Hi,

I found this Japanese site: http://www.geocities.jp/ryumatsuba/ which contains a series of reviews on headphones (not that I understand what is written) and, more importantly, frequency response graphs. I found two headphones with a practically flat response and similar street price tag of around $100, they are the:

Alessandro-Grado Music Series One (MS-1)
http://www.alessandro-products.com/headphones.html
http://www.geocities.jp/ryumatsuba/musicseriesone.html

and the:

Audio-Technica ATH-AD700
http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/he...56f/index.html
http://www.geocities.jp/ryumatsuba/ath-ad700.html

The ATH-AD700 has a flatter response than the MS-1 (check the graphs) so I guess that this is one point in favor of the ATH-AD700. Also I have heard a large number of complaints about the MS-1 being uncomfortable, so this makes the score:
[ ATH-AD700 2 x 0 MS-1 ].

Can anyone give, preferably unbiased, opinions on this subject?

Thanks, bowzee

i prefer the ms-1's much more than the ad700's. but the ad700's are very comfortable.

Quote:



Seems to be very flat for both phones. However I think that the frequency graphs are a bit deceiving because of the scale that can be seen on the left in green. Especially if you compare them for example to Headrooms graphs. The graphs on this Japanese site make the freq response seem flatter than it is. For example MS1 seems to have 10 dB peak on 4-5 kHz.

I don't think that these two graphs differ very much from each other:


Alessandro MS-1 ( http://www.geocities.jp/ryumatsuba/musicseriesone.html )


Grado SR-225 - Headrooms graph ( http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCom...Type=0&graphID[]=147 )

I have found lots of phones 'better' with some musical genres. Still both of the phones you mention are somewhat 'jack of all trades', so no real problem there

I got the A900 first, then some RS-60 and later the MS2i. To be honest, I did prefer the SR-60 over the A900, but the SR-60's coloration made it not quite suitable for each musical genre. Since I have gotten the MS2i (the same sound character as the MS1, only a bit better on all aspects) I haven't even touched the A900 at all. In short, I voted MS1

You won't get realistic results fron this poll, as A700 owners are very rare, and I doubt any of them also has a MS1. Extrapolations of A900 or MS2 owners will only work to a certain extend.

OP is talking about the AD700, the open version.

I've owned both and for my tastes the AD700 was better

very smooth all round sound and balanced throughout the frequencies, didn't get sibilant in the highs nor did it have flabby doof doof.

my first foray into the headphone world actually =D the headphones that ruined me

to be fair the MS-1s would excel and rock and metal though I'm not really into this music

Quote:



These are really nifty graphs. Thank you for posting them! I wonder how accurate they are compared to reality? The bass on the MS-1 is even more impressive considering it's back to reference down at 30hz which is better than I would have expected. I'd really love to see an MS2i graph since the MS2i beats out the MS-1 in bass response. The same at the top end. Not Brighter, just better extended.

That said; unlike speaker graphs, I don't really hold the few can graphs I have seen in very high regard since I don't see any references in them...yet. Compared to speaker graphs and plots they seem to really be in their infantcy.

Thanks for the replies so far, I am still thinking that the ATH-AD700 seems to be better than the MS-1, trying to be unbiased. I have seen piles of fans on this forum in favor of the MS-1 and I have not yet understood the
reason behind the fanaticism...

I have used a photoshop-type program to merge the two images from the Japanese site and the I stretched into a scale that must be similar to the one used by HeadRoom. The blue line is the ATH-AD700 and the red one is the MS-1.

Nice job of plot merging! The only problem with the plots for cans is that they are darn near meaningless! They're helpful perhaps in getting some kind of basic idea, but unlike plots for speakers which may be in a anechoic chamber, or placed in a "standard North American living room" type of controlled environment or are a nice waterfall plot, they don't really tell us much about what they'll sound like.

I know; I brought all of my audio experience to bear that I'd gathered since the late 50s and applied it to phones. Threw it all out and started over.

What seems to work best is tons of notes taking and chicken scratch distillation.

I'll speak up for the MS1s. I've owned both AD700 and MS1, though not at the same time.

The MS1 to my ears sounds like a fuller and more balanced can, and is also a balance of aggressiveness--forward, but not piercing.

The AD700 sounded too saccharine or colored for my tastes. it is also more laid back. otherwise the representation of frequencies between both are pretty much the same. criticisms about the AD700 is lack of bass, but that can be fixed with some EQ.

The biggest difference is whether you want soundstage or not. MS1 will have little, AD700 will have more, but its not going to be the massiveness that people here claim it to be.

I just thought about something else that shows that graphs aren't all that important.

Pads!! Yeah PADS!!

Check out some of the comments of pads on MS-1s! Look at the comfy pads and the modded comfies and the bowls and the flats both taped and un-taped and the 414s and the modded 414s and the reversed modded 414s and the rat shack pads and the "C" pads and even the Bagels! The list is darned near endless and nobody can agree on what sounds best....only to them!!

I like the reversed and modded 414s best on my MS-1s for comfort although to my ears the bowls sound better! And the 414s ARE better for head bobbing! For my MS2i I prefer the bowls.

Go figure.

A flat signal produced by a loudspeaker interacts with the human head, so the signal is no longer flat by the time it arrives at the eardrum. Some of these interactions are lost when one listens through headphones and must be built into the frequency response of the headphones. The frequency response of headphones should be judged not in terms of "flatness" but rather how well it incorporates these lost interactions.

So, in essence, what most of you are saying is that, although the Japanese site has the graphs testing the audio quality, which appear to be correct, that is not enough information as to tell which one of these headphones is going to work correctly? When I use the word "correctly" I mean that, when you hear music, the process (my own description) is intended to have these steps:

1) recording using equipment with some frequency bias,
2) processing in the lab eliminating all bias,
3) media production, unbiased,
4) playback using unbiased system,

: but that is not enough, because there is an extra step:

5) resonance of the ears and head in general, interference of pads, etc.

To me this sounds a bit mystic, but hey, I posted exactly to hear these answers. Concluding by the graphs, this would mean that:

5a) The ears, head and pads will absorb 5 dB in the 50Hz - 200 Hz range and another 5 dB in the 4kHz -10kHz range

alternatively:

5b) Whatever is not ears, head and pads reflects 5 dB mode in the 200 Hz - 4 kHz range.

I confess that by now I am a little bit puzzled, but I very much appreciate the effort in trying to help me with my question.

Awright, although I uttered that I regard extrapolations as questionable, let me state that I prefer significantly the MS1 over my new (but burnt in) A900. Muffled & veiled in comparison, simply lacks details.
***votes Alessandro***