Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › Final Audio Design Muramasa VIII
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Final Audio Design Muramasa VIII - Page 15

post #211 of 352

Plus all metal headphones are the best. Say what you want, metal is more more rigid and harder than any other material. Makes the thing acoustically inert.

 

What is weight when you're on a quest for perfection.


Edited by devouringone3 - 11/14/12 at 1:42am
post #212 of 352

It depends what kind of plastic and what kind of metal...

 

That's so generic that you might as well say that silver is better sounding than black.

 

Also, considering that this is FAD I'm pretty sure they they started with the looks and then put a $#!% load of effort into making it sound good despite whatever drawbacks the enclose presented.
 

 

post #213 of 352

Then I will say that a given quality of metal gives out better performance than an equal (analogous) quality of plastic.

 

And you will reply to me that matching the two in terms of quality is not something practically or theoretically doable.

 

And then I will start a research in the literature or make my own study to find out which atom is best to make headphone housing out of, in terms of inertia, and prove me right. :P

post #214 of 352
Quote:
Originally Posted by devouringone3 View Post

Then I will say that a given quality of metal gives out better performance than an equal (analogous) quality of plastic.

 

And you will reply to me that matching the two in terms of quality is not something practically or theoretically doable.

 

And then I will start a research in the literature or make my own study to find out which atom is best to make headphone housing out of, in terms of inertia, and prove me right. :P

I challenge you to do this. See you in three years.
 

 

post #215 of 352
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssrock64 View Post

I actually think the ED8 is underestimated. It performs like a closed HD800 

In what universe does this occur?

 

post #216 of 352
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post

In what universe does this occur?


I think that's the one where I actually am my avatar...

post #217 of 352

The Edition 8 is too bright and harsh for me, the result of Ultrasone deciding to go with that "hi-fi sparkle" tuning to try and emphasize its detail in my opinion. That being said, I do think Ultrasone gets unfairly dumped on a lot here lately, often times by people who haven't even heard said headphones. I mean... putting them on the same level as Dr. Dre's stuff? Obvious troll is obvious.

 

FWIW, the Signature Pro is actually is really good headphone IMO. So much so I was admittedly a bit surprised Ultrasone made it given how balanced it was.

post #218 of 352

I don't mean to say that the ED8 performs on the level of the HD800. It doesn't. But for a closed can, it comes pretty damn close.

post #219 of 352

I deleted my negative opinions of Ultrasone headphones..  I don't want to get attack for it. regular_smile%20.gif


Edited by tamahome77 - 4/15/12 at 9:08pm
post #220 of 352
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssrock64 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by tamahome77 View Post

I bet the Muramasa will sound just as good as them Dr. Dre beats or those Ultrasone Edition series. biggrin.gif

 

I actually think the ED8 is underestimated. It performs like a closed HD800 that can be technically portable and looks extremely classy.


?
 

 

post #221 of 352
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssrock64 View Post

I don't mean to say that the ED8 performs on the level of the HD800. It doesn't. But for a closed can, it comes pretty damn close.


I never meant to say the SRH-940 is on the level of the HD800, it isn't, but for a closed can at ~$300, it comes pretty close.

 

 

The issue is there are different spectators on head-fi.

 

My take on it is something like this.

 

 

1.  Looks / fashion / price / exclusivity

 

2.  Sound-quality

 

3.  Hard-data / science

 

 

Then we have

 

 

X.  bass-centric

 

Y.  flat/reference-centric

 

Z.  treble/exotic/enhanced-centric

 

 

I would say consensus is typically like this:

 

Beats:  1X

 

Edition 8:  1X

 

Edition 10:  1Z

 

HD800:  123Y

 

 

 

In my opinion each group of people (1/2/3 + X/Y/Z) have a certain cynical attitude to the other group/s, myself included, I am a 2Z/Y person so I have a certain skepticism for everything 1, 3 and X.

 

I definitely think, from my experience, that Final Audio is 1/2Z.

 

 

I'd also like to note I don't think the 16 ohm rating on this headphone has anything to do with portability, likewise I don't think the 32 ohm rating on the Tesla T5p denotes portability either, correlation ≠ causation. 

