Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Final Thoughts: Sony MDR-XB1000 vs. MDR-XB700 *** Pictures ***
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Final Thoughts: Sony MDR-XB1000 vs. MDR-XB700 *** Pictures *** - Page 11

post #151 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD View Post


So you actually think it sounds that nice eh. Coming from the guy who've tried headphones such as T1, HD800 and D7000. :p I suppose when you listen to electronica or any genre requiring a bit more bass to be fully enjoyable.


I'll put in my 2 cents again on this.  The XB1000 bass is very good.  Controlled, detailed, goes low and has great resolution.  But it does not thump like the signature XB sound so I don't know why it is considered an XB.  It has high quality deep bass.  Now for my other point of confusion.  The mids and highs completely lag in quality behind the bass in comparison thus not making them worth $350 to my ears.  Even the XB700 has better mids IMO.  If the XB1000 had mids and highs to match the bass I would see these as great for $200-$250.  I don't think they do.  YMMV.

 

post #152 of 298

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post




I'll put in my 2 cents again on this.  The XB1000 bass is very good.  Controlled, detailed, goes low and has great resolution.  But it does not thump like the signature XB sound so I don't know why it is considered an XB.  It has high quality deep bass.  Now for my other point of confusion.  The mids and highs completely lag in quality behind the bass in comparison thus not making them worth $350 to my ears.  Even the XB700 has better mids IMO.  If the XB1000 had mids and highs to match the bass I would see these as great for $200-$250.  I don't think they do.  YMMV.

 


Where did you audition the XB1000's?

 

Seems that the people who own them really like the XB1000.


Edited by Croozer - 4/11/11 at 3:41am
post #153 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post




I'll put in my 2 cents again on this.  The XB1000 bass is very good.  Controlled, detailed, goes low and has great resolution.  But it does not thump like the signature XB sound so I don't know why it is considered an XB.  It has high quality deep bass.  Now for my other point of confusion.  The mids and highs completely lag in quality behind the bass in comparison thus not making them worth $350 to my ears.  Even the XB700 has better mids IMO.  If the XB1000 had mids and highs to match the bass I would see these as great for $200-$250.  I don't think they do.  YMMV.

 


wrong. after eqing mine the mids and highs do not lag anymore. and the bass is super yummy. best basshead can ive ever tried considering i have owned es10 xb700 xb500 beats studio beat solo before

 

post #154 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by HynchSidrick View Post




wrong. after eqing mine the mids and highs do not lag anymore. and the bass is super yummy. best basshead can ive ever tried considering i have owned es10 xb700 xb500 beats studio beat solo before

 

 

How do you just jump in and claim he's wrong when you have to EQ them to prove he's wrong? LOL
 

 

post #155 of 298


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by aZn_plyR View Post


How do you just jump in and claim he's wrong when you have to EQ them to prove he's wrong? LOL

 

 

Seriously people need to stop hating on EQing, I thought you were fellow audio enthusiasts who just wants the best possible end result? You need to understand there's a difference in unbalanced sound and sound quality, unbalanced sound != poor sound quality, one headphone can be badly balanced but have pretty good sound quality or vice versa, it's balanced but sound quality is still shit so different headphones benefit by EQing by various amounts, if it's just the unbalanced sound that is the major problem then it'll benefit more. Sometimes using a good quality EQ is all it takes to make some headphone sound better than another similarly or a bit expensier headphone. If you are of different opinion chances are:
 
1. You're only used to the software EQs that are included with media players which usually are of worse quality
2. You're choosing the products such as your sources by design/functionality rather than sound quality/EQ enhancement options. iPod/iPhone instead of Cowon or USB DACs instead of soundcards.
3. It's in your head that EQing is something "bad" that shouldn't be "required" for headphones you paid $$$ dollars for and should just function optimally out of box. Well every person got different taste how it should sound like, you just got lucky if a headphone happened to sound EXACTLY as you want.
 
I find EQing more interesting and fun than it's annoying, it's usually the first thing I start with when getting a new headphone to make it sound the way I think is optimal for me. It's not about price of the headphones, all headphones could possibly benefit to a more or less extent depending on your taste, some may need very tiny adjustment, others quite a bit more if it happens to be the opposite sound signature of what you prefer. Plus it can be very educative in understanding sound, it certainly have been for me.

