[MarioImpemba]

If my Q701's were as comfortable as my Beyers, I'd wear them more.

 

[Zombie_X]

I know it's not directed at me, but I felt I could answer this as well.
 
I briefly had the Q701's and they did have more bass than the K400, but it was not a ton more. My K400 has more bass than a K702 and K601 but only by a bit. The mids are also the most forward and the treble is quite smooth though it's elevated. It's smoother than the Q701 to my ears, but not quite HD600 smooth. The Q701 are still bright headphones with somewhat recessed mids and decent bass. 
 
As for the Q701, I find it to be a nice mid-fi can, but not reference grade. It's not accurate or linear as many claim. It's quite colored it seems and is not super detailed as many also claim. It seems the treble is boosted to increase detail in a fake way. The same goes for the K702 and K701. Both of those are not accurate either. They are a fun listen though and I enjoyed them when I had them. 
 
I'm waiting on pads from both the K701 and K601 to try on them, so we'll see.
 
Quote:

@ Tdockweiler:
 
How would you describe the K400 vs Q701 sound?  I got my pair and have been listening to them a bit.  They aren't bad at all.  I've noticed they have less bass and more midrange than Q701s.  The soundstage is large, though I think it might be a little smaller than Q701.  The positioning and separation is a little fuzzier than Q701. 
 
Have you tried pad-rolling AKG K400s?  I put the Q701 pads on them and it really helped increase their bass.  I imaging K601 pads might be nice on them...

 

 

[tdockweiler]

 
Some of those impressions are not too far off from mine. I've never compared the K702 to the K400 though at the same time.
 
The idea of the Q701 having some sort of recession of the mids is absolutely crazy to me! At least with this pair and on any amp i've tried. I think you said you had two pairs and one sounded different than the rest. If you're describing the first you had that sounded identical to the K702, then I could agree. The K702 often sounded as if it had recession in the mids somewhere, but not the upper mids. It's mids were very lean. Much more cold and analytical. Not like the DT-880 I had. Any Q701 that has any sort of recession of the mids would be going back immediately. The Q701 I have has quite a lot of bass. More than even the stock HD-600, but somehow doesn't sound as warm and has better bass extension. It's mids are very full sounding, kind of like the K601, but not quite. My Q701 is nearly as warm as the K601, but not quite.
 
K400 having more bass than the K601 is just plain bizarre too. Of course I think you mentioned it requires an expensive amp or else it might lack bass. I've never tried it on any $1000 monster amps. If I can't get decent bass on an amp with the K400 under $500, then it's not worth using for me. I'm not a believer that an amp that sounds amazing with the K601 and K501 can't drive the K400 well enough. The pair I had was sold to me because they felt it lacked bass. I had the same impression. Maybe amps under $500 won't do it justice. If so, no wonder I sold it. Price really shouldn't matter much. K601 pads definitely did help the bass.
 
So if the Q701 isn't accurate to you, what AKG or headphone is? Hopefully you're not going to say the K400. Maybe the K501 or K601. It seems nobody ever agrees on what headphones are accurate. I don't even think the HD-600 is with stock cable. HD-600 is no more accurate IMO than the Q701 I have. Especially when it makes everything easier on the ears. I guess that's a plus for many.
 
Now if you compare the HD-600 with DHC cable and the Q701, to my ears they reproduced most material quite accurate enough. Even when adding in the KRK KNS-8400 and K601 it wasn't much different. Obviously the HD-600 had thicker/fuller mids.
That is obviously just preference there.
 
Unless you actually produced the music or have memorized a song inside and out, it'd be hard to know for sure, which one is the most accurate. Doesn't matter much to me. I'd prefer to use several other neutral pairs as reference.
 
BTW I also don't find the Q701 to have accentuated treble. Not even close (for me). With some recordings for me it sure sounds like that, but it's the recordings fault. You can listen to it on any other good studio monitor and it's just as bad. Q701 doesn't touch a thing. It's amazing how many times it's easy to get fooled into thinking that what you're hearing is the headphones sound signature, but it's really just a fault of the recording. This happened to me quite often. I have some Pearl Jam songs with very distant sounding vocals and it's quite interesting.
Quote:

I know it's not directed at me, but I felt I could answer this as well.
 
