AKG K371 Review (closed back headphone)

[unruly_disturbance]

Hi, Long time lurker, first time poster.
I've been debating which headphones to get to replace my Audio Technica ATH-m40fs which have served me well in my studio for the last 15 years.
It came down to the Sennheiser HD650 and these AKG-371, I was leaning towards the 650 purely because I wanted open backs and I'd never had a pair, but in the end I've gone for the AKG-371 mainly because of how they measure.
Because i do the vast majority of my mixing in headphones I needed a pair of headphones that would track the Harmann target nicely and require little to no EQ, and the AKG's ticked this box for less money than a used pair of HD650.
The headphones should arrive today or tomorrow, I'll do a few mixdowns with them and report back how I find them from a studio use perspective.

 

[FTB]

Hi, Long time lurker, first time poster.
I've been debating which headphones to get to replace my Audio Technica ATH-m40fs which have served me well in my studio for the last 15 years.
It came down to the Sennheiser HD650 and these AKG-371, I was leaning towards the 650 purely because I wanted open backs and I'd never had a pair, but in the end I've gone for the AKG-371 mainly because of how they measure.
Because i do the vast majority of my mixing in headphones I needed a pair of headphones that would track the Harmann target nicely and require little to no EQ, and the AKG's ticked this box for less money than a used pair of HD650.
The headphones should arrive today or tomorrow, I'll do a few mixdowns with them and report back how I find them from a studio use perspective.

I guess you made a good choice.
HD650 is short on bass and high treble without EQ.
The major problem of K371 is the 4 kHz dip.

The headphones which are close to the Harman target are also the Fiio FT3 (350 ohms version) : https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/d1q8...8a2378kkorn9n6j2nxlen7ry&e=1&st=m9iqz5yv&dl=0

I'll try these when i'll have the money.

 

[LTig]

The major problem of K371 is the 4 kHz dip.

It"s rather the build quality.

The headband breaks too easily and cannot be replaced, as AKG offers no parts.

The "leather" covering the ear cushions dissolves within 3 years. Replacement cushions are available but not by AKG.

 

[respice finem]

This fake leather is really a "curse" in the headphone businness. I don't understand why they can't take Alcantara or simply good quality fabric, if they don't want real leather (which BTW gets discarded if there are no buyers). Greenwashing IMHO.

 

[Dazerdoreal]

Imho, it is only greenwashing if you explicitly claim that you use these pads for ecologic reasons.
If you mention once that it is "vegan" leather, it is still a helpful information for vegan buyers.

That said, the 371 also seems to relatively consistent when it comes to 3rd party pads.

 

[FTB]

It"s rather the build quality.

The headband breaks too easily and cannot be replaced, as AKG offers no parts.

The "leather" covering the ear cushions dissolves within 3 years. Replacement cushions are available but not by AKG.

No problem of quality for me after 4 years of daily usage.
Only earpads replaced once, the ones from ebay or aliexpress which look like the originals are good replacements.
Still more annoyed with the 4 kHz dip than other thing.

 

[Phorize]

It"s rather the build quality.

The headband breaks too easily and cannot be replaced, as AKG offers no parts.

The "leather" covering the ear cushions dissolves within 3 years. Replacement cushions are available but not by AKG.

Yeah mine look like they've been run over by a truck and they've only been on my desk/head.

 

[DVDdoug]

If you are a pro then of course ruggedness and reliability are very important. Or the AKG K371 is inexpensive so you could buy a back-up pair. (I don't listen to headphones that much and mine haven't broken but they do seem to have a poor reputation for reliability.)

And if you're mixing/mastering, or just listening for hours at a time, comfort is important and you'll have to decide what's comfortable for you.

I've saved a handful of excerpts about mixing & mastering with headphones and they generally recommend against it, but I'll share one exception:

This is from a mixing engineer (Recording Magazine):

Can I mix on headphones?

