[Dylan Yamazaki]

But really, are there any other best-bang-for-the-bucks better than this one? Hell, are there any closed cans better than this one? under $1000

 

[nicholars]

Quote:

But really, are there any other best-bang-for-the-bucks better than this one? Hell, are there any closed cans better than this one? under $1000

 
Maybe that is getting a bit carried away?

 

[wje]

Quote:

It's weird to not see anything but very positive feedback by any1 who has tried the headphone so far, this doesn't often happen because of the variety in user preferences, can this really be "the new M50" in terms of allrounder, good recommendation for the starter head-fi who doesn't know what their preferences are like?
 
I think K167 ticks all the things to become that:
 
- Not TOO expensive (under $200)
- Balanced with slight bass emphasis
- Handles every genre pretty well
- Closed (with good isolation), a must for many users
- Not demanding amp wise
- Decent/good design (no Beats flashiness but no Fostex TR50P matureness but modern styling)
- Great comfort
 
The only somewhat questionable thing is the non-detachable cable and build quality/durability that will surface more clearly as time progresses, too early to make any assumptions yet but even if that would be subpar then it doesn't make it any worse as it's performing so well on other aspects and as usual it has to be a catch somewhere, it can't be exceptional at EVERY point or the pricing just wouldn't make any sense.

 
Keep in mind, it's really about the bass quality vs. the level of bass or even the "slight bass emphasis."  To my ears, the bass produced by the K167 is quite good.  In fact, it is simply beautiful.  I've thrown a lot of genres at these headphones since getting them on Saturday morning.  I'm really impressed with the bass that I hear and the bass isn't a "one note" wonder either.  It is detailed / textured bass, as indicated by another member.  The bass has great accuracy to it.
 
I don't think the K167 is anymore fragile than a Sennheiser HD-600, for example.  Nor, do I think they are any more fragile than a $200 to $300 pair of Grados either.  If a purchaser suspects that the'll subject their headphones to a lot of abuse, then they might consider an ulta-rugged studio headphone and accept some lesser performance in exchange.  But, I think for a user who would be using the K167 in a somewhat careful manner, as one should do with any headphone, then I think the K167 will be around for a long time.  
 
As to the non-detachable cable, one isn't giving up all too much. With the K267, the jack on the ear cup is a 3.5mm TRS female jack, and not a mini 3-pin XLR jack.  At the present moment, AKG only has cables available for replacement on their Web site that have the 3-pin XLR connector.  None have the 3.5mm jack on both ends as of yet.  But, I still would prefer the 3-pin XLR instead, as I think it makes for a much stronger connection point at the cup level.
 
Quote:

But really, are there any other best-bang-for-the-bucks better than this one? Hell, are there any closed cans better than this one? under $1000

 
I think it's awfully subjective as to whether the K167 is a killer of all closed cans at the $1,000 and under price-point. The sound and the features are all subjective based on individual preference.  In my personal experience and perspective, it all just matters to what my ears hear and how well I'm cable of enjoying my music with the device or the headphones.  The cost element doesn't enter the equation for me.  It's all about the connection to the music. 

 

[nicholars]

Quote:

 
Keep in mind, it's really about the bass quality vs. the level of bass or even the "slight bass emphasis."  To my ears, the bass produced by the K167 is quite good.  In fact, it is simply beautiful.  I've thrown a lot of genres at these headphones since getting them on Saturday morning.  I'm really impressed with the bass that I hear and the bass isn't a "one note" wonder either.  It is detailed / textured bass, as indicated by another member.  The bass has great accuracy to it.
 

 
How much bass quantity do they have compared to D2000, HD650 or M50? Are they good for bass heavy genres such as electronic?

 

[RPGWiZaRD]

Quote:

 
Keep in mind, it's really about the bass quality vs. the level of bass or even the "slight bass emphasis."  To my ears, the bass produced by the K167 is quite good.  In fact, it is simply beautiful.  I've thrown a lot of genres at these headphones since getting them on Saturday morning.  I'm really impressed with the bass that I hear and the bass isn't a "one note" wonder either.  It is detailed / textured bass, as indicated by another member.  The bass has great accuracy to it.
 
I don't think the K167 is anymore fragile than a Sennheiser HD-600, for example.  Nor, do I think they are any more fragile than a $200 to $300 pair of Grados either.  If a purchaser suspects that the'll subject their headphones to a lot of abuse, then they might consider an ulta-rugged studio headphone and accept some lesser performance in exchange.  But, I think for a user who would be using the K167 in a somewhat careful manner, as one should do with any headphone, then I think the K167 will be around for a long time.  
 
As to the non-detachable cable, one isn't giving up all too much. With the K267, the jack on the ear cup is a 3.5mm TRS female jack, and not a mini 3-pin XLR jack.  At the present moment, AKG only has cables available for replacement on their Web site that have the 3-pin XLR connector.  None have the 3.5mm jack on both ends as of yet.  But, I still would prefer the 3-pin XLR instead, as I think it makes for a much stronger connection point at the cup level.
 
