Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › [REVIEW] Sony MH1 – The Best Kept Secret
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[REVIEW] Sony MH1 – The Best Kept Secret - Page 110

post #1636 of 3394
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketSmiley View Post


That's why it said basshead at the title. I appreciate how respectfully you disagree with me d:

 

BTW, it doesn't seem that you have any experience with Sennheiser. Do you? If so, how were they?

I haven't bought many Sennheiser products because I'm not a fan of the detail veil on much of their line. I have friends with Sennheisers. I was not impressed with anything lower than the HD800.

post #1637 of 3394

Anyone tried these with the Nexus 4? Are they compatible?

post #1638 of 3394
I have tried with another LG phone- optimus l3- everything worked.
post #1639 of 3394
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomasskalnin View Post

I have tried with another LG phone- optimus l3- everything worked.


Do you use the DSP Manager app on your android phone? If not, try it immediately! It comes preinstalled with the Cyanogenmod. You can install it on any android system just follow net tutorials.

post #1640 of 3394
Why should i? Whats the benefits?
post #1641 of 3394
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketSmiley View Post

I bought both the MH1 and the MH1-C.

 

I compared them to the other budget-fi's I own over here (with pictures).

 

I have the same problem with the MH1 as the poster above: I have to press the button for it to sound normal. The MH1-C has no problem.

 

Bottomline: Overrated and overpriced (read my review). Get the JVC HA-FX101 for $14 at Amazon.com instead.

 

I think you really need to preface a general comment like that, that you are primarily concerned with the Magnitude of Bass. At the expense of everything else. Its all you really talk about in your review. If I was rating earphones solely on that I would agree with you ratings of the headphone. But if was rating them on anything else, for example the Quality of the bass I would disagree with your ratings. 

 

Slightly off topic I wonder its to do with that you listen to. I notice on my Car head unit, which as a bass head EQ setting some modern CD's sounds great. Because the albums have been mixed for huge bass at the expense of everything else. Theres often no mids on the tracks at all, this is modern pop or dance tracks. Switch to some classic hard rock or classic or acoustic and this basshead setting destroys the music as its loses vast amounts of detail across the rest of the spectrum. You actually can't hear half the music at all. I notice the same thing with the CX300's I had many years ago. To the point where a review of the CX300 is my baseline for reviews sites. If they give it a general great view I know I won't agree with their options on other phones. If they give an accurate review, that its huge bass lacking in detail, then I'll consider their other reviews. I think you should do a reverse of what I do. because you are looking for the exact opposite of what I am. 

post #1642 of 3394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparky191 View Post

 

I think you really need to preface a general comment like that, that you are primarily concerned with the Magnitude of Bass. At the expense of everything else. Its all you really talk about in your review. If I was rating earphones solely on that I would agree with you ratings of the headphone. But if was rating them on anything else, for example the Quality of the bass I would disagree with your ratings. 

 

Slightly off topic I wonder its to do with that you listen to. I notice on my Car head unit, which as a bass head EQ setting some modern CD's sounds great. Because the albums have been mixed for huge bass at the expense of everything else. Theres often no mids on the tracks at all, this is modern pop or dance tracks. Switch to some classic hard rock or classic or acoustic and this basshead setting destroys the music as its loses vast amounts of detail across the rest of the spectrum. You actually can't hear half the music at all. I notice the same thing with the CX300's I had many years ago. To the point where a review of the CX300 is my baseline for reviews sites. If they give it a general great view I know I won't agree with their options on other phones. If they give an accurate review, that its huge bass lacking in detail, then I'll consider their other reviews. I think you should do a reverse of what I do. because you are looking for the exact opposite of what I am. 

 

Okay just a preface regarding my tone I'm never angry but I may be slightly miffed but it's more like laughably harmless. Now I'm just happy that I get nontrivial criticisms and I really appreciate that.

 

I did write a preface in my (quick) review, but since it's TL;DR I really do need to put more sign posts.