I briefly had the Q701's and they did have more bass than the K400, but it was not a ton more. My K400 has more bass than a K702 and K601 but only by a bit. The mids are also the most forward and the treble is quite smooth though it's elevated. It's smoother than the Q701 to my ears, but not quite HD600 smooth. The Q701 are still bright headphones with somewhat recessed mids and decent bass. 
 
As for the Q701, I find it to be a nice mid-fi can, but not reference grade. It's not accurate or linear as many claim. It's quite colored it seems and is not super detailed as many also claim. It seems the treble is boosted to increase detail in a fake way. The same goes for the K702 and K701. Both of those are not accurate either. They are a fun listen though and I enjoyed them when I had them. 
 
I'm waiting on pads from both the K701 and K601 to try on them, so we'll see.
 


 

 

 

[shorke]

Hmm, if there are different sounding Q701s and mine seem a bit lean on bass maybe I got some old stock that have older drivers or something. What is a song you feel has nice bass and a good example of where the mids may be recessed if I got some outdated driver? One difference I've noticed is that some people reported their 20ft long cable to be black with the black model. Mine is green, just like the 10ft. 

 

[Danthrax]

Quote:

Hmm, if there are different sounding Q701s and mine seem a bit lean on bass maybe I got some old stock that have older drivers or something. What is a song you feel has nice bass and a good example of where the mids may be recessed if I got some outdated driver? One difference I've noticed is that some people reported their 20ft long cable to be black with the black model. Mine is green, just like the 10ft. 

What amp are you using with your headphones?

 

[shorke]

JDSLabs O2 using the optional Triad WAU12-200 AC adapter. On some recordings there is plenty of bass and whatever. The Social Network ost, Girl With The Dragon Tattoo ost, they both sound great. It just seems that in a lot of rock and classic rock the bass gets lost under everything else because it is so much more quiet. With industrial and electronica and stuff the bass is better.
Quote:

What amp are you using with your headphones?

 

 

[Zombie_X]

Yo,
 
Travis the mids are recessed and they still have that odd plastic type coloration to them. Even though the mids were fuller than the K701/K702, they were still thin ans kinda recessed. All K701 variants have this issue, and the Q701 is a step in the right direction for fixing them. I am describing the newer Q701  I had about a month or so back. 
 
As for the bass, I did find that the vintage K400 has more bass than the modern K601 and K701 variants. The K400 you sold me was the bass heavy version, so the bass light version is probably pretty thin sounding. But I found that a powerful amp really brings the bass out on both the K400 and K501, which is the best bass in the AKG line up next to the K1000 IMO. 
 
I find the K501 to be more accurate in many ways and it's also more balanced. None of the described headphone are neutral at all, but are quite natural. I would say the K501 is the most accurate in their line up, but it's just an opinion. The K701 and subsequent variations all have an odd coloration in them that bugs the heck out of me at times. I don't hate the phones, I did own the K702 and I loved it.
 
Even though the Q701 is much smoother in the treble regions, it's still quite bright. AKG fixed the main issue I had with the treble, that being it sounded like a screeching sound on certain music. It's still brighter than my K400 and K501, but is smoother than those two. I hope that makes sense.. The K701 and K702 sound like a DT990 in comparison to the Q701. Maybe saying the Q701 had boosted treble was misleading, but I'd say it's elevated higher than one would expect after reading about it here, heck the headphone is still quite treble oriented to my ears.
 
It could also all be down to manufacturing variations but it's hard to say. Maybe I'll order one again and do some listening..
 
Quote:

 
Some of those impressions are not too far off from mine. I've never compared the K702 to the K400 though at the same time.
 
