Quincy Jones AKG Q460 Review

As per my recent post “When Branding Meets Audio“, more often than not, musician-endorsed headphones seem to be below average quality. It seems almost safe to say that in the majority of cases, the musician branding is done to make up for crappy, mediocre headphones

Quincy Jones AKG Q460

I was hoping the Q460s would break this trend and they certainly look promising…

Straight out of the box, the Q460s look and feel great. They’re light, made of nice materials and have a great carry case that’s compact and solid. The package also includes 2 different cables – a really short, plain cable and a slightly longer one with volume controls for iPhones and certain iPods. The cables are bright green to match the Quincy Jones branding, but my headphones are the black version (as pictured).

When I first listened to these, I made the mistake of coming straight from my Audio Technica AD900s which have a very clean, balanced and lively sound. In comparison, the Q460s seemed muddy and lifeless, but that’s not entirely fair to them. Listening to them clean (i.e. having not listened to anything else for a while) is a different experience and while they’re not perfect, they’re not as bad as I first thought.

Quick Specs

Impedance:  30 Ω (portable player friendly)
Frequency Range:  8 Hz to 24 kHz
Max. Input Power:  30 mW

Bass

Attack: The attack from the Q460s is punchy, but not entirely sharp. I always use “Take the Lord Along with You” by Wayman Tisdale for this test because it’s a bass guitar instrumental with plenty of lively bass activity. The Q460s handled TTLAWY without too much trouble, but it’s not the best I’ve heard it sound.

Rating: 6 / 10

Mass: The mass of the bass in the Q460s is truly impressive. For a little pair of on-ear headphones, the bass is epic while still controlled. Listening to “Who Could It Be Now” by Luciano (feat. the Jungle Brothers), the bass is massive, but well placed. It doesn’t drown other frequencies, but gives you the full impact of the track. The bass output from these headphones is very realistic – they create the feeling as well as the sound so a smooth bass guitar not both sounds and feels right.

Rating: 8 / 10

Vocals / Mids

The mids and vocals are a mixed bag with the Q460. Certain vocals and instrumentals sound warm, rich and smooth, but some others sound a bit harsh and forced at the upper end of the midrange. Jamie Cullum’s “These Are the Days” is quite unpleasant (for a set of good headphones) because of the upper-end raspiness of his voice. The tone of his voice just seems too forced through these phones. Patrick Stump from Fall Out Boy and Amy Winehouse also edge into this slightly harsh territory on the Q460s. On the other hand, “Tin Pan Alley” by Stevie Ray Vaughan is smooth and lush and sexy with Stevie’s guitar sounding as silky as ever, and Nas’ rapping on the Illmatic album sounds clean and punchy over the top of the beats behind him.

What this really means, is the the vocals and mids will sound great on some of your tracks, but may sound a bit edgy on others. It’s not a deal-breaker, but this is an area that can make the listening experience a little less than perfect.

Rating: 6 / 10

Detail

Detail isn’t the strong point of the Q460s. They’re not super sluggish, but they’re also not detailed. There are certain mid-range frequencies that really shine through and surprise with their clarity, but other sounds get lost in the mix. The Q460s are a smooth and rounded sound rather than an accurate detailed sound. That’s not to say it’s bad – some people will no doubt prefer it to the sharpness of more detailed phones, but for me it’s a tiny bit too smooth.

The top end frequencies are very subdued in the Q460s and some tracks really sound like they’re missing something – like there’s a hole. Interestingly, adding the standard treble boost equaliser on iTunes or iPods / iPhones brings an extra sparkle to the Q460s that makes them quite lovely. I don’t like having to use equalisers because it introduces noise and distorting into the sound and also means constantly changing settings if I change headphones, but if you were permanently using the Q460s with you computer or portable player, a permanent EQ setting can create a really enjoyable portable listening experience.

Side Note: where possible, if using EQs on electronic devices such as iTunes, iPods and iPhones try to create your EQ so that nothing is above the central line. In other words, if you wanted the 16kHz frequency 3 clicks louder, don’t raise it by 3, but drop everything else by 3 clicks. It makes EQ setting a bit more fiddly, but the sound quality will be better and will just mean turning up the master volume a tiny bit more.

