The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
AKG K702's. I thought they were supposed to be good?? Studio Headphones
Old 20th April 2018
  #31
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushman View Post
Are you celebrating 4/20? This was a run of the mill, “who makes better butter” thread that died six years ago (as it deserved). It doesn’t need to be a zombie thread, stumbling around in the present and putting the bite on the slow people.
I haven't a clue what 4/20 is supposed to mean. This was not a thread that could be equated to "Who makes better butter", but one about the performance of the AKG K702 headphone. I could have started yet another thread on the subject, but I came across this one, so instinctively added to it because, in all likelihood, others will do as I have done, ie. be searching for a discussion on K702. Perhaps you think I would have been better advised to have started a new thread anyway?
Old 20th April 2018
  #32
Lives for gear
4/20 is a celebration of marijuana.
Thanks for responding and sharing your thinking.
As you should know from reading the thread, it’s all “I love it” vs. “I hate it”, and really nothing factual. Your inclusion of a graph revealing the extreme high midrange peak in response might have meant something to someone six years ago, but it didn’t seem to be a fact-seeking group, so perhaps not.
Old 20th April 2018
  #33
Gear Addict
I've tried a few pairs of high end AKG's. They're not my cup of tea. Very much not what I expected. I liken them to the K&H o300's, you either love them or hate them, as they are quite different from their brethren.

P.S. I own a pair of o300's
Old 21st April 2018
  #34
Lives for gear
 

I had a set of 702's and thought they were bright and light on bass. I have Audeze LCD XC's now.
Old 21st April 2018
  #35
Gear Head
 

I'm test driving k702s right now and noticed this thread pop up. I personally wouldn't buy them for casual listening but they're great for cleaning up details on a mostly finished mix.

Pros: Clear, detailed and open
Cons: Not a lot of low end
Old 21st April 2018
  #36
Lives for gear
 

For casual listening: The best by far in it's price range for classical IMO. Excellent soundstage and clarity. The lack of low bass makes it less enjoyable for rock, EDM, etc.

For mixing: I honestly can't think of anything better in it's price range. Excellent detail and impressively flat for a headphone this (relatively) cheap. The lack of deep lows makes it necessary to check the bass elsewhere though. Apart from that they are perfectly fine.


Of course there are far better headphones out there but they are more expensive. The next step up for me would probably be the HD600 but you basically trade better lows for slightly less detail and a narrower soundstage. They are certainly more fun for rock/EDM though!

The next CONSIDERABLE step up would probably be the DT1990 Pro. That's where high end begins for me. I could easily mix on those. They are AMAZING for the price and FAR better than anything I've tried in it's price range (and quite a bit beyond). In fact, I prefer them to the HD800 for mixing. Not saying the DT1990 is BETTER, just more suitable for mixing IMO. The HD800 can actually be a bit misleading with it's presence peak and impressively HUGE soundstage.
Old 21st April 2018
  #37
Lives for gear
 
latweek's Avatar
 

Old 21st April 2018
  #38
Lives for gear
Oh! It IS a better butter thread!
Your butter looks to be stock earbud butter (not to be confused with Apple butter, which isn’t really butter at all). I prefer a Wisconsin-sourced butter that has been broken in at room temperature for at least one hundred hours. Everything else is just margarine with pretensions. Tracking butter should be covered, but mix butter should be open-air. To be its best, it should be served through a special butter amplifier.
Please, discuss!
Old 22nd April 2018
  #39
Lives for gear
 
thismercifulfate's Avatar
I’m so glad I got rid of mine. I let them “break in”, I tried listening to them from various sources but they just never sounded good to me and didn’t grow on me at all. I liked the soundstage but they were too strident and fatiguing. I wish I had never sold my old K601’s. AKG really got it right with those.
Old 22nd April 2018
  #40
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sventvkg View Post
I got a pair for mixing at night and I hate them. I find them brittle, and thin. My Audio Technica ATH-M50's sound much better. Does anyone have a suggestion for an alternative that actually sounds good? I'm going to sell these AKG's..I can't see how anyone could say they sound good..What am I missing?
Got the K 701 when it was new. After reading about the new K 702 I checked it out, twice.
I didn't like it, either. The K 701 does not have the fattest bass but it's there and it's enough. The K 702 I thought sounded way too thin.
The K 701 is also very affordable now. I bought it for 270€ when it was new and made in Austria. The price is much lower now. The sound is the same.

I got an additional pair of beyerdynamic DT 770 Pro. They have the most massive bass I have ever heard with headphones.

I wanted to check electrostatic headphones by Hifiman and Audeze but haven't found a shop in my area. They are potentially great alternatives.
I also was not able to check out the Sennheiser HD 650 which many people love.

