Is the HD 599 more detailed than the AKG K612 Pro and the K702?

[Oluv's Buddy]

I wanted to go for the K612, but because of shipping delays I got an HD599 first and after getting the K612 it is clear to me that the HD599 is strong on detail even it its bass is a bit muddy and bloated, at least that was my initial impression.

I am new to this headphone game and as the K612 is the "Pro Reference" I wonder whether it lacks reference level detail or it is just my ears. A few reviews indicate that K702 has a more "fun" kind tuning, perhaps more engaging and a better soundstage but not necessarily superior in detail retrieval.

The K702 is only about £20GBP more than the K612 and if it is not much better then I might as well skip it and stick with the HD599.

Hopefully equalization might fix the HD 599's dubious bass, and K612's long cable makes it awkward for desktop usage..

 

[Robbo99999]

Hi, there's massive massive differences between headphones if you don't EQ them to the same curve....simply because the frequency responses of different models of headphones are massively different. The biggest factor of all the elements you describe are explained by the stock frequency response of the headphones you are trying. It's actually quite interesting to own a few different headphones and have them all EQ'd to the Harman Curve, and even then there are differences that you can notice between headphones, but they will instead sound pretty much the same on a broad tonal level. So to me the really interesting thing is which headphones give me the best experience when all are EQ'd to the same curve, and for me that's the Harman Curve, because I know that Harman Curve provides a preferred/good sound to me. If you've ever tried any of your headphones EQ'd to the Harman Curve, probably best to use EQ's from Oratory (https://www.reddit.com/r/oratory1990/wiki/index/list_of_presets ).....if you've ever tried them and you like the results then I think you'll find it really interesting to EQ all your headphones to the Harman Curve & then see which one you like best. I think that's the truest (relatively accessible) way to really find which headphone models are the best.

About your specific headphones you mention. I have two units of K702, and currently they're my joint favourite headphone with my Sennheiser HD560s. K702 has a really quite unique soundstage that is wide & expansive with some very impressive overall detail/resolution (all my experiences I'm talking about are when EQ'd to the Harman Curve). My HD560s has a narrower soundstage, but it's very accurate positionally within that less expansive soundstage.......the bass is also very very good in the HD560s. So they're my two favourite headphones out of the various headphones you see listed in my sig........you can see there's still differences between headphones when EQ'd to the same Target Curve.

So those are my general thoughts on how to compare headphones and arrive at one which has the most potential, and I always believe in EQ'ing a headphone, as it's exceedingly difficult & rare for a manufacturer to produce a headphone that has a stock frequency response that hugs the Harman Curve accurately. You'll find massive massive differences between headphones if you only listen to them at stock, and the frequency responses are often times so messed up I really don't recommend to restricting yourself to choosing & listening to a headphone based on it's stock frequency response - EQ it instead.

 

[Bob-23]

K612's long cable makes it awkward for desktop usage..

I'd also consider that K612's cable is fixed - as opposed to K702's cable which is exchangeable.

Fixed cable means you can throw the headphones off when the cable breaks - and it's gonna break.*

*Of course, if you own a soldering iron a fixed one is no problem.

 

[solderdude]

I wanted to go for the K612, but because of shipping delays I got an HD599 first and after getting the K612 it is clear to me that the HD599 is strong on detail even it its bass is a bit muddy and bloated, at least that was my initial impression.

I am new to this headphone game and as the K612 is the "Pro Reference" I wonder whether it lacks reference level detail or it is just my ears. A few reviews indicate that K702 has a more "fun" kind tuning, perhaps more engaging and a better soundstage but not necessarily superior in detail retrieval.

The K702 is only about £20GBP more than the K612 and if it is not much better then I might as well skip it and stick with the HD599.

Hopefully equalization might fix the HD 599's dubious bass, and K612's long cable makes it awkward for desktop usage..

K702 vs K612.

The K612 is cheaper because it has a fixed cable where the K702 is replaceable.

Take the 'Pro Reference' with a grain of salt.

 

[Robin L]

I have the HD 599, I do not find it detailed. The Sennheiser HD 650/Drop 6XX is more detailed. So is the AKG K371 if you want a closed back phone. Tonally, the HD 650 is similar to the HD 599, with a broad bulge in the lower midrange/upper bass and some tapering off in the treble. But the 650 presents more low level detail. I've got both the HD 599 and the Drop 6XX, don't use the HD 599s anymore.

