Originally Posted by bhazard
I'm starting to really wonder about the overhype here. I'm ok with hyping the sound quality for the price, but saying it is better than the HE-500 is borderline absurd. I've been burning these in 18+ hours straight hoping that they somehow get better, because they do not sound anywhere near as good or neutral as they are being hyped as. Good yes, but better than HE-500 good? Ridiculous. That just took the hype way too far and starts to kill credibility on what the Mikros actually is.
Martin Logan has a hard enough time producing a speaker that can test neutral in a wider than 3ft measurement area head on. They didn't just magically learn to do it on a discontinued headphone.
They need more than 18 hours. The MLs have a LENGTHY, SLOW burn-in, on the order of 300 hours (IMHO).
Your HE-500 hype will be taken under consideration [e.g. "midrange "light years ahead of the Mikros"--deleted] .
But I will repeat: I do not miss my HE-500 in the least.
Now, to me, these are a product that have been hyped out of proportion.
They are, admittedly, a fine mid-centric set of cans, but with notable treble and bass roll-off [e.g. compared to the HE-5LE, HE-6 and Mikros 90].
HifiMAN appealed to the popular crowd on the 500 venture and grabbed up a sizable market share and fierce proponents, like yourself.
It is/was the same way with the M500 in terms of popular appeal and the attendant "pop" mid-centric/mid-emphasized sound signature.
You are entitled to your opinion, and I respect that. But I think this thread, my "hype" and the nature of the Mikros 90 pose a challenge to the status quo, and to users' biases and preconceptions.
I bought the Mikros 90 on a lark, because they were cheap. Now I find myself with no HE-500, -5LE or -6, but with six pairs of Mikros 90, five or six amplifiers and on a bid to upgrade my source in order to discover what other hidden gems reside in the MLs.
How can a discounted, discontinued $70 product give me more technical and musical satisfaction than a $1500 product? It staggers the imagination. It gets devotees of those other brands agitated. It is paradoxical.
For my ears, the Mikros 90 are simply better than the HE-6 [and by syllogism the HE-500]. Others, like Lors, have put the Mikros on par with the best characteristics of other top-tier cans.
No one "has to like" the Mikros 90; but no one "has to like" the HE-500, either.
But in MY experience, the Mikros 90 can go head-to-head with the best out there--including popular Head-Fi "darlings" like the HE-500--and do admirably well [if not better].
Run them with your top tier gear and they will amaze you with their seemingly limitless reserves.
The MLs "scale up" extremely well and will eliminate competitors as the upstream gear improves.
On lesser sources, for example, I thought the M500 sounded respectable alongside the Mikros 90. But on my best gear, the MLs sounded a LOT better, the M500 not so much so. The gap widened appreciably and showed me how static the KEF's signature actually was compared to the ML's.
Edited by pataburd - 2/27/14 at 2:24pm