[money4me247]

Fair enough.

Where did the passage you put in quotes come from?
The methodology I cited, albeit very briefly, is the standard for aural evaluations. You're certainly free to do as you like.

oh that was just from the my previous post that you were responding to. Added the bolded part of headphones as it sounded to me like you were interpreting my comments to be referring to external component comparisons.
 
hahah... I thought you were all about the DBT protocols =P. extended weeklong type listening approaches usually are at the other end of the spectrum.
 
yeaaa, that methodology is often used by many reviewers but I often personally find many sonic findings stated inconsistent, so I tend to approach it a bit differently. I personally also have a bit more "our ears are quite fallible & audio memory is unreliable" type mentality compared to other reviewers who place a lot of faith in their personal critical listening abilities.
 
*shrug* we all approach this hobby a bit differently! appreciate your perspective & thoughts

 

[Shaffer]

oh that was just from the my previous post that you were responding to.

Ahh...OK.

hahah... I thought you were all about the DBT protocols =P. extended weeklong type listening approaches usually are at the other end of the spectrum.

I think you mean to say that I know more about DBT protocols than most in the Sound Science section of the forum, but that doesn't mean that I prefer to use a torture test, myself, nor is it possible to execute one accurately in a non-laboratory environment.

yeaaa, that methodology is often used by many reviewers but I often personally find many sonic findings stated inconsistent, so I tend to approach it a bit differently. I personally also have a bit more "our ears are quite fallible & audio memory is unreliable" type mentality compared to other reviewers who place a lot of faith in their personal critical listening abilities.

If you read web-based blogs, watch Youtube clips, and listen to folks on the forums - sure. Those aren't real reviews; they're pure entertainment. OTOH, if you subscribe to a real audio publication like Stereophile, you'd walk away with a different impression.

*shrug* we all approach this hobby a bit differently! appreciate your perspective & thoughts

I appreciate yours, as well.

 

[Earbones]

  ...Certainly worth the $199 you pay on Massdrop, and for that price I can't think of anything better...

I agree it's a great value. Dunno about the best for the price though.  the German Maestro GMP 8.35D (albeit a closed-back can) retails for $249 and can occasionally be had for as little as $135 "Like New" on Amazon Warehouse flash-sales... The GM's are definitely a superior can to the K7XX in my opinion... 

 

[sonance]

I would say that in almost all situations, I prefer the HD-650. The better your rig is, the larger the difference is, again IMHO. The usual "great deal" caveats apply, but if money is not a factor, I find that the 650s are easier winners than the OP in this thread would seem to indicate. All IMHO, of course.

 

[PilotNorman]

never heard 650, i am sure k7xx are good for their price but no good hifi headphones

 

[Koolpep]

  never heard 650, i am sure k7xx are good for their price but no good hifi headphones

I have both. I also prefer the HD650. However, the K7XX are by no means bad, they are quite close. What makes you think K7XX are "no good hifi headphones"? Can you elaborate?
 
Cheers,
K
 

 

[ZoNtO]

I can chime in on that question. To me:

1. The K7XX sound muddier.
2. Cymbals don't sound like cymbals on the K7XX, they sound like muffled plastic toys.
3. The K7XX are also more fatiguing, especially with music with lots of cymbals or poorly recorded music.

 
 
AKG K712 (close enough to K7XX) vs. Sennheiser HD650 Graphs:
 
Frequency Response

 
Harmonic Distortion

 
Harmonic Distortion, K701 vs. K712

 
Innerfidelity graphs:

1. Sennheiser HD650
2. AKG K7XX

 
The site that shall not be named also has a couple threads in the headphone forum about each of these headphones with measurements and impressions.

 

[Shaffer]

What is the point of the graphs?

 

[ZoNtO]

What is the point of the graphs?

To provide an objective baseline to give support or further color to subjective impressions.

 

[Shaffer]

To provide an objective baseline to give support or further color to subjective impressions.

1. I'm not about to write a novel on the difficulty of measuring headphones accurately, especially at the frequency extremes. For all intents and purposes, the graphs have no applicable meaning. It's impossible to derive the specific sound of a headphone from a naive graph.

2. The graphs you posted don't include the K7XX, not that it would matter. Using K712 is simply wishful thinking, as we have no idea how the two relate to each other.

3. There's zero correlation between the charted numbers and your subjective impressions.

4. What was the point again?

 

[ZoNtO]

1. I'm not about to write a novel on the difficulty of measuring headphones accurately, especially at the frequency extremes. For all intents and purposes, the graphs have no applicable meaning. It's impossible to derive the specific sound of a headphone from a naive graph.

2. The graphs you posted don't include the K7XX, not that it would matter. Using K712 is simply wishful thinking, as we have no idea how the two relate to each other.