The idea of the Q701 having some sort of recession of the mids is absolutely crazy to me! At least with this pair and on any amp i've tried. I think you said you had two pairs and one sounded different than the rest. If you're describing the first you had that sounded identical to the K702, then I could agree. The K702 often sounded as if it had recession in the mids somewhere, but not the upper mids. It's mids were very lean. Much more cold and analytical. Not like the DT-880 I had. Any Q701 that has any sort of recession of the mids would be going back immediately. The Q701 I have has quite a lot of bass. More than even the stock HD-600, but somehow doesn't sound as warm and has better bass extension. It's mids are very full sounding, kind of like the K601, but not quite. My Q701 is nearly as warm as the K601, but not quite.
 
K400 having more bass than the K601 is just plain bizarre too. Of course I think you mentioned it requires an expensive amp or else it might lack bass. I've never tried it on any $1000 monster amps. If I can't get decent bass on an amp with the K400 under $500, then it's not worth using for me. I'm not a believer that an amp that sounds amazing with the K601 and K501 can't drive the K400 well enough. The pair I had was sold to me because they felt it lacked bass. I had the same impression. Maybe amps under $500 won't do it justice. If so, no wonder I sold it. Price really shouldn't matter much. K601 pads definitely did help the bass.
 
So if the Q701 isn't accurate to you, what AKG or headphone is? Hopefully you're not going to say the K400. Maybe the K501 or K601. It seems nobody ever agrees on what headphones are accurate. I don't even think the HD-600 is with stock cable. HD-600 is no more accurate IMO than the Q701 I have. Especially when it makes everything easier on the ears. I guess that's a plus for many.
 
Now if you compare the HD-600 with DHC cable and the Q701, to my ears they reproduced most material quite accurate enough. Even when adding in the KRK KNS-8400 and K601 it wasn't much different. Obviously the HD-600 had thicker/fuller mids.
That is obviously just preference there.
 
Unless you actually produced the music or have memorized a song inside and out, it'd be hard to know for sure, which one is the most accurate. Doesn't matter much to me. I'd prefer to use several other neutral pairs as reference.
 
BTW I also don't find the Q701 to have accentuated treble. Not even close (for me). With some recordings for me it sure sounds like that, but it's the recordings fault. You can listen to it on any other good studio monitor and it's just as bad. Q701 doesn't touch a thing. It's amazing how many times it's easy to get fooled into thinking that what you're hearing is the headphones sound signature, but it's really just a fault of the recording. This happened to me quite often. I have some Pearl Jam songs with very distant sounding vocals and it's quite interesting.

 

 

[tdockweiler]

Here's something that might be of interest to you..(ok, later in this post).
Hopefully you tried the Q701s you had with STOCK cable only. Otherwise impressions may vary. We can go over and over about what every Q701 should sound like, but with all the different gear and possible versions, we'll get nowhere. Nobody ever agrees on anything!

Maybe someone will somehow get a chance to try up to 6 pairs all at once and compare them all! In comparison to the HD-600, sure the mids are thinner. I'm not a fan of the mids of the HD-600. That headphone is way too warm for me it seems, but I still like it for rock and specific music.
I would say the thinness of the mids are similar to the HD-598. Not quite as warm as my K601 or HD-600 (with any cable). Now if I say "thin", that doesn't mean they're thin to me at all. Not even close.
 
If the 2nd Q701 you heard wasn't say a 10% improvement over the 1st one, it might not still be the same as the ones some on here had. Who knows..for all we know, there might even just be one version, but nobody seems to know. Maybe you can go to a store and bribe them to let you try 10 pairs. Just kidding..maybe there is a bass heavy Q701

 
I heard the plasticky sound on the K701 years ago, but it was gone on the K702 and Q701 for me. Just a thing of the past for me.
 
Not trying to say you're hearing things, but the K501 and K400 are known to have the least amount of bass amount between all the open AKGs. This seems to be the general consensus, but who cares about that. I actually think the K601 has more bass than the K702, but very few will agree.
 
