[jpstereo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cswann1 /img/forum/go_quote.gif A psychology major could write a doctoral thesis on the postings of Head-Fi members who take great pains never to miss an opportunity to ignore the context of a thread topic in their continual quest to voice their opinions when it is unasked for. Such thesis titles might read...."My inner child is having a tantrum" or "Why don't people listen to me" or "If I say it enough times, maybe I'll believe it".

Agreed! It is pathetic and juvenile. We ought to be thankful that we have choices. There are many phones that did not sound quite right to my ears. I simply sold them and moved on. I do not and will not purposely pan them since I have no idea how they may sound to someone else's ears with their equipment.

 

[lucky]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsaliga I just add these clowns to my ignore list whenever I bump into them. --Jerome

Indeed. It's so much quicker than arguing with them.

 

[kool bubba ice]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbd2884 /img/forum/go_quote.gif The K701 get plenty of love on these forums and still considered among the greats. From all the posts where I read the person did not like was their own fault. Buying blindly and often just buying the K701 because they are the K701. K701 were made for a purpose and they do it well. If the buyer is too stupid to do the research, then their disappointing experience was completely their own fault.

Where do you audition the 701? Seriously? How many stores do you know that have them on display.

 

[kool bubba ice]

Actually, lucky.. Erik has a few reference monitor headphones.. Meaning, uncolored, flat, & dead neutral.. I think he can tell the difference quite accurately. & is a musician himself. As pleasant sounding as they are, the 701 is far from accurate. Exaggerated & hollow sound stage.. Plastic sounding at times.

 

[hypoicon]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpstereo /img/forum/go_quote.gif Agreed! It is pathetic and juvenile. We ought to be thankful that we have choices. There are many phones that did not sound quite right to my ears. I simply sold them and moved on. I do not and will not purposely pan them since I have no idea how they may sound to someone else's ears with their equipment.

I may have to buy a pair of AKG 702s soon. I like the black better, and the detachable cord.

Personally, I think the most overhyped headphones around here are the Senn HD-650s. I bought a pair. Then I bought a new amp because supposedly my Little Dot MK III wasn't good enough for them. In the end, they sound sort of veiled and muted to me unless I crank them up really loud on less than perfect source material-- in that case, the Sennheisers are great phones, and well worth the effort.

My favorite phones are my Grado RS-1s. They seem really light, airy and alive. The description of many AKG fans suggest that they are not as forward as the Grados, and thus might be an interesting "halfway" in sound between the two phones I own. The way that people protest their sound reminds me of the people who just insist that Grados are "impossible to wear for long periods of time-- painful!" Not to me; they are more comfortable than the Sennheisers. Different strokes I guess.

The reaction here reminds me of what happens when someone asks a question/makes a reference to Shure 530s (which I also own). Half the people claim they are utter crap. The other half claim that they are the best IEM ever made. Yawn. I like using them when I travel, they fill a need in my headphone assortment.

I suspect the same is true of the AKG 701/702. With such a polarized response, at the very least they must be interesting. Too many people claim that they are boring and antiseptic for it to be otherwise. The more threads like this I read, the more curious/sold on trying them out I become.

 

[kool bubba ice]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dcpoor /img/forum/go_quote.gif sarcasm much? read the recent k701 "hate" posts in this thread and others. they've presented the assertations that: -the only people that like k701's are those that haven't heard good headphones. their ignorance and inexperience are the sole explanations for liking k701's. -those that defend the k701's are too cheap to pay $50 more for a superior hd650. if the k701's were priced the same or higher than the hd650's, no one would own them. -implying that those who prefer the k701 sound are "wrong" because the k701's are unequivocally unnatural and inferior sounding. no room for opinion or personal preferences when it comes to sound. etc. imho, the k701 bashing trend is just about getting into bose and skullcandy territory. pretty soon they'll be raving and foaming at the mouth as well.

You are way off base. I liked the 701 a lot when paired with the Bada12 & DAC1.. & I heard plenty of good headphones..501/650/600/K1000/DT48 etc..

 

[jsaliga]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kool bubba ice /img/forum/go_quote.gif Where do you audition the 701? Seriously? How many stores do you know that have them on display.

