[Alondite]

I've been searching around for a pair of suitable full-sized open circumaural headphones to accompany my GR07s for awhile now, and I think I've narrowed my search down to two: The AD900 and the Q701. Is there anyone who has heard both and can give me a good comparison/suggestion? I'll copy/paste my preferences from another thread:

"I'm primarily an IEM user looking to step into the realm of full-sized headphones. Truthfully, I don't even know where to start.

My current pair of IEMs (and my current benchmark) are a pair of VSonic GR07s (which I love). The R07s are everything I'm looking for in terms of a sound signature. They are a sort of "everyman" headphone. For those of you who have not yet had the pleasure of hearing them, they have fairly speedy bass with just enough punch and good extension, the mids are smooth with a bit a warmth, and the high end is pretty clear and airy, though not quite as present as the rest of the spectrum (at least to me). Overally they have what is more or less a neutral sound that is moderately laid-back and very effortless. They have a pretty spacious soundstage compared to other IEMs I've heard, and I particularly love the positioning of vocals sounding like they are smack in the middle of your head. This is basically what I'm looking for in a full-sized headphone as well. Also worth noting is that I am primarily a mobile listener (not necessarily on-the-go always, but my primary source is a mobile device) and have a Fiio E11 out of an iPod (though I'm looking to upgrade to a Cowon J3 very soon). I'd also use them for gaming and movies as well though.

My music preferences are irrelevant, because I want an accurate headphone and an accurate headphone is supposed to recreate the music as it was intended to sound. I've never understood the concept of buying headphones based on genre (though I listen to rock and metal mostly, with some classical and video game tunes sprinkled in) or colored headphones being more "fun." I like headphones that sound "live."

Essentially what I am looking for is this:

- Tight, controlled bass with good punch and extension. I tend to not like bass-heavy headphones, but don't want headphones that are very bass-light either. MY R07s have pretty much the exact bass I am looking for. I'm willing to bend a little in either direction though.
- I like an open, airy sound. I'm a big fan of smooth highs. As I understand it, some headphones that are a bit edgier in the high end can sound more detailed, which is also fine by me. I'm also not opposed to very speedy headphones whatsoever.
- I like a neutral mid-range with maybe a touch of warmth.
- Good separation is a must. I HATE congested sound, and I also really hate headphones that come off as being a sort of "wall-of-sound."
- I don't like feeling to disconnected from the music (as in it being positioned very far away and being overly laid-back), but I do tend to prefer a slightly more laid-back sound as opposed to a very "in your face" and intimate sound.
- I'd prefer something with a spacious soundstage and good imaging. I really like the combination of good separation and being able to hear were all the various audio cues are coming from.


If I need to be more specific with anything let me know. And thanks in advance!"

 

[K_19]

Bass wise, I can say that AD900's have great punch but lack of extension, while K701's (nearly identical with Q701 from what I hear) extends well but lacks the punch. So you'll have to decide which one of the two you'd rather have. AD900's have more midrange warmth but is also more forward than K701 mids. Both have similar highs and excellent separation. AD900's more in your face than the K701 though.
 
You'll also need a decent amp for the K/Q701's to shine, while for AD900's it's not a necessity.

 

[MalVeauX]

Heya,
 
I think you're going to like the AD900 more than the K701. The K701 sounds cold and synthetic to me, good for analyzing, but just so disconnected from the music. I felt like it's sound stage was abnormally large in a synthetic way that also sounded like there was a fog between me and the music. It's a very clean and clear sounding headphone, but I wouldn't categorize it as any kind of warm. The AD900 on the other hand sounds like what you're after in every way.
 
As an alternative though, I would also suggest you consider perhaps the Fischer Audio FA-002 or Sennheiser HD600.
 
Very best,

 

[Alondite]

Thank you! I probably should add that my budget limits me to about $250 at the moment. I've heard that the Q701 can be a  bit cold and analytical sounding, but that's fine with me too. I have a preference, but I wouldn't mind having something different-sounding than my GR07s either as long as it still sounds good and neutral. The only headphones I'm opposed to really are the more colored ones with "V-shaped" response.

 

[tdockweiler]

Quote:

Thank you! I probably should add that my budget limits me to about $250 at the moment. I've heard that the Q701 can be a  bit cold and analytical sounding, but that's fine with me too. I have a preference, but I wouldn't mind having something different-sounding than my GR07s either as long as it still sounds good and neutral. The only headphones I'm opposed to really are the more colored ones with "V-shaped" response.

With a good amp, I don't find the Q701 to be even remotely cold or analytical. I've found it to sound warmer than the K702. The issues I had with the K702 are gone with the Q701 (goofy soundstage and painful treble). But no, it doesn't have any huge bass increase and it'd ruin it.
Q701's soundstage also seems more accurate than the K702 and not so artificially huge. Not sure why this is. The Q701 I have with my setup is almost as warm as the K601. Not like the HD-598 though.
 
