[tdockweiler]

 
If you want more impactful bass than what the K240 Studio offers, i'd avoid the Q701. I don't know if you'd like the bass on the Q701. I don't find the Q701 thin or harsh at all. It's only harsh when it's the recordings fault. The Q701 won't make them any easier on the ears, which is what some people prefer.
Instead of the Q701, I would suggest the K601, but only if you can find it under $250. It needs a good desktop amp though. K601 is more similar to the K240 Studio than the Q701. K601 is warmer and fuller sounding than the Q701 I think. Less treble too.
Quote:

I currently own a pair of AKG K240 MKIIs and I am thinking of moving onto the Q701s, I'm looking for a wider sound stage, better mid/vocals, faster more impactful bass, and overall better resolution, I don't want anything harsh/thin sounding though, from reading this thread I should probably stay away from the K702s?, I was initially going to grab a pair of those due to being on a tight budget but think I may steer clear of them now, I'll be honest, there is an old part of me likes warmth, but I want to wean myself off it and move onto something cleaner and faster, a bit of history, a few years ago coming from a cheap set of warm floor standing speakers to a set of B&W speakers was a big shock for me, it took me months to get used to it, I don't think I'd ever heard mid range frequencies before, but I learned to love them, at the time I owned a pair of koss porta pro's, I started to feel that they sounded too warm and veiled, I wanted more detail, I grabbed the k240's and they have done me well but I like I said I want something better, these days I find myself edging up on the mids on my mixer but I'd rather not use eq's tbh.
 
Fav genres of music, Trance, classical, opera, jazz.
 
I'm currently using a DJ mixer for a headphone amp, it is integrated into my set up and is very useful tool, will this be sufficient?, it's probably not the best solution in terms of audio quality but it seems to have a lot of power, I'd rather not bypass it, I could run a headphone amp off master or rec output of the mixer if needs be.
 
 

 
 

 

[Eisenhower]

 
Quote:

Oh god..not this guy again..the one who hasn't actually heard either of them..
This is getting so old and has already been beaten to death hundreds of times.
 
It will be nice when someone can figure out what causes the differences..and it's not my brain.
You'd have to be a complete moron to think a brain could cause such a difference. It's not even subtle.
I could understand this if it was comparing the K702 to the K701...

 
It apparently hasn't been beaten to death because people still think they are not the same headphone..
I, and others, have explained why these headphones might sound differently. Quite rigorously actually. It is do to inherent manufacturing discrepancies, which result in a measurable differences (if done very precisely), and from psychoacoustic effects. Call me a moron, but I'm pretty sure your brain is responsible for hearing.
Watch this video, and tell if the effects subtle, by your definition.

 

[tdockweiler]

 
Quote:

 
 
It apparently hasn't been beaten to death because people still think they are not the same headphone..
I, and others, have explained why these headphones might sound differently. Quite rigorously actually. It is do to inherent manufacturing discrepancies, which result in a measurable differences (if done very precisely), and from psychoacoustic effects. Call me a moron, but I'm pretty sure your brain is responsible for hearing.
Watch this video, and tell if the effects subtle, by your definition.
 

 
It has because all people like you do is guess as to WHY they sound any different. It doesn't help much. I do the same, but at least i've heard them. We need more posts from people who have actually heard both or have dismantled and compared them. Not just assuming they're the same due to service manuals.
 
Then this idea that it could be due to manufacturing differences. If AKG made the Q701 sound so different than the K702 and it was all due to "manufacturing variances", then AKG must have the worst quality control in the world. That'd be a major screw-up. That'd be like Sennheiser accidentally giving someone an HD-650 instead of the HD-600 they bought. Yeah, the difference is that large. If people can't hear the difference between an HD-600 and HD-650, then they should stop buying expensive headphones.
 
For the hundredth time, the differences are too large to be psychoacoustic effects!!
 
Seriously, why am I even bothering with someone who hasn't even heard the Q701?
 
 

 

[GamerOne]

I used to have a pair of K701's that I switched to a pair of Q701's and there's definitely a difference between them. The difference isn't big, but quite immediately noticable. The Q701's have a certain fullness and warmth that the K701's lacked. I found the K701's to be a bit too cold and emotionless sounding. The Q701's are without a doubt more musical and pleasant sounding to my ears

 

[chicolom]

 
Quote:

 
 
It apparently hasn't been beaten to death because people still think they are not the same headphone..
I, and others, have explained why these headphones might sound differently. Quite rigorously actually. It is do to inherent manufacturing discrepancies, which result in a measurable differences (if done very precisely), and from psychoacoustic effects.