There is no way that K400 could be a bass heavy version. If you say it is, then I believe you. Are you sure you're not confusing it with the K501? When I got my K501 I was expecting very weak bass, but I was totally happy with it's bass. Felt like my K501 was one with very good bass (NOT bass light). When I got the K400 it's like the bass went out the window. It's good you found a matching amp for it. Hopefully it's not just a coloration and changing it's signature too much. That'd be impossible right? All the AKGs are amazing with my Headroom Micro Amp. Less so with Sennheisers. K400 only had to be at about 40% volume and sounded pretty dang good, but I must be sensitive to it's mids.
 
As for what I was going to say earlier..i've found this crazy thing about the Q701. I've found that when I use any other copper or silver platted copper cable the Q701 isn't nearly as warm. It's very strange. With some wire i've found the soundstage to be so much larger that it makes things sound too distant.
I'm not going to get into it with the science people, but that's what I heard. The Q701 cable seems to be very similar to Canare! Have you tried the Q701 with a Canare?
 
It seems that when I use my two pre-made cables they sound more cold and analytical, but with stock they're perfect. Obviously the SXC is best, but not as warm and full sounding. This is really strange..somehow the SXC has smoother treble than stock.
 
I've been trying to figure out why the Q701 sounds the way it does with it's stock cable. Right now i'm alternating between stock and the Ca-0363 one. Every plain copper one i've had doesn't give me the stock sound. Canare would maybe.
 
Seems nobody knows for sure if the K702 and Q701 use the same cable and quality of wire. Some guy on Amazon also claimed the internal wires to the driver are of better quality too! Doubt it.
 
I would say the Q701 is quite bright, but not really any more than the other headphones I have. The only time it's treble bothers me is when it's during poorly mastered tracks. The treble doesn't seem to vary much between amps. I believe some have said the Micro Amp has smooth treble, but it's never tamed the treble on any headphone I had. So glad about that! The treble of the Q701 is similar to my KNS-8400. 8400 has slightly smoother treble sometimes.
 
I also had trouble with the "screeching" sounds on the K702. Some random issue that gave my ears a fit on the K702. It only happened like 10-15% of the time and wasn't a case of garbage tracks. Asgard and the K601 was even worse. That was bad synergy though with the Asgard.
 
At least we agree on the K501.

Maybe it's just that the K400 requires some very expensive amp to sound good. It'd be interesting to see if you get similar results with any budget amps (meaning under $300).
The K501 to me is one of the most natural and smoothest sounding headphone i've heard. The only thing that's NOT accurate about it is it's soundstage. Felt like I was in an airplane hangar with some music.
What's most interesting about this is that despite this the mids (or anything else) sounded too distant. On the K702, it was the total opposite.
 
Of course the only reason I sold the K501 is that the Q701 I have was enough to top it. I'm also not a fan of the massive soundstage on the K501.
 
Maybe someday I can loan you this Q701. Just for testing purposes and for my own curiosity. It'd be interesting for someone else to hear it. Maybe I can convince Tyll to measure it and figure out what's going on with all these Q701s sounding different.
Even when I change gear it's not dramatically different sounding.
 
Quote:

Yo,
 
Travis the mids are recessed and they still have that odd plastic type coloration to them. Even though the mids were fuller than the K701/K702, they were still thin ans kinda recessed. All K701 variants have this issue, and the Q701 is a step in the right direction for fixing them. I am describing the newer Q701  I had about a month or so back. 
 
As for the bass, I did find that the vintage K400 has more bass than the modern K601 and K701 variants. The K400 you sold me was the bass heavy version, so the bass light version is probably pretty thin sounding. But I found that a powerful amp really brings the bass out on both the K400 and K501, which is the best bass in the AKG line up next to the K1000 IMO. 
 
I find the K501 to be more accurate in many ways and it's also more balanced. None of the described headphone are neutral at all, but are quite natural. I would say the K501 is the most accurate in their line up, but it's just an opinion. The K701 and subsequent variations all have an odd coloration in them that bugs the heck out of me at times. I don't hate the phones, I did own the K702 and I loved it.
 
