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 32

post #466 of 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by bareyb View Post

I'm doing a comparison of Bass friendly headphones that are optimized for small amps and iPods.  Here are the one's I've tested and how I rank them so far. 

 

1. Audio Technica ATH-M50 (Best QUALITY of Bass and most comfortable)

2. Pioneer HDJ 2000 K

3. Audio Technica ATH Pro 700 MK2

4. Sennheiser HD439

 

Even though the 700 MK2 has more quantity of, and deeper Bass it wasn't as well defined as the Bass with the M50's. With the M50's you can hear the fingers on the Bass. The Pioneer was good overall, but got a little raggedy with vocals at higher volumes. It has great Bass too, but not as good as the M50. I wasn't happy with the Sennheisers. Not much Bass compared to the others they sounded a little thin in comparison. Nice highs however. Very nice highs. 

 

I am still looking though. I have a pair of Beyerdynamic DT 770s and some Ultrasone Pro 900s coming on UPS (hopefully) tomorrow. I have a four way amp I can direct compare with. If REALLY like the Bass on the M50s a LOT. Can anyone recommend a higher end Headphone that has the same Bass characteristics as the M50 but perhaps a bit more refined up top? I'm kind of hoping the DT 770 or the Ultrasone might fill that bill... Any suggestions gratefully accepted. 

Okay. The Ultrasone 900 and the DT770s arrived yesterday and I gave them a direct A/B comparo. Definitely like the Ultrasones better. They have more Bass kick and better soundstage (best of any closed back I've tried so far). For my money there's no comparison.

 

The DT770 also cost a lot less and the build quality shows that. They feel very plastic-y and cheap in comparison. The cable is permanently attached so if it shorts out, you are out of luck. All in all, the 900s are two or three steps up in quality IMO. They come with a hardcase and an extra set of ear pads. Not to mention a test CD... I will probably keep the 900s but I still have to try an open backed phone just to compare the soundstage and separation characteristics I've heard so much about...

 

If you are looking for a closed back phone with the best separation and sound stage (not to mention the best Bass) you would be hard pressed to beat the Ultrasone 900. 

 

This is how I rank the phones I've tried in terms of Best Bass and best soundstage and separation. 

 

1. Ultrasone 900

2. M50 (Great Bass, but sound very much "in your head" compared to the 900s). 

3. Beyerdynamic DT770 (a lot less Bass than I expected, nowhere near the 900 or M50, but smoother highs and better soundstage)

 

4. Audio Technica ATH Pro 700 MK2 (These get a little loose with the Bass. M50 has more refined bass)

5. Pioneer HDJ 2000 K (good overall, but sound congested with alot of vocals)

6. Sennheiser HD439 (for a bass enhanced phone, they still sound thin and lack punch)


Edited by bareyb - 2/9/13 at 3:33pm
post #467 of 733

I had the chance to listen to a pair of M50's last night modified with DT250 velours. My impressions:

- They were a lot of fun, outstanding on rock,metal and electronic. Had an evil grin on my face listening to some old zombie and nin

- Stage was a bit closed, nothing awesome. Had a (not bad) look on my face with classical and vocals but was not impressed. Very listenable overall with a heavy side to them

- I do not hear recessed mids, I hear emphasis on mid bass and bass in general with nice extension (glass 1/2 full or 1/2 empty :)  ) 

- Tried them from multiple sources (zune, 0204, bdp-93 to SRII tube / class a, oppo to a tube / opamp hybrid, PC out and even a fuze) Amplified, they really came alive and bass was on a whole different level clarity wise. Foot tapping, head nodding good bass. On lower power sources, it was a bit sloppy and muddy sounding, lacking definition and control. I can see why people do not like them if not powered properly

- With the velours, I could listen all day. Would love to see some measurements with velours. I feel they have quite a bit of potential if used with the right equipment and consider them fun personally. Will look into some mods to lower the mid bass a little bit, bring out midrange.

 

In short, I dig them.


Edited by Garage1217 - 2/12/13 at 12:22pm
post #468 of 733
Does anyone here feel that the m50s have an overrated soundstage?

Reviews online all says it has a good soundstage but to me it all just sounds very crammed, even compared to sub$100 iems

The vocals and instruments literally feel like their touching the inside of my skull.

Don't know, maybe it's just me...
post #469 of 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by airo View Post

Does anyone here feel that the m50s have an overrated soundstage?

Reviews online all says it has a good soundstage but to me it all just sounds very crammed, even compared to sub$100 iems

The vocals and instruments literally feel like their
touching the inside of my skull.

Don't know, maybe it's just me...
I feel the same way too, its soundstage is rubbish.
post #470 of 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by airo View Post

Does anyone here feel that the m50s have an overrated soundstage?

Reviews online all says it has a good soundstage but to me it all just sounds very crammed, even compared to sub$100 iems

The vocals and instruments literally feel like their touching the inside of my skull.

Don't know, maybe it's just me...

