Post by Rabbit on Mar 1, 2014 9:26:13 GMT
I've seen the 'Tiesto' range mentioned in various places for quite a while now and have just thought that here's another AKG headphone with a 'namedrop' to give it street cred. Along the lines of Beats but by a manufacturer with a good reputation (on the whole) - AKG.
The 'house' sound for me has always been something of a love/hate thing. I tried so hard with the K701 and wanted to like it since lots of people reaved about it but for me, it had some kind of 'buzz' right high up in the treble which I didn't like. It was something that actually annoyed me on some music, but it has always made me curious about the 702 712 etc. Whether they did a 'fix' for that issue has always interested me since with a bit of a tweak, I'd probably like the K701.
The K450 which I also have is kind of the opposite and a portable headphone which is very skewed into hefty bass and rolled away treble.
The K601 on a warmish amp is fine for me and I feel more relaxed with its sound although I think some find it a flat, boring listen!! IMO, that was a bargain for the money.
Christian sent me a Tiesto, which is a closed AKG, billed as a 'dj' headphone so I was thinking more similar to the 'uneven' K450 perhaps?
Although it's a 'dj' headphone, there are things that make it not the best really for 'dj' work imo. The lead doesn't come off so has the potential to get stressed with typical 'dj' movement!! It's coiled so quite heavy if you want to use it mobile. It comes out of the cup on one side and starts straight, goes into a coiled section and then is straight again into the amp. There is a small jack which has a thread to screw it onto a large jack. So with the lead, the weight is smack bang in the middle of the lead, which is slightly microhphonic too.
The cups don't swivel (Like the HD25) so the dj can't easily hear 'live' without putting them on the head crooked. The build is most definitely not 'sit proof'. I have a bad habit of forgetting where I put headphones and am prone to suddenly sitting on them!! This wouldn't survive that, so again, for dj use, this isn't really what I'd say is a tough headphone.
So it's advertised as a 'dj' phone but the build suggests that it is a home headphone more, from the build quality and the lead/cups if I'm honest. It's also got the label 'pro' I think, but because of those issues ... i don't think so myself. That's just a marketing tag.
As a portable, it's not ideal because of the lead. It's too hefty, but had it have been detatchable, I would have used it this way. Otherwise, what you'd have to do is tuck the coiled section into your belt which manes that you can have the lead quite tight since it's stretchy due to the coils I guess.
The bigger one, the K267 overcomes the issues that I'm mentioning in that it's a bit tougher in aluminium and the lead attaches onto either cup, so it is better suited to pro work imo. But you really pay a lot for the bigger one in the UK. I would like to get hold of one perhaps second hand, but I ain't paying the premium price!! The lead issue is quite important for pros in that sometimes, you want a 'wimpy' little strand for portable, then a fairly decent one at home and at a desk, but also, a very long one so that you can move around. So I would use say, a 3 foot lead, a 6 foot lead and a 20 foot lead with the same headphone!! Some of mine have been adapted to do that. (Yamahas that I use have been fitted with a female connector)
Comfort is really good. Soft (plasicky) pads that feel nice and contain the ears. They are a bit shallow, but it doesn't annoy me in the slightest. I know that some don't like that.
The all important thing for a headphone apart from comfort and durability is of course the sound....
Now this is the part where I really like them but there is something also different about them. If I gave an overall quick impression, I'd say a K701 with bass and less open soundstage. That's the good part - the treble is clear and well defined, like the K701. In fact, it's quite crystal up there and gives very good detail in cymbals and string tone.
The bass is very well defined and quick. I have seen reports where they have said there is NO bass. I reckon they didn't get a good fit or their heads are a different shape to mine. Bass has a very big attack and it dies very fast. It's kind of like a sub down there on the attack but it clears and leaves a well defined bass. I'd say better perhaps than the Denon D2000 bass which can be a little flabby. (I llike the D2000 a lot for home use actually) I like the bass on the K167 but I have noticed that there are quite a few criticisms of its bass on the internet. I like it. It's ramped a bit but very pleasant. Slightly more than my Yamaha monitors. (But they get eq'd) Reminds me slightly of the CAL2 with less bloat and faster.
So treble and bass, I feel wuite comfortable with, in spite of the treble being kind of similar perhaps to the K701. It's not as 'papery' though. I think the bass kind of balances with the treble better than the K701.