 

[Oluv's Buddy]

About your specific headphones you mention. I have two units of K702, and currently they're my joint favourite headphone with my Sennheiser HD560s. K702 has a really quite unique soundstage that is wide & expansive with some very impressive overall detail/resolution (all my experiences I'm talking about are when EQ'd to the Harman Curve). My HD560s has a narrower soundstage, but it's very accurate positionally within that less expansive soundstage.......the bass is also very very good in the HD560s. So they're my two favourite headphones out of the various headphones you see listed in my sig........you can see there's still differences between headphones when EQ'd to the same Target Curve.

When equalized which phone provides the more detail/resolution?

 

[Robbo99999]

When equalized which phone provides the more detail/resolution?

For the headphones you mentioned I don't know the answer to that question, because the only headphone I have which you mentioned is the K702. Out of all the headphones I own, in terms of overall resolution/detail once equalised, then K702 and HD600 offer the most. However, this is not resolution throughout the range, in the bass these two headphones don't have as much resolution as my other headphones, and also note this is not taking into account soundstage (spatial representation).......HD600 is the worst for soundstage and K702 is my best or joint favourite re soundstage (equalling but different to that of my HD560s, with the 560s being narrower but very accurate spatially). That's why HD600 is my least favourite headphone out of all of them, not that it's bad....it's the best out of them when all are used without EQ, just the soundstage is the worst and the bass is not the best, so those two reasons are why it's my least favourite headphone out of the ones I own. My headphones in list of preference are as follows from best to worst: joint 1st place K702 & HD560s, 2nd place HE4XX, 3rd place NAD HP50, 4th place HD600.

 

[Chyżwar]

When equalized which phone provides the more detail/resolution?

What details? Any good headphones will show you all the details in the recording. And I really doubt that such a thing as resolution even exists. Someone ever measured the resolution of headphones, or defined what it is? Details, resolution are only peaks in the FR. I compared the Sony MH1C after EQ to the Campfire Andromeda 2020 and of course I didn't find any new details

 

[Robbo99999]

What details? Any good headphones will show you all the details in the recording. And I really doubt that such a thing as resolution even exists. Someone ever measured the resolution of headphones, or defined what it is? Details, resolution are only peaks in the FR. I compared the Sony MH1C after EQ to the Campfire Andromeda 2020 and of course I didn't find any new details

It is possible to hear some subtleties in recordings that you wouldn't have heard before when using some headphones, certainly if you use them at stock because of the crazy frequency responses (which you alluded to when you mentioned peaks), but even if all are EQ'd to the Harman Curve it's still possible to notice some nuances (details) in recordings that you don't notice in other headphones. So I say detail/resolution does exist when talking about a headphone's potential.

 

[sblrog]

For the headphones you mentioned I don't know the answer to that question, because the only headphone I have which you mentioned is the K702. Out of all the headphones I own, in terms of overall resolution/detail once equalised, then K702 and HD600 offer the most. However, this is not resolution throughout the range, in the bass these two headphones don't have as much resolution as my other headphones, and also note this is not taking into account soundstage (spatial representation).......HD600 is the worst for soundstage and K702 is my best or joint favourite re soundstage (equalling but different to that of my HD560s, with the 560s being narrower but very accurate spatially). That's why HD600 is my least favourite headphone out of all of them, not that it's bad....it's the best out of them when all are used without EQ, just the soundstage is the worst and the bass is not the best, so those two reasons are why it's my least favourite headphone out of the ones I own. My headphones in list of preference are as follows from best to worst: joint 1st place K702 & HD560s, 2nd place HE4XX, 3rd place NAD HP50, 4th place HD600.

Thanks for your thoughts in this thread, Robbo99999. I think I've arrived at a similar destination re: equalization. Oluv's Buddy, did you equalize your HD 599s? I got them at 65% off on Cyber Monday and the detail on them is astounding when EQd to Harmon. Combined with decent soundstage and imaging, this might be my endgame. However, I AM curious about planar magnetics. Robbo99999, could you share your experience with the EQ'd HE4xx and why they came in 2nd (I'm considering the HE400SE). Thanks

 

[Robbo99999]

Thanks for your thoughts in this thread, Robbo99999. I think I've arrived at a similar destination re: equalization. Oluv's Buddy, did you equalize your HD 599s? I got them at 65% off on Cyber Monday and the detail on them is astounding when EQd to Harmon. Combined with decent soundstage and imaging, this might be my endgame. However, I AM curious about planar magnetics. Robbo99999, could you share your experience with the EQ'd HE4xx and why they came in 2nd (I'm considering the HE400SE). Thanks

Hi only just seen your post, but have seen & responded to your Inbox message to me on the same topic, but figured I'd copy & paste my response into this thread too, for the possible benefit of anyone reading.