I don't see too much praise for its soundstage anywhere online really.

 

But do you honestly think that somebody upgrading their $20 to $50 headphones are going to care about a wide open soundstage on a closed back pair of headphones that they'll probably use portably from an mp3 player for about $100-$150?

 

Most people don't know what soundstage even is, because most people don't even know the difference between open and closed headphones.

 

Some of the comments on here are outrageous. People complaining about then not being able to match up to open back headphone that are 2 or 3x the price.

post #471 of 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sound Quest View Post

I don't see too much praise for its soundstage anywhere online really.

But do you honestly think that somebody upgrading their $20 to $50 headphones are going to care about a wide open soundstage on a closed back pair of headphones that they'll probably use portably from an mp3 player for about $100-$150?

Most people don't know what soundstage even is, because most people don't even know the difference between open and closed headphones.

Some of the comments on here are outrageous. People complaining about then not being able to match up to open back headphone that are 2 or 3x the price.
The srh940 and 840 have better soundstage than them. And against open backs its not fair really, the ad700 and hd558 will trash the m50 in soundstage at the same price range.
post #472 of 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by streetdragon View Post


The srh940 and 840 have better soundstage than them. And against open backs its not fair really, the ad700 and hd558 will trash the m50 in soundstage at the same price range.

I agree that there are better closed back headphones (with better soundstage) in the same price range as the m50's.

 

But soundstage isn't everything. Most casual listeners aren't interested in trying to recreate a 3 dimensional sound. They just want a sound signiture thats pleasing on the ear.

 

The M50's deliver a very pleasing sound for their price tag. The sound doesn't fatigue in anyway and it doesn't try too hard to sound as real as possible. Which some people prefer.

 

The issue with headphones with bigger soundstage, is that you have to be more selective about the music you play through them, as some stuff will just sound awful. Where as with the M50's, you can play anything through them, without worrying about them bringing all the flaws to the surface.

 

I know wide soundstage headphones can sound incredible. But some people don't want incredible. They just want a pair of headphones that sound great and won't be overly critical on any of the music they wish to play through them.

post #473 of 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sound Quest View Post

I agree that there are better closed back headphones (with better soundstage) in the same price range as the m50's.

But soundstage isn't everything. Most casual listeners aren't interested in trying to recreate a 3 dimensional sound. They just want a sound signiture thats pleasing on the ear.

The M50's deliver a very pleasing sound for their price tag. The sound doesn't fatigue in anyway and it doesn't try too hard to sound as real as possible. Which some people prefer.

The issue with headphones with bigger soundstage, is that you have to be more selective about the music you play through them, as some stuff will just sound awful. Where as with the M50's, you can play anything through them, without worrying about them bringing all the flaws to the surface.

I know wide soundstage headphones can sound incredible. But some people don't want incredible. They just want a pair of headphones that sound great and won't be overly critical on any of the music they wish to play through them.
That's probably why they are so acclaimed with the beginners, but may not too prefered by the more serious listeners. They are a good pair of headphones still.
post #474 of 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by streetdragon View Post


That's probably why they are so acclaimed with the beginners, but may not too prefered by the more serious listeners. They are a good pair of headphones still.

Agreed.

 

A lot of it comes down to personal taste in music.

 

I wouldn't recommend the M50's to someone who listens to a whole lot of classical or jazz for example.

post #475 of 733
To me, it doesnt excel in any genre but it doesnt do anything wrong either

i guess thats one of the reasons why its so highly recommended, instead of picking out cans genre and genre, why not just get a pair that can do almost all well?

im pretty sure if you were to compare the m50s in certain genres, most of time there will be a similar priced headphone thatll exceed in that region. However, once you start listening to other genres those other cans will probably do poorly.

Though i got to say when listening to ”Yayo” by Lana Del Ray, her voice just sounds so bloated that i had to stop listen after 15 seconds
post #476 of 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by streetdragon View Post


That's probably why they are so acclaimed with the beginners, but may not too prefered by the more serious listeners. They are a good pair of headphones still.

Hahaha, what is a serious listener?

post #477 of 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coq de Combat View Post

Hahaha, what is a serious listener?
Audiophiles, those why would do serious research and are more picky about their gear.
post #478 of 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coq de Combat View Post

Hahaha, what is a serious listener?
Audiophiles, those why would do serious research and are more picky about their gear.
post #479 of 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by streetdragon View Post


Audiophiles, those why would do serious research and are more picky about their gear.

I think by "audiophiles" or by "those who do serious research" you mean people who actually value a wide soundstage rather than people who value other qualities more.

post #480 of 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coq de Combat View Post

I think by "audiophiles" or by "those who do serious research" you mean people who actually value a wide soundstage rather than people who value other qualities more.

Well what i'm actually tying to state is that the M50 is a safe choice, goes well with modern music, isolates well, fairly portable, doesn't need much amping, jack of all trades (most of them) and does not need too much consideration over the other options that need more consideration and are possibly more risky.

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