Make sure that you subscribe at massdrop.com They had the Sennheiser (branded HD 6xx), AKG K 7xx (don't recall if that's a 701 or 702), Audeze and Hifiman for amazing prices.
Old 22nd April 2018
  #41
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by anselm View Post
Got the K 701 when it was new. After reading about the new K 702 I checked it out, twice.
I didn't like it, either. The K 701 does not have the fattest bass but it's there and it's enough. The K 702 I thought sounded way too thin. The K 701 is also very affordable now. I bought it for 270€ when it was new and made in Austria.
As I already said, I just don't get this. In no way could the sound of my Chinese manufactured K702 be called "thin". Although the sub-bass is not present, the bass signal itself is evidently there, sometimes uncomfortably so, whilst the upper mids and treble come across as a little recessed, all of which makes it sound more hifi than surgically analytical. You point out that your K702 was made in Austria, whereas mine is from China, thereby suggesting that perhaps the response pattern has been modified since production was moved there.
Old 22nd April 2018
  #42
Here for the gear
 

Headphone Review - AKG K702

besides the hilarious 2.5khz boost they seem ok. 2.5khz boost ruins them tho lol.
Old 23rd April 2018
  #43
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ianpb View Post
As I already said, I just don't get this. In no way could the sound of my Chinese manufactured K702 be called "thin". Although the sub-bass is not present, the bass signal itself is evidently there, sometimes uncomfortably so, whilst the upper mids and treble come across as a little recessed, all of which makes it sound more hifi than surgically analytical. You point out that your K702 was made in Austria, whereas mine is from China, thereby suggesting that perhaps the response pattern has been modified since production was moved there.
Important clarification: My headphones are the K 701. It's the predecessor of the 702.

I actually checked the 702 twice on 2 different days. The first time, I thought it's really a clear quality improvement.
But when I checked it the second time with more tracks, I did notice that there are quite a few professionally mastered tracks where I feel there's a lack of bass.
That older 701 did never have to massive bass of the beyerdynamic DT 990 Pro or 770 Pro, but it was enough to be happy with it.
Not so with the newer 702. Of course, this is all 100% subjective.

The 701 is still in production, in China. The new Chinese-made 701 sounds identical as the Austria-made 701. Again, subjective.
Old 23rd April 2018
  #44
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DatMicrophoneDo View Post
Headphone Review - AKG K702

besides the hilarious 2.5khz boost they seem ok. 2.5khz boost ruins them tho lol.
I read a very positive review of new Yamaha headphones on a site run by professionals.
I got a pair to check them out.
Result: They are 100% unusable. The pitch-envelope on the bass drum is not audible. Every bass drum sounds like you're kicking a wet cardboard box. The people who reviewed it either got paid to shill it or they are incompetent.
Trust only your own ears.
Old 23rd April 2018
  #45
Lives for gear
I just bought some K702's - ex display going for half price. Initially I'm not at all impressed. They definitely have the low mid bump that someone earlier in the thread pointed out. The fact that some people say they are thin maybe does suggest there is a variation in the manufacturing.

I'm going to burn them in (no idea if that's even a thing in all honesty) and hope they even out a bit. Otherwise I'll sell them on. I also have ATH M50's which are far superior imo.
Old 30th April 2018
  #46
AKG 702 are good reference headphone monitors for hf content as well as wide spatial imaging.
They aren’t meant for low end bass referencing, the are meant for clear mids and highs along with accurate spacial imaging. They are thin sounding when compared to other headphones but they are extremely dynamic and can hear the most subtle instruments.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dontsimon View Post
I just bought some K702's - ex display going for half price. Initially I'm not at all impressed. They definitely have the low mid bump that someone earlier in the thread pointed out. The fact that some people say they are thin maybe does suggest there is a variation in the manufacturing.

I'm going to burn them in (no idea if that's even a thing in all honesty) and hope they even out a bit. Otherwise I'll sell them on. I also have ATH M50's which are far superior imo.

Last edited by griploc_1981; 30th April 2018 at 12:27 AM.. Reason: Typo
Old 18th May 2018
  #47
Gear Maniac
 

I returned the K702 that I've been referring to in my previous posts, and did so after buying the very inexpensive Superlux HD681F. According to response graphs, these are are much flatter than the K702 from 80Hz all the way up to 7kHz - and they sound it! At around 8kHz there's an 8db spike which caused harshness, but after about 48 hours of looped 'burn-in' with loud pink noise and music, it seemed to diminish; either that or my ears just adapted to it. Like the K702, it has no sub-bass, but the clarity is incredible, particularly for such a cheap set of headphones. It exposed flaws in my mixes that the K702 and my other headphones, including DT880, failed to do. Note: this is the HD681F, not HD681. Unfortunately they have vinyl pads, but they're comfortable all the same. You can see the response curve here compared to the K702. The graph says HD681, but that's an error, because it is most definitely the HD681F.

HeadRoom Headphone Graph Comparison Tool

Last edited by Ianpb; 18th May 2018 at 07:52 PM..
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump