AKG K612 Pro -VS- Audio Technica ATH m40x
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 3817 posts since 8 Mar, 2006
Hello,
Do you have these or listened on them?
What do you think?
Need a pair for mixing/mastering.
Cheers"
3ee
Topic EDIT to include the AKG K612 Pro
Do you have these or listened on them?
What do you think?
Need a pair for mixing/mastering.
Cheers"
3ee
Topic EDIT to include the AKG K612 Pro
Last edited by 3ee on Thu Oct 23, 2014 2:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- KVRist
- 433 posts since 29 Jun, 2008 from Mid Wales, UK.
I don't know about those cans, but the dummy head test recordings often sound like headphones do when you don't have them fitting over your ears properly, so I wouldn't trust them.
-
- KVRian
- 1104 posts since 14 Oct, 2006 from france
The m40 are very good for the price. I used them for years (ath m 40fs) and achieved a considerable amount of mixes without a single glitch. Still use them for tracking vocals, but went to hd 650 & m50 for mixing purposes. You can't go wrong, imo.
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 3817 posts since 8 Mar, 2006
They say that they carefully placed the headphones... watch from 1:00 onward..Jim Y wrote:I don't know about those cans, but the dummy head test recordings often sound like headphones do when you don't have them fitting over your ears properly, so I wouldn't trust them.
...I'm probably a bit paranoid to think they maybe make some headphones sound better or worse for marketing purposes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnK1Gq7 ... jegG3u46-v
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 3817 posts since 8 Mar, 2006
Thanks, ideally one has a listen before making the buy, but not really possible here, atm.budweiser wrote:The m40 are very good for the price. I used them for years (ath m 40fs) and achieved a considerable amount of mixes without a single glitch. Still use them for tracking vocals, but went to hd 650 & m50 for mixing purposes. You can't go wrong, imo.
-
- KVRAF
- 5139 posts since 27 Jun, 2004
Exactly. Their recordings don't sound anything like what you'd hear from the actual headphones, and the misrepresentations even vary greatly depending on the type of headphones. The recordings sound like the headphones you're using to listen to them + horribly false dynamics, frequency response ("coloration"), and sound localization.Jim Y wrote:I don't know about those cans, but the dummy head test recordings often sound like headphones do when you don't have them fitting over your ears properly, so I wouldn't trust them.
Even if they used mics that can properly handle different air pressures to provide fairly accurate, stable dynamics (overall as well as frequency range specific), they could never provide accurate enough representations from headphone recordings, because it's simply impossible to achieve a result that's globally accurate using any dummy head, even high quality ones with accurate ear canals (your head and inner and outer ear anatomy will most likely differ greatly, even if you're "average dummy head size"). And localization will always range from vague to terribly weird and fatiguing. Funnily, it's much easier to solve the localization vagueness issue with mathematical models. As David Griesinger wrote in his "binaural hearing and headphones" presentation, what you really need in order to get frontal localization (as opposed to vaguely localized mush) + a realistic, properly equalized / uncolored result from non-individualized recordings, is luck.
Bottom line: you have to check headphones yourself to know how they really sound. And you better not test ones that haven't been "burned in". The effect of it can vary, but with some models I've used (especially Denon AH-D7000 and AH-D7100), it's seriously like you're listening to completely different headphones with hugely different frequency response, especially.
"Music is spiritual. The music business is not." - Claudio Monteverdi
-
fluffy_little_something fluffy_little_something https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=281847
- Banned
- 12880 posts since 5 Jun, 2012
I have the M50 and they sound very good, but I am not convinced of the quality of the materials used.
Since my M50 were falling apart and the HD280 were on sale (99 Euros) at the shop where I bought my new Midi controller, I bought the ancient HD280, believe it or not After 24 hours of burning in they sound pretty good in my view (unlike what some people say, they even have pretty good bass, but I read a trick: one has to put the headband way back onto the highest point of the skull, pretty much towards the back of the skull; then the bass is kind of transferred to the skull as a resonance body), and they feel good because there seems to be more space for my ears in the cups, so they sound more open and spacious somehow, despite being closed headphones.
