AKG K371 Impressions

[pwjazz]

So I am interested in buying the 1990's and I searched for a thread about it but didn't find any, since you own the 1990's if you could do a thread just like this one with a freq graph and all that jazz, that would be amazing! take your time with it and do it when you have the time

@solderdude has you covered.

https://diyaudioheaven.wordpress.com/headphones/measurements/brands-a-i/dt-1990-pro/

From my own experience, the DT 1990 is much brighter than either the HD58X or K371. It's a very different tuning. There are times that I really like it, but most of the time I reach for something else that sounds more "natural" to my ears.

 

[VintageFlanker]

From my own experience, the DT 1990 is much brighter than either the HD58X or K371

100% agreed.

 

[Spech]

Oh, that's great, I shall go read that asap, I am thinking of either getting the 1990's or the Focal Elex as my end game, I also heard that the Hifiman Edition XX are really good, idk if there are better choices in this price range but those 3 seem to be the best ones.
I really want something that extends really well in the bass region and is as flat as possible and with a decent soundstage.

 

[pwjazz]

@solderdude has you covered.

https://diyaudioheaven.wordpress.com/headphones/measurements/brands-a-i/dt-1990-pro/

From my own experience, the DT 1990 is much brighter than either the HD58X or K371. It's a very different tuning. There are times that I really like it, but most of the time I reach for something else that sounds more "natural" to my ears.

BTW I just tried the Dekoni Elite Velour pads for the 1990 and ended up not loving them. Comfort is okay except that they increase the already strong clamp. Their sound reminds me of a tamed version of the stock "balanced" pads which I personally don't like as much as the "analytic" pads. Treble is definitely less bright than stock though still north of neutral, and bass is less elevated but still notth from neutral as well. The resulting signature is a classic example of "v-shaped" which ends up pushing vocals further back in the mix than I like. EQing down the bass about 3dB helps with this but I was hoping that these pads wouldn't need EQ.

 

[pwjazz]

Oh, that's great, I shall go read that asap, I am thinking of either getting the 1990's or the Focal Elex as my end game, I also heard that the Hifiman Edition XX are really good, idk if there are better choices in this price range but those 3 seem to be the best ones.

Here's a comparison I did of the Elex and HD58X.

https://www.headphones.com/blogs/news/massdrop-x-sennheiser-hd58x-vs-focal-elex-comparison

 

[Spech]

Damn, I shall also go read that asap!!!

 

[Spech]

Ok I read it all, so the 58x are that good huh, but I also wear glasses, and the 1990's seem to not be affected by glasses as in bass remains the same from what i read on @solderdude 's review of them, and I could EQ down the treble on them, but then again the Elex seem to not need EQ, but then again the 58x seem to be so good, choices choices, how does one even choose!
...
I guess I can eliminate the 58x even tho they are really cheap and good, because of the glasses, since I have to wear glasses while using my PC, so that leaves the 1990, the Elex and the Hifiman Edition XX.

 

[JJB70]

When it comes to headphone comfort you really can't beat just trying them on as comfort is such a personal and subjective preference. For example some people hate the Audio Technica wing system whereas others swear by it. Some swear by the HD650 (and the various models in that family) where others find the clamping force too high. Some find the AKG K701/702/712 unstable where others find them incredibly comfortable. I find that whatever issues Beyerdynamic have with treble they do know how to make supremely comfortable headphones, I could wear my T5P headphones all day. Sony are up and down and vary by model. Weirdly I find cheaper models and mid range are often more comfortable than statement models as they are often lighter.

 

[solderdude]

I guess I can eliminate the 58x even tho they are really cheap and good, because of the glasses, since I have to wear glasses while using my PC, so that leaves the 1990, the Elex and the Hifiman Edition XX.

To me (may not be others) It would be DT1990 (A pads + filter) > Ed xx. The Ed XX is coarser in the treble.
Comfort differs a lot between the 2.
Never heard nor measured the Elex but it seems to be close the the Clear which I like.
With the Elex you would have to keep in mind that these 'clip' hard at higher SPL, warranty is bitch cause... drop.
HD58X (with mods) is a decent headphone and good for the money but is not a high-end headphone.
The DT1990 is quite different on many aspects. Some are bothered by the peak but many are not. They like the 'hyper details' it brings.

 

[Fregly]

In the comment section of Oluv's review of the new AKGs he says he prefers the 361 to 58x.

 

[JJB70]

I still have my old HD580 Ovation II's, wonderful headphones that have served me well for the best part of three decades and are still going strong. I did think of buying a pair of the Massdrop homage to the 580 as a backup pair but apparently they're not the same.