Rating without EQ: 4.5 / 10

Rating with EQ: 6.5 / 10

Staging

Whenever I listen to closed cans, I expect a restricted soundstage. It’s a rarity to find closed cans that can create an open, wide soundstage. It is possible, however, to have good sound placement within the closed space created by closed cans.

The Q460s place the sounds quite well, but all of the placement occurs in a very tight area. The sounds are placed in a band that runs from one ear around the inside of the front of your head to the other ear. In other words, the stage is as wide as your head and has a narrow range of forward depth – it doesn’t really extend out in front of you very much, but it’s not bad as such. The sound placement is accurate and clear and instruments are clearly defined in most tracks even if they’re not spaced a long way apart. Listening to the “What is Hip” by Tower of Power (Sheffield Labs, Direct Plus! version), it sounded like all of the horns, rhythm, organ, vocals and guitars were crammed inside my head, but I never felt like anyone was on top of anyone else – and that’s a busy recording!

Rating: 5 / 10

Overall

At full price I think these headphones are a little pricey, but if you can pick them up on sale or second hand they could be a good option if you like your music smooth and lush with plenty of body in the bass. They’re a much better option than some of the alternatives like the Beats range by Dre so check them out before buying any other musician-branded headphones.

They’re comfortable, well made, look good (even in the green) and have a great, compact carry case.

I would recommend them for:  Hip-Hop / Rap, Electronica, some Rock (listen to them first), mellow Jazz

I wouldn’t recommend them for:  Acoustic, upbeat Jazz , Blues, Pop

Overall Rating: 5 / 10

$300 Headphones at a Glance

I had a great afternoon today, courtesy of the team at Addicted to Audio (www.addictedtoaudio.com.au) I spent about an hour and a half in their audition room checking out a bunch of closed style headphones for around $300. I’m not going to try to give you a full-blown review for all of them, but thought a little description of each pair might be helpful. Here goes…

Shure SRH840 (approx. $200)

Shure SRH840

Having read lots of good things about the 840s, I came in with them high on my shortlist and they didn’t disappoint. The 840s have a warm, but detailed and balanced sound. They’re very easy to listen too, but not boring. Of all the phones I listened to today, the 840s probably had the sweetest midrange. The sound of rim-shots (when the drum stick is used against the metal rim of a drum) sound very warm and woody – just like they should.

Pros: The 840s are easy to drive and ran perfectly from iPod and laptop. They’re also comfortable on the head and have good padding all around.

Cons: My only real issue with these phones is the small cable running outside of the body of the headphones. Just about each cup, a small cable comes out of the housing and then loops back into the cup. This is obviously to allow for adjustment, but leaves a potentially fragile piece of the headphones exposed to accidental damage.

Verdict: These are still very much on my mind and may yet be my final choice given they are so easy to drive. They’re not as exciting to listen to as the Ultrasones, but they are more comfortable and have a beautiful smooth sound signature while still being detailed and crisp. They’re also a great deal at just under $200.

Ultrasone HFI 580 (approx. $250)

Ultrasone HFI 580

I knew nothing about the 580s going into this afternoon, but considered them because of their price and the fact that they’re easier to drive than the 680s. I was told that they are more bass oriented than the 680s, but can’t say that I was overly aware of that.

Having already listened to some other headphones, the 580s weren’t as good and therefore left the shortlist fairly quickly. That said, they’re a very capable headphone and would definitely suit a lot of people, but I like a bit of extra high-end sparkle and detail. It’s a very subtle gap in the 580’s sound signature and it took direct comparisons to realise that the 680s gave me the sparkle that the 580s lacked – it’s very minor and those who prefer a slightly warmer sound will definitely like the 580s.

Pros: The soundstage is huge (for closed headphones) and the sound is lively, detailed and exciting.

Cons: Although solid, the construction is a bit plastic and they’re not as comfortable as some comparable headphones.

Verdict: The HFI 580s are off my shortlist, but only because they were outdone by their senior sibling, the 680s and that was only by a hair. They’re a great headphone with balanced sound, solid bass and a smooth, slightly less bright signature than some others.

