Yamaha PRO Headphones. - Page 4

The Yamaha PRO 500 is AWESOME!!!!!!  Finally, a headphone that rolls like thunder while actually balanced.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beagle 

Finally, a headphone that rolls like thunder

Under the covers?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beagle 

The Yamaha PRO 500 is AWESOME!!!!!!  Finally, a headphone that rolls like thunder while actually balanced.

More details... NOW 

Don't you hear any dip in the lower-mids like some FR graph suggested earlier? What about male vocals, rock music etc. What about comparision to other headphones? Hadn't you also tested for example M100?

No. That graph is out to lunch. No sure what they were doing or listening to.

Vocals and piano sound almost lifelike. I focused on those because if those were "correct" then everything else should be as well. At first, it seems like they are bass heavy until you realize that the midrange is right there at the same level, if not actually more present. I now feel that the midrange is almost ideal. Actually, everything seems to be ideal. Bass makes its presence felt when required, and top end is clear, smooth, extended. It all just sounds very even. And it has a big energetic footprint that makes it sound close to live music, that's the best part. Only downside is that they are very efficient/sensitive and you can't go for much gain on an amp. I can't go much past 7 o'clock on the volume pot.

To tell the truth, I just enjoy these. I don't think about other headphones (a good thing), I think it is best for people to just take the above and compare it to what they hear in their headphones. 

When you start comparing a bunch of headphones to each other, you just end up questioning what you are hearing, what is wrong and what is right, the music no longer matters and you end up going crazy. That's a great way to spoil the fun. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beagle 

No. That graph is out to lunch. No sure what they were doing or listening to.

 

Vocals and piano sound almost lifelike. I focused on those because if those were "correct" then everything else should be as well. At first, it seems like they are bass heavy until you realize that the midrange is right there at the same level, if not actually more present. I now feel that the midrange is almost ideal. Actually, everything seems to be ideal. Bass makes its presence felt when required, and top end is clear, smooth, extended. It all just sounds very even. And it has a big energetic footprint that makes it sound close to live music, that's the best part. 

 

 

Thanks Beagle - far more articulate than I could express - fully agree! How's your comfort factor, I'm gradually getting used to the feel and pressure. What source are you using - have you tried with any portable sources?

Cheers,

Lee

OK that earlier graph is probably not very accurate, if it was then I doubt vocals and piano would sound so lifelike. ^^ It's a good sign if you think piano sounds realistic, because it's really hard instrument to reproduce realisticly so that it's not overly smooth or too thin sounding.

Exactly how bassy do you find it? Comparisions to some other headphones would probably help, is it like entry level basshead material when the bass is meant to be there or is this more flat.

Hi. I'm the one who wrote the review for soundandvisionmag.com and produced the graph in question. The methodology and equipment I used are spelled out in the review right here. It's all industry-standard equipment, purchased by me personally (at considerable expense, especially for a freelancer). I've spent countless hours reading the available materials on headphone measurement, consulting with manufacturers on the subject, and discussing my process with the U.S. distributor of the measurement system to make sure it's as accurate as possible.

It's worth noting that while headphone measurements tend to vary at the frequency extremes - due to different types of measurement equipment, use of different calibration curves, varying fit of the headphones on the test device, etc. - they tend to be consistent in the midrange. In fact, at the frequencies in question here (about 300 to 700 Hz), the correction in the calibration curve is less than 1 dB.

Some of the music that I and the two other panelists listened to is also listed. We try our best to explain our methods and make our process transparent. And I'm proud that we do have a serious process in place for testing headphones, which most websites and magazines do not.

Of course, none of that means any one listener's subjective impression of a product will agree with our review. We hope that the reviews we present will hold true for at least a majority of listeners, though.
 

Originally Posted by monkeyboylee 

Thanks Beagle - far more articulate than I could express - fully agree! How's your comfort factor, I'm gradually getting used to the feel and pressure. What source are you using - have you tried with any portable sources?

 

Cheers,

 

Lee

Comfort is fine. Not like putting on a fur hat but pads and fit are solid and not painful. I will always give up a bit of comfort for consistency in sound. Soft comfortable pads usually turn music into mush.

I used a Rotel RCD951 HDCD player, Mission 775S turntable w/ Grado MCZ cartridge/PS Audio phono stage, and phones plugged into custom PPA and Graham Sle Novo amps.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD 

OK that earlier graph is probably not very accurate, if it was then I doubt vocals and piano would sound so lifelike. ^^ It's a good sign if you think piano sounds realistic, because it's really hard instrument to reproduce realisticly so that it's not overly smooth or too thin sounding.

 

Exactly how bassy do you find it? Comparisions to some other headphones would probably help, is it like entry level basshead material when the bass is meant to be there or is this more flat.

Like I said, bass seems to be at the same level as everything else. It does not really favour any part of the FR.

Listening to Kate Bush "50 Words For Snow" which is basically solo piano and voice, it sounds breathtaking. Timbre and decay seem spot-on.

To offer a definitive statement on how something sounds, the associated gear shouldn't be a hindrance. Observations can be made using portable stuff, however reference gear needs to be utilized to challenge the equipment under scrutiny. Not everything is "amazing" out of an I-Flop or I-Puddle. A "review" needs to seek truth through finding a particular synergy offered by variant of gear matings, this being done to determine the level or value of the component in review.

A great phone stuck into an amp that isn't compatible electrically can be disastrous. Likewise a phone an amp might be second tier, yet the two combined may punch far above their weight. Enough gear has to be used, not simply a single amp or source, to really fully understand the strengths and weakness of any "piece of kit".

 These are just my opinions of course. It's frustrating not being able to find reviews I can trust on the web. "Reviews" are plentiful....yet they tend to be just quick "opinions" for the most part. Sound bites mostly, much like the piece-meal play-lists on an I-Puddle...... end of rant.....

^this..

I acquired a new amp (PS Audio GCHA) and did some further listening. I certainly do not hear a dip in the upper bass/lower midrange. If anything, there is a very slight enhancement there. It all sounds rather smooth and powerful, a la the old Yamaha sound of the HP-1 etc. 

So maybe there's some ground to the marketing speech about the Yamaha after all. ^^

Though that it's advertised for portable use and a bit flashier design and is very efficient etc doesn't typically give the image of a high quality / studio kind of sound reproduction but some1 got to be the first eh? :p

I haven't checked this thread in some time, but my interest is renewed after Beagle's impressions.  I read some promise in the S&V review,  but was concerned they would be too bright based on the FR graph, like the Ultrasone Pro 900.  Any comparison between Pro 500, MDR-1R, M4U2 and Ultrasone Signature Pro or Signature DJ?