Edited by RPGWiZaRD - 4/11/11 at 1:46pm
post #156 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD View Post


 

 

Seriously people need to stop hating on EQing, I thought you were fellow audio enthusiasts who just wants the best possible end result? You need to understand there's a difference in unbalanced sound and sound quality, unbalanced sound != poor sound quality, one headphone can be badly balanced but have pretty good sound quality or vice versa, it's balanced but sound quality is still shit so different headphones benefit by EQing by various amounts, if it's just the unbalanced sound that is the major problem then it'll benefit more. Sometimes using a good quality EQ is all it takes to make some headphone sound better than another similarly or a bit expensier headphone. If you are of different opinion chances are:
 
1. You're only used to the software EQs that are included with media players which usually are of worse quality
2. You're choosing the products such as your sources by design/functionality rather than sound quality/EQ enhancement options. iPod/iPhone instead of Cowon or USB DACs instead of soundcards.
3. It's in your head that EQing is something "bad" that shouldn't be "required" for headphones you paid $$$ dollars for and should just function optimally out of box. Well every person got different taste how it should sound like, you just got lucky if a headphone happened to sound EXACTLY as you want.
 
I find EQing more interesting and fun than it's annoying, it's usually the first thing I start with when getting a new headphone to make it sound the way I think is optimal for me. It's not about price of the headphones, all headphones could possibly benefit to a more or less extent depending on your taste, some may need very tiny adjustment, others quite a bit more if it happens to be the opposite sound signature of what you prefer. Plus it can be very educative in understanding sound, it certainly have been for me.



AGREED!!! THEY SOUND SOOOO MUCH BETTER EQ..i dont have much audio gear yet.(JUST A BADD A%* SONY MINI SYSTEM THAT IVE HAD SINCE MIDDLE SCHOOL AND STILL SOUNDS AMAZING)..but stock iphone sound with them SUCKS!!! IMO but using the Equ app makes them sound WAAYY better

post #157 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post




I'll put in my 2 cents again on this.  The XB1000 bass is very good.  Controlled, detailed, goes low and has great resolution.  But it does not thump like the signature XB sound so I don't know why it is considered an XB.  It has high quality deep bass.  Now for my other point of confusion.  The mids and highs completely lag in quality behind the bass in comparison thus not making them worth $350 to my ears.  Even the XB700 has better mids IMO.  If the XB1000 had mids and highs to match the bass I would see these as great for $200-$250.  I don't think they do.  YMMV.

 

speaking that, you make wanna buy and make my money go away from my wallets
 

 

post #158 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Croozer View Post

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post




I'll put in my 2 cents again on this.  The XB1000 bass is very good.  Controlled, detailed, goes low and has great resolution.  But it does not thump like the signature XB sound so I don't know why it is considered an XB.  It has high quality deep bass.  Now for my other point of confusion.  The mids and highs completely lag in quality behind the bass in comparison thus not making them worth $350 to my ears.  Even the XB700 has better mids IMO.  If the XB1000 had mids and highs to match the bass I would see these as great for $200-$250.  I don't think they do.  YMMV.

 


Where did you audition the XB1000's?

 

Seems that the people who own them really like the XB1000.


CES in Vegas, January.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by aZn_plyR View Post

 

How do you just jump in and claim he's wrong when you have to EQ them to prove he's wrong? LOL


Thx for the voice of reason.

 

2 points about Eq.

 

1-If you Eq and like Eq then do it.  Nothing wrong, it's your ears.

2-This forum is about letting readers get impressions so they can make up their minds about products they might want to try.  If you Eq all your gear and come on with how great some can sounds it's useless to the other people reading.  There needs to be a baseline as a point of reference for people to use when comparing the same phone.  If your phone sounds perfect Eq'd fine.  Just say you Eq them to get that sound so people reading know it before they spend $400 on something.  Otherwise you offer no one here any service.  It's hard enough getting consensus on how a phone sounds let alone adding Eq into the mix of reviews and impressions.  My 2 cents.

 

post #159 of 298
Thread Starter 

I buy headphones for their designed sound, not my tailored sound if that makes any sense.

post #160 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by DjAmTraX View Post

I buy headphones for their designed sound, not my tailored sound if that makes any sense.


It does.  I appreciate that.

 

post #161 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD View Post


 

 

Seriously people need to stop hating on EQing, I thought you were fellow audio enthusiasts who just wants the best possible end result? You need to understand there's a difference in unbalanced sound and sound quality, unbalanced sound != poor sound quality, one headphone can be badly balanced but have pretty good sound quality or vice versa, it's balanced but sound quality is still shit so different headphones benefit by EQing by various amounts, if it's just the unbalanced sound that is the major problem then it'll benefit more. Sometimes using a good quality EQ is all it takes to make some headphone sound better than another similarly or a bit expensier headphone. If you are of different opinion chances are:
 
1. You're only used to the software EQs that are included with media players which usually are of worse quality
2. You're choosing the products such as your sources by design/functionality rather than sound quality/EQ enhancement options. iPod/iPhone instead of Cowon or USB DACs instead of soundcards.
3. It's in your head that EQing is something "bad" that shouldn't be "required" for headphones you paid $$$ dollars for and should just function optimally out of box. Well every person got different taste how it should sound like, you just got lucky if a headphone happened to sound EXACTLY as you want.
 
