[timbukktwo]

Put the tiger back in his cage man, it's not worth it, lol

No kidding! I could be asking for trouble!

He might've meant it as not popular.

I agree.

 

[timbukktwo]

Me 3x said-

"The K812 was designed to be among the very best if not the best dynamic headphone.
HD800-like with added (needed) warmth and less of a 6kHz treble peak.
But even when you can find some early reviews and users placing the K812 right at the top, more often than not people prefer to look elsewhere these days.

Many things affected the K812 popularity.
Harman/AKG is pretty terrible when it comes to marketing
Add some less than ideal reviews like the one from Innerfidelity (we all know Tyll prefer darker headphones)
Moving production to Slovakia when other top performers are still built in their respective countries.

Sennheiser is huge and much better at marketing.
I guess an HD800 made by Beyer or AKG would have been forgotten long ago.
Sennheiser HD800 is blessed somehow then it's still very popular even after HD800S.
People will always blame the rest of the chain, mod them and EQ them quite a lot to get pleasant sound, but it still retains popularity and acceptance.

On the other hand, a week can pass and no one write in here about K812."


(My response)


These are all good reasons; plus a few more could be added easily. At the end of the day, the informed will make their choice which headphone will overall suit there needs. For me, after all my research (irregardless of what or how others may view of my choice), I'm extremely enthusiastic with my choice of the Akg K812's with the proper supporting cast (amplification, etc., so forth, and so on). There are quite a few other variables to consider in helping them to shine at their best, and the 'WHY' in which you use any headphone is perhaps the most important of all. If not 'perfect' (whatever that is), the K812's were designed for the 'music professional', which includes a somewhat different set of criteria than for 'audiophile' listening. I find many seem to overlook this distinction. Do they accomplish that goal for its intended use? I think so. Could they be improved? Perhaps. I'm not quite sure why some hear the harshness in the higher frequencies, or why the distortion seems a bit much in the lower frequencies, or why the frequency response is not perfectly flat. I have ideas about the possibilities, but in the end it's the overall overwhelming complexity of variables the manufacturer has to consider in putting all this together; more so than we may understand. I appreciate ideals, because that's one of the mentalities in which excellence breeds from. I also appreciate the different headphones choices that we all have! However, all things considered, I'm personally very pleased with the sound quality of the K812's. I'm just not willing to waist time splitting hairs on things that are subjective, because the world's not perfect and there will always be needed improvements to be made (and in this case, I'll just 'learn' any 'deficiencies' (apparent or otherwise) with the K812's; i.e.- K812's as a monitor). As is, the K812 is a fine choice, already. However, I don't necessarily place the K812's at the top, but rather among the top; especially as one of the best dynamics around that (for the most part- imho) accomplishes it's intended purpose overall.
Are all headphones 'perfect'? Of course not; not even the most 'venerable' (but come da** close- subjectively, of course). Additionally, It's funny how we (myself included, of course) also make our individual choices based on things even so subjectively biased, as well. I honestly hope all of you enjoy your setup as much as I enjoy mine! Thanks for your patience regarding this post as I am not defending the K812's as much as I am defending a proper way to view the purpose in WHY anyone uses what they do, even more so.
I'm also willing to be corrected or have anyone more knowledgeable add to what I've said here.

-Best Regards
Tim

v (edited for clarification more times than I care to admit, during the ENTIRE length of the Superbowl- lol)

 

[theveterans]

 
How much would you pay for HD800 or Tesla T1?

 
Both are $500 tops, same as K812 meaning, it's about 20% better sound than K712 Pro to my ears thus worth 80% more than the street price K712 pro.

 

[Me x3]

   
Both are $500 tops, same as K812 meaning, it's about 20% better sound than K712 Pro to my ears thus worth 80% more than the street price K712 pro.

Haven't heard my K812 yet, so for now I can only speak for HD800 and Tesla T1 (compared with K712)
I agree that they are maybe 15% or 20% better overall, although not necessarily more enjoyable.
That's very recording dependent, especially with HD800.
Late Beyer T1 and K712 are more similar in terms of tuning so most of the times when it sounds good on K712 it sounds good on the T1 as well.
 
 