Just trying to think back to my HE4XX impressions, as I haven't listened to them for months. I remember that the bass was of very good quality and seemed very well defined, maybe the best of my headphones. I also remember that after EQ I thought tonality was spot on, so it matched Oratory's measurements accurately in terms of tonality. One thing I found though was that it seemed to lack overall clarity/resolution vs my EQ'd HD560s/K702. It wasn't something I noticed whilst wearing them, but when switching back to HD560s / K702 that's when it became apparent. I'm not sure why the HE4XX doesn't seem to have the clarity of some of my other headphones, some of me thinks it's due to the very fine narrow jaggedness of the HE4XX frequency response, which is a characteristic I've noticed in a lot of planar headphones. I've got a miniDSP EARs measurement rig and I measured all my headphones on it, and following you can see the small sharp jaggedness of the HE4XX response vs my HD560s & K702. (Don't worry about the weird shape of all of these frequency response measurements, it's because it's done on a miniDSP EARS and not the GRAS rig that you're probably familiar with from Oratory/Amir/etc).

HE4XX:

HD560s:

K702:

I think it's quite easy to see how much small sharp jaggedness there is in the HE4XX above 1kHz vs the other two headphones.

Maybe the weirdness at 600Hz in the HE4XX frequency response doesn't help either, I think that is quite difficult to correct for in EQ's (and isn't present in Oratory's measurement to the same degree) - it's a strange shape, it might be somekind of cancellation that doesn't respond to EQ, just an additional thought.

That's my best explanation for my experiences, but it's obviously not scientifically proven, just my intuition based on the measurements and what I've experienced, so I can't know for sure that's the reason why I find my HE4XX to lack behind the other two.

 

[sblrog]

Hi only just seen your post, but have seen & responded to your Inbox message to me on the same topic, but figured I'd copy & paste my response into this thread too, for the possible benefit of anyone reading.

Just trying to think back to my HE4XX impressions, as I haven't listened to them for months. I remember that the bass was of very good quality and seemed very well defined, maybe the best of my headphones. I also remember that after EQ I thought tonality was spot on, so it matched Oratory's measurements accurately in terms of tonality. One thing I found though was that it seemed to lack overall clarity/resolution vs my EQ'd HD560s/K702. It wasn't something I noticed whilst wearing them, but when switching back to HD560s / K702 that's when it became apparent. I'm not sure why the HE4XX doesn't seem to have the clarity of some of my other headphones, some of me thinks it's due to the very fine narrow jaggedness of the HE4XX frequency response, which is a characteristic I've noticed in a lot of planar headphones. I've got a miniDSP EARs measurement rig and I measured all my headphones on it, and following you can see the small sharp jaggedness of the HE4XX response vs my HD560s & K702. (Don't worry about the weird shape of all of these frequency response measurements, it's because it's done on a miniDSP EARS and not the GRAS rig that you're probably familiar with from Oratory/Amir/etc).

HE4XX:

HD560s:

K702:

I think it's quite easy to see how much small sharp jaggedness there is in the HE4XX above 1kHz vs the other two headphones.

Maybe the weirdness at 600Hz in the HE4XX frequency response doesn't help either, I think that is quite difficult to correct for in EQ's (and isn't present in Oratory's measurement to the same degree) - it's a strange shape, it might be somekind of cancellation that doesn't respond to EQ, just an additional thought.

That's my best explanation for my experiences, but it's obviously not scientifically proven, just my intuition based on the measurements and what I've experienced, so I can't know for sure that's the reason why I find my HE4XX to lack behind the other two.

Reasonable working hypothesis, IMO.

Thanks again for your detailed and insightful inbox reply (I wasn't sure if you were still following this >1.5 yr old thread).

Now you've got me curious about differences between the EQd HD560S and EQd HD599. I'm doing a search for threads that contain both of those. If I don't find anything relevant, would the best practice be to start a new thread instead of hijacking this one re: HD599 vs K612 Pro and K702?

