Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › A Concise View of Why The ATH-M50 is No Longer King
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

A Concise View of Why The ATH-M50 is No Longer King - Page 2

post #16 of 732

 

The timbre of the upper mids and lower highs sounds off compared to other offerings from sennheiser, beyerdynamic and denon.  It shares the same characteristic as the AD700, but I've heard people say the AD900 fixes that issue.  I don't know the exacts of it but I guess it's how even/uneven its frequency response is in that area of sound and how it messes up the sound of instruments' natural overtones.

 

 

The punch of the headphone seems lacking compared to the DT990 and D2000.  Even though it has more bass quantity than both it has less physical impact to it, but now I'm nitpicking by comparing it to 300 dollar cans.

 

Soundstage is probably something 9/10 head-fiers would label as one of their top sound quality indicators, but everybody has a different preference in priorities.  I know it's why I don't like the M50.

post #17 of 732
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eisenhower View Post

Hating things that are popular is really cool....

 

The m50's are widely excepted as a great sounding closed headphone. Chances are, if you buy them, you'll like them. That is why they are recommended.

 


1. I haven't heard anyone claim the m50's are "the greatest things ever"

 

2. "Basshead" and "Audiophile" are two very different things. Also studios don't monitor with headphones, they use MONITORS.

 

3. It is still worth what they are asking, apparently.

 

4. Not many people have heard the KRK or Fischer headphones. If they are as good as you say, then people will start buying them and naturally they will "replace" the m50 as the suggested headphone here.

I don't think there is a "hype train", when so many people have bought them and been satisfied. I cannot say the same for 75% of the other brands that mentioned here...

 



If you look back about a year ago, almost any recommendation for any newbie (no matter what their musical preference, opinion on neutrality, etc.) would be the M50. They were definitely over-hyped. If you look at some of the original "Regular Headfier Andy" meme captions from the thread in the Member's Lounge, there's a reason a bunch of the senior members were joking around about all the newer members recommending the M50s.

 

A basshead can be an audiophile and an audiophile can be a basshead. Either of them can be just singular, too. I think that the Basshead Club here on Head-Fi may take issue with your statement. Also, studios do monitor with headphones. While big-name companies can afford to have rooms where the monitoring speakers can be placed precisely so the recording engineer is in the sweet spot, smaller studios opt to always be in the sweet spot with neutral headphones. In addition, most people who record seriously at home monitor with headphones.

 

That's your opinion there, backed up by the very years of recommendations that I'm refuting.

 

KRK and Fischer Audio have come into the spotlight very recently here on Head-Fi, and are set to surpass the M50 in recommendations (along with the HFI-580). Just search "FA-003", and every thread you see will be rather recent. KRK still has more of a cult following on Head-Fi, but is coming into vogue. We will see them come into prevalence. Also, the fact that newbies are satisfied with their M50s is exactly my point. They're astounded by them, and in turn the recommend them to no end. Those who are ranked at 500+ Headfiers and above generally have a less favorable view of the M50, being more experienced with more than just one can in the price range.

post #18 of 732

I have more than 500 posts.  And I don't think you're cool for liking more rare headphones. 

post #19 of 732
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhythmdevils View Post

I have more than 500 posts.  And I don't think you're cool for liking more rare headphones. 



I'm sorry if I'm coming off this way. I don't care what you wear on your head (I regularly use my M50 and it's a headphone that I enjoy); I simply wanted to document the decline of the M50 on Head-Fi. I do honestly believe, however, that most higher-ranked Head-Fi members will have a less favorable view of the M50. I'm not saying they don't enjoy it or that they hate it by any means, but I do think that most that have tried other cans in the price range hold it on less of a crowning pedestal.

post #20 of 732

very nicely written. 

 

 

post #21 of 732
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhythmdevils View Post

I have more than 500 posts.  And I don't think you're cool for liking more rare headphones. 



+1

 

this however is true

post #22 of 732

I completely agree with the OP's viewpoint of the whole M50 thing.