 

There is a lot of white-noise in the marketing of audiophilia.  Let's keep it realistic, this Muramasa VIII is most likely white noise and a pioneer of sound-engineering at the same time.  What the reviewers need to tell us is how much pioneer this is, and how much white noise, assessing that now is pretty pointless given the companies track-record.

 

Anyway, even if it's only 7% pioneer, the fashionistas with spare change will still buy it and love it, it's like having a motorbike with titanium alloy or a violin from 16th century France, heh.

 

 

post #222 of 352

The Edition 8 scores no points in "sound quality?" ...At all? Also why bundle treble emphasis in with a generic "exotic" descriptor? That's lumping the Grado SR325is in with the FAD Piano Forte X.

 

I think it's an interesting system of taxonomy though. I suppose I'd be a 1/2/Y/Z, though I do not like treble emphasis.


Edited by MuppetFace - 4/16/12 at 6:36am
post #223 of 352

Quote:
Originally Posted by MuppetFace View Post

FWIW, the Signature Pro is actually is really good headphone IMO. So much so I was admittedly a bit surprised Ultrasone made it given how balanced it was.


I'll second that. I was pleasantly surprised by the Signature Pro when I tried it a couple weeks ago. Ultrasone has shipped some good things and not-as-good things, but it's one of the few companies taking high-end closed headphones seriously.

 

As for how this relates to the Muramasa VIII... I dunno. They're both products of companies that are variously praised and reviled for unconventional philosophies of design, and produce flagships that make people's heads explode?

post #224 of 352
Quote:
Originally Posted by MuppetFace View Post

The Edition 8 scores no points in "sound quality?" ...At all?

 

The typical consensus I've seen is mixed, contrary, however leaning towards "No.".  My personal feelings are the Edition 8 scores very few points in the spirit of sound quality, and a lot of points in looks, design, fashion, price and exclusivity (precious metal plating), so I'd venture... it's in pretty deep water in 1, as per my "taxonomy" of online audio text-novel culture.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MuppetFace View Post

That's lumping the Grado SR325is in with the FAD Piano Forte X.


Neither are reference and neither are for bass-lovin', so yes, I think they're in the same category.

 

However, within the spirit of shaped FR and exotic tonality, the SR325i may serve as a "metal reference", likewise the PF X as a "Chinese Erhu reference".

 

For example I think most people will resolutely prefer certain music on a high-end FAD IEM rather than the Shure SE535, and in my experience no equalizer or convolver can successfully emulate another HP/IEM.

 

Hence... that's why I make clear distinctions in 2/3 and Y/Z, since in my experience, the spirit of hard-data is like visiting a theme park in black and white and 2D... (limited).

 

If the hard-data'ist's believe the current levels of sophistication in measurements of audio reproduction in 2012 is sufficient to pre-evaluate the human assessment -  either logical or emotional - of a headphone or IEM then I'd like to see a scientific study which shines light on this.

 

As an aside, I think it can be rather difficult to show my spectral theme-park to someone who is b/w colour-blind, so I've found peace in knowing that system exists, too.

 

 

As for the Muramasa VIII I hope the sound quality is super-stellar, because if it's not I think it will heavily taint FAD's recent successful IEM story.

 

 

post #225 of 352

 

Quote:

I deleted my negative opinions of Ultrasone headphones..  I don't want to get attack for it. regular_smile%20.gif


Edited by tamahome77 - Yesterday at 2:08 pm

Chicken.

 

If you have an honest and valid opinion, there's nothing wrong as long as it is an honest opinion. It's an opinion and as valid as any other opinion.

I never have owned an Ultrasone can or heard one, and so I don't comment on them.

 

I have heard some beats and they have more woolly bass than a sheep farm - that's my honest opinion.

I have heard a Denon D7000 and they lasted on my sconce all of ten seconds due to the overbearing flabby bass.

I heard a LCD-2 R1 and was taken in by the glorious solid bass, and I bought one.

 

I have no doubt, based on the reports of FAD's other products, which I have not heard, that the Murumasa Vlll will sound good.

Whether they will sound as good as the other top dynamics is debatable dependant on the reviewer's tastes, proclivities and other relevant biases.


Edited by wink - 4/16/12 at 6:24pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: High-end Audio Forum
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › Final Audio Design Muramasa VIII