New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Basshead Club - Page 345  

post #5161 of 11259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oregonian View Post

 

I literally tried adding bass, reducing bass at all levels on a 7 band parametric equalizer (Equalizer) while driving it with an E-11/ZO double amp setup that is very bass heavy (the ZO is on the highest red contour and on high gain) so I went up with the bass sliders, down with the bass sliders, you name it, I tried it.  Tried without the ZO and again, side by side with a known quantity (Q40) I just couldn't have been less impressed. 

 

Let us know if you get them and try - I just don't know if they can be turned into a bass can.  At all.  Ever. 

 

Unless mine were defective, which I doubt, they could not keep up with the Q40's.  Not even close. 

 

I seem to be maybe the only person on the planet who didn't gush over the MD's. 


oh i hardly think you're the only one, they pop up from time to time on the used forum. and im not surprised you were so unimpressed either, the MDs arent basshead cans... 

but let me get this streight, you REDUCED bass on a software eq, and then boosted it with a zo? why reduce it first? did you try without the software reduction - only double amping together with the zo and e11?

 

edit: if i ever do try it out, it will be in a very long time, as im starting college soon, and i probably wont be able to find the funds =/ but if it ever happens, i assure you that head-fi will be notified tongue_smile.gif


Edited by adamlr - 3/4/13 at 4:36pm
post #5162 of 11259
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamlr View Post

i think the term "overpriced" can only be viewed in comparison to other headphones in the same price range. 

as mentioned (kinda), nothing is worth any more, or any less, than what people are willing to pay for it. as bassheads, we are willing to pay for bass heavy cans, even though they're usually poorly thought of in the "audiophile community". this is because we like bass - and thats all there is to it. i think people get a bit carried away with all this "objective", "analytical", "neutral" business. i fail to understand why "neutrality" became the goal for headphones. i want to enjoy the music i listen to. science, measurements and "accuracy" have nothing to do with it. i do want a neutral amp for example, because i want to control the colour i add to the music, and dont like the idea of my amp giving me a head start. but for headphones, i expect bass quality (though i only have one pair, with one more on the way - just so as to keep things in perspective), and the quantity is managed by me later on. 

what im trying to say, is that price over performance is a meaningless term. performance can be measured 1000 times, but if the shoe fits, who are these audiophiles to say otherwise? if one is looking for a flat line frequency response then by all means. if someone is looking for hot treble - why not?? but when beats want you to pay a couple hundred dollars more, for something that ultrasone (for arguments sake) offer for a lower price - that is what i call overpriced. keep in mind that out of the beats line, i have only ever heard the solos, and have never heard any ultrasones. the examples were only for explanatory reasons.

 

as a related side note, i wonder if anyone agrees with what i said about people getting carried away? ive read crazy arguments people have over slight increase in measurements and impossibly subtle changes. numbers thrown about and graphs pondered upon... i sometimes feel like telling people to calm the hell down, put a song on, and remind themselves why they got into this hobby in the first place - music. i do enjoy learning about the science involved, but as ive said before in a different thread, if i have to, i can enjoy music coming from my phones speaker. 

 

got a bit carried away there didnt i... redface.gif

 

Well, there is some merit in objective analysis because it is, after all, objective. Most of the time, subjective impressions can directly correlate to what the objective testing resulted in because that is how the headphones were made to sound like. Different heads, ears, hair types, etc. can slightly change sonic characteristics from what the objective results are for that headphone, which is one of the reasons why some subjective impressions differ from the objective results. Subjective analysis has lots of variables in it, whereas objective analysis is pretty much set in stone. The only variable you have is the accuracy of the equipment you're measuring the headphones with. 

 

Now on to the neutral stuff. I tend to like a somewhat neutral sound because it sounds the best with the widest range of music genres. A neutral sound gives me the most pleasant and natural listening experience. Some people may say that neutral sound is boring, dull, or whatever, but that's where preferences come into play. Keep in mind that I just prefer everything except the low frequencies to be neutral. I blast the bass out as much as I can biggrin.gif For me, the science, measurements, and accuracy have a lot to do with what I put on my head because a more accurate sound leads to a better listening experience.

