Quote:

Originally Posted by B-Dawk20 

Crisper and thinner? Umm those are two words are probably not something i can agree on. Where the beats have bass, its big, boomy, and loose with little sense of detail. Except in the sub bass region, the m50s have relatively thinner bass with less impact to me. They're intended to be studio monitors so I would like to think they formulated them that way for a reason. So for a true basshead, I cant see one being 100% satisfied with the m50. And worse off, with lesser sources, I think their bass is one of the first things to go. Listening to them out my phone at the moment and the bass is pretty thin in comparison to my home source.

This is interesting. :) To me, the beats are too thin sounding, almost piercing in their lack of smoothness and fullness at times. That's what I mean when I say "crisp". Crisp as in tonality, not in detail. The bass sounds fake and it only truly starts to kick off down very low. When you turn the volume up (which I can't because of the piercing highs) the sub-bass rattles the headphone. 

To me, the M50 is a smoother headphone with fuller sound. The bass is DEFINITELY more present here. It is looser than the Beats to my ears and is slightly boomy but yet seems to be more controlled - by a lot.  Never piercing, this headphone. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by khoi14021993 

I just realize a trend in people asking for "headphones better than Beats": They ended up buying the Beats.

Because they only care about looks. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lan647 

This is interesting. :) To me, the beats are too thin sounding, almost piercing in their lack of smoothness and fullness at times. That's what I mean when I say "crisp". Crisp as in tonality, not in detail. The bass sounds fake and it only truly starts to kick off down very low. When you turn the volume up (which I can't because of the piercing highs) the sub-bass rattles the headphone. 

 

To me, the M50 is a smoother headphone with fuller sound. The bass is DEFINITELY more present here. It is looser than the Beats to my ears and is slightly boomy but yet seems to be more controlled - by a lot.  Never piercing, this headphone. 

Oh, yeah I can get behind that. Because the bass is controlled and detailed, I have to say it makes the bass more prevalent. Whether it is because I want to listen to it closer or whatever, I don't know but I do think that when you create a smoother picture overall, it just makes everything less annoying to listen to and that "piercing" effect goes away. I don't really associate the word piercing with low frequencies so that's an interesting way to look at it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by B-Dawk20 

Oh, yeah I can get behind that. Because the bass is controlled and detailed, I have to say it makes the bass more prevalent. Whether it is because I want to listen to it closer or whatever, I don't know but I do think that when you create a smoother picture overall, it just makes everything less annoying to listen to and that "piercing" effect goes away. I don't really associate the word piercing with low frequencies so that's an interesting way to look at it.

Well, the piercing is not in the bass. It is just one thing I hate about the headphone :) I do think, however, that the entire spectrum is a bit electronic sounding and therefore the upper bass is more of an electronic "kick" than actual bass notes. This headphone has SOOOO many flaws lol it would just confuse people if I start describing all of them xD