[derbigpr]

Quote:

Thanks for the replies.  'Front face presentation' is probably not the right phrase for it.  
 
I have added k550 to the list to give the k701 a bit of competition.  
 
Will play a few songs from the artists you guys mentioned and see how I go.  Will keep you guys updated.  Thank you.

 
 
I absolutely agree with you on the front face presentation.  I find the K701's pretty aggressive (still smooth) and very alive sounding, very sparkly, quick, immediate, punchy. They take your attention 100%. They're not laid back headphones like HD650's which you can have on your head and read a book at the same time. You just can't focus on anything else but music.  I would have expected such sound from Grado's rather than K701's by only reading descriptions of headphones.

 

[2enty3]

Quote:

G'day everyone,

How is the soundstage affected with different amps? I am planning to use an O2 with e17 as the DAC.  I am wanting good width and dept to the soundstage.

Generally, the sound-stage will stay wide, since that is one of the key traits of the K701, but different amps can definitely expand it or have clearer instrument separation. The latter is more noticeable with upgraded gear, but the expansion, at least to me, mostly unchanged. I would say it does, but it could very well be me trying to justify my purchase. That, and the clearer separation kind of gives the feeling or "illusion" of a larger sound-stage. Nonetheless, the greatest improvements will be clearer separation, and maybe a change in tonality.
 
Also, if you enjoyed the K701's, but thought they maybe lacked in the lower end, then you could look in to the K702 anniversary edition.

 

[miceblue]

Quote:

Quote:

G'day everyone,

How is the soundstage affected with different amps? I am planning to use an O2 with e17 as the DAC.  I am wanting good width and dept to the soundstage.

Generally, the sound-stage will stay wide, since that is one of the key traits of the K701, but different amps can definitely expand it or have clearer instrument separation. The latter is more noticeable with upgraded gear, but the expansion, at least to me, mostly unchanged. I would say it does, but it could very well be me trying to justify my purchase. That, and the clearer separation kind of gives the feeling or "illusion" of a larger sound-stage. Nonetheless, the greatest improvements will be clearer separation, and maybe a change in tonality.
 
Also, if you enjoyed the K701's, but thought they maybe lacked in the lower end, then you could look in to the K702 anniversary edition.

Isn't that some $500 USD? I think I'll pass if that's the case....no need to discuss a spin-off of a Beats Detox-like version of a headphone in this thread.
 
That being said, the newer K 701's sound similar to the Q 701 supposedly, which sounds warmer than a standard K 702.
 
 
I find the K 701's soundstage to be quite wide and true for L/R stereo imaging. Even though the mids are slightly forward and warm-sounding, I don't find them to be in-your-face in terms of presentation. I find the L/R imaging so good in fact, that it leaves much of the "space in between the two channels" kind of lacking in my opinion. It doesn't sound that bad, but sounds aren't as up-front and engaging as other headphones I've heard. Don't get me wrong, I love the K 701, but I do think its center imaging isn't its strong point.

 

[2enty3]

Quote:

Isn't that some $500 USD? I think I'll pass if that's the case....no need to discuss a spin-off of a Beats Detox-like version of a headphone in this thread.

Considering he was looking at the LCD, I didn't think $500 would be too much for his taste.
 
And spin-off it is not. Take a look at the dedicated thread to the 65th edition. It does indeed look much nicer, and has a heftier price tag, but has "improved" on the sound of the K701, if you will.
Of course, the "improved" part is completely subjective, as I personally welcome the additional low-end, where others do not not, hence my suggestion if he found the bass to be too light.
 
And if you ask me, the 65th has better imaging, in that the music is coming from the front and center now, instead of the L/R that you mentioned.
 
You shouldn't dismiss a headphone merely because of price and looks, when you haven't heard it before.

 

[miceblue]

Quote:

Quote:

Isn't that some $500 USD? I think I'll pass if that's the case....no need to discuss a spin-off of a Beats Detox-like version of a headphone in this thread.

Considering he was looking at the LCD, I didn't think $500 would be too much for his taste.
 