 

I honestly am confused with the "audiophile" jargon of "boomy" and "muddy" bass as descriptions of the quality of bass (could you please clarify/give an example of its usage? I honestly don't know how). This is why I used onomatopoeia in my (quick) review such as "TUUD" and "TUHD" and "PFDT". Those aren't mere intensity; as I said, the onomatopoeia is very efficient in communicating the quality--even the approximate timbre--of the bass (if I wanted to be a smartass about it I would rationalize the acoustics of onomatopoeia). Perhaps the "UU" means boomy, and the tight "PFDT" means punchy but muddy?, and the "TUHD" means uncontrolled and airy boom.

 

The CX870 for example advertises "Precise Bass", as opposed to the "Enhanced Bass" of the CX300 and CX400. I did notice that the bass in CX870 is less boomy than the CX400 and the CX400 has slightly greater punch. I realize that I do want that boom in my music. So maybe this is where we diverge in our definition of quality.

 

My overemphasis on bass is just the bare minimum: It must be able to drive quality bass sound ("TUUD") and maintain its quality at the highest intensity that my loudness threshold allows. After that, I must be able to hear EVERYTHING ELSE (mids and highs) and they should not be drowned out. This seems like a pretty ambitious demand but the Sennheiser CX300, CX400, and CX870 meet my needs.

 

I listen to everything. I love different instruments. I love different timbres, especially the variety of voices. I mainly love Japanese composers such as Yoko Kanno, Joe Hisaishi, Shiro Sagisu, etc. I do listen to dance tracks a lot, but they are of a different nature: Denpa music. They are pretty much the audio equivalent of the Akihabara experience, and they mix chiptunes and kawaii singing with dance beats and electronica. I love piano, play piano, and my favorite is Debussy. Above all, I love Heavy Metal. I love the double pedal. I love the adrenaline rush. I love heavy metal voices that can sweep a wide range.

 

The test music I used is Blind Guardian - The Wizard (Uriah Heep cover). Uriah Heep is definitely classic progressive rock, and among the first to be. They were progressive rock while The Beatles were still playing. Blind Guardian is known for "over"production and filling all frequencies with orchestra and choir, but this particular file starts out acoustically, which is great for testing detail. When the bass comes in, you'll know if the intensity of this clarity drops. I noticed that the player plays a most critical role here, since in my Sansa Clip+ the mids drop when I turn on the bass, while in my old android phone that I converted to a dedicated mp3 player using Cyanogenmod and Jetaudio, it doesn't. The CX870 sounds perfect.

 

This other test file is a mix of Nightwish and a little Dream Theater, which is representative of the music I listen to and I plead you to try it so that we have more common ground other than the CX300 which renders our conversation fruitless. In Nightwish, each bass kick has an accompanying orchestral hit. That is just their style. Beautiful piano melodies are layered with orchestra and choir and power metal (chugging rhythm guitar, melodic leads, double pedals) and operatic singing. I know if the headphones drown out the delicate atmospheric piano.

 

I did say I made a quick review, and so it was not meant for people who wanted graphs and jargon. I honestly don't understand them fully anyway. I just followed my hunch that I am not alone in my bass preferences, and that my heuristic (Kahneman and Tversky) is efficient in helping bassheads like me.

post #1643 of 3394
I doesn't matter what music it is if everything in the upper freq range is not represented well and sounds terrible. The fx101 does not reproduce any high freq well at all. Going into any detail about what music it is makes no difference - either they can accuratley reproduce high freq sound well, average or below average and they are way below average.
post #1644 of 3394

Yeah i have to agree that these sony MH1Cs are much much better/ more refined that the FX101s. Without that horrible harsh/ sibilant treble of the FX101s it might be a nice iem but despite all my burn-in it has done very little in taming it. The 101s might have more subbass that is about it. 

post #1645 of 3394
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerocoolhifi View Post

I doesn't matter what music it is if everything in the upper freq range is not represented well and sounds terrible. The fx101 does not reproduce any high freq well at all. Going into any detail about what music it is makes no difference - either they can accuratley reproduce high freq sound well, average or below average and they are way below average.

