Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Dec 13, 2014 10:51:52 GMT
I've been looking through the AKG range of headphones and their frequency responses in comparison to Grados that I've been also going through recently and found quite a surprising lack of bass in the 701 and 702. The roll off down there starts really early. Quite a bit higher than many other headphones with a slight hump, not at 100 hZ but at 200. In fact, they're both already starting to dip away at 100 which is really surprising. K612, which is the one I prefer, goes deeper before rolling off. (50 hZ) So, perhaps that's why I found the K701 that I used to have so awful? (And prefered the K601 followed by the 612) The Grado sr60 gets to 40 before fading away. The 325 gets to 60 before going. So Grados go lower than AKG 701and 702 headphones. The bigger AKGs just don't get as low which makes you wonder why so many love the sound of them? I could never settle with the K701 plus an odd 'fizz' right up the top somewhere that really grated with me. I can get on with Grados much easier actually, even with the infamous 2khz 'rocket' peak that they seem to have. The sr225 is easier for me to accept for longer listening but the K701 was one of those headphones that I wore for 5 minutes at a time before wanting to take them off. They may space out the soundstage but for me, the lack of soundstage of Grados isn't really a problem. Oh well, they're perhaps not for me then!!
|
|
solderdude
Administrator
measureutternutter
Posts: 4,882
|
Post by solderdude on Dec 13, 2014 13:39:52 GMT
Try the ATH-AD700 ! Or the K500, K501...
The newer K712, Q702 go a little deeper though and have less annoying peaks.
Because of the 'hype' (before the expensive ones popped up) there was always this battle. K701, DT880, HD650 all of them had avid 'defenders' as being 'the best'. Owned all of them, just to check it out for myself.
HD650>DT880>K701 was my preference.
I found the DT880 too lean and too trebly, the K701 was too 'feisty' with some weirdness and also too lean, the HD650 was for me the best but a little too warm.
For me the solution was to take the best (IMO) and remove the 'disadvantages'.
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Dec 13, 2014 17:44:50 GMT
What surprised me about the k701 was just how high the roll off is. I thought the bass was just lower in quantity, but tbh, it just ain't there!! How people feel that this is such a great headphone and get so feisty about it, I don't know. The Grados go lower slightly louder!!! They're not exactly deep bass monsters either.
I found the DT880 thin as well. Mind you,that was the flat cup version. Not sure about the more recent ones. I wish I'd kept it actually. The ad700 was ok for me tonally, but as you say, bass was indeed lacking. They sounded like little shelf speakers.
When you really scrutinise headphone FR, so many are lacking aren't they? I'm finding more and more, that many are ok to listen to, but they're not really accurate sounding, even remotely and they become such a let down, ultimately because of their weaknesses. They become more glaring with extended listening and so it becomes a choice of which flaw is less annoying to you!!
Even high end headphones have quite glaring problems as well. Looking at FR is very revealing of what is really going on.
|
|
solderdude
Administrator
measureutternutter
Posts: 4,882
|
Post by solderdude on Dec 13, 2014 18:19:10 GMT
The weird bit is there are LOTS of speakers that are really very flat (at 1 meter), especially nearfield active studio monitors. I am contemplating getting me a set so I can have a really good reference. My 'home speakers' are flat as well (around 1 meter in free field) but are far from flat on the listening 'spot'.
All flat speakers in a room, at a distance of more than one meter, or off axis, are far from flat and usually sound 'darker'.
Even though having seen (and heard) a few really flat speakers (plenty exist) I have NEVER found a single headphone that is truly 'flat' by itself. Unmodded and NOT EQ'ed I mean....
Most modern headphones have +5 to +10dB bass, sometimes bleeding in the lower mids, a dip of 5 to 15dB around 5kHz and a peak between 7 and 10kHz. Most of them drop off fast after such a peak. Bass extension isn't that much of a problem with a lot of headphones PROVIDED you have good seal. Most are tuned that way to please young people who like big bass, 'warm' voices and less clarity as that often becomes shrill and all they need is some 'shhh' treble on top if it. The more expensive ones are tuned closer to 'speaker' sound, somewhat subdued treble and slight if any extra bass and 'flat' mids.