The mids is what I felt weird about. They are imo, recessed and at one point, I felt that there was a large 'suck' out somehwere in the middle. I couldn't really pinpoint by 'ear' where I felt it was, but it was quite strong, and I thought perhaps there was a fault. A bit like having good treble and bass with NO mids on some material that I was listening to. Then changing to other recordings revealed a mid that was extremely 'realistic' and unflattering in a way. The surprise came when I tried them with a recording that has lots of sounds in the background or ro the edges (away from the mic) where they were so realistic, that I was starting to mistake the sounds for being actually in the room. There's a certain 'dryness' to the mids, that makes it really lifelike.
Then I noticed that centre, forward vocals sound less loud. Singers seem to be dead center but in the middle of the band, not forward. Turning up presents a better picture from the vocalists viewpoint and the band 'bloom' all around them. There is no voice boom on speech either, which surprised me given the amount of bass that they can deliver.
After listening a while, I aclimatised to these headphones pretty easily actually, once I got past the stage of listening for problems and the funny thing is that these DO sound different to many other headphones, but they are pretty good if I'm honest. I think I prefer them to the HD25. Fit is nicer and there is a crystal top end with quite an amazing bass.
I can't make up my mind about the mids. They are REALLY realistic and if someone speakes to you throught them, they are frightening!! It's like they're in the room with no added colouration to the point of being 'dry', but on music recordings, it seems to place singers more into the band which is something you don't normally get with a headphone. (I do get that with my speakers)
So, perhaps they are showing good image properties? I am poor at headphone image but I am aware of it with these. Not as wide as a K701 but the placing (particularly depth information) seems to be more accentuated and I think that was what I had the problem with at first. Things go further back in the mix, like they are more spaced out from back to front. (Not left to right though)
I like them. Then again, there aren't that many I dislike tbh. I'm not sure I'd 'want' to buy them at the UK price new. To me they aren't built well enough to warrant the price, but I like the sound. I would prefer the K267 with its better build and its ability to switch between 3 levels of bass quantity, ability to swap leads and its metal build rather than plastic like the K167.
However, there is something really quite nice about the K167 as well. It's light on the head, comfortable and is a nice compromise as far as bass goes with the K701. Detail isn't as clear as the K701 and it's more 'closed in' sounding, but it is a comfortable, closed headphone and is one of the first closed ones, that I both like and dislike at the same time.
I'll see how I feel in the long term, but these are very pleasant once you adjust to the odd mid balance which is not like any other headphone I have, but startlingly realistic.
The 'house' sound for me has always been something of a love/hate thing. I tried so hard with the K701 and wanted to like it since lots of people reaved about it but for me, it had some kind of 'buzz' right high up in the treble which I didn't like. It was something that actually annoyed me on some music, but it has always made me curious about the 702 712 etc. Whether they did a 'fix' for that issue has always interested me since with a bit of a tweak, I'd probably like the K701.
The K450 which I also have is kind of the opposite and a portable headphone which is very skewed into hefty bass and rolled away treble.
The K601 on a warmish amp is fine for me and I feel more relaxed with its sound although I think some find it a flat, boring listen!! IMO, that was a bargain for the money.
Christian sent me a Tiesto, which is a closed AKG, billed as a 'dj' headphone so I was thinking more similar to the 'uneven' K450 perhaps?
Although it's a 'dj' headphone, there are things that make it not the best really for 'dj' work imo. The lead doesn't come off so has the potential to get stressed with typical 'dj' movement!! It's coiled so quite heavy if you want to use it mobile. It comes out of the cup on one side and starts straight, goes into a coiled section and then is straight again into the amp. There is a small jack which has a thread to screw it onto a large jack. So with the lead, the weight is smack bang in the middle of the lead, which is slightly microhphonic too.
The cups don't swivel (Like the HD25) so the dj can't easily hear 'live' without putting them on the head crooked. The build is most definitely not 'sit proof'. I have a bad habit of forgetting where I put headphones and am prone to suddenly sitting on them!! This wouldn't survive that, so again, for dj use, this isn't really what I'd say is a tough headphone.
So it's advertised as a 'dj' phone but the build suggests that it is a home headphone more, from the build quality and the lead/cups if I'm honest. It's also got the label 'pro' I think, but because of those issues ... i don't think so myself. That's just a marketing tag.
As a portable, it's not ideal because of the lead. It's too hefty, but had it have been detatchable, I would have used it this way. Otherwise, what you'd have to do is tuck the coiled section into your belt which manes that you can have the lead quite tight since it's stretchy due to the coils I guess.