 

For your second paragraph, if all headphones had the same sound quality, but had different colorations, then you would be right. Sadly, that isn't the case, and it's one of the main things that define what headphones people buy (well, at least for me it is). Price to performance is a relative term, not meaningless. It's just relative to what someone's budget is and what they want in a headphone. 

 

I agree with you about people getting carried away, but on a different subject: recabling and burn-in. I won't trail off too much on that though. I might step on someone's shoes. Unlike you, I'm one of those people who can't go back to anything inferior after they have listened to something superior. I would rather listen to nothing at all than to listen to my music on something that wouldn't satisfy me. If you were to put the term audiophile in the strictest sense, then I would probably not be classified as one. I'm just very selective to what I listen to my music with. Personally, I think that the word audiophile can be divided into two categories. One category is the music itself, and the other half is where the music is coming from. In another sense, on side is subjective and the other objective. Some people just have more of one side than the other.

post #5163 of 11259
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamlr View Post


oh i hardly think you're the only one, they pop up from time to time on the used forum. and im not surprised you were so unimpressed either, the MDs arent basshead cans... 

but let me get this streight, you REDUCED bass on a software eq, and then boosted it with a zo? why reduce it first? did you try without the software reduction - only double amping together with the zo and e11?

 

edit: if i ever do try it out, it will be in a very long time, as im starting college soon, and i probably wont be able to find the funds =/ but if it ever happens, i assure you that head-fi will be notified tongue_smile.gif

 

Sorry if it seemed that way.  No, I basically tried all in first (ZO maxed, E-11 maxed, EQ flat on bass, then EQ up, then as I started playing my go to bass songs, I was so perplexed that I tried every conceivable combo, both up, down and flat.  

 

Where are you starting school?  I'm an old man (51) who loves music.  My truck has 1200 watts of power with a 10" sub........yeah I'm a bass lover.  Hence the need for phones that measure up.  Look at my signature........loaded with basshead cans.  The lone outlier is the Bose AE2, but even they can go pretty deep with the double amp setup!  

post #5164 of 11259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trae View Post

 

Well, there is some merit in objective analysis because it is, after all, objective. Most of the time, subjective impressions can directly correlate to what the objective testing resulted in because that is how the headphones were made to sound like. Different heads, ears, hair types, etc. can slightly change sonic characteristics from what the objective results are for that headphone, which is one of the reasons why some subjective impressions differ from the objective results. Subjective analysis has lots of variables in it, whereas objective analysis is pretty much set in stone. The only variable you have is the accuracy of the equipment you're measuring the headphones with. 

 

Now on to the neutral stuff. I tend to like a somewhat neutral sound because it sounds the best with the widest range of music genres. A neutral sound gives me the most pleasant and natural listening experience. Some people may say that neutral sound is boring, dull, or whatever, but that's where preferences come into play. Keep in mind that I just prefer everything except the low frequencies to be neutral. I blast the bass out as much as I can biggrin.gif For me, the science, measurements, and accuracy have a lot to do with what I put on my head because a more accurate sound leads to a better listening experience.

 

For your second paragraph, if all headphones had the same sound quality, but had different colorations, then you would be right. Sadly, that isn't the case, and it's one of the main things that define what headphones people buy (well, at least for me it is). Price to performance is a relative term, not meaningless. It's just relative to what someone's budget is and what they want in a headphone. 

 

I agree with you about people getting carried away, but on a different subject: recabling and burn-in. I won't trail off too much on that though. I might step on someone's shoes. Unlike you, I'm one of those people who can't go back to anything inferior after they have listened to something superior. I would rather listen to nothing at all than to listen to my music on something that wouldn't satisfy me. If you were to put the term audiophile in the strictest sense, then I would probably not be classified as one. I'm just very selective to what I listen to my music with. Personally, I think that the word audiophile can be divided into two categories. One category is the music itself, and the other half is where the music is coming from. In another sense, on side is subjective and the other objective. Some people just have more of one side than the other.


