MDR-SA5000... Can they be bettered? - Page 10

Man this thread got off topic haha.

Whops looks like a copy and paste error on my part! Thanks for catching that. All except for the last sentence is about the SA5K.

I am doing even more critical listening with the pro 750, now using the RCA out of my Xonar STX and a LD MKV. Quite stunning, to say the least.

The pro 750 scale EXCEPTIONALLY well with a better source and amp. Much more so than my other headphones I would argue, with obviously the exception of an unamped HD 600.

I read a review of the Edition 8 here by a russian fellow whos name I can't recall right now, but he described the Ultrasone approach and sound perfectly. Bass is the foundation of all music, and the Ultrasone do bass like no other. They hold the rest of the spectrum up with more confidence than any other headphone I have heard. They are not afraid to be show you whats in the low end, and they make sure it doesn't mean you cant see the whole picture. No bloating, no muddiness, no cutting out other frequencies, just pure bass bliss.


To comment on the detail and tonality again, I would argue the SA5K is more detailed over all. On the other hand the pro 750 are breaking in, or my brain is, and they do some things that the SA5K can't. Part of this is due to the lack of soundstage on the SA5K, I think. The pro 750 truly give you the feeling you are in the mixing studio with the band playing live on the other side of the glass. Imaging, resolution, or whatever term people want to use to describe lack of congestion in a headphone the pro 750 are the epitome of that term, from what I have heard thusfar anyways. That is based on the headphones I own, however.

So while the speed is slower, the detail a bit lower too (really depends on what aspect you are focusing on, however. Ultra wins some, SA5K wins some, but I would argue SA5K is the more detailed), the presentation and supreme resolution of the music more than make up for any shortcomings. The pro 750 are no slouches, they just aren't as nimble as the SA5K.

I really want to avoid coming off as a fanboy. I love all my headphones, but I am very taken with my Pro 750. They are closed headphones from a lesser known manufacturer. Nothing would have lead me to believe they would be anywhere near this good. I was so skeptical at first I didn't even want to open them in case I couldn't return them! I would like to add I am making sure as much as possible that my observations are objective. So trying to put sound before personal preference, as hard as that is.

I will mention again that these are the only headphones I have found thusfar that truly bring HIFI enjoyment of music genres such as hard rock, metal, and all variants of said genres. These are by no means a "rock can" just with dueling guitars, soloing drums and such things can get crowded, and these do not dissapoint, or in any other genre. I dare anyone to tell my they have heard "Follow the Reaper" sound better on another headphone!

If anyone wants a comparison to any of my headphones vs pro 750 in a given category, give me a shout. I will see what I can do.

Glad to hear you are interested!

There is a very large Ultrasone thread I read through. I will save you a lot of time and give you some highlights.

At the beginning of the thread there was bickering between two hot shot head fiers. One super pro ultrasone, one horrified by them. lots of people bought either pro 750 or 2500 and all positive reviews were being written. Eventually the one who was horrified broke down, purchased a pair of 750, complained about them, then two weeks later admitted he had not given them a fair chance at auditions and they were worthy of the praise they had been given.

Ultrasone requires much more mental adjustment than other traditional dynamic headphones. A/B comparisons are hard to do until you are truly used to the ultrasone sound. Head-fi'ers suggested listening to the Ultrasones, after being burned in, exclusively for at least one week to be acclimatized to their presentation.

Burn in is also apparently very much a requirement for ultrasone. Every head-fi member in that thread mentioned significant improvements after 100-200 hours. If you want more scientific details for the "burn-in", its apparently due to the titanium drivers, which are very stiff when new. I can vouch for the burn in and I don't really believe in burn in much. At first my 750 sounded a bit metallic and hollow in the highs and mids. All of that cleared up after two weeks.

People in that thread seem to agree pretty much unanimously that ultrasone is the only headphone to do bass properly, without drowning out the rest of the spectrum.

The pro 2500 is the exact same as the 750, except it is an open phone, if that interests you at all. If you give them a proper chance and time, I think you will be very happy with a pair of ultrasones. If you are willing to spend more, the pro 900 are supposedly better than the Edition 8 at 1/3 of the price.

Hope that helped.

I mentioned earlier it was a gift I received this Christmas. If I had chosen them myself, I would have gone with the open back version as all my other headphones are open, and not to mention I have had some bad experiences with closed ones. Open to me does tend to equal better. Actually I probably would never have gone with Ultrasone in the first place as their marketing is super... gimmicky to say the least. Kinda makes the audiophile alarm sound *STEER CLEAR*

I will try my best not to ramble on about them again :P but I would say confidently I am not aware of their closed back design when I wear them, which is quite a complement considering the controlled, detailed, and very slammy bass they offer. Even at relatively loud volumes there is very minimal to unnoticeable bloating or muddiness. Let me state again they give you bass like no other, without bloating. You can not imagine the slam these babies give you. you will think they are broken or being overdriven until you notice the sublime lack of distortion and wealth of detail.

Another thing is both of the highest-end headphones Ultrasone offer are closed back -Their Edition 8 at 1400 USD and their Pro 900 at 599.99.
From what I have read, people say the Pro 900 blow the AKG 702, and comparable headphones out of the water... Judging by me 750 I would see how that is very possible if the Ultrasone line scales well enough.

I wish I had a pair of 2500 to compare them too, but I think for once I'll try and enjoy these headphones, without wishing I maybe had a better version of them or what not. However, I am already certain I am putting my pennies towards either the Pro 900 or E8, and not any other headphone.

So I would say if you want to try, go second hand, go with whatever is cheaper between the two. I certainly don't find "closed back" a handicap when it comes to these headphones.

Lastly burn in is very real with these headphones. I am constantly noticing things I didn't hear them do the first or second week of ownership. I didn't do any dedicated burn in, so that is probably why it is taking longer, but it is most certainly real. Tonality is developing nicely, and timbre and other subtleties are deciding they want to show up to the party. Percussion is coming closer and closer to the SA5K, but im sure it won't ever quite be on the same level. If only they would never stop breaking in XD.

Man you sure love those CDxK headphones!

One thing I was wanting to ask you. Did you ditch your STX for the Audiotrak soundcard? I am having issues with noise from my computer using the line out of my stx, I never had any with the amp out, but my LD MK5 makes my headphones sound so much better...Did you ever encounter this?

If you could briefly comment I would greatly appreciate it.