I think it's awfully subjective as to whether the K167 is a killer of all closed cans at the $1,000 and under price-point. The sound and the features are all subjective based on individual preference.  In my personal experience and perspective, it all just matters to what my ears hear and how well I'm cable of enjoying my music with the device or the headphones.  The cost element doesn't enter the equation for me.  It's all about the connection to the music. 

 
Yea I know, bass quality can greatly effect the end result of percieved bass response, a good quality 10dB bass boost as such of Fostex TH900 can sound less bloated than a bad quality 5dB boost for example. My point was that a slight emphasis in the bass ~5dB or so, is better as an "allrounder king" than zero boost as for EDM especially that 5dB boost is very welcome and if it's good enough quality 5dB boost won't disturb genres like jazz.
 
And yea you can't really complain about the lack of detachable cable in this case but that's just a point to throw around for not being seen as overly "favorable" / hyping the headphone to skyheights, have to find some counter arguments too haha.
 
I really want to try this headphone as I like great bang-for-buck headphones with a focus on sound quality, to me that's what I wanna pay for, I don't care about looks and I can live with slight discomfort if it's sounding well above its pricepoint and could accept sub-par build quality that may last you a half year or you could be lucky and it lasts 3 years+ etc if you get well above its price point sound quality. For me sound quality is always by far the most important what I wanna pay for.  Compare "sports" cars for example, some of them may have awful stripped down ergonomics and no extra features at all but they can have great engines/performance for their cost.

 

[pablobaluba]

Quote:

It's weird to not see anything but very positive feedback by any1 who has tried the headphone so far, this doesn't often happen because...

Well... by anyone you are referring to 3 people at this moment I guess. That's not much at all and some people are getting carried away (including me). I'm watching this topic daily and I decided to wait for the K267.
Still, I consider more reviews are necessary to get an objective evaluation of this series, as at the current moment there are only 3 or 4. Not that I don't believe them, but I would like to hear more opinions until we get a final image.

 

[Prakhar]

Theres 6 people from my count. And some of them are pretty experienced.

 

[alpha10]

I can only speak for the D2000 which I had for years, the K167 goes deeper and is more controlled and detailed, the D2000 has a nice bass but it's no match for the K167, combine that with a clearer midrange and nice rolled off highs you have a headphone that sounds great with all kinds of music, a headphone that brings the best out of good recordings, and makes you want to listen to your entire collection all over again, and that's for me the most important aspect

How much bass quantity do they have compared to D2000, HD650 or M50? Are they good for bass heavy genres such as electronic?

 

[miow]

Quote:

 
How much bass quantity do they have compared to D2000, HD650 or M50? Are they good for bass heavy genres such as electronic?

 
...!!!

 

[Craigster75]

Would you describe the mids and highs of the K167 as more analytical or colored?  I ask because I will definitely wait for the K267 since I want the option of as much bass as possible, but I would also imagine the Tiesto line would share a similar sonic signature throughout.  I have not been a fan of AKG's sound and am wondering if they have gone in a different direction with the Tiesto line, or if they share the AKG signature which, to my ears, is too cold and analytical.  The variable bass feature is primarily what interests me about the K267, but only if the overall signature is enjoyable like I have found with the M-100.  I also just ordered the Velodyne V-True and if that doesn't work for me as a quality basshead can, I am considering the Ultrasone Signature DJ.
 

 

[Highlaw]

Saw a pair of K550 at a store today, they look puuurty but cumbersome at the same time, I'm glad I didn't get them for walking around and drawing. Also got a glimpse of some AKG headphones similar to K167 in design (K490 I think) and drooled over them before leaving.
Quote:

 
(...) But, I still would prefer the 3-pin XLR instead, as I think it makes for a much stronger connection point at the cup level.

Doesn't a TRS and XLR connection function the same way? Are you talking about sound quality or toughness (the cable won't be pulled off accidentally as easily) ?

 

[alpha10]

They are not colored, I would rather call them analytical, but not too much.

From my 10 minutes with K267 I didn't them more bassy than K167, I would only buy the K267 if I wanted better build quality

 

[Craigster75]

Quote:

They are not colored, I would rather call them analytical, but not too much.
From my 10 minutes with K267 I didn't them more bassy than K167, I would only buy the K267 if I wanted better build quality

Thanks.  If you don't mind me asking, how in the world did you get to try the K267?  Also, do you recall the setting of the K267 during your brief audition- studio, club or stage?

 

[journeyy]

Is the K67 a good budget allrounder? How does it compare to the M50/CAL? Someone said the comfort was subpar, is that only for big heads/ears or is it an universal issue?

 

[LiIy]

Can someone sum up in a sentence or two what the "bad" aspects of these K167s are (for a student into hip-hop, cares mildly about fashion and portability)?

The only thing that irks me is the center logo is not flush with the body. I would of preferred it wasnt a buttony circle in the center, fashion wise. It's not an ugly set...

Also Miow; the K67 have more bass emphasis but its looser. Basically its a k450 without the veiled mids and trebs and a more refined bass. Theyre great for their price though for supra. I just wish AKG would make some orthos.
Sent From My Thunderbolt with Xparent Pink Tapatalk 2