No. But in all seriousness, headphones can be a secret weapon and it really doesn’t matter what they sound like…

Over time, after constantly listening back to my work from different studios on those headphones I really started to learn them. They became sort of a compass. Wherever I went… It became a pattern for me to reference these headphones to see if what I was hearing was “right”…

I learned them, I knew them, I trusted them. It didn’t matter whether or not I loved them…

So, can you mix on headphones? Probably. I just think you really need to put some time into learning them first…

I have another one that I need to find and add to my collection that recommends checking the bass with headphones because although you can't feel the bass in our body like with speakers, you don't have standing waves, and most people don't have woofers/subwoofers that don't go "honestly" down to 20Hz or so.

 

[Yersinia Bestmate]

It"s rather the build quality.

The headband breaks too easily and cannot be replaced, as AKG offers no parts.

The "leather" covering the ear cushions dissolves within 3 years. Replacement cushions are available but not by AKG.

Exactly. The quality is far from adequate and if one has a small head, the cups rest on your ears. They sound nice though..

 

[unruly_disturbance]

I have only had 24 hours with them, but in that time I have completed one mixdown and started some sound deign for a new track heres some thoughts.

I'm going to lead with the negatives:
1: The headband could do with being a bit smaller, I have it on it's shortest setting and I dont feel like its relly "hugging" my head, which gives me doubts about the strength and consistency of the seal, which leads on to my next gripe.
2: Initially I felt like the clamping force was not enough, like if I pressed them mode firmly against the side of my head I got an increase in the low end. However I don't think that increase necessarily means "better" or more accurate bass response, since I do feel that the bass level after completing the mixdown is natural in the finished item.
3: This one has already been raised but the noise from cable contact on the body is by far it's biggest design flaw, the cable naturally hangs on to my chest and any movement at all makes a really distracting dull scraping noise thats amplified by the space in the can. I fully accept this is a massive oversigt on AKG's part, I do however have a solution, I have a flexible arm for holding mic's and cameras in my studio, I've just hung the cable off that so it never makes any contact with me. Granted I shouldn't have to resort to this on a pair of headphones which sits in the professional space, but there you go.

I cant comment on long term build quality or longevity of the pads at this stage, all I will say is that they have perished on every set of cans I've ever owned and quality of replacements can be inconsistent. My previous main cans (AT-MTH40fs) the first pair of pads lasted 12 years but the replacements (allegedly a higher quality after market brand) perished in less than 2, so theres that.

So the positives.
1: Detail, far more detail than I'd expect from closed back at this price point. How they zoom in and reveal are approaching what I'm used to with my IEM's. I was able to pick out tiny distortion from having the attack time on a compressor for a parallel group to fast, my previous cans would not have picked this up.
2: Tonal balance, this comes through after a couple of hours, you're making mix decisions and when something sounds balanced or just right in these headphones, I'm already confident that it is right I feel this comes down to their natural sound and the accuracy to the harmann target. I have used them "flat" and with Amir's EQ adjustment and after an initial step change I found I prefer the slight correction.
3: Long session comfort. I know there have been split opinions on this but having had them on for a 3 hour session of mixing where I'm pretty much sat still, then. 2 hour session of sound design where I'm moving around more and changing position, I can say the comfort is good, I didn't feel too hot around the cups and never did the headphones feel like they were impeding my workflow or causing discomfort.

So, overall I'm definitely keeping them because they have delivered on the thing that was most important to me which is use for accurate mix downs, and they do so very well with comfort levels appropriate for my use case.

I hope someone finds that useful who is also considering them for studio use, it's nice to try and give back to a community who I have learned so much from reading the reviews over the years.

 

[unruly_disturbance]

If you are a pro then of course ruggedness and reliability are very important. Or the AKG K371 is inexpensive so you could buy a back-up pair. (I don't listen to headphones that much and mine haven't broken but they do seem to have a poor reputation for reliability.)

And if you're mixing/mastering, or just listening for hours at a time, comfort is important and you'll have to decide what's comfortable for you.

I've saved a handful of excerpts about mixing & mastering with headphones and they generally recommend against it, but I'll share one exception:

This is from a mixing engineer (Recording Magazine):


I have another one that I need to find and add to my collection that recommends checking the bass with headphones because although you can't feel the bass in our body like with speakers, you don't have standing waves, and most people don't have woofers/subwoofers that don't go "honestly" down to 20Hz or so.