 
I hear what your saying, and it's a sound argument ("sound" argument, get it?   It doesn't seem to explain the consistency in which Q701 is reported as sounding warmer, from people who have heard both.  If it was sometimes warmer, and sometimes the K70x was warmer, then the manufacturing variation would make more sense. 
 
I know now would be a good time for you to insert the psychoacoustic effects argument to explain the consistency in reports from users, but I think you may be underestimating the size of the difference between the two. 
 
Like some of us have been saying, the gap between the two is two large to be psychoacoustic.  Like AD700 > AD900 and HD600 > HD650 for example.  If that size of a gap, big enough that they sound like two different models, is due to inconsistency in manufacturing, I would be really concerned about AKG's production process.  You would be playing the headphone lottery every time you bought one.

 

[Kevin Brown]

 
Quote:

For the hundredth time, the differences are too large to be psychoacoustic effects!!
 

 
 
Quote:

Like some of us have been saying, the gap between the two is two large to be psychoacoustic. 

 
 
Eh, 102 now, including me.
 

 
I could suggest that anyone who hasn't heard both refrain from posting, referencing the thread title itself, but I know that ain't gonna happen ...
 

 

[frenchbat]

Yeah !! Take out the pitchforks !! This guy doesn't think like me !!

Anyone cares to answer my question about the Mc Gurk effect ? Or are you simply going to ignore it and keep on telling how consistent is your hearing compared to the others ? And is anyone a neurologist here, to be able to say that the difference cannot be linked to psychoaccoustics ?

I see Tdockweiler saying that it would be nice to know what makes the difference. That's what I suggested early in the discussion, saying that the FR graphs are not a good comparison because they don't tell the whole story. I even suggested that CSD Plots might show a difference, but you guys focused on how the graphs from Headroom had to be right., because they show the "difference". And don't get me started on the simple suggestion that it would be interesting to see if there's consistency for this reported difference in a DBT.

Now do whatever you want, I'm gonna repeat myself by saying that you can lead a horse to the water, but you cannot make it drink. You got it, be happy, you'll be all together to say how these 2 are sounding soooooooooooo different, and just that, all over again.

*Unsuscribing*

 
Quote:

For the hundredth time, the differences are too large to be psychoacoustic effects!!
 

 
 
Quote:

Like some of us have been saying, the gap between the two is two large to be psychoacoustic. 

 
 
Eh, 102 now, including me.
 

 
I could suggest that anyone who hasn't heard both refrain from posting, referencing the thread title itself, but I know that ain't gonna happen ...
 

 

[chicolom]

 
Quote:

Yeah !! Take out the pitchforks !! This guy doesn't think like me !!

And don't get me started on the simple suggestion that it would be interesting to see if there's consistency for this reported difference in a DBT.

Now do whatever you want, I'm gonna repeat myself by saying that you can lead a horse to the water, but you cannot make it drink. You got it, be happy, you'll be all together to say how these 2 are sounding soooooooooooo different, and just that, all over again.

*Unsuscribing*

 
*Sigh*
 
Your allowed to present an argument, but I can't?  

 
I'm not refuting what you've said.  I would use your same arguments against others, if I had heard the gear in question and felt that psychoacoustics were playing a role.  It's just silly to try and argue that with the pair I compared.

In all seriousness, I would LOVE for you to DBT the pair I had.  LOVE IT.

It's not like this will be solved though.  We're all just

 
 
 
 

 

[lejaz]

 
Quote:

 
 
*Sigh*
 
Your allowed to present an argument, but I can't?  

 
I'm not refuting what you've said.  I would use your same arguments against others, if I had heard the gear in question and felt that psychoacoustics were playing a role.  It's just silly to try and argue that with the pair I compared.

In all seriousness, I would LOVE for you to DBT the pair I had.  LOVE IT.

It's not like this will be solved though.  We're all just

 
 
 
 

X2 on the DBT.....and that's the only thing that would solve it once and for all. BTW that video on the mcGurk effect was very convincing on how our senses can be completely fooled....or completely fool us.
 

 

[lowrider007]

 
Quote:

 
If you want more impactful bass than what the K240 Studio offers, i'd avoid the Q701. I don't know if you'd like the bass on the Q701. I don't find the Q701 thin or harsh at all. It's only harsh when it's the recordings fault. The Q701 won't make them any easier on the ears, which is what some people prefer.
Instead of the Q701, I would suggest the K601, but only if you can find it under $250. It needs a good desktop amp though. K601 is more similar to the K240 Studio than the Q701. K601 is warmer and fuller sounding than the Q701 I think. Less treble too.
 
 

 

Thanks, been reading up on the K601, seems like it could be the can for me, also no bumps in the headband!, I can get them for £147.99 in the UK, the only downer is no detachable cable , do you think my mixer will power the K601s ok? if not a FiiOE9? working to a budget here.