How many stores do you know that have any audiophile headphones on display?

--Jerome

 

[kool bubba ice]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsaliga /img/forum/go_quote.gif Fair enough. But just because you didn't care for them doesn't make them a bad headphone. It only makes them a bad headphone...for you. I know that sounds like I'm stating the obvious but people like to argue these things as though they are matters of fact and not matters of opinion. You can't research your way to a set of headphones that you are guaranteed to like. That is a point I tried to make in the current thread where I let Head-Fi members choose my next set of phones. The AKG K701 is no different from any other set of cans being discussed on this forum insofar as some people will love them, some will loathe them, and there will a lot of folks landing somewhere between those two extremes. Where any particular individual falls on that continuum is something that people must decide for themselves -- but it doesn't invalidate someone else's experience. I used to own a set of AKG K701s and I really did like them a lot for jazz and other acoustic music. My problem with them is that I found them to be very uncomfortable to wear for more than 30 minutes at a clip. I have a set of Denon AH-D7000s that I am expecting to be delivered shortly, but no matter what other headphones I try there will probably always be some desire for that AKG sound when listening to my favorite jazz recordings. I may end up buying another pair if I can't find another can that approaches their sound with the kind of music I listen to the most. --Jerome

So now bad is subjective

& just because I got a D in history class doesn't mean I'm a bad student. Not true. Just saying.

 

[kool bubba ice]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsaliga /img/forum/go_quote.gif How many stores do you know that have any audiophile headphones on display? --Jerome

None.. But the poster made it sound like they were easy to audition, & calling people stupid.

 

[jsaliga]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kool bubba ice /img/forum/go_quote.gif Actually, lucky.. Erik has a few reference monitor headphones.. Meaning, uncolored, flat, & dead neutral.. I think he can tell the difference quite accurately. & is a musician himself. As pleasant sounding as they are, the 701 is far from accurate. Exaggerated & hollow sound stage.. Plastic sounding at times.

Actually I wasn't refering to Erik when I made that comment, though I strongly disagree with him. In essence he seems to be saying that when the rest of us talk it is a matter of opinion but when he speaks it is a matter of fact (correct me if I am wrong Erik -- but you basically said it twice).

And I also can't say that I agree that him being a musician automatically makes him an authority as an audio engineer. They are different skills and you cannot infer that someone has skill as the latter by virtue of having skills as the former. You both are free to argue that but when you cut away the posturing we are still talking about opinions.

--Jerome

 

[jsaliga]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kool bubba ice /img/forum/go_quote.gif So now bad is subjective & just because I got a D in history class doesn't mean I'm a bad student. Not true. Just saying.

At least in History class everyone is being given the same test. Do you understand the difference between norm referencing and criterion referencing?

Joe Grades the 701s a "B"
Fred Gives them an "F"
Mike Gives them a "C"

So the test in this case is how they measure up to what each individual is judging them against, and each are probably using different yardsticks.

It is not...Fred gives them an "F" so that must be the correct grade and the 701s are bad for everyone. You can see that, can't you? Until you do I have nothing further to say to you on this subject.

--Jerome

 

[intoart]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbd2884 /img/forum/go_quote.gif K701 were made for a purpose, being very analytical. So I still feel people who bought them and were disappointed did not buy them for what they excel at. Good reasons why I did not buy the K701 or will not buy them.

How can they be considered "analytical" (or "flat" or "accurate") when they have no bass? Doesn't accuracy require reproducing the entire spectrum without significant emphasis or deemphasis on any particular frequencies?

 

[olblueyez]

I wish I had a dollar for every sucker who was talked into buying the 701 by all of the fanboys who have never heard a real headphone. What a peice of junk. BTW, anyone who says the 701 is neutral or natural sounding is certifiable. I often wonder if these people have EVER been to a live event? Its 2009 and AKG cant even make a headphone that fits a wide variety of heads, how the hell could they possibly make it sound natural, they cant even make it fit your head. WTH.

Hopefully someone will pop in and tell us how they sound great using his meier head5.

 

[triode12]

Here we go again....

[puts on the theme song from the movie 'The Godfather']

 

[anadin]

OMG it's olblueyez again with his weekly rendition of how to slag off a AKG K701/702.