Even though the Q701 is much smoother in the treble regions, it's still quite bright. AKG fixed the main issue I had with the treble, that being it sounded like a screeching sound on certain music. It's still brighter than my K400 and K501, but is smoother than those two. I hope that makes sense.. The K701 and K702 sound like a DT990 in comparison to the Q701. Maybe saying the Q701 had boosted treble was misleading, but I'd say it's elevated higher than one would expect after reading about it here, heck the headphone is still quite treble oriented to my ears.
 
It could also all be down to manufacturing variations but it's hard to say. Maybe I'll order one again and do some listening..
 


 

 

 

[Chris J]

Quote:

 

 
i Had DT-880 Pro and DT-880-600 ohms , both were brighter than my K702  , more trebble energy . (DT-880-600 ohms first week on november 2011 , DT-880 PRO : end of october 2011) .
 
For me DT-880-600 was a bit similar to  K702  , DT-880- PRO less . Had the 3 at same time for 2 weeks before sending back the DT-880 PRO , and finally sold DT-880-600 , this january and after K702 after getting T1 .
 
K702 had a touch of warm on their mids , DT-880's no .

Very strange, makes me wonder about either Beyers or AKG's quality control.
I hear just the opposite:   Q701s are definitely brighter than DT880 600 ohm.
Hard to believe it comes down to everyone hears different.
I have no reasonable explanation.
Interesting reading about different impressions of the same 'phones.
 
 
 
 

 

[soundlikes]

Has anyone tried the NFB-12 with the Q's ??? If yes let me know how good it is at driving these cans. I found a good deal on one so just wondering

 

[KimLaroux]

This thread is so full of controversy, I just had to buy a pair.
 

 
Besides, the white version is just too sexy to pass up, don't you think?
 
So anyways, I received them two days ago. I got them used, but they have very little play time, something around 25 hours. After a careful but thorough cleaning, I put them on my head...
 
Wow, those are light! Compared to the Shure, those are feathers on your head. 

 The clamping force is close to not existent. Then the bumps under the head band started digging holes in my skull and the ear cushions (At this size, it would be more appropriate to call them pillows) made themselves felt on my bones. I just don't know what AKG thought when they designed those bumps under the head band. As for the cushions, they are not really hard. The issue is the sum of a few facts. First, the clamping is very light and Second, the contact area of the pads is huge. Put this together, and the pads don't "squish" on your head. They simply hold on to the angles of your bones. That said, they are still more comfortable than my Shure and I had no troubles wearing them for a few hours straight. With the Shure, I continuously have to resit them as the weight and the clamping force gets overbearing.
 
I listened to the Q701 directly trough my Audio-GD NFB-12. My first impression on the sound was that it was very distant, at least compared to the Shure. With the SRH-440, it's very obvious that you have a driver less than an inch from your ear. Vocals sound like the singer is speaking directly in your ear. All the sounds come from inside your head. It's actually worse than sitting in the middle of the stage. When I put the Q701 on, I feel more like I'm sitting a few rows back in the crowd. It sounds more like I'm listening to speakers than headphones. I must admit though that this sound left me underwhelmed at the Q701. I don't hear anything special about them. So far, I found them more "laid back" than my Shure. Since those are my first open cans, can I conclude that what I hear is a normal open headphone sound?
 
I listened to Electronic, Rock and Metal so far. I can see how so many people claim the Q701 are bass light. Even my SRH-440 has better bass than them... which I totally didn't expect when I looked at the FR charts. Kick drum sounds SO much different between those to cans. Q701: "tud tud". SRH-440: "bang bang". Weird. From the many live kick drums I heard, I'd say that the Shure has a more realistic representation of them. I'll have to listen to more albums and do so A/B testing before I conclude on that though.
 
I haven't had my NFB-12 for a while either, and I'm still testing the different filters. So far, I found that the filters with treble roll off sound smoother with the Q701. I'll be listening to them more and post my findings later. I watched a few movie trailers and was quite impressed. They pull out impressive sub-bass. I can't wait to watch a movie with those.