1st paragraph - i think i havent explained myself properly (as usual). ofcourse theres alot to be said for measurements and objective results. im not saying they are worthless, im saying they pail in comparison to personal taste. objective results are important for comparisons, and deciding on new gear, but i know that if i could audition the gear with my own ears - i wouldnt have the slightest interest in any measurements whatsoever (alright some basic specs to work out amplification - but nothing else).

 

2nd - ...in your opinion you mean? heck, i think i probably agree with you, but for example, some people are looking for a wide soundstage, and would rank that higher on their priority list than detail retrieval. someone listening to hip hop might not care that much about little nuances being audible or not, when someone who listens to downtempo electronica like myself, cares a whole lot. chose your headphones according to the music you listen to, not according to 5% differences in its specs, thats what i think atleast...

 

3rd - alright, relative as opposed to meaningless. i can accept that. im saying that performance is a wide term, and the performance im looking for may be very different the the performance you're looking for. thats all. and ofcourse headphones vary in quality, but what with diminishing return and all that, i think a few reviews should be enough to determine if a headphone is sub par, or if its "good enough", and you can concentrate on the colouration your looking for.

 

4th - no i dont think cables and burn in are relevant here, i imagine we have a similar opinion anyway. but when i read a/b comparisons and "golden ear" talk of microchanges and slight fluctuations of this that or the other... it bugs me. sure, differences can be measured to extreme precision, way more precise then any ear can detect, but its like the old "mine goes up to 11" thing imo, if its that tiny that you have to put a hell of alot of effort into detecting it - why the hell bother? i hope im not coming off as being belligerent, i just think that instead of picking on the small stuff - why not listen to the music?

 

oh and as for "going back to anything inferior", thats not what i meant (again). i was trying to stress that music comes first. yes, id rather use my rig, but if nothing else is available (like in the changing room at work), i can enjoy a track playing from my phones speaker just as much as i would at home. because i love the music i listen to.

post #5165 of 11259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oregonian View Post

 

Sorry if it seemed that way.  No, I basically tried all in first (ZO maxed, E-11 maxed, EQ flat on bass, then EQ up, then as I started playing my go to bass songs, I was so perplexed that I tried every conceivable combo, both up, down and flat.  

 

Where are you starting school?  I'm an old man (51) who loves music.  My truck has 1200 watts of power with a 10" sub........yeah I'm a bass lover.  Hence the need for phones that measure up.  Look at my signature........loaded with basshead cans.  The lone outlier is the Bose AE2, but even they can go pretty deep with the double amp setup!  


you maxed out your ZO and the mad dogs didnt respond at all??? oh well, there goes that idea...

 

yep you do seem like a bass lover! a friend of mine has a 10" sub in the back of his car - its awesome! im curious though, what made you try the mad dogs if youre such a basshead?

and not to be rude, but theres a reason why i havent written in my profile where i live, i want to avoid political arguments =\ 

edit: though now that ive said that, you can probably get a rough idea of the general area XD


Edited by adamlr - 3/4/13 at 6:15pm
post #5166 of 11259
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamlr View Post


you maxed out your ZO and the mad dogs didnt respond at all??? oh well, there goes that idea...

 

yep you do seem like a bass lover! a friend of mine has a 10" sub in the back of his car - its awesome! im curious though, what made you try the mad dogs if youre such a basshead?

and not to be rude, but theres a reason why i havent written in my profile where i live, i want to avoid political arguments =\ 

edit: though now that ive said that, you can probably get a rough idea of the general area XD

 

Why did I try them?   They were recommended as a great headphone that could be made to produce bass at a level to make a basshead jealous (not exactly those words but that was the gist) while getting all the benefits of an ortho phone.......from someone here who has tried dozens of headphones and seems to be an expert.  

 

Glad I tried them.  It answered the question I had about them and now I know what I don't want.  

