Can you tell us which one is better, SONY mdr-e888 or A44?

The 888s sound warmer, more musically enjoyable, at the cost of details. The A44s sound more balanced; rather than having a very thick midrange like the 888s, they have just a smooth midrange. They also provide more inner detail into a recording. It's a toss up really. At this point I'd prefer the A44s myself...then again I haven't used my 888s for months now.

However, I have listened to A34, and I feel its sound ordinery.

Anyway, I think A44 is so little that it should not be compared with those hifi headphones such as hd580 or SR325.

Rice,

The Etymotic r4s are even smaller... Size is not a factor in good sound.. If you don't know the size of the Ety's all i can say is that this smiley could be wearing them:

Now I know why small headphones such as the MDR-A44L can be more detailed-sounding (in a REAL sense, which is NOT the same as what most tin-ear people call "detailed"): Larger headphones, such as the Sennheiser HD 580 and the Grado SR-325, actually have GREATER mechanical resonances, which are due strictly to the size of their earcups - and the larger the earpieces, the greater the mechanical resonances are. (And those are some of the better full-size open-air designs; closed designs that are the same size as those Senns and Gradoes have much more mecahnical resonances than open-air designs of the same size, due to the lack of sufficient air leakage - and note that air leakage doesn't always equate to sound leakage.) Those mechanical resonances can - and do - smear some of the REAL detail in headphone listening. Thank Jan Meier for coming up with that theory (as far as we Head-Fiers know).

Quote:



This is true. I plan on keeping any further comparisons of that sort strictly between me and my own head from here on out, and will conviently forget to record those comparisons on Headfi. It's all going on only in my own head anyways.

That's all very nice and good vert - but could ya PM some of your A44 comparisons?

PLEEEEEEASE?

After doing some listening with the 44s the last several days, I only have a few comments to make:

For listening, I used a Sony D-EJ01 with a Cosmic and also listened shortly with an EMP.

Vert's discription of the mids-highs are pretty much right on the money. Very sweet. Details are great especially considering the design and price of the phones. (I must admit that I've never done any critical listening to VITE type headphones). Bass extension is fair. Again, I think you have to consider what you're listening to. Remember also, I'm listening primarily with the "mother" of detailed phones (Omega IIs) on a daily basis and I don't think I can really be fair in relating focus and detail because I'm somewhat biased.

All in all, I'd say that the 44s sound very good for a lightweight portable headphone and probably a little better than a few of the full-size cans we discuss here regularly. I switched back and forth between these and my SR325s while listening to 'A Tribute to Miles' with Herbie Hancock, Wayne Shorter and the the boys. The mid to upper range of these phones sounded quite similar with the 44s being slightly more grainy.However, Ron Carter's bass on the Grados presented with more punch and depth...just an overall fatter sound. I don't think this is any surprise.

Vertigo said: Quote:



I don't know if I like them as much as Vert, but I must admit I am surprised at how well they perform.

Du da de... My turn...

First of all I really thank RickG for this pair of A44.

On to the impressions...

I listened to the A44s out of my main rig and portable rig and for the most part, the impressions are the same for both. This is also the first time I have used a vertical phone, and they are very light and comfortable. Not very well constructed though, and they feel very delicate.

The sound, as others have said, is surprisingly good, at this price point anyway. The A44s are very enjoyable and are definetely worth the purchase. As for the actual sound (this will mostly sound negative though), the A44s struck me as imbalanced. The extreme bottom end, like below 60hz or so, I feel is lacking compared to my other headphones, in fact, I think the midbass is a little more in volume than what it should be. Comparing to the EX70, the bass is more balanced - the EX70 has waaaay more bass then it ever should; the A44 bass is more like the Ety bass actually, though more in the midbass and not enough in the deep bass. The bass does have an impact like the CD3000s though, unlike the Etys, but not as satisfying as the CD3000s. Out of the CHA47, though, the bass sounds more balanced than the MG Head.

The midrange is solid. The upper mids, however, I feel are too pronounced. They can be sweet, true, but they can be aggressive too. The highs are laid back and with that, the treble can sound thin and sharp, and I do not find it smooth. The treble just does not have the fullness that some of my other phones have. Silibance is low to none on the A44s.

The presentation of the A44s is a somewhat forward sound. The soundstage is okay and the imaging isn't too great. There can also be some stereo imbalance due to the nature of these cheapo verticals, which is really annoying me (a bias to the right channel for me).

The A44s seem to just DIE in complex passages, the sound becomes blurred and mushy and it is hard to listen to them. They perform well in quieter, less complex passages. Also, the word "detailed" was not a word that I would describe the A44s as. My Etys and CD3000s easily best them in detail, but compared to my cheaper phones, I can see how they are considered detailed. They also lack a dynamicity that my Etys and CD3000s have, and some aspect of musicality... hard to describe. May have to do with some more missing frequencies, I'm not sure.

