[qazxsw80]

Some interesting AKG K1000 mod that was made by a guy who worked for Kennerton (a Russian headphone manufacturer).

He replaced the lower part of the headphones with a new 3D-printed one to make a detachable cable.
Also, he replaced the foam disk with a felt one so it won't deteriorate over time.
Heinz, do you think it is a good ideal to change the material of the disk? How will it affect the sound?
Hello, by the way.

 

[hrklg01]

Hello,
Yes, the foam disk I always replace by a felt made out of polyester, when I repair K1000.
This felt I use has the same acoustic properties as the original foam had.
But careful! Felt is not equal to felt.
You have to take care that the air flow is equally.
Otherwise it it would tend to less or to too much damping. This effect mainly the bass region.
Best regards Heinz

 

[K1k-fan]

Hello!

I have tried applying some parametric EQ to the K1k’s, mainly to tame the slightly excessive treble. So far, I’ve used the different EQ’s that can be found on Jaakko Pasanen’s AutoEQ-page.

This has truly taken the K1k’s to yet another level (or two). Now they aren’t just ”impressive” on the right material, but I can also listen to them for really long stretches without fatigue. Possibly the most high-end sonics I’ve ever experienced. Still, they aren’t quite neutral on all types of recordings which leads to my question:

Since the K1k’s are completely open, wouldn’t it be possible to measure them in free-field, say 1 cm from the driver, and get a frequency response that could then be EQ:ed to ”flat”, rather than needing proper pinna/head measurements? Or are there still head-related aspects that has to be taken into consideration?

Any thoughts?

 

[hrklg01]

This is how we measured at AKG always and I still do with MYSPHERE...
So, yes! You are right!
Br heinz

 

[K1k-fan]

This is how we measured at AKG always and I still do with MYSPHERE...
So, yes! You are right!
Br heinz

Marvelous, straight from the source! Thank you so much, Heinz - I'll report back when I have made some measurements...

 

[K1k-fan]

OK. First try.

This is the unequalized response:

After some quick EQ, I ended up with this:

This is very good. Not surprisingly, since I haven't corrected the rising mid-bass, the sound is on the warm side - but very, very pleasant. I suspect that Eq:ing for flat might sound too anemic - but I'll have to try it just to have it confirmed.

 

[KaiSc]

Hello!

I have tried applying some parametric EQ to the K1k’s, mainly to tame the slightly excessive treble. So far, I’ve used the different EQ’s that can be found on Jaakko Pasanen’s AutoEQ-page.

This has truly taken the K1k’s to yet another level (or two). Now they aren’t just ”impressive” on the right material, but I can also listen to them for really long stretches without fatigue. Possibly the most high-end sonics I’ve ever experienced. Still, they aren’t quite neutral on all types of recordings which leads to my question:

Since the K1k’s are completely open, wouldn’t it be possible to measure them in free-field, say 1 cm from the driver, and get a frequency response that could then be EQ:ed to ”flat”, rather than needing proper pinna/head measurements? Or are there still head-related aspects that has to be taken into consideration?

Any thoughts?

To me the three available EQ settings from Jaakko Pasanen’s AutoEQ-page have too many narrow-band fine-tunings:

• The measurements these EQs are based on are not transferable to individual, personal listening circumstances in such a detailed way.
• Of course there are unit to unit variation on the AKG K-1000 that differ in this regard.
• The K-1000 doesn’t suffer from narrow-band resonances that need to be EQ’d, according to my own measurements.


The AKG K-1000 is capable of delivering a nice amount of bass if used at reasonable (earsaving) loudness.

Here’s the EQ I do use. It’s based on listening AND my own measurements.
I open the earpieces 22 mm, measured between the upper corners of holder and earpiece.
Mine is a Bass-Heavy version, but not extremly so.
Serial No. 19##, driver resonance frequencies left: 68 Hz, right:76 Hz.

Band# Type Freq. Q-Fac. Gain
01 Shelving 58Hz Q:0.8 +12dB
02 Peaking 2.0kHz Q:1.2 -5.5dB

When listening louder, less sub-bass boost to avoid overload:
Band# Type Freq. Q-Fac. Gain
01 Peaking 31Hz Q:0.9 +12dB
02 Peaking 250Hz Q:0.7 -1.0dB
03 Peaking 2.0kHz Q:1.2 -5.5dB

That’s all!
Still some EQ bands left for individual corrections.
I suggest to use an amplifier that does not exceed 2 W @ 110 Ohms, to avoid breaking the drivers.
RME ADI-2 Pro / DAC works fine for me.

 

[K1k-fan]

One more, then I'll stop clogging the thread. Made some broad adjustments , basically emulating the Harman house-curve for loudspeakers, ending up with this:

Now all needed is a subwoofer!

 

[K1k-fan]

To me the three available EQ settings from Jaakko Pasanen’s AutoEQ-page have too many narrow-band fine-tunings:

• The measurements these EQs are based on are not transferable to individual, personal listening circumstances in such a detailed way.
• Of course there are unit to unit variation on the AKG K-1000 that differ in this regard.
• The K-1000 doesn’t suffer from narrow-band resonances that need to be EQ’d, according to my own measurements.


The AKG K-1000 is capable of delivering a nice amount of bass if used at reasonable (earsaving) loudness.

