[3602]

Well, I just feel that lower-end AKG stuff don't live up to the name. K514...and those earbuds...
I know that when AKG reaches a certain price range, the products are really good, but low-ends just...similar priced other headphones tend to be a bit better. Anyone know why? Or am I just wrong?

 

[Uncle Erik]

Some of us aren't crazy about AKG's top offerings, either.

AKG blew it when they discontinued the K-1000, and they should have kept the K-501 around in some form.

It's sad; AKG used to make some of the best and most innovative headphones. Today, AKG just makes plasticky sounding bling sold at a discount to undercut the HD-650.

Resurrect the K-1000 as a HD-800 slayer and discontinue the K-701 in favor of something that doesn't sound like an artificial flavoring tastes.

 

[Morph201]

Quote:

Resurrect the K-1000 as a HD-800 slayer

Hmmm .... CES 2010 hopefully *wink* *wink*

 

[moonboy403]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif Some of us aren't crazy about AKG's top offerings, either. AKG blew it when they discontinued the K-1000, and they should have kept the K-501 around in some form. It's sad; AKG used to make some of the best and most innovative headphones. Today, AKG just makes plasticky sounding bling sold at a discount to undercut the HD-650. Resurrect the K-1000 as a HD-800 slayer and discontinue the K-701 in favor of something that doesn't sound like an artificial flavoring tastes.

THE SA5000 is a lot more plasticky sounding IMO.

 

[Acix]

Plasticky sounding...the K702/1 have a very extended highs. So, maybe this is the plasticky sounding feel. in the studio this highs feel good, I can shape and control them, it's a big pluse for monitor mix/mastering.

On topic, every hps company offer low end hps for low cost.

 

[jbloudg20]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acix /img/forum/go_quote.gif Plasticky sounding...the K702/1 have a very extended highs. So, maybe this is the plasticky sounding feel. in the studio this highs feel good, I can shape and control them, it's a big pluse for monitor mix/mastering. On topic, every hps company offer low end hps for low cost.

Is it really too hard to type out 'headphones'?

 

[Donald North]

When I compared the DT880/250 with the K701, I find they have similar but not identical midrange presence. The biggest difference is their top octave: The DT880 has oodles of sparkle and extension, whereas the K701 does not. I think this is also shown in comparative measurements.

On classical I don't find the suppressed top octave of the K701 much of a problem, but I quickly hear it with rock music and thus, prefer the DT880.

 

[paulb09]

Perhaps it's because people will take styled cheap crap at a certain price point? Where AKG might differ to Skullcandy etc. is that where there could be some people who do very basic research on headphones, they may happen see reviews going "OMG K701 best headphone!", so they think they're getting something really good sounding at a low price point.

 

[Acix]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donald North /img/forum/go_quote.gif When I compared the DT880/250 with the K701, I find they have similar but not identical midrange presence. The biggest difference is their top octave: The DT880 has oodles of sparkle and extension, whereas the K701 does not. I think this is also shown in comparative measurements. On classical I don't find the suppressed top octave of the K701 much of a problem, but I quickly hear it with rock music and thus, prefer the DT880.

On classical, the highs are more natural,

with rock music some times the sound engineers crank up this highs.

 

[intoart]

The flagship of the AKG line, literally the best that they make, are the K701s and those suck. What chance do their cheaper offerings have, really?
The only possible conclusion is that the brand sucks.

 

[paulb09]

Quote:

Originally Posted by intoart /img/forum/go_quote.gif The flagship of the AKG line, literally the best that they make, are the K701s and those suck. What chance do their cheaper offerings have, really? The only possible conclusion is that the brand sucks.

Except for all the people I hear complaining about the K701, I don't hear much about the K601 except perhaps bass impact here and there. Many say it's very good for the price point, though I won't say as I own nothing else at that price point.

 

[ericj]

Seeing as i'm wearing a K500 and have owned about a dozen AKG products, I'm not going to say AKG sucks. Even though i'm not much interested in their current product line.

Most companies that make something good also make something terrible.

AKG is a little weird that their quality falls off a cliff at a particular price point, though. I've heard this said about their mics too.

 

[Morph201]

Quote:

Originally Posted by intoart /img/forum/go_quote.gif The flagship of the AKG line, literally the best that they make, are the K701s and those suck. What chance do their cheaper offerings have, really? The only possible conclusion is that the brand sucks.

LOL! How old are you? Really?

 

[CDBacklash]

Why does half the sennheiser line suck?
Why does half the beyer line suck?
Why does half the sony line suck?
Why does half the ATH line suck?
Why do skullkandy suck?
Whinge whinge whinge.
There are plenty of offerings from AKG that are cheapish and sound good. What about the k240 sextett?
Newsflash: people make headphones to suit a variety of tastes. Just because you dont like them doesnt mean you have to whinge about it. Sell them and move the **** on

 

[pearljam5000]

do you have any secret info? wink wink...
Quote:

Originally Posted by Morph201 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hmmm .... CES 2010 hopefully *wink* *wink*