What I also like about them is that one can replace various parts, including the headband cushion, unlike with the M50, where the headband was disintegrating into a sticky disgusting mess after less than two years (before you ask, I do wash my hair and face regularly ). The artificial leather of the pads also seems superior to the AT one, much softer and thus less likely to break (on the M50 the pads literally broke because it was rather hard stuff).
Technically the M50x and also the M40x are probably more advanced than the HD280, but I am very happy I resisted buying the new version of the M50. Not least since I don't know if the materials on the X version have really been significantly improved. And from the money I saved I bought a headphone amp for the HD280.
The HD280 have also been improved over the years, they are not the same headphones as 10 years or so ago. They are still used in many studios, especially in Europe.
Since my M50 were falling apart and the HD280 were on sale (99 Euros) at the shop where I bought my new Midi controller, I bought the ancient HD280, believe it or not After 24 hours of burning in they sound pretty good in my view (unlike what some people say, they even have pretty good bass, but I read a trick: one has to put the headband way back onto the highest point of the skull, pretty much towards the back of the skull; then the bass is kind of transferred to the skull as a resonance body), and they feel good because there seems to be more space for my ears in the cups, so they sound more open and spacious somehow, despite being closed headphones.
What I also like about them is that one can replace various parts, including the headband cushion, unlike with the M50, where the headband was disintegrating into a sticky disgusting mess after less than two years (before you ask, I do wash my hair and face regularly ). The artificial leather of the pads also seems superior to the AT one, much softer and thus less likely to break (on the M50 the pads literally broke because it was rather hard stuff).
Technically the M50x and also the M40x are probably more advanced than the HD280, but I am very happy I resisted buying the new version of the M50. Not least since I don't know if the materials on the X version have really been significantly improved. And from the money I saved I bought a headphone amp for the HD280.
The HD280 have also been improved over the years, they are not the same headphones as 10 years or so ago. They are still used in many studios, especially in Europe.
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 3817 posts since 8 Mar, 2006
Thanks for the feedback guys! ..anyone else?
People all over the internet seem to prefer the m40x over the m50x (as reference headphones)
Fluffy, I understand that the m50x kept the same sound as the m50 (only very small improvements) but the materials used are of higher quality as well of the build.
People all over the internet seem to prefer the m40x over the m50x (as reference headphones)
Fluffy, I understand that the m50x kept the same sound as the m50 (only very small improvements) but the materials used are of higher quality as well of the build.
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 3817 posts since 8 Mar, 2006
hmm, good to know, thanks!Shy wrote:Bottom line: you have to check headphones yourself to know how they really sound. And you better not test ones that haven't been "burned in". The effect of it can vary, but with some models I've used (especially Denon AH-D7000 and AH-D7100), it's seriously like you're listening to completely different headphones with hugely different frequency response, especially.
... looks like I'll really have to go to this store (about 200 and something kilometers from here) to check some different models. I'll try to get "burned in" versions, although I don't think they'll have them...
btw, aren't the manufacturers suppose to burn in the headphones for technical control reasons before they ship em' out?
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 3817 posts since 8 Mar, 2006
it seems that the "burn in" stuff is a bunch of hooey according to this wired article:
http://www.wired.com/2013/11/tnhyui-earphone-burn-in/
http://www.wired.com/2013/11/tnhyui-earphone-burn-in/
... Shure has tested some thoroughly used pairs of its E1 earphones, which first launched in 1997. And guess what? They measure the same now as when they came off the line. In fact, during the 15 years Shure has been actively selling earphones, its engineers have reached the same conclusion again and again: The sound produced by these tiny transducers during final testing is the same sound you’ll get in a day, in a year, and in five years… unless something goes wrong. ...