Here’s the EQ I do use. It’s based on listening AND my own measurements.
I open the earpieces 22 mm, measured between the upper corners of holder and earpiece.
Mine is a Bass-Heavy version, but not extremly so.
Serial No. 19##, driver resonance frequencies left: 68 Hz, right:76 Hz.

Band# Type Freq. Q-Fac. Gain
01 Shelving 58Hz Q:0.8 +12dB
02 Peaking 2.0kHz Q:1.2 -5.5dB

When listening louder, less sub-bass boost to avoid overload:
Band# Type Freq. Q-Fac. Gain
01 Peaking 31Hz Q:0.9 +12dB
02 Peaking 250Hz Q:0.7 -1.0dB
03 Peaking 2.0kHz Q:1.2 -5.5dB

That’s all!
Still some EQ bands left for individual corrections.
I suggest to use an amplifier that does not exceed 2 W @ 110 Ohms, to avoid breaking the drivers.
RME ADI-2 Pro / DAC works fine for me.

Thank's for your input, KaiSc!!

Yes, I subscribe to your view on the EQ per Jaakko Pasanen. The general tonality got better, but there were still some (new?) problems. I'll definitely try your EQ as well (but that is a lot of bass boost!). I have SN 48## myself - I have assumed these are also bass heavy (black box).

Edit: Have you seen no need to EQ the peak in the high treble?

 

[KaiSc]

Thank's for your input, KaiSc!!

Yes, I subscribe to your view on the EQ per Jaakko Pasanen. The general tonality got better, but there were still some (new?) problems. I'll definitely try your EQ as well (but that is a lot of bass boost!). I have SN 48## myself - I have assumed these are also bass heavy (black box).

My EQ’s are for listening at ear-healthy loudness levels over longer periods of time.
On these levels AKG K-1000 can handle the bass boost and gives you a comparable perception to when listening louder (with less boost).
Kind of “Loudness Correction”.

Black box here too, but that’s not a reliable indicator for the bass heavy version.
The driver’s fundamental resonant frequency is.
Your S.No. strongly points to bass heavy.


The high peak at ca. 14 kHz you can see in the measurement above is not audible in reality.
An explanation could be found in the posting below: the driver does not point on the real ear like on the measurement rig’s.
High frequencies in general are not easy to get representative results with headphones measurements.

 

[K1k-fan]

One observation: The "Emulated Harman House Curve" above did sound surprisingly muffled. When contemplating why this was the case and why KaiSc preferred the seemingly not neutral curve above, I realised that since we are basically measuring a speaker in the free field we also have to consider how this "speaker" behaves off axis. When doing the above measurements I aimed the microphone straight into the driver. But since I listen to the K1k's angled out from the ears, this is not necessarily representative of the sound that enter my ears. And when I moved the microphone to an angle and distance approximating my ears, the frequency response did no longer follow the original curve. The midbass hump disappeared completely becoming almost subdued, and the treble became lower in level - apart from a prominent peak at 15 kHz. So I corrected *this* curve accordingly so that the response was within +/- 2 dB on a sloping line - about 3 dB from 100 Hz to 10 kHz. To me, this sounds "neutral", i.e. very good.

 

[bigjako]

I'm the new owner of a bass-heavy K1000. I'm still feeling it out to understand it. Some treble glare, but I tame that with a Lokius. Technicalities are behind the TOTL cans these days, but the experience of listening is intoxicating. Reminds me of the Stax Sigmas to a large degree but being able to change the angle of the speakers, and the wide-openness of it, makes it unique.

I run it off a DNA Stratus via a 1/4 inch jack, but I would like to re-terminate to XLR (I mean, there's a K1000 label above it, how could I not?). Before I think about doing it myself I wanted to see if any K1000 owners have some experience and tips for me when reterminating? Thank you.

Edit: could I use something like this as an adapter to connect the 1/4" connector to the XLR jack? I'm worried it may blow the headphone, since it's intended for mics or as interconnects, not headphones (as are all similar adapters I've found)

 

[robm321]

The K1000 is something special. Congrats!

 

[ESL-1]

Congratulations on the unique classic. Stax may have done it first with the Sigma but as you mention having the ability to change the positions of the drivers gives you a lot of control. I have the Bass Lite (light wood box) and never got to hear the version you scored. They do not need much power from the speaker amp you might chose but they will definitely scale with better gear.
BTW, the Sigma I have is standard/low bias.

Check some DYI guys, should be no issue with 5 pin XLR wired in but check the wire guys….

Enjoy

 

[ESL-1]

One observation: The "Emulated Harman House Curve" above did sound surprisingly muffled. When contemplating why this was the case and why KaiSc preferred the seemingly not neutral curve above, I realised that since we are basically measuring a speaker in the free field we also have to consider how this "speaker" behaves off axis. When doing the above measurements I aimed the microphone straight into the driver. But since I listen to the K1k's angled out from the ears, this is not necessarily representative of the sound that enter my ears. And when I moved the microphone to an angle and distance approximating my ears, the frequency response did no longer follow the original curve. The midbass hump disappeared completely becoming almost subdued, and the treble became lower in level - apart from a prominent peak at 15 kHz. So I corrected *this* curve accordingly so that the response was within +/- 2 dB on a sloping line - about 3 dB from 100 Hz to 10 kHz. To me, this sounds "neutral", i.e. very good.

They enjoy experimenting to find your favorite combos.