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Dec 13, 2014 18:33:29 GMT
Years back, I put some small Mission speakers into a spare room. They were a bit small for the room really, but there was actually a 'spot' in the room where everything snapped into focus nicely. They became 3d and quite stunning. I placed some Yamaha monitors in the same spot - same thing. (But better) Move away from that spot and it all went to pot. I went around the room with a sound meter and my goodness, were there hot spots. All over the place. I was mad in those days so I tried using mirrors in order to find reflective points on the floor, walls and ceilings for a given listening spot that would be more practical. I stuck acoustic material to the ceiling and put up sound boards at specific points, dictated by mirrors in order to determine where potential reflections could eminate from. Things did improve, but never as good as that damned inconvenient sweet spot. After that, I gave up and turned to the dark side with floor speakers and accepted it. That was my introduction to headphones!!! Lose the room so it's perhaps more consistent. However, for me, I really struggle with imaging big time. There isn't one headphone that I'd say gives me an amazing image in spite of what hi fi people rave on about. (I don't see myself as a hi fi person really) Speakers just do it better for me as far as that goes, but the blasted rooms don't reproduce what the speaker puts out really!! Interestingly, the sweet spot for those old Missions was very close as well. There was a point that I could find with a blindfold on. (Yes, I did it ) I found it every time. I wonder whether monitors are more appropriate in UK rooms which tend not to be that large. OK, bass might not be as deep as a floorstanders, but then again, floorstanders can sound awful in a room that's too small. I wonder whether AKG are trying to emulate monitor speakers with the K701 so bass is curtailed on purpose. For me, it doesn't work though because the imaging is difficult for me to get. I'm much more sensitive to timbre or tonality.
|
|
|
Post by jhelms on Dec 17, 2014 17:00:01 GMT
I have never quite liked any AKG I have heard to date... Will see how the 7XX's sound when they finally arrive.
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Dec 17, 2014 20:33:10 GMT
I don't get all the raving about them if I'm honest. I tried really hard to like the the K701 but just couldn't get on with them. Lacking in low end and some weird ringing in the top end that Frans had spotted I think on a Graph somewhere. It's very high but adds a kind of unpleasantness to the treble. (Nasal and edgy) I think some call it an unnatural top end. I certainly found that.
The K612 works with K702 pads. Much more clout in the bass and less edgy. In fact, it sounds more like a Sennheiser, but seeing the lack of bass extension on The GE site has really put me right off big time. It's not that bass is missing on the K612, but it doesn't go deep. So for a lot of stuff, it's fine, but when you want the ultimate clout in the depths, it doesn't exist at all. It was the lack of extended bass that got me looking at graphs in case I'd done something to mine.
It's a pity that the Denon D600 has too much (in quantity) in the bass actually. It goes extremely deep and has real impact but they've also ramped it right up. Mind you, the Denon treble can sound a tad hard and not as textured as some other headphones. Strings can sound steely and have a single sound rather than a collection of different violins!! It kind of merges them together.
|
|
|
Post by jhelms on Dec 24, 2014 3:12:45 GMT
Received my 7XX's today... Some quick notes...- Build quality is excellent for $200 and they look the business in all black. - Comfy as any headphone I own, equal to the comfort of my 560's. Velours are HUGE. I can slide them forward or backwards over 1" which has a dramatic and obvious effect on stage - They have a very smooth sound but as you noted Ian, top end is a bit off and not quite right... but not bad. I would say a tad nasal on vocals. Not hearing the ringing though or anything that makes the top unpleasant. I think the added warmth may be making the top end sound thin to my ears... again a very smooth and surprisingly mellow sound. - If I did not have some wonderful cans sitting here to A/B, I think I would be quite content. They are a really easy, non-fatiguing listen. With the added bass, they are rather jazzy sounding - Imaging is quite good - I think they are a good deal at $200. Nothing mind blowing and no "discovery" here... just not bad for $200 new - Cable is thin and flimsy. Crap actually. It even feels a tad lumpy. Looking at it more... worst cable I have ever had on headphones over $100! Is the snow in the background on this site slowing anyone's browser down besides mine? Some of my cans I am listening to and enjoying tonight. Decided to relax a tad and enjoy for once
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Dec 24, 2014 7:56:34 GMT
That 'nasal' quality is the outcome of what I refer to as 'ringing' Jeremy.mi think there's something wrong higher up (very high up) which mixes with sound lower down to produce that unpleasant treble. My guess is that the bass doesn't really go that deep either if it follows the trend of the others. They seem to roll of really high up. I mentioned it to someone who likes AKG's and he said that music doesn't often go down there so it doesn't matter. Well, I miss it even on the K612 which rolls off lower than the 7**. What some do (I did) is to change the pads on the K612 to the K702 pads. They give the impression of much more bass. However, it doesn't extend it but raises the hump down there!! It also takes the sting out of the treble. I haven't found an AKG yet that I feel is well balanced in terms of timbre. They either have no deep bass like the 7** series or too much of a hump like the portable Gary looking ones, with the mids sucked away. All seem to have that weird top though. Yet so many headphone listeners swear buy them - I don't get it tbh. What a fine collection in that photo Jeremy. I also like the car seat I'd say the weakest in terms of sound is the m50 actually and that's not too shabby!! I'd like to hear the x version. You've also changed the pads which probably makes a difference, I see.
