[Kevin Brown]

Hmmm ...  Different people really do have different ears, I'll say that. 

  I just switched over to the DT880/250 after having listened to the Q701 for about 2.5 weeks.  I think the Q701 is a more revealing headphone that can sometimes be too analytical vs the Beyer's.  I think the Beyers are the warmer of the two, and definitely have more of a low end.

 

[Chris J]

Hmmm ...  Different people really do have different ears, I'll say that.    I just switched over to the DT880/250 after having listened to the Q701 for about 2.5 weeks.  I think the Q701 is a more revealing headphone that can sometimes be too analytical vs the Beyer's.  I think the Beyers are the warmer of the two, and definitely have more of a low end.

I basically agree with everything you said!
Especially the part about the DT880s being warmer and having More Low End!

 

[psun786]

Quote:

This comparison seems to make sense.
There are way too many stories about the Ks and Qs sounding the same and way too many stories about them sounding different to make me wonder if AKG revised the sound of the different phones as time went on.
I really doubt it is burn-in.
 
You are right, you are a

 AKG did retuned k701 but not k702 or q701.
 
The older version k701 (serial # 10k and lower I think) sounded musical and warmer, while newer k701s is leaning toward k702's analytical signature. So if someone is comparing the "newer" k701 to k702, good chance they are going to say the two headphones sounded the same even though there is still some difference (k702 being slightly more transparent and faithful). Anyone with the "older" k701 will find more similarities in q701 than k702.
 
Although k701 / k701 has a relative lower price tag for a flagship model, they are VERY difficultly to drive (unlike hd600 or hd650). I don't know any amp below $900 that can drive these headphone to a decent quality. They usually sounded very dry and over bright when amp is not up to the task. Which explain why some say they prefer q701 over k70x, q701 is just more forgiving in this respect. When matched with a good source (audiophile CD player or studio mastered lossless + desktop DAC) and sufficient amp, k70x offer very smooth sound and resolution that most other headphone can't match.

 

[Chris J]

 AKG did retuned k701 but not k702 or q701.

The older version k701 (serial # 10k and lower I think) sounded musical and warmer, while newer k701s is leaning toward k702's analytical signature. So if someone is comparing the "newer" k701 to k702, good chance they are going to say the two headphones sounded the same even though there is still some difference (k702 being slightly more transparent and faithful). Anyone with the "older" k701 will find more similarities in q701 than k702.

Although k701 / k701 has a relative lower price tag for a flagship model, they are VERY difficultly to drive (unlike hd600 or hd650). I don't know any amp below $900 that can drive these headphone to a decent quality. They usually sounded very dry and over bright when amp is not up to the task. Which explain why some say they prefer q701 over k70x, q701 is just more forgiving in this respect. When matched with a good source (audiophile CD player or studio mastered lossless + desktop DAC) and sufficient amp, k70x offer very smooth sound and resolution that most other headphone can't match.

How do you know this?
Sorry to ask, but there seems to be so much BS floating around about these 'phones.

Talking about Q's, I think you can drive them with just about anything, of course you really can't hear how good they sound when you use an iPod, but they sound very reasonable out of an iPod.

 

[HaVoC-28]

Quote:

 
Although k701 / k701 has a relative lower price tag for a flagship model, they are VERY difficultly to drive (unlike hd600 or hd650)

 
HD600 and HD650 easy to drive ? that's quite new , they also need an amp to really shine , but like Chris J said , either H6XX or K/Q/70X , or even DT-880/600 ohms are listenable from an ipod .

 

[juantendo8]

The Beyers 600 ohm are the only headphone listed that I would call truly difficult to drive. The K501 predecessor is more hungry than all those except perhaps the Beyers. The high-end orthos are the kings of ridiculous power requirements though (and the K1000).  

 

[Chris J]

Quote:

The Beyers 600 ohm are the only headphone listed that I would call truly difficult to drive. The K501 predecessor is more hungry than all those except perhaps the Beyers. The high-end orthos are the kings of ridiculous power requirements though (and the K1000).  

 
I like your quote from Mahler. I'm gald Mahler wasn't a writer!
 
