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 45

post #661 of 748
Quote:
Originally Posted by koolas View Post

Maybe we should create a challenge here on formum:)
So since this is supposed to be "concise" can someone reiterate and tell why M50 is no longer a king? Because I'm still not seeing it. There are headphones which do better this or that, but is there a pair that is better in everything from M50 and costs same as M50?

 

DT770, HM5 :) 

post #662 of 748

I think what makes the M50 stand out more to me at it's price is the durability. Godly durability! I believe they are the most durable headphones. .

post #663 of 748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Primetime86 View Post

DT770, HM5 smily_headphones1.gif 
These HM5 actually look very nice. Why do you think they are better than M50? Can yo compare?
About DT770, how mids compare to M50?
post #664 of 748

The HM5 sound less congested than the M50 and just do everything a touch better IMO. It doesn't trump the M50 but it's a noticeable difference. They are built really well and look good too.

 

As for the DT770 it's one of them headphones thatjust sound  right, I get that lively and musical feel that I get with the mad dogs and only a handful of headphones give me that. They trump the M50 it's not even close for me.

 

Others I love

Mad dog 3.2

Denon D2000/D5000

post #665 of 748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Primetime86 View Post

The HM5 sound less congested than the M50 and just do everything a touch better IMO. It doesn't trump the M50 but it's a noticeable difference. They are built really well and look good too.

As for the DT770 it's one of them headphones thatjust sound  right, I get that lively and musical feel that I get with the mad dogs and only a handful of headphones give me that. They trump the M50 it's not even close for me.

Others I love
Mad dog 3.2
Denon D2000/D5000
I wish I could believe you, but there is so may opinions here that is really hard to say whether I'd agree or not. These HM5 look tempting though:)
post #666 of 748

You can always buy from amazon and take advantage of their returns. If it makes you feel any better look at my SIG I have compared the beyers to all of them and it is not recessed. it may not be ruler flat, but what headphones are? But these are pretty balanced overall and quite accurate. 

 

Examples of recessed mids I have heard

Beyer Custom one pro

Sony XB500/300

Denon D400

V moda LP 

 

 

These are some examples and they sound crap, I HATE recessed mids with a passion It just ruins the music. But it's up to you.

 

You can't go wrong with the HM5 though! excellent deal :)

post #667 of 748
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by koolas View Post

So since this is supposed to be "concise" can someone reiterate and tell why M50 is no longer a king? Because I'm still not seeing it. There are headphones which do better this or that, but is there a pair that is better in everything from M50 and costs same as M50?

I think you might be misinterpreting what I meant when I originally said it's no longer king, but you've explained my reasoning in your own post.

 

I don't mean to claim that the ATH-M50 is no longer relevant for any puspose. As an all-rounder, it's still a very capable headphone, especially at the discounted price point that's common in today's market. However, we've moved beyond the era in which the ATH-M50 was the default answer for any recommendation at its price range. It was an innovative monitor and casual listening headphone that was one of the best for a very long time, but now the competition is much tougher and more specialized than it was in 2007. For nearly any circumstance, there is a better headphone out there.

 

The M50 is still a viable option for somebody wanting a slightly bassy all-rounder, but it's not anywhere near the best choice for a number of applications it was being recommended for over the last six years. There are better headphones in nearly every category.

post #668 of 748

I agree with OP that Head-Fi has had an M50 problem. I agree with the some of the aggrieved defenders, too, that one can have worse problems. Maybe the best thing about this thread is that it induced several members to overcome their shyness and post for the first time.

 

Were I new to headphones, I might have bought M50 based on some of the reviews linked to. But in response to those who mentioned Tyll Hertsen's high opinion of them, they should read him more carefully or quote him more honestly. "Pros and avid enthusiasts would do well to spend the extra to go for the SRH 840 . . ." I agree with him, though I wish SRH840 had ATH-M50's build and comfort.

 

Besides everyone's sensible explanations for the popularity of M50, I've thought of two other factors:

 

OP mentions many newer members buying it, liking it, and recommending it without sufficient comparison. I suspect that a good number of the members who moved on bought mostly more expensive products, so they still don't know what else to recommend when someone asks them for something cheaper. (I listen to cheaper headphones when I can partly in order to know what to tell acquaintances who don't want to spend $500 on a system. But I'm still somewhat at a loss because many people I've met think even $100 is a lot for headphones.)

