choices on studio headphones!

[rob1031]

hey there im new! and i would like to ask some questions befoer deciding what phones i should get. i am thinking of the Audio Technica m40fs sutdio phones, which my friend has, which i know are really good, or the AKG K271's. obviously quite a large price difference, but i want to ask if the AKGs are really MUCH better?

actually i like the raw-ness of the studio phones and the clarity so dont put me up on some hifi phones. i like the "not much colouring" in tone. i liked my friend's $350 bose headphones, but i preferred my other friends' ATm40fs studio phones

so my question is if the AKG K271's are any good? if they're better than the ATs? i am also wanting it to have a flat frequency response(curve) for monitoring, and also i like the sound of it.

oh and one more thing, are the sony 7605's as good?or not as good? i am looking if the sony's are worth it as well


thanks for any comments,

rob

EDITED: HAHA SORRY not 471's i meant 271's

 

[gsferrari]

I have tried the AKG K271S and they are VERY nice headphones to have. Dont know about the 471 (actually I havent heard of such a model) but the K271S does well without an amp.

 

[rob1031]

oops i am very sorry i typed it wrongly! i meant the 271's. thanks for the reply. do you think it is more of a hifi amp, colours the tone, or a studio headphone which has flat frequency curve? (kinda raw/acoustic, clear sounding)

 

[gsferrari]

Sounds pretty flat...frequency response doesnt look terribly flat though :-

And

But it is a good headphone. No coloration and no undue stress on specific frequencies...

No matter what the chart says - this is a flat sounding headphone if there ever was one.

Cheers!

 

[commando]

I sold my 271s, I prefer the A900s which cost not too much more ($210 or so) and sound way, way better. Read my closed can review, linked from my sig, if you like.

 

[rob1031]

whoa those charts are awesome!! ahah. 10 - 20 dB diffference is miniscule i think.. i dont think my ear could tell THAT much of a difference. thanks!


btw, commando, im getting the AKG's for like..190. 210 more is ALOT of money to me. well for now at least, im a student. haha

 

[EdipisReks]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rob1031 btw, commando, im getting the AKG's for like..190. 210 more is ALOT of money to me. well for now at least, im a student. haha

the A900's are $195 from audiocubes.

 

[gsferrari]

AKG can be had for cheaper than that

Go to meier audio http://www.meier-audio.de/ and look it up there (email Jan Meier if you dont see it there - ask him for a price including shipping).

I had one from Sam Ash for $175.00

Search online - you can find them for about $150.00 if you look hard.

Best

gs

 

[gsferrari]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EdipisReks the A900's are $195 from audiocubes.

Does that include shipping?

 

[commando]

You can get 271s for less than that - see here

In your position i'd probably get A500s from audiocubes for like $110 + $10 shipping.

Don't put too much weight in what the charts say, often my ears (and other peoples) disagree with them.

 

[commando]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gsferrari Does that include shipping?

No.

 

[gsferrari]

ideally a studio headphone is something you can chuck around. A headphone that turns off when you take it off your head so that it doesnt interfere with the mic pickup (if you are performing - singing, guitar...)

The AKG-271 is good - it was designed to be a studio headphone.

A900 and A500 are too big and unwieldy to use in a studio. I would be more worried about the finish on the earcups to concentrate on my recording/performance.

They are huge and heavy...not good in a studio environment.

with the AKG K-271 it is easy to remove one pad off the ear without throwing the whole headphone off your head. I dont think this is possible in a quick action with one hand on the A900/500

Cheers!

 

[Evilson]

Quote:

They are huge and heavy...not good in a studio environment.

Heavy? Unwieldy? They're large headphones, but they're not huge, and they're certainly not heavy/unwieldy

Quote:

with the AKG K-271 it is easy to remove one pad off the ear without throwing the whole headphone off your head. I dont think this is possible in a quick action with one hand on the A900/500

??? I'm listening on the A900 right now, and it's certainly not a hassle, not even worth a mention

 

[Hibbsy]

The Akg is a phone designed for studio work and monitoring. It has several very nice features, such as the auto shut off when you take it off your head. This prevents headphone bleed into the mic when you're not wearing it. I do not own it (though that will hopefully change! ) nor have I heard it (though that had better change soon!) but I have been recommended it by several enginneers.
Now, about the graphs and percieved flatness. Here, people do not seem to realise that our ears do not have a flat frequency response. For example, we hear a percieved peak around 4khz or something and troughs at other frequencys. Consequently, for headphones to sound flat, they utilise built in equalisation to compensate for the acoustics of our ears - and measure very "unflat". (is that even a word?) Headphones that measured flat would sound extremealy weird!
Many of the popular headphones on these forums do not measure flat (none of 'em do) and most don't sound flat. Headphones that sound good probably aren't flat - due to the crazy ways we perceive sound, it sounds better (most of the time) if theres a bit of a hump say in the mid range or something.
Balanced and flat sound do not necessarily mean the same thing. Flat means (ideally) that all frequencys are at the same percieved level (to our brain) Balanced (to my interpertation) means all frequencys sound "good" against each other. For example, no frequency dominates, and the overall sound is pleasing. Balanced usually doesn't sound "pleasing" for normal listening.
I belive the Akgs sound quite good for normal listening anyway, and the A900 may not be accurate and balanced enough for studio work. But they (going by the majority of opinon!) sound good!
The bose 'phones would definately not be accurate and flat headphones. Bose are masters at eq'ing equipment to sound good - to most consumers.
So, keep in mind that the majority of people on these forums are consumers (bit more descirning than the average bose buyer!) but they buy their headphones to sound good (not to sound "flat" as such, but with a balanced sound). At the end of the day, it is not other peoples opinon that count (including mine!) but how the 'phones sound to you. People here can point you in the right direction, but they can't chose for you. Listen to the 271s, the A900's, and the other cans with the music you will be using as well as whatever you want to monitor/mix/whatever. At the end of the day, its you.
Anyway, rob1031, I'm new here too, so welcome! (And you haven't gotten the traditional welcome!!! Watch that wallet!
More infomation on judging headphones for accuracy can be found here: http://headwize.com/articles/judging_art.htm

 

[ssportclay]

Why is it that everyone ignores the Beyer DT150 for studio?Even though they are very ugly,they have an excellent reputation.