Q701 is probably one of my favorites right now, but anyone who wants a lot of bass impact should avoid it of course. To me the mids on the Q701 seems a little fuller sounding than those of the K702. I've had the Q701 for about 2-3 weeks now and have zero complaints. I usually have a lot for almost any headphone!
 
Based on your description of "a touch of warmth", that's the K702. Not as cold and analytical as the DT-880 IMO. Sounds like you may like the Q701, but it is a tad warmer to me than the K702 and just as cheap usually. I even prefer it to my old K601 and K501! Q701 is just so fatigue free for me. Reminds me of a mix between maybe the HD-598 and the K702!

 

[Alondite]

Being fatigue-free is something I love about the GR07s, so that's definitely a big plus.

 

[Gwarmi]

AD900 sounds like your cup of tea in your pursuit for an open airy sound with that typical warm signature house
sound from Audio Technica.
 
Ultimately, the Q701 are the more technically competent set of cans but it will not suit anyone without very good
amplification/source and a tendency to prefer a warm upper mid range and treble region.
 
Although as tdockweiler pointed out ~ this could all be fine tuned from the source and amplification side of things,
but in their natural state ~ the AD900 is naturally warmer to my ears.

 

[Alondite]

So then what would you consider "good amplification and source"?

Being warm is really irrelevant to me. I tend to prefer a slightly warmer sound, but by no means is it necessary. I'm more interested in hearing how they compare across the spectrum, in speed and detail, soundstage, separation, imaging. I'm less concerned with their sonic signature and more concerned with how they compare objectively.

 

[Gwarmi]

Quote:

So then what would you consider "good amplification and source"?

Being warm is really irrelevant to me. I tend to prefer a slightly warmer sound, but by no means is it necessary. I'm more interested in hearing how they compare across the spectrum, in speed and detail, soundstage, separation, imaging. I'm less concerned with their sonic signature and more concerned with how they compare objectively.

I find that the Q701 will be superior in separation and clarity to the AD900 ~ the AD900 makes leaps and bounds in terms of curbing the
graininess that is apparent with the lesser AD700 but it cannot top the crystal clarity of the Q701 when matched with high quality recordings
from a clean source and amp. Detail is good on both cans but again the Q701 has the edge if you wish to retrieve everything on the track.
 
Sound stage and imaging is again the Q701's trump card, it is better in my opinion than the fabled LCD-2. Some would say I'm delusional
but anyone who has heard both cans will tell you that the Q701 throws a very big image and locates it properly in the grand scheme of things.
 
As a bare minimum consider something like the Audio GD NFB-5 which is a very good value Dac/Amp at around $340USD.
 
It is modular in it's design so that various aspects can be improved upon relatively easily by the end user to improve performance down
the track.
 
The key with the Q701 is finding an amp that will give it the necessary current and voltage swing  ~
some amps do one but not the other. 

 

[Alondite]

Well, the only amp I currently have is my Fiio E11, which I mainly got just to clean up the sound from my iPod and be able to use the line out as opposed to the headphone jack. Fiio claims it can "properly drive" headphones up to 300 Ohms, but I have to take that with a grain of salt.

 

[Gwarmi]

Quote:

Well, the only amp I currently have is my Fiio E11, which I mainly got just to clean up the sound from my iPod and be able to use the line out as opposed to the headphone jack. Fiio claims it can "properly drive" headphones up to 300 Ohms, but I have to take that with a grain of salt.

You will sorely be disappointed with a Fiio E11 and the Q701, that leaves you with the AD900.

 

[staxxx]

Agreed, +1 for the AD900

I just got mine, and I'll be honest, it's not much of an upgrade from the AD700.

As for the K701, it's really a strange sounding headphone, I just doesn't sound right to me. I've never heard the Q701.

 

[chicolom]

I've have heard both of these cans, and I currently own the Q701s, So I can give you a comparison.
TL;DR    Get the Q701s! 

 
I went a little overboard

, as I've sort of been wanting to write some kind of review on the Q701s since I got them last week.
 
So this will serve as my review of the Q701 as well:
 
 

ATH-AD900

The AD900s are very airy, light, and delicate sounding.  The bass on them is better than they're little brother the AD700s, but it's still on the weak side.
 
When I got the AD900s, I A-B'ed them with my AD700s and after a few days of listening, the AD900s got sold.  They're too similiar to justify the price difference.  You can practically EQ the AD700s into AD900s with a slight boost in the bass/mids and drop in the upper treble. 
 