3. There's zero correlation between the charted numbers and your subjective impressions.

4. What was the point again?

 
Ok, I'll hold your hand and walk you through it:

• AKG K712 is very similar to the K7XX (Inner Fidelity graphs: AKG K712 // AKG K7XX). This has also been documented in subjective impressions on the forum.
• HD650 is a warm headphone with an already-emphasized midbass hump (graph #1)
• The K712/K7XX has an even more pronounced bass and midbass hump (graph #1)
• Conclusion: muddier (subjective impression #1)
• Which conclusion is further supported by graph #2, wherein the K712/K7XX has worse measured distortion, especially in the bass and midbass
• Conclusion: muddier (subjective impression #1)
• K712 and K7XX have a more pronounced treble energy/peak between 7-10 khz (graph #1)
• Conclusion: more fatiguing, especially on music with a lot of cymbals or poorly recorded music (which usually has worse treble to my ears) (subjective impression #3)
• The K712 and K7XX also have more distortion then their earlier iteration (graph #3), showing AKG is moving away from the clean sound they were known for toward a bassier headphone with more distortion
• Subjective impression #2 is not supported by the graphs, but by my ears with music I'm familiar with

 
I never said the graphs were gospel. I gave subjective impressions and then gave measurements that supported what I was hearing. I don't want you to get started on the difficulties of measuring headphones because it isn't relevant here. They were measured in the same way, so it's a decent way to objectively evaluate their performance.
 
My subjective impressions were not derived from the graphs. They were derived from my owning both headphones right now and listening to them. The HD650 is more refined and sounds better to me.
 
Welcome to my ignore list. 

 

[Koolpep]

Ok, I'll hold your hand and walk you through it:

1. AKG K712 is very similar to the K7XX (Inner Fidelity graphs: AKG K712 // AKG K7XX). This has also been documented in subjective impressions on the forum.
2. HD650 is a warm headphone with an already-emphasized midbass hump (graph #1)
3. The K712/K7XX has an even more pronounced bass and midbass hump.
4. Conclusion: muddier (subjective impression #1).
5. Which conclusion is further supported by graph #2, wherein the K712/K7XX has worse measured distortion, especially in the bass and midbass.
6. Conclusion: muddier (subjective impression #1)
7. K712 and K7XX have a more pronounced treble energy/peak between 7-10 khz (graph #1)
8. Conclusion: more fatiguing, especially on music with a lot of cymbals or poorly recorded music (which usually has worse treble to my ears) (subjective impression #3)
9. The K712 and K7XX also have more distortion then their earlier iteration (graph #3), showing AKG is moving away from the clean sound they were known for toward a bassier headphone with more distortion.
10. Subjective impression #2 is not supported by the graphs, but by my ears with music I'm familiar with.

I never said the graphs were gospel. I gave subjective impressions and then gave measurements that supported what I was hearing. I don't want you to get started on the difficulties of measuring headphones because it isn't relevant here. They were measured in the same way, so it's a decent way to objectively evaluate their performance.

My subjective impressions were not derived from the graphs. They were derived from my owning both headphones right now and listening to them. The HD650 is more refined and sounds better to me.

Welcome to my ignore list. 

I think ignoring each other by the slightest disagreement is pretty childish. Let's be adults and talk this through.

You certainly hear what you hear and that's totally ok.

At the next RMAF is a presentation of an audio measurement equipment manufacturer about what measurements tell us what they don't, that same measurements might sound very different and how you can only make very limited conclusions how something sounds from the measurements. I would have doubted that profound belt if it wouldn't come from a producer of the finest measurement gear around.

I wish I could attend.

Cheers,
K

 

[BeHik]

Here's some good read about SanjWatsuki survey and survey itself. As we can see HD 650 got D, while 712 is getting C-, falls short to score C because of right channel slightly failing 100db bass distortion test, while left channel passes. Overall both phones got THD (specially at 90Db) measurements that is above human audibility so it's hardly got anything to do with someone's problems that K7XX/K712 sounds muddy.
Now going to K7XX, judging by graphs, we actually see that it got even better THD measurements than K712 (thus should've get higher grade - C?), it is also more sensitive and need quite less power to reach same volume levels (easier to amplify), having both Q701 and K7XX at hands i can confirm that there is quite a difference regarding loads they put on O2.

 

[canali]

seems i should have read the whole article...sorry...seems the setup could be much more$$$ 
given home tempermental it is..so...perhaps i'll just seek out a 600 somewhere
 
ps i've read that alot of people prefer the 600 to the 650...which do you prefer?
cheers
joe

 

[Il Mercante]

Hi, after a while I decided to buy the AKG K7XX, I want to run them with the Schiit Modi/Vali combo, but early today I saw a great hybrid tube amp on Amazon at a great price, it's the Monoprice 113194, wow, it looks awesome, just what I was looking for, that retro looks with a modern touch, anyway, my problem is, will it be a good match for my future AKG's?, I want to use it as a headphone amp only, the VU meter will give me the nostalgic flavor I am looking for.
 
Now I am a bit anxious, will the amp be enough for them, I know the Modi/Vali is the way to go for a headphone only system at that price point, but the Monoprice with those four tubes glowing + VU meter must be a beautiful sight while listening to my classical records.
 
Looking for some advise guys, I want the K7XX badly, and the amp too!,