 

[Kevin Brown]

 
Quote:

 
X2 on the DBT.....and that's the only thing that would solve it once and for all. BTW that video on the mcGurk effect was very convincing on how our senses can be completely fooled....or completely fool us.
 

 

I have already offered to do a DBT too.  The differences between the Q701 and K701 I had were easily large enough to pick each out unsighted.
 
 

 

[Chris J]

Oh boy.

Without trying to start WW III & I hope no one gets offended:
At a headphone meet a few weeks ago an owner of K701 swapped headphones with an owner of Q701 (I was the Q701 owner).
We swapped headphones back and forth for a few minutes.
While we both agreed that the headphones did sound different we both a agreed that the difference was not huge, and we agreed that they sounded very similar to each other. 
I suspect I would have a hard time picking 'em out unsighted.
 
Disclaimer:  I ain't no troll!   And YMMV! 

 
 
 

 

[Chris J]

 
Quote:

I currently own a pair of AKG K240 MKIIs and I am thinking of moving onto the Q701s, I'm looking for a wider sound stage, better mid/vocals, faster more impactful bass, and overall better resolution, I don't want anything harsh/thin sounding though, from reading this thread I should probably stay away from the K702s?, I was initially going to grab a pair of those due to being on a tight budget but think I may steer clear of them now, I'll be honest, there is an old part of me likes warmth, but I want to wean myself off it and move onto something cleaner and faster, a bit of history, a few years ago coming from a cheap set of warm floor standing speakers to a set of B&W speakers was a big shock for me, it took me months to get used to it, I don't think I'd ever heard mid range frequencies before, but I learned to love them, at the time I owned a pair of koss porta pro's, I started to feel that they sounded too warm and veiled, I wanted more detail, I grabbed the k240's and they have done me well but I like I said I want something better, these days I find myself edging up on the mids on my mixer but I'd rather not use eq's tbh.
 
Fav genres of music, Trance, classical, opera, jazz.
 
I'm currently using a DJ mixer for a headphone amp, it is integrated into my set up and is very useful tool, will this be sufficient?, it's probably not the best solution in terms of audio quality but it seems to have a lot of power, I'd rather not bypass it, I could run a headphone amp off master or rec output of the mixer if needs be.
 
 

 
I used to own a pair of K241 before i had my Q701.
The K241 sound basically the same as the K240 only the 241 had tighter bass.
 
Wow!
I think that the Q701 is a great upgrade from the K241, the Qs are more detailed, cleaner and faster.
I don't think that the Q701 have harsh treble, just my opinion, but I think the Q701 is a great upgrade, in addition you will still get that great AKG comfort.
Go for it, man!

 

[lejaz]

 
Quote:

 
 

I have already offered to do a DBT too.  The differences between the Q701 and K701 I had were easily large enough to pick each out unsighted.
 
 

 
Do it, or take it? If you have both, or can get a hold of both, then why not do it, assuming you can figure out a valid protocol.

 

[LizardKing1]

 
Quote:

 
It apparently hasn't been beaten to death because people still think they are not the same headphone..
I, and others, have explained why these headphones might sound differently. Quite rigorously actually. It is do to inherent manufacturing discrepancies, which result in a measurable differences (if done very precisely), and from psychoacoustic effects. Call me a moron, but I'm pretty sure your brain is responsible for hearing.
 

 
 
I haven't tried both. I wish I had, but I don't have them both available. I get what you're saying, but in this particular case I find it hard to blame it all on quality control. Here are my contradictory opinions:
 

• If after this long AKG they still hasn't been able to minimalize the sound differences between drivers by less than +/-1dB, I don't know what they've been doing (actually I do, they've been painting the K701 green). However, we can't ignore that the graph shows a big difference between drivers. At exactly 1kHz on the K701, and between 8kHz and 9kHz on both headphones, the differences between drivers of the same headphone are definitely audible, so it's logical to assume if they were indeed the same headphone, the differences between "equal" drivers would explain differences between "equal" headphones.
• However, these differences would be random. I have so far encountered no one that agreed to hearing a difference to say the Q701 was brighter. I know, I know, suggestive bias and all that. All it would take was a couple of first reviewers to say the Quincy's jewel is warmer and most people would agree. But here you have pretty much everyone who's tried both saying that not only are they difference, but agreeing on the differences. In stuff like USB cables where I don't believe there's a difference, but people say they hear one, there's rarely a consensus. Some say the bass gets tighter, for others it gets 'rounder', the mids never seem to agree on a position and end up exactly where they should 
  
   my point is, there seems to be too much consensus to me, and one simple justification for that is that people aren't hearing things this time.