 

And I must be dense but I have no idea where you live.  No problem.  Anyway, good luck in school.  I have two daughters in school - one at Oregon and one in nursing school.  

post #5167 of 11259
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamlr View Post


1st paragraph - i think i havent explained myself properly (as usual). ofcourse theres alot to be said for measurements and objective results. im not saying they are worthless, im saying they pail in comparison to personal taste. objective results are important for comparisons, and deciding on new gear, but i know that if i could audition the gear with my own ears - i wouldnt have the slightest interest in any measurements whatsoever (alright some basic specs to work out amplification - but nothing else).

 

2nd - ...in your opinion you mean? heck, i think i probably agree with you, but for example, some people are looking for a wide soundstage, and would rank that higher on their priority list than detail retrieval. someone listening to hip hop might not care that much about little nuances being audible or not, when someone who listens to downtempo electronica like myself, cares a whole lot. chose your headphones according to the music you listen to, not according to 5% differences in its specs, thats what i think atleast...

 

3rd - alright, relative as opposed to meaningless. i can accept that. im saying that performance is a wide term, and the performance im looking for may be very different the the performance you're looking for. thats all. and ofcourse headphones vary in quality, but what with diminishing return and all that, i think a few reviews should be enough to determine if a headphone is sub par, or if its "good enough", and you can concentrate on the colouration your looking for.

 

4th - no i dont think cables and burn in are relevant here, i imagine we have a similar opinion anyway. but when i read a/b comparisons and "golden ear" talk of microchanges and slight fluctuations of this that or the other... it bugs me. sure, differences can be measured to extreme precision, way more precise then any ear can detect, but its like the old "mine goes up to 11" thing imo, if its that tiny that you have to put a hell of alot of effort into detecting it - why the hell bother? i hope im not coming off as being belligerent, i just think that instead of picking on the small stuff - why not listen to the music?

 

oh and as for "going back to anything inferior", thats not what i meant (again). i was trying to stress that music comes first. yes, id rather use my rig, but if nothing else is available (like in the changing room at work), i can enjoy a track playing from my phones speaker just as much as i would at home. because i love the music i listen to.

 

1- I'm not saying that subjective analysis is worthless either. In reality, you need both in order to really decide what you want. I was just trying to emphasize that objective measurement should be taken more seriously. There are some things that can't be objectively measured like comfort and soundstage, to an extent (nobody really measures soundstage performance nowadays). Objective measurements are nothing more than an indication of what the headphones sound like. Some people aren't able to audition the headphones they want, so they will have to go with the second best: written/video reviews and measurements. 

 

2- I'm pretty sure that whole paragraph is in my perspective, and I think this is where our perspectives collide.  I choose my headphones according to the specs of the driver, not by what music I listen to. If the driver is good, then it should be good with all types of music. The headphone enclosure generally shapes the driver to cater to a certain genre. For instance, my ad900s stock are generally known for being bass light. Is it because of the driver? No. Throw on better sealing earpads, bend the headband, and you have basshead worthy headphones. 

 

3- I agree. 

 

4- Yeah, I completely understand where you're coming from. I should have said so in my previous post. Some people are just that way. 

 

5- Again, that paragraph was in my perspective (Key words: Unlike you), and I was just giving you my viewpoint: Once you go black, you can't go back biggrin.gif


Edited by Trae - 3/4/13 at 7:58pm
post #5168 of 11259

hahaha... that was a very interesting discussion. I think that sound signature preference is probably a really personal thing and also people may not hear the same way.

 

I guess I was just curious if someone could describe in audiophile terms why the Yamaha Pro 500 is $100 more compared to the Pro 400 (same specs w/o aluminium earcups) and the V-Moda M100. What are the subtle sonic changes and maybe some song examples where this is apparent for someone with an untrained ear? What would be the difference in bass between the Pro500 & the M100? I feel like bass differences may be easier to hear.

 

So if I ever get a chance to demo them, I can see if I can tell what's up. I guess I think they are just overpriced, but I would love to be able to hear what the difference is.

 

Sidenote: The thing I really loved about the M100 was there seemed to be an extra presence to the bass?? ...not really sure how to describe it (extra rumble or maybe texture or maybe detail), but if someone could teach me about the bass differences that would be kinda cool too.


Edited by money4me247 - 3/4/13 at 8:48pm
post #5169 of 11259
Oregon, what kind of 10s do you have?