It's one of those things that isn't even worth calling a debate, because there is nothing to debate.
Can / Have great recordings been mixed on speakers ? Yes.
Can / Have great recordings been mixed on headphones ? Yes.


For me there's nothing to debate.
It all comes down to it being much easier to achieve a controlled mixing environment within a small space with headphones, than it is to achieve the equivalent with speakers, when you take room size, speaker size & placement and acoustic treatment into account.
Having been through the process more than once, I'll take headphones every time, but if someone has the space, time and money and want to learn about room acoustics then that will work for that person just as well.

 

[markanini]

I try not to inform my opinion on headphone mixing based on what others say, but on outcomes after verifying my work on multiple playback systems. Indeed, with AKG K371 and other headphones translatability always suffered in some way, and I inevitably had to revert to using speakers primarily to gain certainty of my work. For tracking and arranging, basic sound design/sound selection headphones can work great. I do find headphones, and to a larger extend IEMs, useful as an alternate perspective on the low bass, as those frequency ranges have the most linearity issues due to room acoustics.

 

[unruly_disturbance]

I try not to inform my opinion on headphone mixing based on what others say, but on outcomes after verifying my work on multiple playback systems. Indeed, with AKG K371 and other headphones translatability always suffered in some way, and I inevitably had to revert to using speakers primarily to gain certainty of my work. For tracking and arranging, basic sound design/sound selection headphones can work great. I do find headphones, and to a larger extend IEMs, useful as an alternate perspective on the low bass, as those frequency ranges have the most linearity issues due to room acoustics.

I guess this is one of those that comes down to individual experience.
My experience has been the opposite of yours, in that I was always taught to mix on speakers but I always found I'd have to make many iterations of changes after auditioning my mixes on multiple systems, but in my 20 year journey of writing, mixing and releasing music I have found that the mixes I have done in the last 2 years the vast majority of which are done in headphones all seem to translate in a predictable way across multiple systems and require the fewest changes. This also includes music which I have done in my friends studio which is professionally treated and tuned, and I alternate some mixes between that space and the headphones in my home studio.

Of course I fully accept that this may just be down to the 20 years and finally in the last 2 years I've got to a point where my ears just know, and its all just one correlation (not causation) of me opting to mix exclusively on headphones in the last few years.

 

[markanini]

I started exploring headphones instead of speakers twenty years ago, starting with Etymotic ER4S. And revisited the idea several times over the years.

I can totally see the attraction of fully removing unwanted room interactions from the process. At the same time, I discovered that the threshold for a viable speaker setup isn't as high as some want to make you think on the internet. An equilateral triangle made up of the listener and two speakers, can be as small as 3.5ft per side, placed in front of a symmetric front wall, speakers toed in toward the listener and almost touching the wall, tweeters at ear level. A two-band shelf EQ to correct unwanted spectral tilt if needed. Done. It doesn't take much to significantly decouple the speakers from the room. Gear culture and marketing won't let you believe that absolutely minimal effort pays off big here, but measurements say otherwise. Too many give up before reaching an informed conclusion.

I don't really think any of our stories invalidate the others experience. It's prudent though to add a YMMV as the majority of professionals continue to prefer speakers for audio work.

 

[unruly_disturbance]

I started exploring headphones instead of speakers twenty years ago, starting with Etymotic ER4S. And revisited the idea several times over the years.

I can totally see the attraction of fully removing unwanted room interactions from the process. At the same time, I discovered that the threshold for a viable speaker setup isn't as high as some want to make you think on the internet. An equilateral triangle made up of the listener and two speakers, can be as small as 3.5ft per side, placed in front of a symmetric front wall, speakers toed in toward the listener and almost touching the wall, tweeters at ear level. A two-band shelf EQ to correct unwanted spectral tilt if needed. Done. It doesn't take much to significantly decouple the speakers from the room. Gear culture and marketing won't let you believe that absolutely minimal effort pays off big here, but measurements say otherwise. Too many give up before reaching an informed conclusion.