|
|
|
Post by jhelms on Dec 24, 2014 22:22:50 GMT
I found some measurements on changstar of the 7xx's (Saw Frans poke his head in ). They do not measure like the 701 / 702 or older gens. When I mentioned nasal sounding, I think it is the warmth adding a touch to much to the bottom vocal region / balance is just off. Hard to describe. There is just something a smidgen off with them in that region. With certain vocals and strings, the 650's and 560's can send a shiver up your spine like a beautiful woman was whispering in your ear. The 7xx's do not have that quality but they are quite likable. Listening more today as I work. For the $200 range, I quite like them. As I previously stated, I have not heard an AGK I like (until now) but I have only listened to a few last gen. - these are not terrible at all. www.changstar.com/index.php?topic=1902.0Haha not my car seat - but a cheap office chair that was on special for $69 a while back Bought a few and the padding is already flat in the arse) I still like the M50 for rock, metal and such. Great can for under $100. I really DID NOT like the 50x. It has a totally different signature. I expected it to be similar, but it was so far off, I returned it. All the fun bottom end was totally gone and they sound weird. I actually have two sets of M50's. One set with velours and one with stock pads. I think the stock M50 pads sound better, however I listen for extended periods so velours are a must for me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2014 23:30:51 GMT
I haven't found an AKG yet that I feel is well balanced in terms of timbre. They either have no deep bass like the 7** series or too much of a hump like the portable Gary looking ones, with the mids sucked away. All seem to have that weird top though. Yet so many headphone listeners swear buy them - I don't get it tbh. Ian, I wish you could hear my ancient AKG K240 Sextett. Well balanced with plenty of deep bass and no discernible 'hump', no mids suckout, with a clean and clear top end, definitely not weird. Maybe I should send them to Frans to measure because I trust his impartiality and technical ability, and then maybe on to yourself to listen to because I trust your ears and descriptive powers. Jeff
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Dec 25, 2014 8:25:56 GMT
Hi Jeff. Merry Christmas!!
I've often wondered about the 240 series. Never tried them.
The reason is how they're touted as pro studio headphones and yet to me, they look almost toy like.
Studio stuff tends to be more 'industrial' since musicians get so engrossed, they tend to do stupid things like walk off with headphones still on their head. (So stuff tends to be bolted down or heavy) therefore it's useful to be able to change the lead quickly when they get broken.
The other thing I do is what I do with glasses. Costs me a fortune. I put them down somewhere, forget and then sit on them.
Not to mention dropping them or some mad drummer throwing them at you. It's always the drummer - they tend to be mental.
They also need to be able to go comfortably as loud as a jet plane. Then drummers play much better. They can't play into a low volume piece of hi fi. They need power, so they balance by actually hitting the drums to balance rather than tapping them in order to balance in the headphone. They need life volume. Also, We can lay them down and use them as speakers while having a beer if they're loud.
Also high impedance, so we can share outputs safely.
Then of course ...... The sound!!!!
That's why we see quite a lot of DT150s since they're modular and the DT770 (would you believe) although the leads don't come off on those. People mixing, generally don't use headphones. It's a recent thing where kids use them to mix which I personally find a bit odd, but hey, if it works.
The headphones tend to be eq'd so they sound fine to be honest. Get them home and they can sound very different as I find with the DT150. At home, it's heavy and thick sounding. At work, it has a sheen and no heavy bass. The wonders of people like Frans, who can get these things to just sound right. (As Frans did with my T40) the T40 is the closest to what I would normally hear although I'd normally have the bass slightly raised for a more speaker like sound tbh. More like my T50 with a filter. That has a raised bass and is still pretty good elsewhere.