The bigger one, the K267 overcomes the issues that I'm mentioning in that it's a bit tougher in aluminium and the lead attaches onto either cup, so it is better suited to pro work imo. But you really pay a lot for the bigger one in the UK. I would like to get hold of one perhaps second hand, but I ain't paying the premium price!! The lead issue is quite important for pros in that sometimes, you want a 'wimpy' little strand for portable, then a fairly decent one at home and at a desk, but also, a very long one so that you can move around. So I would use say, a 3 foot lead, a 6 foot lead and a 20 foot lead with the same headphone!! Some of mine have been adapted to do that. (Yamahas that I use have been fitted with a female connector)
Comfort is really good. Soft (plasicky) pads that feel nice and contain the ears. They are a bit shallow, but it doesn't annoy me in the slightest. I know that some don't like that.
The all important thing for a headphone apart from comfort and durability is of course the sound....
Now this is the part where I really like them but there is something also different about them. If I gave an overall quick impression, I'd say a K701 with bass and less open soundstage. That's the good part - the treble is clear and well defined, like the K701. In fact, it's quite crystal up there and gives very good detail in cymbals and string tone.
The bass is very well defined and quick. I have seen reports where they have said there is NO bass. I reckon they didn't get a good fit or their heads are a different shape to mine. Bass has a very big attack and it dies very fast. It's kind of like a sub down there on the attack but it clears and leaves a well defined bass. I'd say better perhaps than the Denon D2000 bass which can be a little flabby. (I llike the D2000 a lot for home use actually) I like the bass on the K167 but I have noticed that there are quite a few criticisms of its bass on the internet. I like it. It's ramped a bit but very pleasant. Slightly more than my Yamaha monitors. (But they get eq'd) Reminds me slightly of the CAL2 with less bloat and faster.
So treble and bass, I feel wuite comfortable with, in spite of the treble being kind of similar perhaps to the K701. It's not as 'papery' though. I think the bass kind of balances with the treble better than the K701.
The mids is what I felt weird about. They are imo, recessed and at one point, I felt that there was a large 'suck' out somehwere in the middle. I couldn't really pinpoint by 'ear' where I felt it was, but it was quite strong, and I thought perhaps there was a fault. A bit like having good treble and bass with NO mids on some material that I was listening to. Then changing to other recordings revealed a mid that was extremely 'realistic' and unflattering in a way. The surprise came when I tried them with a recording that has lots of sounds in the background or ro the edges (away from the mic) where they were so realistic, that I was starting to mistake the sounds for being actually in the room. There's a certain 'dryness' to the mids, that makes it really lifelike.
Then I noticed that centre, forward vocals sound less loud. Singers seem to be dead center but in the middle of the band, not forward. Turning up presents a better picture from the vocalists viewpoint and the band 'bloom' all around them. There is no voice boom on speech either, which surprised me given the amount of bass that they can deliver.
After listening a while, I aclimatised to these headphones pretty easily actually, once I got past the stage of listening for problems and the funny thing is that these DO sound different to many other headphones, but they are pretty good if I'm honest. I think I prefer them to the HD25. Fit is nicer and there is a crystal top end with quite an amazing bass.
I can't make up my mind about the mids. They are REALLY realistic and if someone speakes to you throught them, they are frightening!! It's like they're in the room with no added colouration to the point of being 'dry', but on music recordings, it seems to place singers more into the band which is something you don't normally get with a headphone. (I do get that with my speakers)
So, perhaps they are showing good image properties? I am poor at headphone image but I am aware of it with these. Not as wide as a K701 but the placing (particularly depth information) seems to be more accentuated and I think that was what I had the problem with at first. Things go further back in the mix, like they are more spaced out from back to front. (Not left to right though)
I like them. Then again, there aren't that many I dislike tbh. I'm not sure I'd 'want' to buy them at the UK price new. To me they aren't built well enough to warrant the price, but I like the sound. I would prefer the K267 with its better build and its ability to switch between 3 levels of bass quantity, ability to swap leads and its metal build rather than plastic like the K167.
However, there is something really quite nice about the K167 as well. It's light on the head, comfortable and is a nice compromise as far as bass goes with the K701. Detail isn't as clear as the K701 and it's more 'closed in' sounding, but it is a comfortable, closed headphone and is one of the first closed ones, that I both like and dislike at the same time.
I'll see how I feel in the long term, but these are very pleasant once you adjust to the odd mid balance which is not like any other headphone I have, but startlingly realistic.