Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Headphone help; dont like the m50s
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Headphone help; dont like the m50s - Page 3

post #31 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by tdockweiler View Post




What version of the M50 did you have? I had the older version and the highs didn't even remotely bother me. Supposedly the newer white box versions have even more treble and less bass.

I only tried the newer M50 for amount 20 minutes and couldn't believe how much more treble they had. I didn't get a chance to burn them in though.

 

There might just be variations between pairs due to updates.

 




Still got mine, although they rarely see the light of day. Mine are the ones with the little white sticker under the left pad stating #1032.

 

atm50.jpg

post #32 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vonx View Post





They are probably the most exagerated feature on my m50's, the bass being in close second. They are just very bright, especially on high guitar licks. Maybe youve been softened to them by listening to a grado, since ive never heard a grado. To me, from where ive come from, these are almost overwhelming. They arent QUITE as painful as they were out of the box, burn in did these headphones good.

 

They surely arent fakes, though. I would just consider your ears to be different to mine. I got these factory delivered from Audio technica themselves for full price because i dont trust many online distributers. The build quality and good sound quality, although fatiguing, are definately of the audio technica nature.


Still on my personal journey to find an Audio Technica that I truly love - still got a long way to go. Only ever tried

the AD700 and (own) the M50.

 

You're right though - they are a bullet-proof headphone in terms of construction. I recommend them almost solely

on this basis for some people who are going to give the headphone hell for what ever reason eg, like some marine

on here looking for a headphone to accompany him on his deployment in Afghanistan. Practically, war proof the M50 is.

 

post #33 of 41

Ironically their pads are total garbage :(

post #34 of 41
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by blacknile View Post

I have owned the new M50 model, in the white box. Now, with:

 

-my music

-my ears (I can hear up to 18khz)

-my source equipment

 

the treble on the M50 is not piercing, fatiguing, bright, etc. Not even remotely. 

 

I've  also owned a pair of Alessandro MS1 (modded Grado) alongside the M50. Now those had fatiguing treble in my experience.

 

One thing the M50 are is they are highly revealing of imperfections in the music you're playing. Poorly recorded music will shoud poorer than with cheaper, more common headphones. Properly recorded music will sound fantastic.

 

What music do you listen to?



i think what levels of treble is ear peircing or bright is subjective, so thats your opinion. 

 

I have tried every type of bitrate file, from 128 kbs to ALAC, i have it all. I dont do any judging on non-ALAC files though. I agree that they respond much better to high quality sound files, but the characteristics of brightness and uncomfortable highs remain the same, regardless of what file type im listening to. 

 

I listen to a large range from solo acoustic to metal to trance to hip hop and everything in between

post #35 of 41
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwarmi View Post




Still on my personal journey to find an Audio Technica that I truly love - still got a long way to go. Only ever tried

the AD700 and (own) the M50.

 

You're right though - they are a bullet-proof headphone in terms of construction. I recommend them almost solely

on this basis for some people who are going to give the headphone hell for what ever reason eg, like some marine

on here looking for a headphone to accompany him on his deployment in Afghanistan. Practically, war proof the M50 is.

 


thats really true! i was thinking about shelling the m50 and putting in different drivers and modifying it endlessly, because i really do enjoy the sturdy and comfortable fit, just not the sound :(

 

post #36 of 41
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by baka1969 View Post

I'm going to second the recommendation of the Shure 840. It has very good bass weight, tamed highs and liquid mids. I've had the M50 and 840 together and preferred the 840 by a sizable margin.


wow, thats really good advice. Now i really want to hear those ......... :D

 

They do look a little funky though, but if i wont be leaving the house with them I dont really care 

 

although, i heard a few other users saying they dont feel like "first row" phones.

 

is there anything out there that feels in the first row without fatiguing and bright highs?


Edited by Vonx - 9/5/11 at 12:34pm
post #37 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vonx View Post





wow, thats really good advice. Now i really want to hear those ......... :D

 

They do look a little funky though, but if i wont be leaving the house with them I dont really care 

 

although, i heard a few other users saying they dont feel like "first row" phones.

 

is there anything out there that feels in the first row without fatiguing and bright highs?

 

The SRH-840 gets my approval too. It's an old favorite and I always liked it sound, but not it's comfort. If you get it, make sure you can return it/sell it if you can't deal with it's comfort.

 

Another worth looking into that matches the bold part is the KRK KNS-6400. $99 and for an extra $30 you can upgrade it with memory foam pads. They're also much smaller than the SRH-840 and way more comfortable.
 

 

post #38 of 41

I still think you can hear the tinny soundstage on the Shures.  Once you hear it you will not be able to hear anything else.  Other than that I think the SRH-840 is a nice can.

post #39 of 41
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tdockweiler View Post



 

The SRH-840 gets my approval too. It's an old favorite and I always liked it sound, but not it's comfort. If you get it, make sure you can return it/sell it if you can't deal with it's comfort.

 

Another worth looking into that matches the bold part is the KRK KNS-6400. $99 and for an extra $30 you can upgrade it with memory foam pads. They're also much smaller than the SRH-840 and way more comfortable.
 

 


thanks, tdockweiler, youve been a lot of help! i wish there was a thanking system ha

 

You know, nobodies really mentioned any IEMs, maybe those can give the "involvement" without the painful highs.

 

I used IEMs until i got the m50s and i still think i prefer the IEMs atm

 

post #40 of 41

If you are listening exclusively from the computer, do some parametric EQing, buy an E7, and save yourself hundreds of dollars and disappointment.

post #41 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vonx View Post




thanks, tdockweiler, youve been a lot of help! i wish there was a thanking system ha

 

You know, nobodies really mentioned any IEMs, maybe those can give the "involvement" without the painful highs.

 

I used IEMs until i got the m50s and i still think i prefer the IEMs atm

 




The lush, rich sound of a pair of Shure SE215's? Recently heard a pair and I thought they were sensational for $100-ish bucks.

They're on my Christmas shopping list for my sister now.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Headphone help; dont like the m50s