Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Martin Logan Mikros 90 On-Ear Headphones
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Martin Logan Mikros 90 On-Ear Headphones - Page 163

post #2431 of 5910
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grayson73 View Post
 

Thanks!  The 6 foot cable is only $2.97 at my local radio shack, so I'll give them a try.  Do you think there will be SQ loss in the extra 3ft?

 

http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=4344797

Wow!

Nice deal.  I am refunding the 3-footer I just got for $15 and ordering online.

Thanks.

post #2432 of 5910
Quote:
Originally Posted by pataburd View Post

Wow!

Nice deal.  I am refunding the 3-footer I just got for $15 and ordering online.

Thanks.

 



Looks like a Massena trip for me....when? I have no idea.... smily_headphones1.gif
post #2433 of 5910
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nimzerz View Post
 

How bout someone with the HE-500 posts a comment and opinion. As anyone else's perception on bass is obsolete.

I owned the HE-500 and a/b-ed them against the HE-5LE, preferring the 5LE (by a wide margin), which I felt were more balanced and more extended in both bass and treble.

I then a/b-ed the HE-5LE against the HE-6 and preferred the HE-6, which I felt were more balanced than the HE-5LE and cleaner overall.

I subsequently sold my HE-6 after a/b-ing them with the Mikros 90.

 

So: Mikros 90 > HE-6 > HE-5LE > HE-500.

 

IMHO, the HE-500's bass does not extend as deep nor stay as flat and clean as the bass on the Mikros 90.  

IMHO,  the HE-500's midrange is not as clean, detailed or coherent as that of the Mikros 90.

IMHO the HE-500 are rolled off in the treble compared to the Mikros 90.  

IMHO the HE-500 cannot resolve low level detail as well as the Mikros 90.    

IMHO the Mikros 90 are also more coherent from top to bottom than the HE-500.  

IMHO, the Mikros 90 trump the HE-500 in tonal purity.

 

In fact, for me, I can't think of anything the HE-500 effectively do "more" than the Mikros 90 other than COST MORE.

 

I view the popular following for the HE-500 as analogous to the highly touted/popular following for the KEF M500 portables.  These headphones have a pedestrian "pop" signature.

 

To me, HE-500 is mid-fi; Mikros 90 is hi-fi


Edited by pataburd - 2/27/14 at 8:53am
post #2434 of 5910
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombywoof View Post
 

Found a use for my P5's.

LOL!

Now, that's PRECIOUS!!!!

post #2435 of 5910

IMHO IMHO IMHO....he is saying MIKROS IS HYPE-FI that kicked all the $$$$sssssss 

 

frankly i fear for the tenure of the rest of cans in my garage.

earlier i took out my D7k...but it didnt get air time,

after 2 hours i kept it.

 

Just took out the D7k again...and for the last two hours again it didnt get air time...geezzz never happened b4.

post #2436 of 5910
Quote:
Originally Posted by pataburd View Post

I owned the HE-500 and a/b-ed them against the HE-5LE, preferring the 5LE (by a wide margin), which I felt were more balanced and more extended in both bass and treble.

I then a/b-ed the HE-5LE against the HE-6 and preferred the HE-6, which I felt were more balanced than the HE-5LE and cleaner overall.

I subsequently sold my HE-6 after a/b-ing them with the Mikros 90.

 

So: Mikros 90 > HE-6 > HE-5LE > HE-500.

 

IMHO, the HE-500's bass does not extend as deep nor stay as flat and clean as the bass on the Mikros 90.  

IMHO,  the HE-500's midrange is not as clean, detailed or coherent as that of the Mikros 90.

IMHO the HE-500 are rolled off in the treble compared to the Mikros 90.  

IMHO the HE-500 cannot resolve low level detail as well as the Mikros 90.    

IMHO the Mikros 90 are also more coherent from top to bottom than the HE-500.  

IMHO, the Mikros 90 trump the HE-500 in tonal purity.

 

In fact, for me, I can't think of anything the HE-500 effectively do "more" than the Mikros 90 other than COST MORE.

 

I view the popular following for the HE-500 as analogous to the highly touted/popular following for the KEF M500 portables.  These headphones have a pedestrian "pop" signature.

