KVR Audio

layzer · Post by **layzer** » Wed Oct 22, 2014 9:01 pm

consider the uncolored flat response of the long time industry standard.... the infamous AKG K-240

3ee · Post by **3ee** » Wed Oct 22, 2014 11:20 pm

^ A friend has the K-240 MK II and had a quick listen...
They sound great, but not so sure if I want that extra low mids/high bass.

I'm looking on the web about the K-612 atm, I understand that they sound awesome for the price so maybe I'll get those instead of the m40x.
They seem closer to the K-712 but without extra bass bump and way cheaper!

3ee · Post by **3ee** » Wed Oct 22, 2014 11:24 pm

btw, does anyone know if I would need a headphone preamp for the 120 ohm AKG K-612? (hopefully not)
I have an M-Audio Fire Wire Solo audio interface with a headphone output (and volume control) and planning to use that.

RandomWave · Post by **RandomWave** » Thu Oct 23, 2014 2:42 am

A headphone that doesnt come up a lot for studio reference tracking and mix checking is the Senn HD598.

It arguably has flatter frequency response than the 701, HD650 or the DT880. It cost less and is only 50 ohm. Excellent construction, styling and comfort too. Superb clear sound with incredible detail and soundstage.

http://www.headphone.com/pages/build-a-graph

3ee · Post by **3ee** » Thu Oct 23, 2014 2:02 pm

Just checked the HD598 on the headroom graph but man...why do "all" headphones tend to have that huge bump around 2-6k (when using the RAW freq response)? is it for some acoustic compensation having to do with the ear canal or something? ...need to investigate.

I've asked AKG for some graphs but they said they didn't provide any... but anyway the rest of the info they gave me was helpful.

The K 612 pro is a further develompent of the K 601 and for sure better for mixing /mastering as a (consumer level) K 550.

3ee · Post by **3ee** » Thu Oct 23, 2014 2:12 pm

updated 1st post

AKG K612 Pro -VS- Audio Technica ATH m40x

I have a sensation that the K612 Pro will win perhaps?!

fluffy_little_something · Thu Oct 23, 2014 2:18 pm

3ee wrote:Just checked the HD598 on the headroom graph but man...why do "all" headphones tend to have that huge bump around 2-6k (when using the RAW freq response)? is it for some acoustic compensation having to do with the ear canal or something? ...need to investigate.

I've asked AKG for some graphs but they said they didn't provide any... but anyway the rest of the info they gave me was helpful.
The K 612 pro is a further develompent of the K 601 and for sure better for mixing /mastering as a (consumer level) K 550.

Mine also have a bump, I undo it with the help of an equalizer. I don't know why they do that. One does hear details better with such a bump, but the color of the sound is wrong, which I think is worse.

Hermetech Mastering · Post by **Hermetech Mastering** » Thu Oct 23, 2014 5:35 pm

Diffuse field equalisation. Negating it with your own EQ is kind of bass-ackwards, might as well just have bought a non diffuse equalised pair of cans...

http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/au ... r-function

http://www.head-fi.org/t/19259/what-is- ... ualization

fluffy_little_something · Thu Oct 23, 2014 5:50 pm

Funny, although I had never heard of that before (thanks for the link, the Beyer link within the link is also interesting) I did notice the greater detail (probably because everything is not stuffed into one imaginary spot but spread in imaginary space) and the reverb touch to it by myself

So I will stop using an equalizer

But the different, obviously intentional sound color does make me wonder if the HD280 are ideal for sound programming since they clearly change the sound.

The M50 don't do that, but they do sound denser, they probably have much less of that diffusing effect.

In terms of my purchase decision, I don't remember reading anything about that on the sites I investigated, like on Sennheiser's own site. Maybe I just didn't see it. I was not able to test hear them anywhere before...

audiosabre · Post by **audiosabre** » Thu Oct 23, 2014 6:28 pm

Personally, I'd go with AKG every time. I had the older m50, but I found them better for listening on the move than as a reference. Unless tracking, I find closed designs too claustrophobic and low end heavy (the modern ones generally are).

Even so, I replaced them with AKG 271, and I prefer those as closed cans. But mixwise, I trust the k702 quite a lot. If the k612 are based on the design of the k701/702 they'd be my choice out of the 2.

They don't necessarily need an amp, it depends on how much juice the headphone out on your interface will provide. Mine seems to give me enough, and they even sound 'ok' driven by an iPhone

3ee · Post by **3ee** » Thu Oct 23, 2014 7:03 pm

Thanks again for the feedback guys!

...will have to do a bit more research but my bet so far is more on the K612 now. (maybe because I studied them more in the last days?!

)

As I found on the internet, the K612 is suppose to resemble the K701, K702 sound quite (K712 has more bass which takes away a bit from a "flat" response) ... people say that the K612 has a more natural/true sound stage/image than the "wider" K700s.. hmm

layzer · Post by **layzer** » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:51 pm

audiosabre wrote:Personally, I'd go with AKG every time.

yup, showing my age here... seeing them more times in music videos (the gold cup rings) than anything else,
AKG is by far the industry standard.
you can't beat the comfort and durability when spending hours and hours mastering an entire album. i've only ever had to replace them once in my 34 year recording/mastering career.

layzer · Post by **layzer** » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:55 pm

3ee · Post by **3ee** » Fri Oct 24, 2014 5:06 am

Finally found some graphs for the K612 Pro:
http://en.goldenears.net/42471

Hermetech Mastering · Post by **Hermetech Mastering** » Fri Oct 24, 2014 7:17 am

I wouldn't ever recommend mastering on headphones. HD600s are very common with mastering engineers, but not for doing the main work on, just for QC checking at the end.