Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › M50s overrated?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

M50s overrated? - Page 43

post #631 of 964
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragunov-21 View Post

What is it, exactly, that they do well?
And what do they do poorly?
I have had some for a few years and... I just don't get it. Their bass is capable, if muddy, the highs ate noticeably present, but slightly harsh, amped our not.
The sound signature isn't particularly clear, detailed or musical, but at the same time they're not thinking bass monsters...
So what exactly is it that people who love them love?

The M50s are neutral with a midbass hump and hyped up highs. They have a good amount of detail retrieval. They have almost no soundstage or imaging. They isolate very well and don't leak very much. They're stylish and sturdy. They're comfortable and easily driven out of nearly anything. 

 

Most importantly though, they're under $150. For the features and qualities you get, at such a low price, they're amazing. The sound is good, but it isn't the best. But the M50 hits everything else spot-on.

post #632 of 964
Quote:
Originally Posted by takato14 View Post

The M50s are neutral with a midbass hump and hyped up highs.

Can you explain this in more detail? Do they fatigue you?

post #633 of 964
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocko1 View Post

Can you explain this in more detail? Do they fatigue you?

They're not fatiguing, no, but the highs are very 'there' and sparkly. It sounds a little weird now, going back from my other headphones, but when I first heard them the M50s made my jaw drop.

post #634 of 964
Quote:
Originally Posted by takato14 View Post

They're not fatiguing, no, but the highs are very 'there' and sparkly. It sounds a little weird now, going back from my other headphones, but when I first heard them the M50s made my jaw drop.

Ah, good info. Is there much sibilance?

post #635 of 964
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocko1 View Post

Ah, good info. Is there much sibilance?

 

Just my 2 cents, but after owning the M50 for more than 2 months I could say that yes, there is some sibilance there. Although I still love my M50! As per the original topic, I disagree the M50 are overrated. They fit exactly in their price range and I could even say they are punching above their weight in terms of performance/price ratio.

post #636 of 964

I listen to a wide variety of music and since the recording quality varies greatly I was looking for a can that could provide enough accuracy to be more accurate and involving with good recordings, yet not too resolving as to make the poorer recordings unlistenable.

Sure it'd be nice to have multiple cans to accomodate different genres, recording quality, etc... but I am no longer that obssessed that I worry about it.

Give me something that does a competent job stratight down the middle...

 

I've read reviews stating the M-50 is too bass heavy, mids smeared and/or recessed, siblant highs, etc... and find once again that quality of recordings are more to blame for these observations as on "good" recordings my ears tell me they do a pretty damn good job...especially for the price paid when you look at the alternatives.

YMMV due to the capabilities/limitations of your own hearing and music library but I'd say that I am quite happy with the M-50 thus far and the many positive reviews I read prior to purchasing reflect no FOTM blip on the radar.

 

Trying to equate these with "bling bling" offerings is misleading as these cans are about affordable performance across a wide variety of genre and recording quality.

I find the Grado 60 and 80i series to have great sound (maybe even more preferable in certain circumstances) but I needed a closed can so they are off my shopping list... for now. ; )

post #637 of 964
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteZero View Post

 

Just my 2 cents, but after owning the M50 for more than 2 months I could say that yes, there is some sibilance there. Although I still love my M50! As per the original topic, I disagree the M50 are overrated. They fit exactly in their price range and I could even say they are punching above their weight in terms of performance/price ratio.

They're my most sibilant can. 

 

That being said, none of my other cans are sibilant.

post #638 of 964

Thanks. Are there any stores that demo these?

post #639 of 964
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocko1 View Post

Thanks. Are there any stores that demo these?

No clue. I got my pair from a friend as a gift.

post #640 of 964
Quote:
Originally Posted by takato14 View Post

.... They have a good amount of detail retrieval. They have almost no soundstage or imaging. .

Regarding your comment on soundstaging and imaging...listen to Cowboy Junkies Trinity Session, BVSC, Little Feat Live at Neon Park, just about any version of Bach's Cello Sutites, etc... and tell us what you think. I have several dozen 16/44 recordings that provide similiar spacial recreation thru the M-50's...and unfortunately many many more that do not regardless of what is used for listening. If your musical tastes are in a genre that does not lend itself to quallity recordings then I feel for you as you can spend thousands of dollars chasing TAS and your music will most likely still sound like garbage.

 

 

I agree there's other products out there that may do slightly better but to say the M-50's provide almost none is a misleading as the recording quality will dictate such...especially if they have a good amount of detail retrieval don't you think?

post #641 of 964
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandman65 View Post

Regarding your comment on soundstaging and imaging...listen to Cowboy Junkies Trinity Session, BVSC, Little Feat Live at Neon Park, just about any version of Bach's Cello Sutites, etc... and tell us what you think. I have several dozen 16/44 recordings that provide similiar spacial recreation thru the M-50's...and unfortunately many many more that do not regardless of what is used for listening. If your musical tastes are in a genre that does not lend itself to quallity recordings then I feel for you as you can spend thousands of dollars chasing TAS and your music will most likely still sound like garbage.

 

 

I agree there's other products out there that may do slightly better but to say the M-50's provide almost none is a misleading as the recording quality will dictate such...especially if they have a good amount of detail retrieval don't you think?

Well as per your suggestion they do have fair imaging, but I was mainly saying the soundstage is tiny. My Pioneer SE-500s have far superior imaging compared to the M50. If I close my eyes it literally feels like I'm in the room with the performer, but the M50s do not do that.

post #642 of 964

IMHO....

 

Bass - Yes there is good quantity of bass on the M50 but it is not very detailed and is borderline "monotone fart cannon" bass. It is alright for a pair of headphones costing £130, nothing special.

 

Mids - These are very recessed and a bit hollow and thin sounding but again not bad for a £130 pair of headphones.

 

Treble - This is pretty good detail but it sounds mettalic and it has sibilance and spitty vocals

 

Soundstage and imaging - Hmmm well they are ok again for the money but they sound very closed in and cavernous.

 

Overall - Yes they are decent for the money - not great IMO.... I would say yes they are over rated... If they were < £100 then they would be an excellent deal.

 

I know that I would definately rather listen to my £70 Shure SE215 IEM's instead of the M50's


Edited by nicholars - 9/7/12 at 2:48pm
post #643 of 964
Quote:
Originally Posted by takato14 View Post

Well as per your suggestion they do have fair imaging, but I was mainly saying the soundstage is tiny. My Pioneer SE-500s have far superior imaging compared to the M50. If I close my eyes it literally feels like I'm in the room with the performer, but the M50s do not do that.

Open backs almost always have better sound stage. Hard to compare really.

post #644 of 964

BTW, these are on sale at B and H for $109, no tax or shipping.

post #645 of 964
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocko1 View Post

Open backs almost always have better sound stage. Hard to compare really.

See, mine were converted to closed back, and I didn't say soundstage, I said imaging. The closed back mod made the soundstage collapse.

 

However, it also made the sound even out, and it doesnt sound whispery and '70s-ish  anymore.


Edited by takato14 - 9/7/12 at 5:48pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › M50s overrated?