I guess my ears are far different than Vertigo's (or these A44s are far different), but I would never consider these on the level of my Etys/CD3000. The A44s, however, I think are definetely superior to the EX70, MX500, and other phones around that calibre. They are definetely a good buy and have potential; I would definetely consider them a "good" headphone. I just do not think they can compete with the big boys.

I did a little fiddling tonight with positioning, and figured out my own setting...set the A44's headband to 2 clicks (which is pretty darn tight), and then shift the headband towards the front of my head. This results in the strongest bass response along with the most smoothening of the sound. However I noticed the bass tended to be somewhat boomy, and the highs seemed extremely rolled off. Time to do a little modding.

Taking a pair of worn earbud pads off my MX500s, I applied a small amount of double sided tape directly inside the pads, dead center, and then just stuck this directly onto the tips of the A44's earpiece. The result should make the A44s look like Panasonic's vertical 'phones. This results both in greater comfort and what I was hoping for, greater coupling without losing the highs. The bass response is much stronger now without the boominess, and without the extreme loss of highs. This is utterly preliminary, and of course just opens up a whole new can of worms so I'll just say this much for now...the mod could go good or bad ultimately.

Now this only serves to show that these headphones are very ear shape dependant and position dependant. These things just sound really great to me. Apparently they sound halfway decent to others as well.

I posted this at http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showth...&threadid=8135 in the thread about similar verticals:

I bought the A44L just for the heck of it, and because I wanted something I could carry around. I haven't yet received my Corda, but here's what I think. I'm comparing them to the ATH-W100 and MDR-F1, as well as an MDR-V6.

They're the most comfortable verticals I've tried (I used to have two that came with Sony and Aiwa portables). I think the rounded shape of the fairly large inserts is smoother and easier on your ears than the others. I burned them in for about 72 hours before really listening.

They sound surprisingly good from portable units with some real oomph, such as my Aiwa radio, D-25S, and WM-D6C. But they're not in the same class as any of the other cans I've listed. As easily carried portable cans, they're, well, very nice. People near you aren't going to hear too much, so they may be a nice substitute for closed cans. The leakage is pretty unobtrusive, far less than any supraural or circumaural open cans. Out of my Rotel preamp, which puts out around 2 amps (not mA) into the resistance presented by the A44L, they do sound better than out of the portables.

The bass is surprisingly clean and full, tight and well-defined, but it definitely drops off pretty fast. I'd say they start going down at about 150 hz, and drop pretty fast, but they're apparently very flat to that point. The mids are also surprising. A good deal of presence, clean, and fairly transparent. Voice is done pretty well. I think the mids are elevated when compared to the rest of the spectrum, but they blend well with the bottom end. The highs are elevated (I can clearly hear a hiss with these that is not present with any other cans or speakers, and it's not coming from the other components in my system). Cymbals and the like are not realistic. Blurred, smeared, dulled. Strings are OK, but not great. There's not much transparency at the top; it's like a two-way speaker with a fast midrange and a discontinuity at the cross-over to a slower-responding tweeter. There's absolutely no sibilant spitting like the V-6, and the highs are much more listenable, but they don't approach the W100 or the F1 at the top. No way!

Again, I've not listened to them from the kind of amplification claimed to transform them. I also didn't notice much difference from playing around with the fit and angle. Some slight changes, but nothing major. Sorry guys, but you'd have to have giant ear canals, like Dumbo, to get these in very far without splitting your head open. But anatomy differs.

So for $20, they're pretty damn good. I think they're nicer than the Koss 35 and 50 that I briefly listened to (far less boomy and muddled, much more listenable, and not too hi-fi-ish). But they're not giant-killers, and not in the same ballpark as the 580, 600, or the cans I have. I think they're more listenable than the V6, which I find to have a depressed midrange and irritating top end. I wish they had a better headband, thicker and softer (the plastic is pretty flimsy, although the folding feature is very nice).

ADDED 3/4, Post-Corda HA-1:

My opinion is unchanged. Nice for $20, but no way are these giant-killers. The deep bass, below about 100 hz, just isn't there. But there's no comparison with what the W100 can do -- and they're not as fast or as balanced as the F1. The mids are OK, but nothing even remotely close to the W100's transparency, solid imaging, and delicate detailing. The highs verge on strident, they're smeared, grundgy, and fatiguing. And on complex stuff they do give up completely.

Nice cheapies, though.

Hi, 

Really sorry for bringing this post back, but I hope people who used to write here might enlighten me about the topic as I tried to start a topic about Sony MDR-A series (vertical) without success. 
I bought an original MDR-A20 not long ago and I was BLOWN AWAY by the quality. It almost instantly wiped out all the E series stuff I listened to. Can you help with this series, where the A20 stands in it and should I search for an A60 as I heard that's the best here? And the A44 compared to the A20? Or the A40, A50? Anything in general and specific?
Sony MDR-A series fans, experts, the opportunity is yours now.
You can PM me of course as well.
Thanks