 

[MarioImpemba]

Quote:

Then the bumps under the head band started digging holes in my skull and the ear cushions (At this size, it would be more appropriate to call them pillows) made themselves felt on my bones. I just don't know what AKG thought when they designed those bumps under the head band.

Slice off the bumps with a utility knife blade - much better in comfort, worse in resale, lol.

 

[lejaz]

Quote:

This thread is so full of controversy, I just had to buy a pair.
 

 
Besides, the white version is just too sexy to pass up, don't you think?
 
So anyways, I received them two days ago. I got them used, but they have very little play time, something around 25 hours. After a careful but thorough cleaning, I put them on my head...
 
Wow, those are light! Compared to the Shure, those are feathers on your head. 

 The clamping force is close to not existent. Then the bumps under the head band started digging holes in my skull and the ear cushions (At this size, it would be more appropriate to call them pillows) made themselves felt on my bones. I just don't know what AKG thought when they designed those bumps under the head band. As for the cushions, they are not really hard. The issue is the sum of a few facts. First, the clamping is very light and Second, the contact area of the pads is huge. Put this together, and the pads don't "squish" on your head. They simply hold on to the angles of your bones. That said, they are still more comfortable than my Shure and I had no troubles wearing them for a few hours straight. With the Shure, I continuously have to resit them as the weight and the clamping force gets overbearing.
 
I listened to the Q701 directly trough my Audio-GD NFB-12. My first impression on the sound was that it was very distant, at least compared to the Shure. With the SRH-440, it's very obvious that you have a driver less than an inch from your ear. Vocals sound like the singer is speaking directly in your ear. All the sounds come from inside your head. It's actually worse than sitting in the middle of the stage. When I put the Q701 on, I feel more like I'm sitting a few rows back in the crowd. It sounds more like I'm listening to speakers than headphones. I must admit though that this sound left me underwhelmed at the Q701. I don't hear anything special about them. So far, I found them more "laid back" than my Shure. Since those are my first open cans, can I conclude that what I hear is a normal open headphone sound?

Not at all....it's the AKG open sound. The open sennheisers, 6XX series and 580, don't have that 'distant' sound, and have more body/weight in the midrange. I would think the 70X should have much better sound stage, imaging, and detail retrieval than the Shure 440. They can wow you with that, for sure. You may grow to like them after you give your ears and brain some time to get used to them. I could never get totally used to their brightness and light weight midrange.....but that was the 'k'. The 'Q' is supposed to be a little less bright 

 

[ivantoar]

Impression after 77 hours:

I had headache from the head crushing bumpy headband at first, but I can trick this by pulling up the headband when I'm wearing this headphone so it loosen up. They do get more comfortable than when they're new. I have no complain about comfort now, they don't crush my jaws and my top head. They're very light, I expected this headphone to be heavy as it's relatively big.
 
Coming from Superlux HD668B, I thought they sound weak on the bass and distant at the first time I got them. Now I have played 77 hours on my Q701 with music, movies, and mostly pink noise of course. Finaly I'm getting used to the sound signature of this headphone. The bass gets punchier a little bit than it was and I can appreciate the huge sound stage. it's like the musician having a bigger room to perform their music. Clarity, details, and instrument separation is nice with emphasis on electric guitar. But still, it doesn't do any ground shaking on the famous "Bass I Love You". I just get dizzy listening to that extremely bassy song. CMIIW, I can't really describe what I'm hearing.
 
 

 

[danielbarakat]

After 100 hours + of break in...my M-Stage finally came in.  Loving it.  It seems like it changes the character of the headphone.  It tames the highs and forwards the mids a bit it seems.  Unfortunately, I'm running it through my Fiio E7 that's also doubling as an amp.  So its being amped by the tine E7 and the M-Stage.  I forgot to buy the L7.  But yeah..definitely better than the E7/9 combo.  It should sound even better when I get a dedicated DAC.  Hoping to get the HRT Streamer II soon