 

To me, HE-500 is mid-fi; Mikros 90 is hi-fi

 



Preach on, brother!!! smily_headphones1.gif
Edited by kevb - 2/27/14 at 8:58am
post #2437 of 5910
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darknet View Post


Hmm that's probably the case. The kefs treble is a bit more subdued so it works well on some aggressive edm tracks. Though with some other music I listen to its not as bad... Though i don't think sharp was the exact, accurate term to use.

The KEF's treble is rolled off, true.  And the M500 don't resolve nearly as thoroughly as the Mikros 90.

post #2438 of 5910
I have a hard time taking that post seriously...
post #2439 of 5910
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorspeaker View Post


(a)  I made money on the Burson ...blush.

(b)  Hey, u used quite a big thick piece of foam on your first cave dive huh...did it fill up the whole cavern?
      How does it affect the sound depth?
 

(c)  The lower resolution still makes the Mikros sound quite good..like a regular popish can.

(a) Hopefully, I too can make money, or at least break even, on the Burson.  It sounds a little rough around the edges for my tastes.  (Does a nice job as a pre-amp for my outboard speakers, though.)  I have higher hopes/expectations for the GCHA

 

(b) Did not foam all the way out to the perimeter where the "rounded overhang" is, but just inside the screw triangulation area immediately below driver.  It seems to have significantly enhanced the sense of depth.  Vocals, especially, sound much fuller/chestier.  Last night, Hiroshima's Go album sounded almost perfect in the bass.  Will leave the foam in for another 50-100 hours and let these MLs burn in for awhile (otherwise I will be "modding" what burn-in should otherwise accomplish).  Bought the felt, double-sided tape and some tacky.  

Still searching for the doe skin, scouring I-86 for roadkill, LOL!!

Am considering just cutting random pieces of a denser type of foam and stuffing it lightly/snugly under the driver.

 

(c) Agreed.  Recabling turns the Mikros into different cans, too.  But the MLs always manage to sound "good", despite the limitations.


Edited by pataburd - 2/27/14 at 9:31am
post #2440 of 5910
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nimzerz View Post

I have a hard time taking that post seriously...

 

understandable...i did like the KEF...until

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by pataburd View Post
 

The KEF's treble is rolled off, true.  And the M500 don't resolve nearly as thoroughly as the Mikros 90.

 

i bot the mikros...and i am committed to this train..lol

post #2441 of 5910

LMAO.....roadkills...just airdry some chicken skin. anything organic should do. 

 

=======

 

i just put on another of ERICH KUNZEL's cd...

the soundsstage depth rendition is so shockkking..jaws dropping..havent heard this cd like THIS..

now playing LES MISERABLEs Suite..ooooh a civil war is about to start...the timpani crecendoing....

the trumpet in the distant raising the alarm for battle...arrghhhhh...


Edited by Lorspeaker - 2/27/14 at 9:11am
post #2442 of 5910
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nimzerz View Post

I have a hard time taking that post seriously...

 



Either buy it or don't.....not that big a deal at the current prices, is it? What about his post is so hard to take seriously? It's his impressions - his ears. I took the plunge, I'm happy. Mind you, the bar wasn't set that high (Grado SR60i, AKG K172HD, PSB M4U-2).
Edited by kevb - 2/27/14 at 9:19am
post #2443 of 5910
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trunks159 View Post

What we need is a mod to do away with that lower treble peak.

Check you sources.  I have never heard a lower treble peak--but then I don't have your ears, either.

post #2444 of 5910
Quote:
Originally Posted by pataburd View Post
 

Check you sources.  I have never heard a lower treble peak--but then I don't have your ears, either.

 

when i first heard the can, it was a little bright to my ears...i tot it was the stock cable..

then i switched to the v moda, thought it was airier..

but now i am back to the stock cable, i tot it has a richer sound..

probably all the burning in is starting to stabilized.

 

i havent associated any peak akin to those i heard in AKGs...i sold every one of those..just cant take vocals on those cans.

K550...Q701..K702.. all gone.

post #2445 of 5910
Quote:
Originally Posted by robakri View Post
 

Yeah, even ordered the pipeline cable for good measure. I went with the one for around 9$ shipped on amazon which I believe is a 10 foot cable (which is actually more convenient than a 4 foot for my home setup). I don't remember reading about it but was there a sonic difference between the 4 and 10 footers?

You will have to reduce the input plug barrel diameter by about 3.2 mm on that ET-4 before it will fit the Mikros 90.  PM PredatorZ about it.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Martin Logan Mikros 90 On-Ear Headphones