I had a Digital designs Z10 in my car years ago with a modded DDZ1a. Sold it after it was literally tearing my car apart....
post #5170 of 11259

Went to a headphone meet in Austin this weekend and learned a few thing. I got to compare my Q40s to M100 and i concluded thatthey werent worth the price difference The sound wasnt much better and they were also uncomfartble to me. Also got to try the E17 and man is it a huge difference compared to my E7. The bass w/E7 and Q40s is so so sweet. Definatley getting E17

post #5171 of 11259
I actually think the M100 were a substantial upgrade over the Q40. The soundstage was larger and I thought they were clearer as well.
post #5172 of 11259
I actually think the M100 were a substantial upgrade over the Q40. The soundstage was larger and I thought they were clearer as well.
post #5173 of 11259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prakhar View Post

I actually think the M100 were a substantial upgrade over the Q40. The soundstage was larger and I thought they were clearer as well.

+1

 

Thought my Q40's were fantastic for what they cost, but they aren't a touch on the M100s. I'd pay the extra for them every day of the week!

post #5174 of 11259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oregonian View Post

 

I could have written this post - and the key to me is "who cares what audiophiles think" about our love of all things bass????  Really.  We know what we like and no amount of cajoling is going to make me like non-basshead phones.  Great example - I got a pair of Mad Dogs last weekend - heavily aI just did not like the sound.  Had no thump.  No mid bass hump (as if I know what that is). 

That was refreshing to read!

post #5175 of 11259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craigster75 View Post


For me, the science is irrelevant and the graphs go out the window as soon as I put the headphones on my ears and press play.  Either the sound they reproduce moves me or doesn't. 

 

This. Every review I read only serves to give me an idea of what it sounds like. The actual sound is something different altogether. It's really hard to explain why a headphone sounds better than the other. You can say, "Oh, the treble is more extended, and you can see it in the graphs". These are all objective measurements that only serve as a small window to the big picture. Once you put on the headphones and listen to your favorite tracks, you will instantly know whether this headphone is for you, or not. Some headphones take a tad longer to achieve that feel, but for most of my headphones, I knew I wanted them the moment I listened with them.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oregonian View Post

 

I could have written this post - and the key to me is "who cares what audiophiles think" about our love of all things bass????  Really.  We know what we like and no amount of cajoling is going to make me like non-basshead phones.

 

To each their own is the final moral of the story.  You like Beats like my buddy at work?  Fine with me.  Not my money he's spending.  He readily admitted after a rather intense A/B session with me that not only do my XB700's sound much better, so do my Q40's.  

 

Again, we have a sound we want and audiophiles be damned. 

 

Me likey bass................

 

Your post really hits home, Oregonian. I really love loads of bass in my cans, as it perfectly complements my taste in music. Detailed cans are good for some, but it's definitely not for me. I've listened to a few hi-fi cans, but they were certainly not involving in the least bit. Yup, everything sounded clearer and more detailed than most, if not all, of my basshead cans, but then.. where's the bass? For what it's worth, I can appreciate these cans for what they are, but at the end of the day, I know what I want to listen to, and there's no way anybody's going to tell me that my choice of cans is lo-fi or at best mid-fi. It's just great-fi to me. smile.gif

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by adamlr View Post

as a related side note, i wonder if anyone agrees with what i said about people getting carried away? ive read crazy arguments people have over slight increase in measurements and impossibly subtle changes. numbers thrown about and graphs pondered upon... i sometimes feel like telling people to calm the hell down, put a song on, and remind themselves why they got into this hobby in the first place - music. i do enjoy learning about the science involved, but as ive said before in a different thread, if i have to, i can enjoy music coming from my phones speaker. 

 

Frankly speaking, I don't let graphs dominate my choice in headphones. They serve as a tool to provide others with an insight as to a headphone's objective qualities, but it is no way a deciding factor when I am purchasing my headphones. Maybe some people are too caught up in the graphs and the science to truly appreciate the art of it all. After all, that's why we got into this hobby, right?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
This thread is locked