 

post #23 of 732

Ok I don't mean to be rude, I'm just saying that the bias goes both ways.  Everyone always points out how noobs sometimes buy the M50 becasue another noob recommended it who hasn't heard anything else.  But a lot of old timers are way harsher on the M50 than they deserve.  I guarantee you if the M50 came out today with a lesser known brand and without all the noob association, most of these people would suddenly like them a lot more. 

 

But no headphone is for everyone of course. 

post #24 of 732
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhythmdevils View Post

Ok I don't mean to be rude, I'm just saying that the bias goes both ways.  Everyone always points out how noobs sometimes buy the M50 becasue another noob recommended it who hasn't heard anything else.  But a lot of old timers are way harsher on the M50 than they deserve.  I guarantee you if the M50 came out today with a lesser known brand and without all the noob association, most of these people would suddenly like them a lot more. 

 

But no headphone is for everyone of course. 


Yes, I agree with you mostly here. There is a good deal of undeserved hate (as with more consumerist brands like Monster) for the M50. They're capable (if not astounding), and sometimes people used to higher-end phones will dismiss them completely.

 

I have a feeling the M50 without Audio-Technica would be somewhat known like the M-Audio Stereophile Q40 or Equation Audio RP-21. It'd be in the background, owned by a few who swear by it, but not much beyond that. They're a bit too expensive to be a cheapo FOTM, and since their performance isn't absolutely astounding for the price it probably would be relegated to the background or steadily trickle into mainstream.

 

I don't mean to deride the M50; I simply want to provide logical reasons for its rise and fall.

post #25 of 732

I'm not married to mine, but I like them. They isolate decently. With the coax mod the comfort is just fine. With the coax mod there's a bit more air and I guess you could say soundstage. I listen at very low volumes where our hearing naturally de-emphasizes bass and treble, and the M50s are sublime for this level, providing clear midrange while not letting the air and wetness of the treble or the impact and depth of the low bass run away and hide. Rather, the extremes are actually still satisfying. Very balanced, exceptionally clean, and right in the "goldilocks zone" of the refinement/engagement continuum. The M50s benefit, in my opinion, from near zero output impedance, and my Cute Beyond boasts a 0.05 ohm output impedance, and the bass is tight, textured, impactful, and never boomy. Build quality and durability are unimpeachable. Styling is unpretentious. Mine were $128.

 

In my experience they do everything except maybe isolation better than the SRH840 (have not tried any Ultrasones, the HD-25-II, the 280/380 Pro, the newer Sony closed cans, or the D2000). The square wave graphs back that up. cool.gif

 

Yes, I've discussed them in recommendation threads here and there, with a few of these caveats (type of music, low volume, coax mod, zero output impedance).

 

The only other closed non-IEM cans I've really considered recently are the ATH-ANC7Bs. I value isolation (as I said, quiet listener and the best headphones around will exhibit huge "distortion" numbers if external noise is intruding).

 

Oh and I'm really too old to give a fauk about brand loyalty, fanboyism, external perceptions, etc.


Edited by Nepenthe - 1/18/12 at 5:23pm
post #26 of 732
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssrock64 View Post



If yours came in a white box like this, it's the newer version. If the box was multicolored (like this), it was the older, bassier version.



ah ok thanks. definitely the old box. i started listening to them again today and there def have good bass but they refinement. wonder if i should keep them

post #27 of 732
I guess I'm wondering, when was the M50 king? If a general mid-fi value king had to be named, I would think it would be the HD598. It's what I usually recommend.
post #28 of 732

Wonder if I should buy them. Since I'm a newbie too :D

post #29 of 732

every headphone i have owned/tried that cost more then my $100 m50s has failed to beat it. M50s are more then deserving of their fame. Try finding a headphone with as good sound quality, build quality, looks, and portability for $120. I have trouble finding all that at 2x the price.

post #30 of 732
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enter Darkness View Post

every headphone i have owned/tried that cost more then my $100 m50s has failed to beat it. M50s are more then deserving of their fame. Try finding a headphone with as good sound quality, build quality, looks, and portability for $120. I have trouble finding all that at 2x the price.

CAL!? Fostex T50RP? KNS6400? MDR7506? Not trying to fight, just saying there are quite a few in that area.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › A Concise View of Why The ATH-M50 is No Longer King