 

What if the song is like, "1-100 Hz bass frequency sweep.flac" does it still matter? d:

 

I'll listen to the FX101 again and see if they do produce terrible higher frequencies.

 

BTW, what do you mean by "accurately" reproducing? What if it was designed to boost highs? Like the CX870, it sounded harsh at first but since the corticofugal network in the auditory cortex is plastic (neuroscience of burn-in), I made myself get used to it. So this is why I didn't notice whether the FX101 highs were harsh. I'll test it again and tell.

post #1646 of 3394
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketSmiley View Post

 

...I honestly am confused with the "audiophile" jargon of "boomy" and "muddy" bass as descriptions of the quality of bass (could you please clarify/give an example of its usage?...

 

I'm really a lowfi kinda guy. But the best way I can describe what I hear, is that I get bigger thump from the CX300 but I'm not hearing the different instruments, or notes in that bass. With something like the MH1C I hear slightly less of a thump but I can separate all the instruments that are making it, and I hear a lot more notes in the bass. In terms if music with the MH1C I hear a bass player a lot more in the mix where as with the CX300's I'd really only hear them when no one else is playing. Thats an exaggeration but its the general idea. I'm hearing a lot more detail in the drums too. 

 

That said I can't wear the MH1C buds they keep falling out. So I'll be selling mine onwards. Ironically enough I forget all my earphones recently on a journey, so I picked up a set of CX200 as it was the only thing available. Very much a budget earbud, Ironically I've ended up using them a lot as I can wear them with my head on a pillow, unlike most of my other phones.  

post #1647 of 3394
Quote:
Originally Posted by sfwalcer View Post

Yeah i have to agree that these sony MH1Cs are much much better/ more refined that the FX101s. Without that horrible harsh/ sibilant treble of the FX101s it might be a nice iem but despite all my burn-in it has done very little in taming it. The 101s might have more subbass that is about it. 

 

I'm comparing both the MH1-C and the FX101 right now using a 3.5mm Y adapter connected to a Fiio E5 amp and I must have gotten used to the "sibilance"/boosted treble of the FX101 because it doesn't bother me. At first I felt the same way with my CX870 but then I learned to love it. Though I admit this preference might be subnormal, given that people don't normally train their brain just to like something foreign to them. The MH1-C definitely doesn't come close to the intensity of bass of the FX101 even when I raise the volume on just the MH1-C.

 

I'm thinking of trying the carbon nanotube JVC HA-FXD80 next, but that's after getting a Klipsch S4. After getting the Soundmagic E10 I am now more suspicious about the importance of material in sound quality ... but carbon nanotube is THE FUTURE~

post #1648 of 3394
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketSmiley View Post

 

I'm comparing both the MH1-C and the FX101 right now using a 3.5mm Y adapter connected to a Fiio E5 amp and I must have gotten used to the "sibilance"/boosted treble of the FX101 because it doesn't bother me. At first I felt the same way with my CX870 but then I learned to love it. Though I admit this preference might be subnormal, given that people don't normally train their brain just to like something foreign to them. The MH1-C definitely doesn't come close to the intensity of bass of the FX101 even when I raise the volume on just the MH1-C.

 

I'm thinking of trying the carbon nanotube JVC HA-FXD80 next, but that's after getting a Klipsch S4. After getting the Soundmagic E10 I am now more suspicious about the importance of material in sound quality ... but carbon nanotube is THE FUTURE~

Dood, take it easy on your ears, might go deaf. haha Hey here is a thought, since you live so close to me.  I have both the FX101's and FX40s for sale/ trade. If you are willing to trade i can trade both of them for your MH1Cs. You probably can't tell but I love these damn sonys a lot. bigsmile_face.gif

post #1649 of 3394

To my lowfi ears the the treble was the weakest part of the MH1C. Very good but not excellent. 

post #1650 of 3394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparky191 View Post

To my lowfi ears the the treble was the weakest part of the MH1C. Very good but not excellent. 

Yeah, i had similar feelings at 1st. They are smooth to a fault in their treble but I really enjoy them now.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › [REVIEW] Sony MH1 – The Best Kept Secret