Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Hippo VB VS Monster Turbine Pro Gold?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Hippo VB VS Monster Turbine Pro Gold?

post #1 of 35
2/26/10 at 12:30pm
Thread Starter 
So about a month ago i got some Hippo VB's just on whim from some good reviews I saw here.

To put it bluntly these replaced my Atrio M5 within a few mins and I have really enjoyed them since. Best sounding IEM I have owned and for only 80$ they are a steal.

The IEM's I have used over the last few years are Super.fi EB's ---> Atrio M5 ---> Hippo VB's

I have been lucky in that each new purchase was enough of an upgrade to retire my old IEM's without question. I never had to go through any back and fourth or anything this upgrade path has been pretty clear.

So now even though I'm pretty thrilled with the Hippo VB's I find myself drawn to the Turbine Gold's as reviews of them would indicate there sound signature is exactly my tastes.

If I end up getting the gold's it will either be another open box sale at newegg or getting lucky on Ebay.

So in short has anyone heard the VB's and the Gold's and if so are the gold's a clear upgrade to the VB's?

If they aren't a clear unquestioned upgrade I'll just stick with the VB's but the gold are seriously drawing my interest.

I like deep prominent bass with a warm overall sound signature. Now while the VB's were a little harsh at first they are now getting warm enough for me to really enjoy them after long hours of burn in.
Reply

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #2 of 35
2/26/10 at 12:44pm
Im also interested by this although i expect MTP gold to be overall substancially better than VBs. But i would imagine than it would be hard to beat the VBs in the area where IMO they really shine : their spacious, uncompressed, airy, very 3D-feeling soundstage, that is further enhanced by the very good extension on both ends, with an incredibly deep sub-bass that can very clearly separate different layers of sub-bass better than a lot of subwoofers, but an unfortunately unrefined, harsh-ish higher end that exacerbates any preexisting vocal sibilance in the recordings. MTP gold have been said by many to present a smooth, while still detailed and well extended, high end .
Reply
post #3 of 35
2/26/10 at 2:08pm
You know, all the open box sales for the MTP Golds (it's how I got mine) smell like Returnomania.

Not a good sign.
Reply
post #4 of 35
2/26/10 at 2:10pm
I have the M5 ver 2 and the MTP Gold. The M5 has deep prominent bass and the MTP has a mid-bass emphasis. Overall, the MTP does sound warm.
Reply
post #5 of 35
2/26/10 at 2:49pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rip N' Burn View Post
I have the M5 ver 2 and the MTP Gold. The M5 has deep prominent bass and the MTP has a mid-bass emphasis. Overall, the MTP does sound warm.
So is the MTP the clear winner? Cause the Hippo's blew away my Atrio M5 V.2 in a matter of mins. If the MTP's are not a clear concise upgrade of the Atrio's I'm not sure if they would be even as good as the Hippo VB's.

I do like warm sound though which some would say is the opposite of the hippo's but I guess I have some good equipment synergy going on cause after burn in the VB's are almost warm sounding now while still having a lot of good detail and separation.

Hopefully someone has heard both the VB's and the gold's to compare.
Reply
post #6 of 35
2/26/10 at 2:55pm
^^Swanlee, i dont know what is your definition of warmth, but VBs are most definitely on the warm side for my understanding of it. And they always have been, although in the beginning they were warm & very harsh, now they are warm & a little harsh. The warmth hasnt changed with bur-in.
Also, i have to say that i didnt think they were that warm until i got the more neutral pr1pro (which is neither warm nor cold) to compare them to
Reply
post #7 of 35
2/26/10 at 3:02pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by daouda View Post
^^Swanlee, i dont know what is your definition of warmth, but VBs are most definitely on the warm side for my understanding of it. And they always have been, although in the beginning they were warm & very harsh, now they are warm & a little harsh. The warmth hasnt changed with bur-in.
Also, i have to say that i didnt think they were that warm until i got the more neutral pr1pro (which is neither warm nor cold) to compare them to

Yeah I also thought they were a little warm even at first and then got warmer after burn in but since a lot of people complained about them being to harsh I thought that maybe it was just me that thought of them as slightly warm sounding.
Reply
post #8 of 35
2/26/10 at 3:04pm
^^What i meant is i think warmth and harshness are totally unrelated, and independant from each other. Warmth is more of a sound signature trait, harshness is more of a sound QUALITY issue, although it can also be perceived when treble and/or mids are too much forward for someone's tastes.
Reply
post #9 of 35
2/26/10 at 3:07pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by daouda View Post
^^What i meant is i think warmth and harshness are totally unrelated
Yeah I tend to associate the two maybe to often.
Reply
post #10 of 35
2/26/10 at 3:36pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by swanlee View Post
So is the MTP the clear winner? Cause the Hippo's blew away my Atrio M5 V.2 in a matter of mins. If the MTP's are not a clear concise upgrade of the Atrio's I'm not sure if they would be even as good as the Hippo VB's.