I find EQing more interesting and fun than it's annoying, it's usually the first thing I start with when getting a new headphone to make it sound the way I think is optimal for me. It's not about price of the headphones, all headphones could possibly benefit to a more or less extent depending on your taste, some may need very tiny adjustment, others quite a bit more if it happens to be the opposite sound signature of what you prefer. Plus it can be very educative in understanding sound, it certainly have been for me.


 

Definitely agreed. EQing headphones reminds me of the resampling debate. If x sounds good to some but not to others, and y sounds good to others but not to some, then that must surely mean that everyone has different, specific and sometimes peculiar tastes that can't be pinpointed and standardized with the accuracy we all desire.

 

Basically, I think the best thing would be to state the honest personal opinion on the gear being debated and if relevant, mention that said gear sounds better/worse/different if tweaked in a certain manner.

post #162 of 298

IMO if the xb1000's need to be EQ'ed for an optimal sound that kind of sucks. If there were say xb500's that cost $50 and need EQ thats a different story. I was planning on trying them out when they came to the states, but i have a real good feeling there going to be outperformed by my Pro 900, which it probably should anyway considering price. Just my hypothesis tho.

post #163 of 298

Not hating on EQing, but Anaxilus was giving his impressions on the sound of the XB1000 and that guy comes in and tell him his impressions are wrong and suggested EQing them. Well if everyone on this forum gave impressions on their new purchase after EQing them, then this forum would be a huge mess since there will be no reference point to how a set of headphone sound like.

 

EQing to personal preference is another story.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD View Post


 

 

Seriously people need to stop hating on EQing, I thought you were fellow audio enthusiasts who just wants the best possible end result? You need to understand there's a difference in unbalanced sound and sound quality, unbalanced sound != poor sound quality, one headphone can be badly balanced but have pretty good sound quality or vice versa, it's balanced but sound quality is still shit so different headphones benefit by EQing by various amounts, if it's just the unbalanced sound that is the major problem then it'll benefit more. Sometimes using a good quality EQ is all it takes to make some headphone sound better than another similarly or a bit expensier headphone. If you are of different opinion chances are:
 
1. You're only used to the software EQs that are included with media players which usually are of worse quality
2. You're choosing the products such as your sources by design/functionality rather than sound quality/EQ enhancement options. iPod/iPhone instead of Cowon or USB DACs instead of soundcards.
3. It's in your head that EQing is something "bad" that shouldn't be "required" for headphones you paid $$$ dollars for and should just function optimally out of box. Well every person got different taste how it should sound like, you just got lucky if a headphone happened to sound EXACTLY as you want.
 
I find EQing more interesting and fun than it's annoying, it's usually the first thing I start with when getting a new headphone to make it sound the way I think is optimal for me. It's not about price of the headphones, all headphones could possibly benefit to a more or less extent depending on your taste, some may need very tiny adjustment, others quite a bit more if it happens to be the opposite sound signature of what you prefer. Plus it can be very educative in understanding sound, it certainly have been for me.


 

post #164 of 298
I've never owned a headphone that didn't need some kind of EQ. If you can actually get by without it (and aren't just fooling yourself with some stupid notion about "purity" while simultaneously collecting components with flaws that cancel each other out and calling it "synergy") then count your lucky stars.
post #165 of 298


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post


2 points about Eq.

 

1-If you Eq and like Eq then do it.  Nothing wrong, it's your ears.

2-This forum is about letting readers get impressions so they can make up their minds about products they might want to try.  If you Eq all your gear and come on with how great some can sounds it's useless to the other people reading.  There needs to be a baseline as a point of reference for people to use when comparing the same phone.  If your phone sounds perfect Eq'd fine.  Just say you Eq them to get that sound so people reading know it before they spend $400 on something.  Otherwise you offer no one here any service.  It's hard enough getting consensus on how a phone sounds let alone adding Eq into the mix of reviews and impressions.  My 2 cents.

 


I agree with you on that, I always describe how a headphone sounds unEQ'd not with EQ applied as otherwise it would be pointless as a reference but I also state wheter how much it benefits by EQing and what kind of settings just the way I wrote my XB500 vs D1100 review for example, it was based on completely unEQ'd settings but I also had a section for how I thought they could be EQ'd to sound better. But ofc unEQ'd results need to be described in order to give a good description of a heaphone for comparision's sake.

 

It's just I'm a little suprised how not all people don't want the best possible listening experience of a headphone and some do even physically mod them but wouldn't necessarily use any EQing. I just keep tweaking whatever product I get to my liking, a TV gets very accurately tweaked picture settings, my computers get overclocked for best possible performance and headphones gets EQ'd for best possible sound. I only care about the end result, not how it's done.

 


Edited by RPGWiZaRD - 4/11/11 at 9:34pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Final Thoughts: Sony MDR-XB1000 vs. MDR-XB700 *** Pictures ***