Originally Posted by plastic4000
This statement holds a lot of weight with me. Its good to hear that these headphones are comparable to others in the price range.
Can you think of a pair of headphones that is far and above the competition in its price range and if so does the m-100 fit into this cetegory?
Anybody can answer that last question if they want.
I can't think of any headphones at the moment, other than the HD650. From my experience, the HD650 is too warm for me, with not enough treble presence (AKA the "Sennheiser veil"), so even though the M-100's midrange is laid-back relative to the bass, I would still prefer it over the HD650.
I can't compare the M-100 to the HE-500 since I've only heard it when not properly amped, and it sounds like the SRH940, which is completely different in sound from the M-100.
Originally Posted by musical-kage
I do have to say something though.
You say there are better headphones out there for home listening for 300 dollars and yes, you are right but what headphones could you get that are better at that price range that offer as much and are also fully portable, and can be powered perfectly fine without an amp?
You would probably have to buy two sets of headphones but I think personally this fun sound, should be very rewarding, as long as (and I'll see for myself when I get them) the bass doesn't mud the sound up all over.
Some impressions tell me the sound does sound muffled and others saying its clear and precise and punchy and offers a very wide sound stage.
Very hard to predict what they actually offer, but I will be seriously happy if the sound is as textured and detailed as.most say they are.
They will be my go to headphones for everything and everywhere. They will be the only headphones I will own.
This is true, and I was going to add that in my review. For the price, I think the M-100 is amongst the best of portable headphones available in the market today.
I had a hard time deciding what to write about in my M-100 review since it's built to be a portable/mobile headphone, but at the same time, many audiophiles around Head-Fi are expecting it to be a more "audiophile-like" M-80, which in my opinion is not, considering the "fun" U-shaped sound signature. I've been mentioning this throughout my M-100 "journey" that the M-100 excels as a portable headphone, but is only OK for home listening (which is how most audiophiles listen to their headphones, on their desktop rigs).
And yes I've noticed that too. From the first time I listened to the M-100, I have always said that the soundstage seems deeper than wide. Perhaps the distortion of the M-100 causes this effect, but I'm not entirely sure. From my experience, the M-100's offer the deepest soundstage in a headphone, which may or may not be good. As I mentioned in my review, live concerts tend to have a stage that is limited in depth, but spacious in width.
As for the muffled sound, I think it's dependent on how much bass you're used to hearing in a track. When I first listened to the M-100, I thought the sounds were pretty muffled by the bass since I was coming from a, basically, bass anemic SRH940. Again, from a more traditional audiophile perspective, most "neutral" headphones have a quieter bass response so people might have the impression that the bass is really overpowering, and it does veil the midrange a bit as some have mentioned, especially for home listening. Couple that with a laid-back upper-treble response and you get the overall impression that things are muffled.
Bass lower-midrange upper-midrange lower-treble upper-treble
^ hence the U-shaped sound signature
In my opinion, the M-100's are well textured and detailed, but due to the laid back midrange and upper-treble, the resolution isn't as good as other headphones might offer (as in headphones with a forward midrange and more treble presence) at the same volume level.
Edited by miceblue - 11/12/12 at 3:33pm