Even 600 ohm Beyers can be run from iPods, iPads, etc.
The sound is OK, but the volume is limited.
 
I guess my idea of difficult to drive would be a headphone which you plug into an iPod and you say, "that just sounds terrible", then you plug it into a good headphone amp and you say, "now that sounds good".
But that's just my opinion and what I can tolerate.  if I really what decent sound out of an iPad and am too lazy to use "more equipment" then I plug my Q701s direct into the iPad.
I really bought a pair of Senn PX-100 ii for the iPad & iPod, etc.  So I guess "it depends".

 

[MDR30]

Quote:

 
Put the Q701 covers and foam inserts on the K702 and tested them.  Not much difference. 
 
So you can NOT convert the K70x to the Q701 by swapping the covers and foam inserts.  Something else is making them sound different  (Quincy Jones may have sprinkled magical dust on them).
 

 
Check the back of the driver and the size of the holes/filter weave. This is where bass tuning occurs and the Q701 may look different from the K701.

 

[chicolom]

Quote:

 
Check the back of the driver and the size of the holes/filter weave. This is where bass tuning occurs and the Q701 may look different from the K701.

 
Not sure what the back of the driver looks like.  This is as deep as I went:
 

 

[MDR30]

Quote:

 
Not sure what the back of the driver looks like.  This is as deep as I went:
 

 
 
Here's the back of the K701 driver, fetched from the ever-useful driver pics thread:
http://www.head-fi.org/t/202122/the-headphone-driver-pics-thread/15
 

 
 
You see the openings on the left, right and centre covered with filter paper/nylon fabric. These affect themovement of the diaphragm, and the bass response. If you remove the centre fabric you would get more bass, but also a less controlled membrane. It's all a give and take. I'm very curious as how the back of the Q701 driver looks.

 

[psun786]

Quote:

 
HD600 and HD650 easy to drive ? that's quite new , they also need an amp to really shine , but like Chris J said , either H6XX or K/Q/70X , or even DT-880/600 ohms are listenable from an ipod .

[size=10pt][size=10pt]Since we are talking about full size open headphones, by easy to drive I mean they can be driven to near full potential with a mid-range headphone amp (<$500). I doubt any of these headphone are designed to be plugged into ipod's 3.5mm jack so I won't even go there. [size=10pt]There are quiet few mid-range amps that are capable of drive 300Ω hd650/600 sufficiently. sxt-2lite balanced amp $385, Graham Slee Solo SRGII $490 or even Asus Xonar Esscence $165 for example. [/size][/size][/size]
[size=10pt] [/size]
[size=10pt][size=10pt]There is a difference between an amp that is capable to drive a hp to required volume than it is able to drive it sufficiently in term of sound quality. k701/k702, despite have a relative low 62Ω, they crave for massive amount of current sound to their full potential. Such unusual character make them harder to drive than hd600/650. k701/k702 will sound thin / dry and over bright treble when amp not up to the task and can't sustain its highs. Amps that I have listened that are decent for k701/702 are Violectric HPA-V200, SPL Auditor and Graham Slee Solo Ultra Linear Diamond. All these models came with a price tag of near $1k. Not mention, bein an extremely transparent and faithful headphone, you need a good source to avoid artifacts. hd600/650 on the other hand, is much forgiving in my opinion. [/size][/size]

 

[psun786]

Quote:

How do you know this?
Sorry to ask, but there seems to be so much BS floating around about these 'phones.
Talking about Q's, I think you can drive them with just about anything, of course you really can't hear how good they sound when you use an iPod, but they sound very reasonable out of an iPod.

 
None taken... =)
 
This is not BS, anyone with an early version k701 (serial # <8000) can confirm this. The initial batch of k701 (serial # <4000) sounded even fuller and smoother. Anything newer the serial # 14000 is considered newer version, which has a sonic signature close to k702. I pretty sure someone who owned k701 from various period would brought this up here on head-fi... I mean the difference is quiet clear.

