. Using the Beyer those instruments take a little step backwards for a more cohesive and distant presentation (HD800-like)
 
Bass is quite similar on both, just a tad more resolving in the AKG. Soundstage is bigger and more layered on the AKG but still nice on the Beyer.
The Beyer is sturdier and comes with a carrying case.
 
Hope this helps!

 

[ekvilibrijum1]

Thank you very much!

I have been reading about these headphones and the the thing is, a lot of people is taking about Beyer being U shaped, and that is a deal breaker for classical, and AKG having plasticky midrange and soundstage which is too wide.

Do you think this is a case?

Thank you!

 

[Me x3]

Thank you very much!

I have been reading about these headphones and the the thing is, a lot of people is taking about Beyer being U shaped, and that is a deal breaker for classical, and AKG having plasticky midrange and soundstage which is too wide.

Do you think this is a case?

Thank you!

No.
 
DT990 can be labeled as u-shaped but DT880 is very much like HD800.
Read, neutralish bass, slightly softened upper midrange, and slightly raised but very detailed/fast treble. That's not a U-shaped response in my book.
 
Maybe early K701s had that plasticky tonality but things have changed.
I've bought my second AKG K702 few months ago and it's slightly warmer than DT880 with a very natural presentation overall.
 
Feel free to share a song of your preference, I can try it on both and share a comment.

 

[ekvilibrijum1]

You have been very helpful!
 
If you could share your comparison between these headphones with Rachmaninov - Piano concerto No. 2 - Adagio sostenuto, that would be great!
 
I find these piece to be very tricky to get a right balance in real life, so I am very curious about your opinion!
 
Thank you Me x3!