And spin-off it is not. Take a look at the dedicated thread to the 65th edition. It does indeed look much nicer, and has a heftier price tag, but has "improved" on the sound of the K701, if you will.
Of course, the "improved" part is completely subjective, as I personally welcome the additional low-end, where others do not not, hence my suggestion if he found the bass to be too light.
 
And if you ask me, the 65th has better imaging, in that the music is coming from the front and center now, instead of the L/R that you mentioned.
 
You shouldn't dismiss a headphone merely because of price and looks, when you haven't heard it before.

Oh OK, mah bad. I thought the K 702 Anniversary Edition was just another re-make of the K 701 like the original K 702 and Q 701 were to an extent (removable cables aside)....and I suppose the new 8-bump K 701.

 

[FritzS]

Quote:

Oh OK, mah bad. I thought the K 702 Anniversary Edition was just another re-make of the K 701 like the original K 702 and Q 701 were to an extent (removable cables aside)....and I suppose the new 8-bump K 701.

 
You could compair the differences self - the most differences, the selected capsules for the K702 and Q701 / and the other pads for the K702 65th Anniversary Edition
 
http://www.akg.com/site/powerslave,id,7,nodeid,7,_language,EN,cat,11.html
 
K601/K701
http://www.akg.com/mediendatenbank2/psfile/datei/58/k601_k701439d5815555d1.pdf
 
K702 / K702 65th Anniversary Edition
http://www.akg.com/mediendatenbank2/psfile/datei/4/k70248b2a8664eaf0.pdf
 
Q701
http://www.akg.com/mediendatenbank2/psfile/datei/34/Q7014ccfcf894bb82.pdf
 
This hints are posted here often again!
 
My K701 have 7 pumps and ser# 12750
my Q701 have 8 pumps an ser# 02018

 

[Contrails]

Thanks again for the replies.  I was looking at the LCD, but it was more out of pure curiosity and amazement, not to help my wallet lose weight. 
 
I am very intrigued by the k702 65th after reading the reviews.  Will post some questions on the relevant thread.  

 

[FritzS]

Quote:

And you definitely have to try out binaural records like:
Amber Rubarth - Sessions from the 17th Ward (2012) - 24/192 - don't have the words to describe the sound here...its as if you're THERE.
Same goes for Ottmar Liebert & Luna Negra - Up Close (2008)....  I really wish there were more binaural records out there.  
 

 
Here I post my experience about my compairing K501, Q701, D7000 and use the Amber Rubarth - Sessions from the 17th Ward (on CD) too
http://www.head-fi.org/t/157102/akg-k501-love/810#post_9134621
Quote:

I compared now with Amber Rubarth, Session From the 17th Ward
https://www.jpc.de/jpcng/poprock/detail/-/art/Amber-Rubarth-Sessions-From-The-17th-Ward/hnum/2952935
K501 lacks in bass and Amber Rubarth's voice sounds a little flashy (shrill), Q701 more balanced, with D7000 the chello and drums have the right body.
At some tracks sparrows chirping softly in the recording room, this could I hear best with D7000

 

[bracko]

I own a pair of k701and like them a lot. The serial number is 80000+

 

[miceblue]

Out of curiosity, do the K 701 earpads fit your guys' head? For me they generally fit but since the earpad hole is so large, it doesn't get a good seal near the top-forward position.
Right here:

 

[LugBug1]

#84506
 
Had K701's for a few days now, bought new. Defo a little warmer than the K702's and with a bit more body. Really nice well balanced bass. Treble is still fatiguing if the recording is hard. (brass on older classical) But I wouldn't have it any other way Mids seem a little thicker and imaging is more centered. Soundstage is a fraction narrower than my old 702's.
 
I've been looking out for a better compliment to my LCD2's recently and these have beat the HE500's and DT880 to the post. Not saying these are better, just a better for what I want them for. And that is classical/world and ambient. LCD2's are for Jazz...  

 

[miceblue]

Quote:

#84506
 
Had K701's for a few days now, bought new. Defo a little warmer than the K702's and with a bit more body. Really nice well balanced bass. Treble is still fatiguing if the recording is hard. (brass on older classical) But I wouldn't have it any other way Mids seem a little thicker and imaging is more centered. Soundstage is a fraction narrower than my old 702's.
 