 

[chicolom]

Quote:

 
 
Here's the back of the K701 driver, fetched from the ever-useful driver pics thread:
http://www.head-fi.org/t/202122/the-headphone-driver-pics-thread/15
 

 
 
You see the openings on the left, right and centre covered with filter paper/nylon fabric. These affect themovement of the diaphragm, and the bass response. If you remove the centre fabric you would get more bass, but also a less controlled membrane. It's all a give and take. I'm very curious as how the back of the Q701 driver looks.

 
Interesting. 
 
I see what you mean now.  I don't think anyone has disassembled a Q701 to look at the driver yet.  It would be interesting to see if really is different, like you suggested. 

 

[HaVoC-28]

Quote:

[size=10pt][size=10pt]Since we are talking about full size open headphones, by easy to drive I mean they can be driven to near full potential with a mid-range headphone amp (<$500). I doubt any of these headphone are designed to be plugged into ipod's 3.5mm jack so I won't even go there. [size=10pt]There are quiet few mid-range amps that are capable of drive 300Ω hd650/600 sufficiently. sxt-2lite balanced amp $385, Graham Slee Solo SRGII $490 or even Asus Xonar Esscence $165 for example. [/size][/size][/size]
[size=10pt] [/size]
[size=10pt][size=10pt]There is a difference between an amp that is capable to drive a hp to required volume than it is able to drive it sufficiently in term of sound quality. k701/k702, despite have a relative low 62Ω, they crave for massive amount of current sound to their full potential. Such unusual character make them harder to drive than hd600/650. k701/k702 will sound thin / dry and over bright treble when amp not up to the task and can't sustain its highs. Amps that I have listened that are decent for k701/702 are Violectric HPA-V200, SPL Auditor and Graham Slee Solo Ultra Linear Diamond. All these models came with a price tag of near $1k. Not mention, bein an extremely transparent and faithful headphone, you need a good source to avoid artifacts. hd600/650 on the other hand, is much forgiving in my opinion. [/size][/size]

Ya i know that lound volume don't mean that a headphone is well drived ^^ .I had a K702 and tryed it on various amps soo i know how it works 

 
I disagree with STX handling correctly HD600/650 or K70X too , but Matrix M-stage / lovely cube (Lehmann Black Cube Lineanear clones) is one of the cheapest way to make them shine under 300$ . A better amp ,will improve things , with C2.1 , K702 improved , but a HD6XX would have improved too . For source a decent one yes , but what matters most is Headphone , Amp after , and at last Source . 
 
K702 with auditor is not an ideal match , Auditor don't like very much low impedence cans (damping factor from the initial outpout impedance of auditor)) , it's suited to high impedance cans .

 

[psun786]

Ya i know that lound volume don't mean that a headphone is well drived ^^ .I had a K702 and tryed it on various amps soo i know how it works 

I disagree with STX handling correctly HD600/650 or K70X too , but Matrix M-stage / lovely cube (Lehmann Black Cube Lineanear clones) is one of the cheapest way to make them shine under 300$ . A better amp ,will improve things , with C2.1 , K702 improved , but a HD6XX would have improved too . For source a decent one yes , but what matters most is Headphone , Amp after , and at last Source . 

K702 with auditor si not an ideal match , Auditor don't like very much low impedence cans (damping factor from the initial outpout impedance of auditor)) , it's suited to high impedance cans .

I agree with u on almost everything except SPL auditor + k702 combination. Personally, I prefer amp and headphone to be as transparent and faithful as possible. If anything should has "color", it should be the source gear. I only auditioned SPL with k702 so dont know how well it does with other low impedance headphones. The store I tried them has the Linn DS streamer as source, and the combination sounded simply amazing. I really enjoy the amount of detail they are reproducing. Otherwise, I will just listen on my home system which probably out performer headphone in almost every other aspect. This further confirms what I had in mind.... If such colorless amp + neutral hp sounded awful, the source should be the one to blame. Again, its probably all personal preference... I prioritize detail and resolution than anything else when pick headphones.

Unfortunately, my DAC budget is less than $2k so Linn DS streamer is out of question. Probably going to get either Hegel HD10 or Lavry DA11 when revision is out. It appear their input is limited to 96khz at the moment ><