The K240 is kind of plasticky and the pads are also pleather. Quite hard pleather too by the looks. I know that our USA friends swear by them but I never tried one because of my experiences with the K701. There were hi fi guys swearing by the K701 and if you dared to mention any minuses, you got jumped on. The same for the Beyer DT880. I had a very nasty experience with regards to the DT880. I was on HF a lot and someone who was a DT fanboy was actually using one of Norman's Go Vibes to power a DT880. I couldn't believe it worked and since Norman used to send me every one of them (and they weren't at all bad). So I tried the same combo as the fanboy.
I found the DT880 thin and edgy (the original) and even worse with Norman's amps. When I said so on HF, I got jumped on by the Fanboy who followed me around on there in order to tale the mick. I've never forgotten it, since It got so bad that I verbally went for him in the end and nearly got myself banned. I then wrote to Jude about what had happened and sent him copies of this guy's mickey taking and it was soon stopped thank goodness.
So I kept very quiet about the K701 for a long time. I tried very hard to like it and just couldn't adjust to its sound which is unusual for me. Normally, I can kind of tune in to headphones quite quickly and accept what they can't do, but not the K701. It turned out that I was hearing something nasty in the treble, a long way up I think which irritated the hell out of me. The K601 was better so I stuck with that for analytical listening only.
Because of the K701, I avoided the K240. I even tried the new AKG series the Y headphones, and they're also, not quite right in spite of the What Hi Fi award. Imo, they got that wrong. Now you've mentioned it, maybe I'll try a K240. I know there are different versions though and am wary of getting the wrong one because it's an AKG!!!
They are the one brand that I find difficult on the whole, although Jeremy seems to have found a nicer one.
|
|
|
Post by chinook9 on Dec 25, 2014 20:00:04 GMT
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! I found an article the other day that may be of interest to those reading this thread. I had known for a long time that full sized dynamic speakers need a lot of power at lower frequencies but I never gave it a lot of thought in regards to headphones. Assuming all of their drivers are similar, that apparently applies to the AKGs in spades. lsirui.wordpress.com/2009/04/15/k701-vs-hd650-electrical-measurement/Some of you might be able to find problems with his process or findings but I believe that his general conclusion is correct. Those AKG headphones take a lot of power to achieve their potential. In regards to the K7XX, the rated impedance is 62 ohms. The Max input power of 200mW is derived. Anyone have any idea what frequencies are used for these measures?
|
|
solderdude
Administrator
measureutternutter
Posts: 4,882
|
Post by solderdude on Dec 25, 2014 20:23:59 GMT
Impedance is usually measured at 1kHz, some times at 400Hz.
The DC resistance is close the the impedance at 1kHz.
The story is a bit strange especially when he starts taking 100Hz and 85dB SPL as the HD650 has a bass hump and the K701 is rolled off. His story is ONLY true if EQ is applied to the K701... in that case it requires more power.
The 'difficult to drive' idea is a bit lame from a technical POV. Most cheap low power amplifiers run out of current (K701) or out of max voltage swing (HD650)
apples and pears...
The K7xx (only available through massdrop) has a LOT of bass compared to the K701, Q701, K702. The K712 is closer to the K7xx.
The early production K240 sextets are also a bit bathtub shaped but far less than later models. The current K240 line up is nowhere near the SQ compared to the old ones.
I don't like any of the current K240's IMO they 'live' on their reputation which they cannot hold a candle to.
|
|
sekar
quite active
Posts: 161
|
Post by sekar on Jan 5, 2015 20:38:02 GMT
Hi Rabbit , I'm newbie here. I had the same problem when my old X-Cans v.1 just could't drive my AKG K601 properly - lean sound and weak bass. After some investigation I coupled my power amplifier Sherwood AM8500B with this phones. Surely I need to listen at low volumes ( ~9 a.m.) and use adapter to connect AKG to outlet terminals of amplifier. I recabled AKG K601 finally and made balanced scheme of connection. I discovered later that it doesn't matter which scheme of connection I use to listen headphones. I may use either balanced or unbalanced one amplifier expose very tolerable to any. Most of power amplifiers support only balanced scheme of connection. I use same amplifier for my old AKG K240DF 600Ohm version.
|
|