[buson160man]

 The akg 701/702 has bass it just takes a pretty powerful amp to awake them. I am using a vintage receiver for driving my akg 701s and the bass is more than adequate. It is probably because the old akg 701s are somewhat insensitive and inefficient. They need some power to really open up. When powered adequately there is little to criticize sonically speaking . They have abundant detail with a very spacious presentation. They have well defined bass and plenty of pace when properly amped. They are extended at the top and can be very palpable sounding when properly driven.

 

[Schokolade bar]

The main issue I find with people complaining regarding the K702/1 is more than likely they are driving it with an awful amp. I don't specifically love or hate the K702 but I know that when I used a Soloist and HA160 with them they sounded quite excellent, far far above their price point. They just can't be driven by a bad amplifier and be considered viable. 

 

[cdma2k]

  The main issue I find with people complaining regarding the K702/1 is more than likely they are driving it with an awful amp. I don't specifically love or hate the K702 but I know that when I used a Soloist and HA160 with them they sounded quite excellent, far far above their price point. They just can't be driven by a bad amplifier and be considered viable. 

the common practice is to ignore or discount the review/impression if the associated DAC/AMP is incomparable.

 

[Jevon Greatorex]

   
Diluted?
 
I think you mean "deluded".

 
But yeah, I tend to agree. Most youngsters just want "loud" with big boomy bass. They have no idea that music also has a mid-range and a treble.

 
 

   
 
With a decent hps amp you can easy hear down to 20hz. About ''lack bass'', those rumors are spread by diluted kids that want cheap high end hps with a boomy bass.

 
 

   
I see, thanks for the explanation.

I've been contemplating these headphones for quite a while now, but whenever I see people say that they're only good for classical and jazz, it kind of puts me off them.

Guys, I have to add my bit here. I own the AKG K702 with a shorter after market HQ cable.  Sound is great out of the box, cable length and quality rumors that indicate that there is a huge benefit to be had from a cable change are rubbish, I got a 1.5m down from the standard 3m cable and there is no improvement (not that expected or was buying for this very reason).  Secondly, regarding Bass, they have lots of bass, you just don't feel it, you hear it. Many "Audiophiles" claim that something is crap if there ear dumbs are not being shaken from there heads with bass that makes the headphone itself vibrate into you skull.  This is going to damage your ears (which are probably already shot to **** as a result of your lust for bass) and drown out the little nuances of the mid range and treble.  I have been slowing listening back through my music collection and am noticing small details in the music I never knew where there before I go into the serious Audiophile world of headphone amps and expensive cans. 
I love my K702s over my HD6000 as the HD6000s make it harder to hear the same details you get with the K702s. 
 
This is my opinion based on my experience, yours may vary. If you can own both then I think it is a great idea to have these two pairs, one for Sunday listening and one for the week......

 

[Sound Quest]

I would argue that it's sharp piercing highs that are most damaging to the ears, rather than head shaking bass. Because people buy headphones expected them to rumble, they turn the volume up on their headphones looking for that rumble, this leads to hearing fatigue as a result of the sharp highs which can lead to serious tinnitus (I know all about that).

 

[musiclife]

  I would argue that it's sharp piercing highs that are most damaging to the ears, rather than head shaking bass. Because people buy headphones expected them to rumble, they turn the volume up on their headphones looking for that rumble, this leads to hearing fatigue as a result of the sharp highs which can lead to serious tinnitus (I know all about that).

So you actually had tinnitus from heavy listening? First time I see that happen...

 

[Alizz]

AKG K701, K702, K712 all are bass shy (last one the least bass shy) but it's def BELOW neutral!! IMO the flat DT250 is neutral in bass everything below that is bass shy!

 

[theveterans]

 AKG K701, K702, K712 all are bass shy (last one the least bass shy) but it's def BELOW neutral!! IMO the flat DT250 is neutral in bass everything below that is bass shy!

