what you want, 
is the flattest headphone, for reference.
 
if you have anything hyped at all,
you will make mix decisions made on the hype.
 
 
 
i know it all boils down to money,
i sure don't have a lot, 
here's a link to a site that has some good info:
https://www.headphone.com/collections/audiophile

review of the akg's
 
https://www.headphone.com/collections/audiophile/products/akg-k712-pro
 

batsbrew
review of the akg's
 
https://www.headphone.com/collections/audiophile/products/akg-k712-pro
 

I'm going to assume (and I hope I'm wrong) that you're taking a slight offense to my review of the Shure SRH1840? I'm also going to assume you're pointing out that, in this review it is stating that the AKG's are hyped in the low-end. I won't totally dispute the review, and I will even agree that mix decisions may be based on how your brain "trains" up to the sound source. Once you're in tune with your speakers, you're going to do the best work you can with those speakers.
 
But I believe I have addressed all this to some degree. In the realm of mix decisions based on the speakers/headphones, you are absolutely correct in that this is the case. One person may swear by one pair, while another will refuse to ever use them. My shootout was difficult for me to decide, because I loved all three pairs. In fact, I broke out the Shure's one more time last night to be absolutely sure I wouldn't change my mind.

The AKG's, I (personally) didn't find were hyped in the lows. My understanding is that there were complaints of the K702's having weaker than normal bass. AKG, to my understanding merely corrected that weakness and gained 3db back to normal expectations. One reviewer will have a different opinion from another. But I found the AKG's to be more flat and natural in the low end than the Shure's (to my ears). It was REALLY close, though.

However, what really sold me on them was that, when I took them off to listen to my reference speakers, then put them back on, they were the closest to my speakers than the other two headphones. They also sounded a bit more open-back than the other two. I loved the Shures and the Sennheiser's sounds. I even found the Sennheisers to be less responsive in the top and bottom than the Shure's. So, again, this hyped feeling was very relative, not objectively apparent. In fact, I may even say they just responded better in the top and bottom than the other two sets, which might make them better for many listeners. Trust me, I didn't want to give them back. I LOVE them!!

So, please don't take offense to my use of the term "hype". It's very minute and very relative, whether right or wrong.

you know what they say about "assume"?
 
heheh
 
yea, don't assume anything.
it's almost always wrong.
 
i just happen to like the sound of the akg's, and thought i'd throw a review out there,
for the benefit of everyone.

Thanks for sharing your process, Brian. Not everybody goes to so much trouble in making their choice (for good reason) so everybody benefits from your efforts.
 
For myself, I'm still on the hunt for the ultimate headphone experience. Well, actually, I've found it a couple of times. Just nothing I could afford.

it does sound as if you are favoring a slightly hyped low end, after all,
and this will lead you astray with low end decisions.
 
ultimately, i think anyone can learn just about any playback and compensate, in time.
 
best of luck. 
 

An interesting read...
 
I have been meaning to invest in some "decent" headphones for some time. Although I have now got my nearfields set up again, I invariably still do a lot of mixing on my headphones, for some of the reasons mentioned above (ie some details are easier to pick up on "cans").
 
I used to have a pair of DT-250's which at some point in the last five years I lent to my son for general use. I replaced them with a pair of KNS-8400's and I find that I can have them on for hours on end, at a reasonably low level, of course. So, certainly comfortable enough.
 
I will mix on my cans, and also keep a check on frequencies using SPAN, for instance, and then, as I am nearing reaching what I am happy with I switch in my nearfields and do some low level "listening" with those, and wind them up a bit, at least once, although that may be a waste of time due to the fact that I can't really afford to splash out on appropriate room treatments and my Tannoy Reveals have a rubbish bass response, but I work with what I have...
 
Anyway, I'm waffling now, so I'll get back to reading and see if anything mentioned here takes my fancy

batsbrew
it does sound as if you are favoring a slightly hyped low end, after all,
and this will lead you astray with low end decisions.
 
ultimately, i think anyone can learn just about any playback and compensate, in time.
 
best of luck. 
 

In actuality, I found the AKG's to still be weaker in the low-end than the other two sets. But barely. More-so I found the other two sets to simply be closer-sounding to my ears than the AKGs, which could be part of why I observed that. Again, this is part to the direction AKG apparently took in adapting technologies to make the headphones sound less like cans and more like speakers in a room. It was truly revealing, this process. Much like my shootout between my three tube mics and a set of AKG c12, Tele ELA M 251, and Tele U47. I was impressed at how similar they were, but yet where they were different. It's a lot of fun to do this sort of thing.