Thanks.

 

[solderdude]

and isn't present in Oratory's measurement to the same degree

That could be caused by averaging a few of them (or even L + R), not saying it is but could be, also smoothing can seemingly lower this.

 

[Dazerdoreal]

The K612 is cheaper because it has a fixed cable where the K702 is replaceable.

Not here in Germany, actually.
If it had costed the same, I probably have bought a 612 because I would have prefered the sound signaure without EQ, but 612 was pricier.

 

[solderdude]

At Thomann yes, the K702 is cheaper.
Probably because they are sold in bigger quantities than K612.
The MSRP of the K702 (USA) is $ 409,- the K612 is $ 229.-
At Thomann the K702 = € 129,- and the K612 € 145,- (B-stock = € 125,-)

 

[markanini]

K702 vs K612.

The K612 is cheaper because it has a fixed cable where the K702 is replaceable.

Take the 'Pro Reference' with a grain of salt.

To my ears K612 is more linear with bright tilt(not DT990 bright, just mildy bright), K702 less linear, a bit shorty and boxy. K702 looks more balanced than K612 on a graphs but doesn't sound that way.

 

[solderdude]

The measure a bit more different on Oratory's plots but it is not known whether this is due to averaging of a few copies of the same headphone or a measured difference.
Below the K612 and K702 measured by Sonarworks. Though they have a test fixture that is much like mine.

They differ slightly in the bass mostly and around 1.5kHz. The K612 being a bit more 'linear' sounding.
Also Crin measured both and they too show the same differences.

AKG K612 Pro – In-Ear Fidelity

crinacle.com

AKG K702 – In-Ear Fidelity

crinacle.com

When one uses a 10 band equalizer and pulls the 1.5kHz slider up or down 2.5dB this is audible. There are small differences between the models but not substantial ones.

I am not saying the K612 and K02 are the same headphone with just a different cable though. They are different models and would prefer the K612 as it is more linear.

 

[Robbo99999]

Reasonable working hypothesis, IMO.

Thanks again for your detailed and insightful inbox reply (I wasn't sure if you were still following this >1.5 yr old thread).

Now you've got me curious about differences between the EQd HD560S and EQd HD599. I'm doing a search for threads that contain both of those. If I don't find anything relevant, would the best practice be to start a new thread instead of hijacking this one re: HD599 vs K612 Pro and K702?

Thanks.

I'd say either start a new thread or maybe post it in the HD560s review thread, maybe better to start a new thread.....put an @Robbo99999 in your thread or post and I'll give my thoughts too.

That could be caused by averaging a few of them (or even L + R), not saying it is but could be, also smoothing can seemingly lower this.

Oratory's measurements are more smoothed than mine, I think it's as you say because he measures more than one unit. His earlier versions of HE4XX looked a bit less smoothed even though he'd measured more than one unit at that time, but then sometime in the last year or more it's been smoothed out - either through measuring more units or maybe he applies some degree of smoothing nowadays.

 

[Robbo99999]

The measure a bit more different on Oratory's plots but it is not known whether this is due to averaging of a few copies of the same headphone or a measured difference.
Below the K612 and K702 measured by Sonarworks. Though they have a test fixture that is much like mine.

View attachment 262745View attachment 262746
They differ slightly in the bass mostly and around 1.5kHz. The K612 being a bit more 'linear' sounding.
Also Crin measured both and they too show the same differences.

AKG K612 Pro – In-Ear Fidelity

crinacle.com

AKG K702 – In-Ear Fidelity

crinacle.com

When one uses a 10 band equalizer and pulls the 1.5kHz slider up or down 2.5dB this is audible. There are small differences between the models but not substantial ones.

I am not saying the K612 and K02 are the same headphone with just a different cable though. They are different models and would prefer the K612 as it is more linear.

K701 is a little different from K702 though, not much though. When I last looked at comparison measurements (Oratory) the K701 was warmer IIRC, but shared the same characteristic humps. Might be difficult to rule out unit to unit variation, but I don't think we can assume K701=K702. (You mention K702, but have K701 in your graphs).

 

[solderdude]

The comparison in my plot was K702 vs K612.
Yes, K701 and K702 are not the same either.

Indeed unit to unit variance can certainly be a factor as well. Not all headphones are created equal.