The overall strengths of the AD's are very airy sound (hence the "air" branding) and bright treble that emphasises details.  The AD700s actually sound more airy then the AD900s due to their exaggerated highs (the highs are grainy though, and a bit like sandpaper).  This makes them great for classical, and of course they're large soundstage and good instrument placement helps as well.  The downfall of the AD's is that they're are too metallic and thin sounding.  This severely limits their genre bandwith IMO.  The one genre I loved them for was classical, but they just couldn't deliver on other genres.  I held on to AD700s because they still had the best soundstage I could get at the price

 

Choosing the Q701

....I did months and months of research on head-fi and the internetz, gauging my sound preferences with the characteristics of headphones I'd gleaned from the forums.  The K70x kept coming up as the top contender for me; they seemed to posses the traits I was looking for.  I came across many complaints against the K70x as sounding to cold, sterile, analytical, thin, unnatural, bass light, etc. 
 
I decided to settle on Q701s and pulled the trigger.  I don't understand many of the complaints I've read, as they don't seem to fit with these Q701s I have.  I don't find them to be sterile, thin, or bass light. 

 
I think they sound very natural.  For instance, if I record a piano then play back the recording, out of all the headphones I've tried (see sig) on the Q701 it sounds the most "natural" -> like I'm back  in the room listening to the real piano play.
 
I've never heard the K701s or K702s, so I can't say for sure if there is a difference. A couple people, (such as tdockweiler above ^) have experienced both at some point, and from what I've read they report some sonic differences.  
 
The AD700s got sold the next day after my Q701s arrived.
 
 

AKG Q701

 
Compared to the AD900/700, the  Q701s are a different beast.  These are not thin.  They are punchy and powerful...
      

Soundstage

...yet at the same time, they have a wonderful soundstage. For me this is a rare combination. 
 
Most cans that I've heard that have a large soundstage are thin sounding, while the punchy cans tend to have a small congested soundstage.  The Q701s manage to combine both a large soundstage w/great separation and a punchy sound. 
 
Soundstage size wise the ADs have a soundstage close in size to the Q701s (although Q701s is taller), however the Q701s have better separation and placement.  You can see and visualize the different sounds clearly, like they're suspended in air in front of and around you.  I find this effect very cool for the genres I  listen too (classical/jazz/acoustic/electronic).  I don't know how it would do for rock and metal though

 
So again, the soundstage is intoxicating for me.  I'm a soundstage whore, and I love it.
      

Bass

And the bass.  Its delicious.  Its the best I've ever heard.  AD900s aren't even remotely close to having the punch in bass the Q701s have.  The quality is very, very good - and I found the quantity to be absolutely perfect.  I don't find them to be bass light at all.  In fact, I had to keep checking my EQ settings to make sure my bass boost wasn't turned on.  It extends very low and delivers a deep, low, rumble when called to. 
 
When it needs to, the bass delivers a punch that is perfectly balanced and doesn't intrude over the other frequencies.  With acoustic genre's its just perfect.  I would never apply bass boost to these.  I'm even a little wary of using a warmer amp (like a Matrix m-stage).
 

Mids

The mids are nice and seem full.  I don't have much to say about them.  No complaints  :x
      

Highs

You said you like smooth highs, and the Q701s have this.  They're very detailed, but not over exaggerated like some headphones. 
Just liquid smooth, and very natural sounding.
 
So, as you've know doubt guessed by now, to me the Q701s are in a different league than the AD900s.  

>

 
I would pick the Q701 in a heartbeat.  

 
 
 
P.S. -  You DO need to get a good source and amp.  Especially the source.  I'm not going to be snobby and say they sound like S#@% out of anything else; they don't.  However they definitely "unlock" with a better source/amp.  Comparing from my laptops headphone out to my DAC/amp out, the former sounds stuffy, congested, and claustrophobic - like they're are boxed in hitting the ceiling.  Just double amping my laptops headphone jack wasn't that impressive, but putting a DAC + AMP in there was.  The sound opened up and got much cleaner, detailed, and the soundstage improved dramatically. 
 
I'm on a budget so I went the FiiO E10 and E9 and I think they're great, but maybe I'm an ignorant person

 

[Chime Bells]

Q701 is pretty weak on the  bass side, lacking the punch you need. Plus, Q701 needs a decent  amp to perform acceptably.
 
So my vote would go to AD900.

 

[chicolom]

Quote:

Q701 is pretty weak on the  bass side, lacking the punch you need. Plus, Q701 needs a decent  amp to perform acceptably.
 
So my vote would go to AD900.

 
Again, common complaint that I don't understand.  Are we listening to the same headphone? 

 
I'll admit that the AD900 runs great unamped, but it's much weaker on bass than the Q701s.  Even unamped the Q701 has more bass.