Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › "Mad Dog" by MrSpeakers, modified Fostex T50RP review
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

"Mad Dog" by MrSpeakers, modified Fostex T50RP review - Page 416  

post #6226 of 6388

post #6227 of 6388
Quote:
Originally Posted by BleaK View Post

After looking at the graphs it looks like I would keep the 3.0, I like the mid-sentric sound of the MD.

 
I totally get this. I had both at the same time. I eventually decided on the upgrade, but it was close.
post #6228 of 6388

Just thought that I'd post a quick comment. Today I had friends over and let them audition the MD's and my hd650's. I expected mixed reviews but everyone preferred the MD's. My best friend who has been into high end full sized speakers for many years said, "the maddog's sound more like live music." I thought that was well put and a nice complement. 

post #6229 of 6388
I think the MD does sound more natural and organic than the HD650. Something about their voicing that just gets it right, for the most part.
post #6230 of 6388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Lust Envy View Post

I think the MD does sound more natural and organic than the HD650. Something about their voicing that just gets it right, for the most part.

 

Even with the congestion due to its closed-back nature (though both don't necessarily come together => TH-600, which don't isolate like the MDs)?

post #6231 of 6388
Personally, I'm not referring to it's sense of space or openness. The 650 easily wins there. I'm talking about how voices and instruments sound more realistic, with better thickness, and weight to their tone.

The MD does still sound closed in to me.
post #6232 of 6388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Lust Envy View Post

Personally, I'm not referring to it's sense of space or openness. The 650 easily wins there. I'm talking about how voices and instruments sound more realistic, with better thickness, and weight to their tone.

The MD does still sound closed in to me.

 

But the rest can compensate for this, right?

 

Basically, that's my sole complaint with the MDs. They're a winner (and, possibly, the 3.2 even more) but the closed-in sound is an issue for me.

I'd rather trade some isolation for openess (I don't need that much isolation): the TH-600 is an example of such a balance.

The TH-600 don't have the planar magic and - from what I could tell so far - not the bass quality of the MDs wink.gif (that's a crime for a $1k+ headphones tongue.gif).

 

Dan, if I send you the TH-600, could you put some of your magic in it? biggrin.gif Transform the bio-cellulose drivers into planars maybe? etysmile.gif

post #6233 of 6388

^^ Send them to me. I'll take care of them for you. wink.gif

post #6234 of 6388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clemmaster View Post

 

But the rest can compensate for this, right?

 

Basically, that's my sole complaint with the MDs. They're a winner (and, possibly, the 3.2 even more) but the closed-in sound is an issue for me.

I'd rather trade some isolation for openess (I don't need that much isolation): the TH-600 is an example of such a balance.

The TH-600 don't have the planar magic and - from what I could tell so far - not the bass quality of the MDs wink.gif (that's a crime for a $1k+ headphones tongue.gif).

 

Dan, if I send you the TH-600, could you put some of your magic in it? biggrin.gif Transform the bio-cellulose drivers into planars maybe? etysmile.gif

 

 

So Clem,

 

Do you like the 600s or are they just Meh...??

post #6235 of 6388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Lust Envy View Post

Personally, I'm not referring to it's sense of space or openness. The 650 easily wins there. I'm talking about how voices and instruments sound more realistic, with better thickness, and weight to their tone.

The MD does still sound closed in to me.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clemmaster View Post

 

But the rest can compensate for this, right?

 

Basically, that's my sole complaint with the MDs. They're a winner (and, possibly, the 3.2 even more) but the closed-in sound is an issue for me.

I'd rather trade some isolation for openess (I don't need that much isolation): the TH-600 is an example of such a balance.

The TH-600 don't have the planar magic and - from what I could tell so far - not the bass quality of the MDs wink.gif (that's a crime for a $1k+ headphones tongue.gif).

 

Dan, if I send you the TH-600, could you put some of your magic in it? biggrin.gif Transform the bio-cellulose drivers into planars maybe? etysmile.gif

The MD's are closed.  They are one of the most open sounding closed cans I've heard or owned.  My memory of the D7000's has faded to the point where all I remember, is that I really liked them, they were colored, and the bass was a bit boosted.  I do remember also that they sounded closed as well.  I don't remember which sound more closed, the MD's or the D7000's.  The D7000's have a bit more sparkle up top (bordering on too much for me) and this may give them a bit more sense of air, at least initially.  Regardless of what some on this thread say, the MD's are a closed can, and exhibit the characteristics of a closed can, though less than most.  I have not yet heard a closed can that doesn't sound closed to some degree.  I think we need to accept this here, where we discuss a closed headphone.  Especially one that is 1/3 or less the price of the "magic" (per others, haven't heard them) Fostex.

post #6236 of 6388
Quote:
Originally Posted by aamefford View Post

Especially one that is 1/3 or less the price of the "magic" (per others, haven't heard them) Fostex.

Not really magic. It's still more closed than open headphones of comparable size. It's just a very good compromise.

post #6237 of 6388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clemmaster View Post


I'd rather trade some isolation for openess (I don't need that much isolation): the TH-600 is an example of such a balance.

Exactly what I feel between the md and d2000. At the same time, I wonder if giving it a little bit of openness and losing that isolation would also take away the mids magic.
post #6238 of 6388

I don't know if it's been mentionned already: 6moon's review was released. Didn't read it yet ;)

post #6239 of 6388

As a budding web designer--actually no, as someone with eyes--6moons' website will ALWAYS make me cringe. However, I think their reviews are a fun read if you're ready to sit down and deal.

 

In particular, I very much agreed with these sentiments

 

 

Quote:
I couldn't penetrate into the sonic fabric as deeply [as the K702]. Still this very hifi realization didn't bother me. Though clearly no ultimate resolution transducer, there was something about the Fostex which like a pair of well-worn hush puppies felt supremely comfortable.

 

Quote:
This overhauled Fostex isn't about Cayenne pepper or super resolution. It's about rich milk chocolate whose top layer has begun to melt. Think chewy, mellow, creamy and a bit soft around the edges. Think very drawn-out sessions without fatigue, ringing or mosquitoes. Nothing bites, nothing irritates, nothing gets squinty-eyed, thin, lean or small.

All in all, a fair and brightly positive review. Congrats again, Dan!

post #6240 of 6388
The D7000 is known to be quite open sounding for a closed headphone. The MD doesn't come close to it's soundstage and airiness, IMHO.

Clem, if you didn't like the closed sound of the previous MD, not much that's gonna change your mind with the 3.2.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › "Mad Dog" by MrSpeakers, modified Fostex T50RP review