-
- KVRAF
- 5619 posts since 23 Mar, 2006 from pendeLondonmonium
I just had a listen to the HD650 vs K702 headphones comparison out of curiosity, since I use HD650 and K701 every day (the K701s are not that different from K702s) and one thing is clear to me: these tests do not show the reality. In the test above, the HD650 come out as brighter sounding than the K702s, whereas the HD650s have a darker top end. The bass is similarly reversed. The HD650 has a stronger bass response than the AKGs and it's not there in the example files. It's almost as if the files are incorrectly placed and what is the HD650 file is actually the K702. I wonder....
3ee, if you are interested in a pair of Sennheisers then I'd recommend that you try the HD600 instead of the HD650, which I do not consider to be the perfect choice for critical mix listening. The HD650s are superb hi-fi headphones great for listening to music, or while watching blockbuster movies where you can pump up the volume without ear fatigue...etc. Pure enjoyment of a silky smooth sound. But not for critical mix decisions simply because the top end is slightly curtailed, at least for my liking.
3ee, if you are interested in a pair of Sennheisers then I'd recommend that you try the HD600 instead of the HD650, which I do not consider to be the perfect choice for critical mix listening. The HD650s are superb hi-fi headphones great for listening to music, or while watching blockbuster movies where you can pump up the volume without ear fatigue...etc. Pure enjoyment of a silky smooth sound. But not for critical mix decisions simply because the top end is slightly curtailed, at least for my liking.
-
fluffy_little_something fluffy_little_something https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=281847
- Banned
- 12880 posts since 5 Jun, 2012
I don't really care about whether or not burning in helps. But that article is on3ee wrote:it seems that the "burn in" stuff is a bunch of hooey according to this wired article:
http://www.wired.com/2013/11/tnhyui-earphone-burn-in/
... Shure has tested some thoroughly used pairs of its E1 earphones, which first launched in 1997. And guess what? They measure the same now as when they came off the line. In fact, during the 15 years Shure has been actively selling earphones, its engineers have reached the same conclusion again and again: The sound produced by these tiny transducers during final testing is the same sound you’ll get in a day, in a year, and in five years… unless something goes wrong. ...
EARphones, which are not the same as the big-diaphragm headphones we are talking about here.
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 3817 posts since 8 Mar, 2006
Wow, those HD600s seem great and the freq response graph seems good too, unfortunately they are out of my budget for "my 1st" reference headphones. they are almost 300 euros on Thomann.dehimalaya wrote:3ee, if you are interested in a pair of Sennheisers then I'd recommend that you try the HD600 instead of the HD650, which I do not consider to be the perfect choice for critical mix listening. The HD650s are superb hi-fi headphones great for listening to music, or while watching blockbuster movies where you can pump up the volume without ear fatigue...etc. Pure enjoyment of a silky smooth sound. But not for critical mix decisions simply because the top end is slightly curtailed, at least for my liking.
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 3817 posts since 8 Mar, 2006
My ignorance earphones.. headphones... didn't realize they where different.fluffy_little_something wrote: I don't really care about whether or not burning in helps. But that article is on
EARphones, which are not the same as the big-diaphragm headphones we are talking about here.
about the "burn-in" process: well, if it's a real thing, I guess it matters especially when deciding on a pair as Shy pointed out...
So far, IMhO, this burn-in process makes sense (a bit) and I probably will try it for a couple of hours maybe with some pink noise and some frequencies...
-
fluffy_little_something fluffy_little_something https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=281847
- Banned
- 12880 posts since 5 Jun, 2012
I really don't know whether or not burn-in helps, or rather, whether there is such a thing in the first place. Basically it simply means playing a lot of music at a higher volume (I have no idea how loud 85db is, that number was recommended somewhere). I assume that even if one does not burn headphones in, it will happen naturally over a longer period of time. I read that most headphones sound better the older they get (unless of course they get damaged). Maybe the part which connects the membrane to the frame gets softer over time, allowing for smoother vibrations.