These are all good reasons; plus a few more could be added easily. At the end of the day, the informed will make their choice which headphone will overall suit there needs. For me, after all my research (irregardless of what or how others may view of my choice), I'm extremely enthusiastic with my choice of the K812's with the proper supporting cast (amplification, etc., so forth, and so on). There are quite a few other variables to consider in helping them to shine at their best, and the 'WHY' in which you use any headphone is perhaps the most important of all. If not 'perfect' (whatever that is), the Akg K812's were designed for the music professional. Do they accomplish the goal for its intended use? I think so. Could they be improved? Perhaps. I'm not quite sure why some hear the harshness in the higher frequencies, or why the distortion seems a bit much in the lower frequencies, or why the frequency response is not perfectly flat. I have ideas about the possibilities, but in the end it's the overall overwhelming complexity of variables the manufacturer has to consider in putting all this together; more than we may understand. I appreciate ideals, because that's one of the mentalities in which excellence breeds from. I also appreciate the different headphones choices that we have! However, all things considered, I'm personally very pleased with the sound quality of the K812's. I'm just not willing to waist time splitting hairs on things that are subjective, because the world's not perfect and there will always be needed improvements to be made (and in this case, I'll just 'learn' any deficiencies with the K812's; i.e.- K812's as a monitor). As is, the K812 is a fine choice, already. However, I don't necessarily place the K812's at the top, but rather among the top; especially as one of the best dynamics around that (for the most part- imho) accomplishes it's intended purpose overall.
Are all headphones 'perfect'? Of course not; not even the most 'venerable' (but come da** close- subjectively, of course). Additionally, It's funny how we (myself included, of course) all make our individual choices based on things even so subjectively biased, too. I honestly hope all of you enjoy your setup as much as I enjoy mine! Thanks for your patience regarding this post as I am not defending the K812's as much as I am defending a proper way to view the purpose in WHY anyone uses what they do, even more so.

-Best Regards
Tim

 
Hey Tim, nice write up.
Few comments:
 
Modern music is recorded pretty bad and that can play a role with regards to those finding the K812 harsh or unforgiving. In addition some people listen to music at very loud levels so that plays a role as well. Even then HD800 is very bright, but I've seen little to none reviewers dismissing the HD800 for the peak at 6kHz. On the other hand, I've seen people dismiss the K812 for the upper mids 'harshness' and same happens with the upper treble on the Beyer T1. It's quite strange.
 
Distortion in the bass is relatively high in absolut terms but not much of an issue in practice at normal listening levels. K812's distortion in the bass is still pretty similar to that of the T1 and the newer HD800S.
 
With regards to the headphone not being flat, that's a very tricky topic because there's no such a thing as flat when it comes to headphones. All headphone frequency response graphs depend on the shape of the measurement equippment and/or use a compensation. Change one of those variables and you'll end up with different plots. Flat on innerfidelity is not flat on goldenears, and so on... And there's no consensus about what flat means on headphones (unlike speakers). The shape of our body tweakes the sound naturally, when we use headphones most of our body is out of the equation, so that makes everything more tricky with headphones than with speakers. Same can be said about the lack of natural crossfeed and few other variables. Each brand has kind of a target response and refines it based mostly on listeners impressions (and consumer targets). Last but not least, there's huge variance among recordings and what's pretty neutral for recording A, might not be neutral for recording B.
 
Happy Listening!

 

[timbukktwo]

Me x3-

(No direct quote; post would be too long-lol)

You and I are completely on the same page, and I understand the things you say. I'm just glad I understand enough of these kinds of things I would consider 'technical grey areas' at least to make decisions that don't bother me at all anymore like they did at one time. (Especially, when trying to learn from the internet- just poking fun at us all!) It's hard sifting through all that is available on the web to finally get to what is the right kind of information, and what kind of information is the best for oneself.

 

[mocenigo]

(text deleted)

 

[up late]

in response to some points made by @timbukktwo and @me x3 in no particular order:
 
- the hd800 was designed to be used as both a studio headphone monitor and reference headphone. the hd800s was released later and aimed at the audiophile market.
- golden ears doesn't have measurements for the k812. innerfidelity and headphone.com do, however.
- while variations between headphone measurements from different sources are to be expected, that doesn't make them invalid or useless. headphone measurements should be regarded as indicative rather than absolute, and i have found that they are more similar than they are different.
-  i used a selection of well recorded music tracks and listened at low to moderate volume levels when i auditioned the k812 and compared it to the hd800
- it was apparent to me that the hd800 sounded cleaner, and apart from increased bass presence, i was disappointed to find that the k812 did not out-perform the hd800 in any other area to my ears
- i auditioned the k812 before tyll hertsen had published his review and measurements
 
 
i don't own the k812 or hd800. however, when i audition totl headphones and want a reference to compare them to, i invariably choose the hd800. i have no issue with folks preferring one or the other, for the choices that we make in this hobby are ultimately based on personal preference. while i recognize that we seem to have an infinite capacity to rationalise and defend our choices, that can also lead to skewed argument and selective examples.
 
links to k812 measurements:
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/AKGK812SN001130.pdf
 
https://www.headphone.com/products/akg-k812

 

[timbukktwo]

up late- Thanks for your input. The HD800's are a fine headphone. I personally haven't heard them, but it doesn't take much convincing of the common ground of many whom have heard them and do own them.

 

[Me x3]

Quote:

  in response to some points made by @timbukktwo and @me x3 in no particular order:
 
- the hd800 was designed to be used as both a studio headphone monitor and reference headphone. the hd800s was released later and aimed at the audiophile market.
- golden ears doesn't have measurements for the k812. innerfidelity and headphone.com do, however.
- while variations between headphone measurements from different sources are to be expected, that doesn't make them invalid or useless. headphone measurements should be regarded as indicative rather than absolute, and i have found that they are more similar than they are different.
-  i used a selection of well recorded music tracks and listened at low to moderate volume levels when i auditioned the k812 and compared it to the hd800
- it was apparent to me that the hd800 sounded cleaner, and apart from increased bass presence, i was disappointed to find that the k812 did not out-perform the hd800 in any other area to my ears
- i auditioned the k812 before tyll hertsen had published his review and measurements
 
 
i don't own the k812 or hd800. however, when i audition totl headphones and want a reference to compare them to, i invariably choose the hd800. i have no issue with folks preferring one or the other, for the choices that we make in this hobby are ultimately based on personal preference. while i recognize that we seem to have an infinite capacity to rationalise and defend our choices, that can also lead to skewed argument and selective examples.
 
links to k812 measurements:
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/AKGK812SN001130.pdf
 
https://www.headphone.com/products/akg-k812

 
I'll build up my measurment rig again sometime and measure both my K812 and HD800. I already have measurements of my HD800 but not of my K812 sadly as I've bought it later.
 
From some comparisons I've made, both headphones are more similar than different, Tesla T1.1 is quite different for instance. The main differences I've found between (my) K812 and (my) HD800 is that the K812 is more forward sounding and boast better instrument separation and bass tracking. The HD800 on the other hand is more distant, just a tad more cohesive and drier overall, but does inner detail better than the K812 which tends to smooth up the finest layer of texture present on the recording. Both are very nice headphones in my book, both leaning to the analytical side.

 

[timbukktwo]

Thanks!

 

[mocenigo]

  Assuming the K812 performs better off lower-end amplification while the HD800 performs better off higher-end amplification, I wonder at what (amp price point) the two would crossover...

Maybe the Chord Mojo is near the crossover point? It is considered a fantastic matching for the HD800, which I can confirm, and I slightly prefer the K812 over the HD800 on it.
 
 Roberto

 

[mocenigo]

  To be fair, an easy to drive headphone doesn't mean it don't scale with amp. If anything, it will be very picky about the amp and source. Instead of wanting more voltage swing, it will want a bit more current and while doing so, sensitive to output impedance and noise level compared to most of the less efficient flagships out there.

 
36 Ohm means that you need an amp with low output impedance, at least <1Ohm (I have seen headamps with output impedances of 10Ohms - those would have problems) and, as you say, they need more current than voltage swing. If your amps are a bit noisy, or pick up noise easily (for instance, I live close to an electrical power plant, and everything buzzes a lot) then you will head it. This is all correct.
 
 Roberto

 

[Me x3]

 

  Assuming the K812 performs better off lower-end amplification while the HD800 performs better off higher-end amplification, I wonder at what (amp price point) the two would crossover...

 
I wouldn't assume that.
K812 needs more than 4 times the power needed for HD800, it also needs lower output impedance and being a little bit more sensitive it needs slightly lower noise floor as well.
 
Amp matching is a whole different and quite subjective topic.

 

[mocenigo]

  K812 needs more than 4 times the power needed for HD800, it also needs lower output impedance and being a little bit more sensitive it needs slightly lower noise floor as well.
 
Amp matching is a whole different and quite subjective topic.

 
Well, true, the K812 may need meow power. But at 36 Ohm of impedance most head amps will deliver way more power to the K812 than to the HD800, that has an impedance of 300Ohm. Also, the K812 is more sensitive (110 dB/V vs 102 dB/V). In fact, with my amps in order to drive the HD800 I need to turn the volume significantly up in order to get the same sound pressure.
 
The main issue with the K812 from this point of view is the damping factor. Amps with a too high output impedance may not be able to drive it properly, and you get some combination of slow bass, dampened highs, collapsed scene, lack of dynamics. 
 
 Roberto

 

[Me x3]

   
Well, true, the K812 may need meow power. But at 36 Ohm of impedance most head amps will deliver way more power to the K812 than to the HD800, that has an impedance of 300Ohm. Also, the K812 is more sensitive (110 dB/V vs 102 dB/V). In fact, with my amps in order to drive the HD800 I need to turn the volume significantly up in order to get the same sound pressure.
 
The main issue with the K812 from this point of view is the damping factor. Amps with a too high output impedance may not be able to drive it properly, and you get some combination of slow bass, dampened highs, collapsed scene, lack of dynamics. 
 
 Roberto

 
Most amplifiers are voltage limited, that's why when you look at the power specs they will have more power for lower impedance loads and less power for high impedance loads despite these being the easier loads. People tend to think that more extra power means the amp is less loaded, but this is not the case most of the times.
 
In this case,
 
- Sennheiser HD800 needs 0.24 Vrms for 90dB @1kHz
- AKG K812 needs 0.18 Vrms for 90dB @ 1kHz
 
So the amp will have to provide 35% more voltage for the HD800, but voltage alone is not a problem for the amplifier most of the times.
 
On the other hand, when you put 0.18 Vrms into the AKG K812 it will drain 4mA of current from the amp.
While when you put 0.24 Vrms into the HD800 it will only drain 0.6mA so from the amplifier perspective it will be a much easier load.
 
You can drive six HD800 at the same time with that single amp before they represent a similar load to a single K812.