I do like warm sound though which some would say is the opposite of the hippo's but I guess I have some good equipment synergy going on cause after burn in the VB's are almost warm sounding now while still having a lot of good detail and separation.

Hopefully someone has heard both the VB's and the gold's to compare.
In terms of bass quality and quantity, the M5 v2 is the clear winner. Midrange sounds darker with the M5 but has good details. Midrange with the MTP is warm and lush but it doesn't have the separation of the M5. I prefer the midrange of the MTP but it's not a clear winner. The highs, openness, and soundstage with the MTP are definitely a clear winner. I only wish that the MTP had the same bass presentation as the M5 v2...
Reply
post #11 of 35
2/26/10 at 3:41pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rip N' Burn View Post
In terms of bass quality and quantity, the M5 v2 is the clear winner. Midrange sounds darker with the M5 but has good details. Midrange with the MTP is warm and lush but it doesn't have the separation of the M5. I prefer the midrange of the MTP but it's not a clear winner. The highs, openness, and soundstage with the MTP are definitely a clear winner. I only wish that the MTP had the same bass presentation as the M5 v2...
Hmm interesting the VB's killed my atrio's in every conceivable way even out of the box. It only took me a couple of mins to put my atrio's in the IEM pile. Doesn't seem like the Golds will be an upgrade over the VB's then at this point.
Reply
post #12 of 35
2/26/10 at 3:41pm
Sounds like MTP could be like VBs with smoother & less pronounced treble, which is exactly what I'm looking for! Although i dont know how the mids details would compare, i have never heard the atrios. Swanlee, do you find that atrios have more or less detailed mids compared to VBs?
Reply
post #13 of 35
2/26/10 at 3:51pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by daouda View Post
Sounds like MTP could be like VBs with smoother & less pronounced treble, which is exactly what I'm looking for! Although i dont know how the mids details would compare, i have never heard the atrios. Swanlee, do you find that atrios have more or less detailed mids compared to VBs?
The Atrio's to my ears have less of everything compared to the VB's. Please note I owned the Atrio's for well over a year and even bought another pair when I broke my first pair so it's not like I have anything against them. But they are completely outclassed by the VB's

The VB's have better more defined deep and mid bass, it can better layer bass as well so you hear more dimensions of bass. Impact is similar. Please note the VB's have a different bass settings pretty much lean bass, mid bass and super bass. I use the mid bass setting as it does not intrude on the other freq's. On the super bass setting the VB's have much more bass than the Atrio's but it is a little to much for me even.

As far as mids and treble it is not even close the VB's are in a whole other class compared to the Atrio's. I was REALLY missing out on alot of detail with the Atrio's. Lots of audio in the mid and higher end spectrum just did not exist on the Atrio's compared to the VB's. The Vb's also have much better stereo separation and more 3d like effects going on.
Reply
post #14 of 35
2/26/10 at 3:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by swanlee View Post
Hmm interesting the VB's killed my atrio's in every conceivable way even out of the box. It only took me a couple of mins to put my atrio's in the IEM pile. Doesn't seem like the Golds will be an upgrade over the VB's then at this point.
Now I've got the urge to buy some VB's! What type of harshness did you experience and how did you remedy it?
Reply
post #15 of 35
2/26/10 at 3:56pm
Then it looks like Mingos WM2 should be the closest thing to improved VBs (although probably not in the soundstage department), check out their reviews by shigzeo and average_joe.
Or maybe MTP copper, or senn IE8 (although they probably have more midbass compared to subbass, otherwise probably an improvement in every other area)?

EDIT:
based on reviews cyclone pr2 could have the same kind of soundstage and bass as VBs, but with colder/dryer mids, and maybe(just maybe) a little less harsh treble.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home

Gear mentioned in this thread:

Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Hippo VB VS Monster Turbine Pro Gold?