or Connect
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 49

post #721 of 6488
I'll probably keep the ML, but I may re-buy the FC300.
post #722 of 6488
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACDOAN View Post
 

I have been a fan of ML quasi-dipole electrostatic speakers for the last 20 years. I started out with the little Aerius I and then the SL3. These speakers are amazing for their fast and accurate reproduction of recording music as long as they are paired with proper amplifier(s) and speaker position. They are not perfect and not for every one. I would not listen to ML with heavy rock, rap, techno...but rather with Classical music and Jazz. Fans of Diana Krall, Patricia Barber, Madeleine Peyrous...etc will enjoy the larger than life vocals and the accuracy separation of the instruments.

 

Having said that, I would not expect heavy bass on these transducers from ML. I have a pair on the way from Amazon for $90.00 that is such a good deal that I cannot pass on. I know what I would expect from ML house sound even though I do not like the entry level ML home theater speakers. Cannot wait to put Diana Krall, or David Sanborn for a test drive with the Mikros 90.

Let us know your impressions.

 

The Mikros 90 are not bass-heavy like many other (popular) products out there.  But they can go surprisingly deep, while staying remarkably clean and relatively flat in the process.  To me, their bass is balanced and fit--not fat.

 

Sarah Vaughn sounds breath-taking with the Mikros 90.  : )

 

Some users have expressed issues with soundstage, but I think the MLs' rendering of 3-D space is more organic/natural than most of the other headphones I have heard, with excellent focus as you mentioned.  I have listened to Wagner with the Mikros 90 and have never felt deprived of the attendant orchestral scale that these pieces convey.  Often, soundstage perception with the MLs is recording-dependent, anyway.  I have had some occasions where the listening space seemed vast, and others where the space seemed confined. 

 

I agree that the MLs offer a less visceral/more "cerebral" listening experience that is probably not optimal for heavy rock, rap, techno listeners.  (But I still enjoy techno with them.)

 

For $90 you cannot go wrong with these.


Edited by pataburd - 1/31/14 at 10:31am
post #723 of 6488
Quote:
Originally Posted by pataburd View Post
 

Let us know your impressions.

 

The Mikros 90 are not bass-heavy like many other (popular) products out there.  But they can go surprisingly deep, while staying remarkably clean and relatively flat in the process.  To me, their bass is balanced and fit--not fat.

 

Sarah Vaughn sounds breath-taking with the Mikros 90.  : )

 

Some users have expressed issues with soundstage, but I think the MLs' rendering of 3-D space is more organic/natural than most of the other headphones I have heard, with excellent focus as you mentioned.  I have listened to Wagner with the Mikros 90 and have never felt deprived of the attendant orchestral scale that these pieces convey.  Often, soundstage perception with the MLs is recording-dependent, anyway.  I have had some occasions where the listening space seemed vast, and others where the space seemed confined. 

 

I agree that the MLs offer a less visceral/more "cerebral" listening experience that is probably not optimal for heavy rock, rap, techno listeners.  (But I still enjoy techno with them.)

 

For $90 you cannot go wrong with these.

I agree with pataburd on this one. They are worth their $90, I hear it the way he does.

 

The highs are pretty accurate and detailed, although they are grainy in some ways.

 

The highs of the re700s are better as they keep that accuracy and detail, without the graininess.

 

Both are not silibant btw.

 

Re700s are livlier than the martins, and also sound closer to you than the martins.

 

Bass of the re700's are more in quantity, not in basshead level, but they are pretty good in quantity. Quality wise, they're both tied, and they both extend pretty deep. 

 

The mids are captivating on both, and to be honest, they're pretty similar in the mids, detailed, airy, clean. I give the edge to the re700s, and I'll explain why soon enough. The mids are not forward on these martins, but they sound almost as good as the re700s, almost captivating to be honest. It's just more relaxed than the re700s, which I do like and prefer at times.

 

I have to say that these headphones can definitely compete with each other.

 

The martins can sound silibant depending the volume you play it at. Not at the treble, but at the way the singer enunciates his SSSSS.