 
Disagree with the K712. If anything it's slightly higher than neutral and my reference is the Sony MDR 7506 which has a +/- 0 db flat bass frequency response. Even the frequency response comparison with your DT250 shows that K712 is a lot bassier.
 

 

[Alizz]

   
Disagree with the K712. If anything it's slightly higher than neutral and my reference is the Sony MDR 7506 which has a +/- 0 db flat bass frequency response. Even the frequency response comparison with your DT250 shows that K712 is a lot bassier.
 

Are u kidding me? That Graph is NOT what people hear.. I have the K712 and DT250 side by side and the DT250 is clearly bassier and clearly punchier.. 
Don't get me wrong I love my K712 for soundstage, detail, resolution, timbre, comfrort, almost everything but it's bass is BELOW neutral.

 

[Alizz]

I also quote someone from the DT250 thread: ''The low range of any closed can, because of its structure, sound louder than what the graph represents. So graph does correlate well with my listening experience, though experientially dt250 is flatter and natural. Open cans tend to be the opposite, their low range tend to sound less substantial than what the graph shows (of course these are all relative terms).''

 

[theveterans]

  Are u kidding me? That Graph is NOT what people hear.. I have the K712 and DT250 side by side and the DT250 is clearly bassier and clearly punchier.. 
Don't get me wrong I love my K712 for soundstage, detail, resolution, timbre, comfrort, almost everything but it's bass is BELOW neutral.

 
Headroom made that graph which IMO is accurate representation of what I hear out of the K712. It's certainly bassier than neutral, but our standards are different, considering that I use the Sony 7506 rather than DT250 as reference.
 
Here is their RAW frequency response graph (i.e. without compensating for decibel matching between samples). You can see that the 7506 and the DT250 have a similar curve if the 7506's curve is shifted down to match the DT250's mids and treble decibel.
 

Fortunately, Headroom also has a "frequency response compensated" graph which matches the mids and treble levels so that you can compare their bass frequencies relative to mids and treble:

 
Now you can see that both DT250 and Sony 7506 are FLAT on most frequency range while the K712 is definitely boosted by 5 - 10 db on the bass region.

 

[theveterans]

  I also quote someone from the DT250 thread: ''The low range of any closed can, because of its structure, sound louder than what the graph represents. So graph does correlate well with my listening experience, though experientially dt250 is flatter and natural. Open cans tend to be the opposite, their low range tend to sound less substantial than what the graph shows (of course these are all relative terms).''

 
Agree with this. Though the graph shows about 5 - 10 db bass increase, I perceive 3db above Sony 7506's bass response at most with the K712 while the rest the deep bass sounds perfectly neutral to me

 

[Me x3]

I think recordings play a big role here.
 
For those top class recordings with full dynamic range and spot on tonal balance K702 typically sounds very well. Same recordings on K712 might sound a bit on the warm side but still not far from neutralish.
 
On the other hand, with average and poor recordings, the K702 can sound too light on the bass. These (K702) are not intended to make compressed mainstream sounds good, but to expose how bad it sounds. K712 might be just a tad more forgiving, but it's not HD650 anyway.
 
Some recordings won't sound good even on HD650...
 
The amplifier play a smaller role in my view. Different amplifiers sound different but recordings differ much more than well engineered amplifiers.
Plugging K702 into a receiver with really high output impedance makes the sound more forgiving but less precise.
That's a possible match, great for those who enjoy it, but it's by no means the perfect pairing.

 

[Kirkles]

I'm a newbie here so I may be being really thick.
I bought a pair of these (702) on the belief that they had a pretty flat response. That graph shows something completely different. Now I'm upset (
Regards

 

[sheldaze]

  I'm a newbie here so I may be being really thick.
I bought a pair of these (702) on the belief that they had a pretty flat response. That graph shows something completely different. Now I'm upset (
Regards

Try this link: http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/AKGK702.pdf
The K702 truly aren't that bad. They have a little extra treble between 6k and 9k. They fit very comfortably.