[KuKuBuKu]

Quote:

Thanks for that. I wonder what the story is with the HD-800 measurements then.

I thought that HD800s were all slightly different from another. Not sure though, just remember reading it somewhere.
 

 

[Audiophile1811]

Quote:

Has anyone yet directly compared the K701 to the Q701?
 
At the very least, the newest 701's seems to have more bass according to some, and the graph up above agrees with that.  So ...  could be some truth there.
 
 

Thank you. I would appreciate someone comparing Both models and stating their sonic differences.

PLEASE?! ANYBODY?
 
 

 

[Hawkinsman07]

For some reasons, my family just got me the Q701's in black instead of the K's which are considerably cheaper.. I have never heard a stock K series phone...but I will be posting a review of it as soon as its burned in. Maybe in 2 weeks or so.
 
What I can tell right now is that it has really well defined...if not booming...bass.

 

[debitsohn]

interesting...

 

[Audiophile1811]

Quote:

For some reasons, my family just got me the Q701's in black instead of the K's which are considerably cheaper.. I have never heard a stock K series phone...but I will be posting a review of it as soon as its burned in. Maybe in 2 weeks or so.
 
What I can tell right now is that it has really well defined...if not booming...bass.

If you are going to post a review please start a new thread for it. It should get a lot of attention. 

 

[BlackbeardBen]

Quote:

There's no difference between the K701 and Q701 from 10khz to 20khz, which makes sense of the notion that foam is probably the main difference. Oh, and the Q701 has replaceable cables.

So many people underestimate the effect of the ear pads.  With Grados no one seems to dispute that.  But everything else...  well, it's virtually ignored despite the huge effect it has.  You get ignored if you tell someone to swap pads on a "new version vs. old version" test of some headphone...
 
Sample variation and especially measurement accuracy/repeatability (in particular the placement on the dummy head as someone mentioned) are of course contributing factors as well.

 

[Kevin Brown]

Maybe just a typo, but I'm keeping my radar out for these.  Anyway:
 
Magnolia insert in the paper 2 days ago.  They are advertising K701's on the last page, but in little print in the details, the model number is the Q701.
 

 

[exnx]

i just had a quick audition of both the K701 and Q701 at my local hi-fi shop.
 
i wish i could've had more time with them (i could've spent all day in there), but from what i heard i think the Q701 had slightly more of the bass presence that i like in my listening. and since the guy told me the K701 had several more hours on them, maybe it wouldn't be crazy to think that the Q701's sound would warm up even more over time. i really love bass, but i don't love stupid bass. obviously, bass isn't something that either of these headphones are known for (maybe their lack-thereof), so between these two headphones that are so similar, whichever i feel has the better low-end is going to get my pick. i'm probably going to get one of these two in the next 6-10 months, and i think if i had to pick one today i'd go with the Q701.
 
it's also worth noting that the Q701 has a superior soundstage. i've only tried out maybe 10 audiophile-grade headphones?, and these had by far the craziest soundstage i've heard. it wasn't off-putting at all, but it would probably take some getting used to at first.
 
hopefully this helps a little? 

 

[estreeter]

Weird - word from a very experienced headphone vendor who has stocked the K701 since its release is that the Q701 is the same headphone in slightly different attire - any tweaks Quincy might have suggested are so subtle as to be inaudible. Aaah, humans -- what do we know, right ?

 

[Head Injury]

We know what we know, never anything else 

 
Really, the button on the Q701's grill would probably have more sonic impact than short-term driver burn-in, so it's not that far-fetched to assume they sound a little different.

 

[tdockweiler]

I've said this before in other threads, but the Q701 sounds much better and very, very slightly different to me. Could it be my imagination, variations between pairs or perhaps that the Q701 is burned in longer at the factory? It's rather silly to pretend that the new fancy button has no effect on the sound. I don't think AKG would slap a button on there without thinking through the resulting sound. The foam from what I read is also different. Has anyone went through each and every part and compared them? AKG would have to be stupid to release the Q701 without making some tiny changes. It seems that even with the K702 they made minor adjustments (that most people don't even hear).
 
Here is what my ears tell me....
 
Q701 is warmer sounding than the K702. It's treble is much, much smoother to my ears. I've owned my Q701 for 2 weeks and not once have complained about it's treble. Nothing has changed in my setup.
The Q701 has TONS of bass. More than the Pro900. Ok, sorry, I made that up. To me, I can't tell if it has any more bass than the K702. Maybe a very tiny bit, but probably not audible by my ears.
 
I had the K702 about 6 months ago and liked it but it's treble was painful for my ears. Had 200 hours of burn-in. The 2nd problem I had was that it's mids were a bit too lean and at times felt they almost sounded recessed. Huh?! No, not the upper mids. The Q701's mids sound a bit fuller with more body. Maybe it's my imagination? Don't think so.
 
3rd problem with the K702 was it had a very goofy soundstage. It was especially noticeable in gaming. Things that were 2' away in game sounded much more distant than they sound be. That was another killer for my K702. At times things sounded too far away or distant with specific music. The soundstage didn't seem so accurate and artificially huge.
 
The Q701 feels as if the soundstage is MUCH smaller, but still very large, but more accurate. Vocals don't automatically sound distant, but just the way they were recorded. The Q701 isn't the most engaging and fun headphone in the world, but I love it. Can't say the same about the K702 (that I did like).
 
Now some could say it's all my imagination. I just know I couldn't deal with the K702, but have ZERO complaints about the Q701. Two weeks in and I haven't had any issues yet.
 
Now there are some who bought both and compared them and found ZERO differences. I'm not saying they're wrong, just that they sound very slightly different to ME. Maybe there is a specific frequency that was tweaked to make my ears less bothered.
 
I wouldn't suggest upgrading your K702 to the Q701. If you had some of the same issues with the K702 I had and sold it, the Q701 is worth a try. Just sell it or return it if you don't like it.
 
What's funny is that I'd take the K501 or K601 over the K701/K702 any day, but I prefer the Q701 over them (there's now 3 on here that have said this!). I compared the K601 to the Q701 last night and female vocals are now just as good on the Q701 as the K601. The Q701 is slightly less warm than the K601, but pretty close.
 
So..again..very minor differences, but enough for me to keep them this time.

 

[rhythmdevils]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tdockweiler /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
I don't think AKG would slap a button on there without thinking through the resulting sound.

I think they would. 

 
I won't doubt your impressions though.  Seems a lot of people have found similar differences. 

 

[purrin]

 
Quote:

Thanks for that. I wonder what the story is with the HD-800 measurements then.

 
Quote:

Actually Audeze pointed out that most of the variation in their graphs is from the testing equipment, not variation in the headphones themselves.

I guess my testing rig must have "accidentally misaligned" itself to give the HD800s and SR009 perfect driver matching. Yeah, that explains it. And when I tested them under different environmental conditions a week later, I guess they must have accidentally misaligned themselves again.
 
...
 
On the K and Q FR plots, the differences are within what I see as typical variance from headphone to headphone. So it's hard to say without more samples. Although I must say at the recent Irvine meet, I did hear someone's recent Q (or was it K), that sounded quite different from the K that I used to have.

 

[rhythmdevils]

They said that every time they measure the same headphone, they get the same variations as when they measured different units.  So I guess I should have said measuring placement or something.  But your measurements have changed our understanding of the LCD-2 since that post...

 

[purrin]

Indeed, precise alignment of the headphones on the testing apparatus is crucial for consistent results in the higher frequencies.