 

The name "M50" definitely helped. "M" is one of the more popular letter designations in tech (after X, S, and Z). "50" is easy to remember and sounds solidly mid-range and approachable. Even the company name "Audio-Technica" might have helped. It makes its purpose obvious while sounding pleasantly sophisticated.


Edited by Claritas - 11/17/13 at 12:23am
post #669 of 748
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Claritas View Post
 

I agree with OP that Head-Fi has had an M50 problem. I agree with the some of the aggrieved defenders, too, that one can have worse problems. Maybe the best thing about this thread is that it induced several members to overcome their shyness and post for the first time.

 

Were I new to headphones, I might have bought M50 based on some of the reviews linked to. But in response to those who mentioned Tyll Hertsen's high opinion of them, they should read him more carefully or quote him more honestly. "Pros and avid enthusiasts would do well to spend the extra to go for the SRH 840 . . ." I agree with him, though I wish SRH840 had ATH-M50's build and comfort.

 

Besides everyone's sensible explanations for the popularity of M50, I've thought of two other factors:

 

OP mentions many newer members buying it, liking it, and recommending it without sufficient comparison. I suspect that a good number of the members who moved on bought mostly more expensive products, so they still don't know what else to recommend when someone asks them for something cheaper. (I listen to cheaper headphones when I can partly in order to know what to tell acquaintances who don't want to spend $500 on a system. But I'm still somewhat at a loss because many people I've met think even $100 is a lot for headphones.)

 

The name "M50" definitely helped. "M" is one of the more popular letter designations in tech (after X, S, and Z). "50" is easy to remember and sounds solidly mid-range and approachable. Even the company name "Audio-Technica" might have helped. It makes its purpose obvious while sounding pleasantly sophisticated.

All good points, and much more nuanced than my original post.

post #670 of 748
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssrock64 View Post
 

All good points, and much more nuanced than my original post.

 

That's kind of you. I had the benefit of reading your thread before posting.

post #671 of 748
Quote:
Originally Posted by FiioforMeOh View Post

 

LOL'd

That's too funny man. I agree with you that the M50 is too sibilant, at least for my tatse. With all of the accliam they receive on here, I was rather shocked when I went to audition them. I couldn't take the highs on them at all.

For the record, I do not like bright headphones/prefer a darker sound signature. Yes, I own the HD-598, as well as Grado SR80i (neither of which are what I would consider dark) and enjoy them both, but they are at the upper limit of my tolerence for brightness. Truth be told, I wish they were both a bit darker, and had deeper & more impactful bass.

All of this is IMO and YMMV. smily_headphones1.gif
Edited by painted klown - 1/23/14 at 9:53am
post #672 of 748

On the amps I've used, the M50 is at least a few levels lower than my SR80i when it comes to brightness.  The M50 sound is certainly v-shaped, and I do hear the sibilant sound with some music, but it seems more prevalent when I use them directly out of my phone or ipod.

post #673 of 748
I liked them at first then my ears started to bleed from the treble. Cymbals sounded more like shattering glass or nails on chalkboard. Thankfully I didn't suffer and permanent hearing damage and replace them with the sennheiser hd 380, which is a superior headphone in every aspect, sound especially. It's ridiculous that the 380 doesn't get the attention it deserves cause it's now in the same price range of the M50 on amazon.

But worst part if the sticky sweaty hard pleather pads *shudders*
post #674 of 748
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by painted klown View Post

For the record, I do not like bright headphones/prefer a darker sound signature. Yes, I own the HD-598, as well as Grado SR80i (neither of which are what I would consider dark) and enjoy them both, but they are at the upper limit of my tolerence for brightness. Truth be told, I wish they were both a bit darker, and had deeper & more impactful bass.

You must like a really dark sound signature if you consider the HD598 overly bright. It's quite a warm headphone to my ears.

post #675 of 748
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssrock64 View Post

You must like a really dark sound signature if you consider the HD598 overly bright. It's quite a warm headphone to my ears.

 

I do like a rather dark tone. I like to listen at very high volume levels, and when I am pushing things hard, the highs can become too much to bear with some recordings, especially modern ones with hot/compressed mastering jobs.

It's odd, and (to be honest) I think that I might just have a weird hyper sensativity to higher frequencies, as I find some stuff (speakers, recordings, headphones, etc) to be bright that no one else does, and I can't even hear much above about 13-14k hz.

It just proves that we really all do hear things differently I suppose.
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