I don't really think any of our stories invalidate the others experience. It's prudent though to add a YMMV as the majority of professionals continue to prefer speakers for audio work.

Fair point, well made Jim.

 

[TurtlePaul]

It feels obvious that Harman should make the AKG 381:

- Metal hinges and mostly metal construction. Completely change the hinge design.
- K361 levels of bass, a couple dB lower than K371.
-Otherwise, mostly K371 treble, which is better damped than K361.
- Find a way to get around +3 dB in the 4 khz hole (I know a lot of headphones have this dip, but you would hope Harman believes in the Harman target)
- 4.4mm TRRS cup termination with cables and adaptors for 4.4mm, 3.5 mm, 1/4 inch with longer and shorter cables. Cable termination pointed 30 degrees in front of the shoulder to avoid microphonics. A 4.4mm cable should be light enough to not need counterweights like the K371 right cup (a metal headband will be heavy enough). Balanced is a pretty decent audiophile selling point.
- Maybe $249-299 MSRP?

 

[Dazerdoreal]

- K361 levels of bass, a couple dB lower than K371.

According to measurements by @oratory1990, the 371 does not look bassier than the 361. Rather the opposite.

Dropbox

www.dropbox.com

Dropbox

www.dropbox.com

I think in most peoples ears the 361/371 are not as bassy as they graph anyway. On some graphs they appear as "subbass cannons", but I guess most people dont get such a perfect seal anyway (and it is not necessary in order to enjoy it). Personally, I would not mind 1 or 2db less bass on my 371 but it is really not a big deal and I even enjoy it on some tracks.

I really would not need a 371 which adheres better to the Harman target than it already does. EQ attempts in that direction did not work out for me overall. The 4k dip seems like a construction thing and I imagine it wont be easy to correct.

 

[roladyzator]

According to measurements by @oratory1990, the 371 does not look bassier than the 361. Rather the opposite.

Dropbox

www.dropbox.com

Dropbox

www.dropbox.com

I think in most peoples ears the 361/371 are not as bassy as they graph anyway. On some graphs they appear as "subbass cannons", but I guess most people dont get such a perfect seal anyway (and it is not necessary in order to enjoy it). Personally, I would not mind 1 or 2db less bass on my 371 but it is really not a big deal and I even enjoy it on some tracks.

I really would not need a 371 which adheres better to the Harman target than it already does. EQ attempts in that direction did not work out for me overall. The 4k dip seems like a construction thing and I imagine it wont be easy to correct.

I'm one of those. I think they have just the right amount of bass.

It's the one headphone for me that sounds fantastic with anything I throw at it and it doesn't even improve with EQ.
I feel lucky to get this with the relatively cheap K371.

 

[FTB]

The sub-bass boost of these AKG are not so important as it is sub-bass... It is not like the Audio Technica ATH-M50X which has a boost at 150 Hz which masks everything under this frequency...

 

[oratory1990]

According to measurements by @oratory1990, the 371 does not look bassier than the 361. Rather the opposite.

Dropbox

www.dropbox.com

Dropbox

www.dropbox.com

I think in most peoples ears the 361/371 are not as bassy as they graph anyway. On some graphs they appear as "subbass cannons", but I guess most people dont get such a perfect seal anyway (and it is not necessary in order to enjoy it). Personally, I would not mind 1 or 2db less bass on my 371 but it is really not a big deal and I even enjoy it on some tracks.

I really would not need a 371 which adheres better to the Harman target than it already does. EQ attempts in that direction did not work out for me overall. The 4k dip seems like a construction thing and I imagine it wont be easy to correct.

The K371 is tuned with more bass than the Harman Target - because it takes into account that on the average head, there will be a bit more leakage than on a dummy head.
I've done some investigations on this with a few other headphones (using microphones mounted inside the ear of a group of 15 people), and the average amount of reduction at low frequencies happens to almost exactly match the amount by which the K371 overshoots the Harman Target - surely this is not a coincidence.
Meaning: The K371 was tuned to match the Harman Target on human ears/heads (on average), not necessarily on perfectly-sealing ear simulators.