 

[Spech]

To me (may not be others) It would be DT1990 (A pads + filter) > Ed xx. The Ed XX is coarser in the treble.
Comfort differs a lot between the 2.
Never heard nor measured the Elex but it seems to be close the the Clear which I like.
With the Elex you would have to keep in mind that these 'clip' hard at higher SPL, warranty is bitch cause... drop.
HD58X (with mods) is a decent headphone and good for the money but is not a high-end headphone.
The DT1990 is quite different on many aspects. Some are bothered by the peak but many are not. They like the 'hyper details' it brings.

Thanks for the info! I think I will get the 1990's and if the treble bothers me I'll EQ the peak (or maybe get the Dekoni Elite Velours), idk which pads I'd use tho the analytical pads seem to reduce the bass but which is the correct amount of bass aka the harman target which has +4db in the bass

 

[pwjazz]

HD58X (with mods) is a decent headphone and good for the money but is not a high-end headphone.

I hear this sentiment a lot, and with the stock tuning I can sort of understand why people don't love the HD58X. There's not enough energy around 2-3 KHz and a bit to much around 7. But the HD58X seems to have competitive THD and is very well damped. What aspects of more expensive headphones's technical performance makes them more "high-end"?

 

[solderdude]

The HD58X (with mods) is almost as good as the HD660S without any mods. In direct comparisons the HD660S is just a tad better in certain aspects.
An EQ'ed HD800 is miles ahead of the HD660S and HD58X when it comes to a lot of aspects.
EQ'ed HD800 and EQ'ed HD58X (tonally the same) still sound very different when it comes to pinpointing instruments (separation of them) and head-stage (there is no sound stage) as well as details, 'looseness' of instruments etc.
This separate 'high-end' with mass consumer headphones.

I am not saying the HD58X is bad, on the contrary. It is excellent for the money in many aspects but it can not compete with flagship headphones.

 

[JJB70]

I think at the higher end headphone prices are increasingly divorced from performance, and some models which reviewers wax lyrical about really aren't that impressive. I've listened to the Focal Elear quite a few times, every time I think it'll match the expectations established by Tyll Hertsens review on Innerfidelity and each time I come away feeling very meh (although I do love the build and industrial design, even if it is a bit heavy). I love the industrial design and feel of the AKG K812 and in some ways it is superb, but overall I think the K712 is a better headphone (although the K812 looks a lot more attractive at its new price point, originally it was ridiculously over priced for what it was, now at around £650 it looks a bit more sensible if still expensive). I haven't taken to the HD800 either. I really like some of the Audeze LCD models sound wise but they're just too heavy and cumbersome for me to enjoy wearing. And a headphone you don't enjoy wearing is not going to work. I did like the AKG N90Q sound despite its weight and bulk but wasn't impressed by the quality and sent them back.
I do love my PM-2's and in some ways do regret not biting the bullet and buying a pair of PM-1's. And I still like my Sony MDR Z7's despite them being a bit bass heavy. Beyond that I've sort of come full circle and arrived back at more modest headphones.

 

[pwjazz]

still sound very different when it comes to pinpointing instruments (separation of them)

Any hypothesis on what accounts for that? Rtings has some ideas on that, but per their formulation the HD58X actually has exceptional imaging. Interestingly the HD800 which is highly regarded in this area had angled drivers, perhaps that has an effect?

head-stage (there is no sound stage)

I actually hear the HD58X as sounding "larger" than the DT1990, but I think this is very personal. I'm also a crossfeed junky, so I'm more interested in how stuff sounds when crossfeed on than out off the box.

 

[solderdude]

Lets just say I disagree with Rtings on their ratings. I also had a private conversation with Sam about this. It basically comes down to the fact that he had to rate stereo image with a measurement.

Like most people, I hear the HD800 as extremely well separated and unusually but not abnormally spacious and the entire HD6** range as narrow.
I think this is one of the things in subjective headphone land about everyone agrees about.

As you mentioned this is all changed a lot using crossfeed.

 

[Tene]

Pretty hard to rate headphones objectively I'd say, there are a lot of parameters when it comes to psychoacoustics.

In that setting for example I'd say the first headphones have better mids thanks to a perfect matching, but Rtings would rate the second one better because it's closer to the target response in average.

 

[solderdude]

Sam told me the whole point is to rate headphones on measurements and they are still refining the weighing of the individual scores. They improved it a bit by adding use cases. He said they did not rate on listening. To me measurements give an indication (when done properly) in the case of headphones but the real proof is in listening and doing comparisons against a known reference.
Rtings for instance doesn't measure in the time domain.. yet.. they are looking into this and think is an important aspect as well.

 

[JJB70]

In fairness Rtings are trying to provide an objective assessment supported by a pretty comprehensive set of measurements. Maybe not perfect but I tend to treat their reviews more seriously than most.