Ultrasone HFI 680 (approx. $300)

Ultrasone HFI 680

The 680s were high on my shortlist after reading plenty of good things. They didn’t dissapoint. Plenty of punch, plenty of detail and that awesome Ultrasone soundstage. It’s important to note that the 680s really do need amplification. I listened to the Shure SRH840 and the Ultrasone HFI 680 side-by-side and alternated between them across a variety of music. Initially, I was listening through a dedicated headphone amp, but soon moved over to my iPod and then laptop so I could hear some music I was more familiar with. I wasn’t using amplification at this stage and started to be amazed at the difference between the SRH840s and the HFI 680s. At first I put it down to the music selection, but soon realised it was amplification. Once an amp was added, the 680s once again edged ahead of the 840s in terms of their lively detail and punchy presence.

Pros: Punchy, lively sound in a great big soundstage.

Cons:
As per the whole HFI range, the comfort isn’t as good as some alternatives and the build quality isn’t spectacular. Also, the significant difference between amped and un-amped performance means an amp is a must.

Verdict:
A great headphone for the dollars. I listened to some $1000+ phones today and kept coming back to the fact that I couldn’t justify the extra for the type of listening I do and for the minimal difference in sound. I’m not suggesting the more expensive headphones aren’t better, but the 680s do such a great job across the board that they’re ahead of most other closed cans in terms of bang-for-buck.
I’d highly recommend a listen to these if you have a device that will drive them effectively. I’m personally looking at something like a Nu Force uDAC-2 (approx. $200), but it takes the 680s up to around $500.

Audio Technica ATH-A900
(approx. $250)

Audio Technica ATH-A900

As a massive fan of the open style ATH-AD900s, it made sense to listen to their closed equivalent, the A900s. I’d heard that they have a “darker” sound, but didn’t yet know exactly what that meant – I had my theories, but it’s a very subjective term. I know understand exactly what those people meant. The top-end and bottom-end are just like the AD900s – crisp, detailed and awesome, but then came vocals… The closed design of the A900s make the mid-range sound very closed-in. The mid-range and vocals were muffled and crowded – not very enjoyable.

Pros: Beautifully made and insanely comfortable (like all similar style Audio Technicas with their 3D fitting system)

Cons:
The mid-range is so muffled and crowded that it completely smothers the rest of the sound – such a shame.

Verdict:
There are much better options out there for the price. I would take the Shure SRH840s anytime over the A900s.

Beyer-Dynamic T50p
(approx. $300)

Beyer-Dynamic T50p

I had seen these online, but knew little about them other than funky looks and a good, reliable brand. Straight out of the box they were the most impressive in terms of build quality and style of all the phones listed in this “At a Glance”. The only comparable quality of build is the Audio Technicas, but the T50ps are funkier in style (but that’s also a matter of taste).

Before talking about the sound of these it’s important to note that they were straight out of the box with no burn-in or general play time whatsoever so the following description needs to be taken with a grain of salt as it were…

The T50ps had an interesting sound signature. While detailed and neutral, there was something I couldn’t put my finger on at first, but after a few tracks I think the mid-range is a bit too forward and the top-end not quite forward enough. The bass is sublime for a small on-ear headphone. It’s tight, but with plenty of mass and presence and this continues up into the mids, but somewhere that outstanding start falls away. The T50ps reminded me of the AKG Q460 headphones which I’ll be reviewing very soon. They’re probably a touch better than the Q460s, but still lack a little sparkle at the top-end.

Pros:
They’re sexy, made of metal (i.e. high quality) and have a quality sound if you like warm, mellow signatures.

Cons:
The lack of sparkle at the top-end was a deal-breaker for me, but that was the only issue I could find so if you like the sound signature you’ll love these phones!

Verdict:
Probably a great option for some depending on your music and sound tastes. I’d love to own a pair from a design and quality point of view, but just not sure if I can justify it when I don’t like the sound style. That said, I haven’t had a chance to try them with slightly boosted treble.

At a Glance Overview

After plenty of listening and switching between sources and music tracks, I definitely gravitated towards 2 options. The Shure SRH840s and the Ultrasone HFI 680s were clearly the best of the bunch. For non-amplified use I think the Shures are a winner. For amplified use, the Ultrasones take a slight lead. The tricky thing now is that I haven’t yet auditioned the Ultrasone HFI 780s, but will do so before purchasing because they’re easier to drive from a non-amplified source. I’ll keep you posted…