I've been looking out for a better compliment to my LCD2's recently and these have beat the HE500's and DT880 to the post. Not saying these are better, just a better for what I want them for. And that is classical/world and ambient. LCD2's are for Jazz...  

Wow, that's quite the compliment for the K 701. Usually people would prefer the HE-500 I think due to its awesome bass response.

 

[EddieD]

I love my 701's! I am in the market for a tube amp in the $500-$750 range. In the running so far: PanAm, Woo WA3 or 6 and maybe a Schiit Lyr. Any suggestions about pairings? I also have Senn HD580's and I forsee HD650's in my future.
 

 

[LugBug1]

Quote:

Wow, that's quite the compliment for the K 701. Usually people would prefer the HE-500 I think due to its awesome bass response.

Yup in all seriousness I wouldn't swap back to the HE500's. The 500's are brilliant at what they do, but they just don't have the imaging and soundstage for big complex peices. Same goes for the LCD2's for that matter. The K's are really special in that respect, the way that you can pin-point instruments in an orchestra for e.g. The newer K's don't seem to have that thin-ness in the mids that my 702's used to have. Not bashing the 702's here either because I had them for a year and thought they were brilliant too. Only I seem to be enjoying the AKG sound a lot more this time round. And I suppose that has to say something when I've spent the last 8 months listening to 2 high-end orthos. I thought that I would never be able to step down with headphones again. But the K701's are not a step down, no way. They are only a lot cheaper!
The orthos have a certain charm that makes pretty much any recording sound good. This is almost like wearing rose tinted lenses, you know its gonna sound good before you put them on your head. But its not realism. A headphone such as the k701's gives you the true picture, good or bad. Admittedly it makes you more selective in regards to recordings, but when the recording is good then the sound is a true hifi experience.  
 
I've read quite a bit of this thread today and one poster stated to not use a warm source with these and to let the music provide the warmth if it is there. I couldn't agree more! I think the whole point of owning a headphone such as the K701 is to appreciate the linearity. It was designed for accuracy, so don't colour it!
 
Cheers everyone!   

 

[miceblue]

Quote:

Quote:

Wow, that's quite the compliment for the K 701. Usually people would prefer the HE-500 I think due to its awesome bass response.

Yup in all seriousness I wouldn't swap back to the HE500's. The 500's are brilliant at what they do, but they just don't have the imaging and soundstage for big complex peices. Same goes for the LCD2's for that matter. The K's are really special in that respect, the way that you can pin-point instruments in an orchestra for e.g. The newer K's don't seem to have that thin-ness in the mids that my 702's used to have. Not bashing the 702's here either because I had them for a year and thought they were brilliant too. Only I seem to be enjoying the AKG sound a lot more this time round. And I suppose that has to say something when I've spent the last 8 months listening to 2 high-end orthos. I thought that I would never be able to step down with headphones again. But the K701's are not a step down, no way. They are only a lot cheaper!
The orthos have a certain charm that makes pretty much any recording sound good. This is almost like wearing rose tinted lenses, you know its gonna sound good before you put them on your head. But its not realism. A headphone such as the k701's gives you the true picture, good or bad. Admittedly it makes you more selective in regards to recordings, but when the recording is good then the sound is a true hifi experience.  
 
I've read quite a bit of this thread today and one poster stated to not use a warm source with these and to let the music provide the warmth if it is there. I couldn't agree more! I think the whole point of owning a headphone such as the K701 is to appreciate the linearity. It was designed for accuracy, so don't colour it!
 
Cheers everyone!   

Yeah, the LCD-2 has one of the smallest soundstages I have heard in an open back headphone.

 
Thinness of the mids? Certainly not, at least I think so. I do find the mids to have a slight metallic kind of sound to it though; I still like the mids nonetheless.
 
I don't know if it's due to the K 701's soundstage, but I find that a good chunk of my music doesn't sound very natural with the K 701. Maybe it's because it's open-back? Maybe it's because the K 701's strong L/R imaging leaves the center kind of lacking a bit to me? I didn't hear this kind of sound with closed-back headphones, such as the Shure SRH940.
 
Not to say the K 701 sounds bad, it's currently my reference headphone.