AKG K167 TIËSTO - Discussion, Impression, Review & Appreciation Thread
Jan 10, 2013 at 6:06 PM Post #1,474 of 1,489
Also, they measure ... response. .


Thats strange I felt them to be light for their size.

Also the grapths comparison really is totally un applicable, bordering ridiculous ..

Even if the graphs were an exact frequency match(not just overall shape) within 3db of response, they would never sound similar due to material and housing and driver quality and performance.
 
Jan 10, 2013 at 7:01 PM Post #1,475 of 1,489
Well just received these today and they'll be heading back as well. The cups simply aren't deep enough for my ears, a problem I don't recall having with the Citiscape Uptowns, so I'll be sticking with those.
 
This is indeed an upgrade from the Uptowns though, and this is pre-burn in.
 
Unfortunate.
 
Jan 10, 2013 at 7:18 PM Post #1,476 of 1,489
Quote:
Well just received these today and they'll be heading back as well. The cups simply aren't deep enough for my ears, a problem I don't recall having with the Citiscape Uptowns, so I'll be sticking with those.
 
This is indeed an upgrade from the Uptowns though, and this is pre-burn in.
 
Unfortunate.

 
If you like the sound, you might try the Shure cushions suggested above.  I agree with you on the cups-- haven't decided if I want to keep these and spend a little more trying out other pads, or continue my search for an over-ear portable.
 
 
Jan 10, 2013 at 7:23 PM Post #1,477 of 1,489
Quote:
 
If you like the sound, you might try the Shure cushions suggested above.  I agree with you on the cups-- haven't decided if I want to keep these and spend a little more trying out other pads, or continue my search for an over-ear portable.
 

 
I actually ordered the Shure pads and tried them out as well. Even those aren't deep enough for me to be able to use them comfortably.
 
They do sound good, but not good enough that I'm willing to spend more time and money for cups that actually fit me.
 
Jan 10, 2013 at 9:01 PM Post #1,479 of 1,489
Quote:
 
Not to be a jerk or anything, but you're really not helping sell these cans. 
tongue.gif
 <3
 
That's essentially the worst of both worlds. You get smudges, chips, and cracks on the outer shell, which looks bad, and then they're just as heavy as if they were made out of metal.

Also, they measure really weirdly in frequency response.
 

 
This headphone basically seems to be an awkward fusion of the Beats Pro and Beats Studio.
 
Even the frequency response of the PRO 500 is uncannily similar to the Studios.
 

 
LOL. Not even close.
 
And the Deaf and Blind, er, Sound and Vision graph is way off, from what I'm hearing, anyway.
 
Why don't you just forget about these. They are obviously not for you.
 
Jan 10, 2013 at 10:18 PM Post #1,480 of 1,489
LOL. Not even close.
 
And the Deaf and Blind, er, Sound and Vision graph is way off, from what I'm hearing, anyway.
 
Why don't you just forget about these. They are obviously not for you.

 

 
Chill out a bit. It's just my personal skin-deep analysis of a headphone I don't even own, from the little information that is readily available to me.

I don't like the idea of what these headphones provide from the information I have on them. This is a deeply subjective hobby. My opinion shouldn't detract from your experience from them.

If my opinion is that important to you, hell, let me borrow them so I can make a better analysis. Prove me wrong. 
basshead.gif

 
Jan 11, 2013 at 7:14 AM Post #1,482 of 1,489
I don't like the idea of what these headphones provide from the information I have on them. This is a deeply subjective hobby. My opinion shouldn't detract from your experience from them.

The graphs were not close if U know how to read them as many headphones will have a general similar curve, so the impression you left was a rather an insult to even mention or use a grath from a "beats" headphone wich is probably the worst sounding headphone ever invented ,
So it misguidingly portrays the type of sound U are familiar with by using it.
Edit:
To gain a proper perspective of the sound I will compare from my recollection of the m50LEs I had .
The k167 has a cleaner deeper bass extension and brighter highs.
The m50 has more open forward mids.
 
Jan 11, 2013 at 7:42 AM Post #1,483 of 1,489
Quote:
 

 
Chill out a bit. It's just my personal skin-deep analysis of a headphone I don't even own, from the little information that is readily available to me.

I don't like the idea of what these headphones provide from the information I have on them. This is a deeply subjective hobby. My opinion shouldn't detract from your experience from them.

If my opinion is that important to you, hell, let me borrow them so I can make a better analysis. Prove me wrong. 
basshead.gif

Exactly who is it that needs to chill here? 
confused_face(1).gif
 I only really gave my opinion and comments because I actually own them.
 
 
 
I don't like the idea of what these headphones provide from the information I have on them

 
Hence my previous comment that they are not for you.
 
 
If my opinion is that important to you, hell, let me borrow them so I can make a better analysis. Prove me wrong

 
Why would you think your opinion is important to me? Did I hint at that somewhere along the line?.
 
Jan 11, 2013 at 11:43 AM Post #1,484 of 1,489
I've done a ghetto bass increase mod on my custom K167.  What I did was mimic Ultrasone headphones in the way that they only have the bottom portion (a small arc) open by covering the top half of the holes with tape.  Try if you are bored and/or drunk with some tape.
However, I'm using a different earcup, so it might not work on the original K167 body. (〜 ̄▽ ̄)〜
 
Jan 11, 2013 at 12:14 PM Post #1,485 of 1,489
Quote:
quote.gif


Just ordered a pair of AKG K 167 ! can't wait for them to arrive now ! so excited :D 


Where did u get them? I dont know if it was posted in the thread, but I just saw the K167 tiesto at 165$ amazon. Probably lowest price I have seen them.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top