 

The re700s, since they're more forward, are more silibant than the martins.

post #724 of 6488
Quote:
Originally Posted by vlenbo View Post
 

I agree with pataburd on this one. They are worth their $90, I hear it the way he does.

 

The highs are pretty accurate and detailed, although they are grainy in some ways.

 

The highs of the re700s are better as they keep that accuracy and detail, without the graininess.

 

Both are not silibant btw.

 

Re700s are livlier than the martins, and also sound closer to you than the martins.

 

Bass of the re700's are more in quantity, not in basshead level, but they are pretty good in quantity. Quality wise, they're both tied, and they both extend pretty deep. 

 

The mids are captivating on both, and to be honest, they're pretty similar in the mids, detailed, airy, clean. I give the edge to the re700s, and I'll explain why soon enough. The mids are not forward on these martins, but they sound almost as good as the re700s, almost captivating to be honest. It's just more relaxed than the re700s, which I do like and prefer at times.

 

I have to say that these headphones can definitely compete with each other.

 

The martins can sound silibant depending the volume you play it at. Not at the treble, but at the way the singer enunciates his SSSSS.

 

The re700s, since they're more forward, are more silibant than the martins.

Yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes.  Agreed.  Keep us posted!!

post #725 of 6488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trunks159 View Post
 

Yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes.  Agreed.  Keep us posted!!

I'm in love with the martins already to be honest! 

 

But I'm more in love with the re700s. I'll keep you posted for today. I won't make another comparison like this until the next two weeks.

 

People, please buy the martin logans.

 

Don't think that the re700s can't compete, they should also be bought. I'm one of the few that has the re700s. I hope others will buy the re700s as well.

 

I can almost say that the martins have a bit more detail on the treble, but it does sound a bit thin, but not that noticable. The re700s are somewhat thicker in the cymbals, which is what makes it lose that detail, but it's not that much to be honest.

 

I'm surprised that the re700s hang with the martins. 


Edited by vlenbo - 1/31/14 at 11:24am
post #726 of 6488
Quote:
Originally Posted by vlenbo View Post
 

I'm in love with the martins already to be honest! 

 

But I'm more in love with the re700s. I'll keep you posted for today. I won't make another comparison like this until the next two weeks.

 

People, please buy the martin logans.

 

Don't think that the re700s can't compete, they should also be bought. I'm one of the few that has the re700s. I hope others will buy the re700s as well.

 

I can almost say that the martins have a bit more detail on the treble, but it does sound a bit thin, but not that noticable. The re700s are somewhat thicker in the cymbals, which is what makes it lose that detail, but it's not that much to be honest.

 

I'm surprised that the re700s hang with the martins. 

I will buy them.  Listen more closely to the ML.  WIth good recordings you'll hear some crazy stuff. The detail is retarded good.

post #727 of 6488
Quote:
Originally Posted by vlenbo View Post
 

I agree with pataburd on this one. They are worth their $90, I hear it the way he does.

 

The highs are pretty accurate and detailed, although they are grainy in some ways.

 

The highs of the re700s are better as they keep that accuracy and detail, without the graininess.

 

Both are not silibant btw.

 

Re700s are livlier than the martins, and also sound closer to you than the martins.

 

Bass of the re700's are more in quantity, not in basshead level, but they are pretty good in quantity. Quality wise, they're both tied, and they both extend pretty deep. 

 

The mids are captivating on both, and to be honest, they're pretty similar in the mids, detailed, airy, clean. I give the edge to the re700s, and I'll explain why soon enough. The mids are not forward on these martins, but they sound almost as good as the re700s, almost captivating to be honest. It's just more relaxed than the re700s, which I do like and prefer at times.

 

I have to say that these headphones can definitely compete with each other.

 

The martins can sound silibant depending the volume you play it at. Not at the treble, but at the way the singer enunciates his SSSSS.

 

The re700s, since they're more forward, are more silibant than the martins.

Treble grain could be an artifact of the stock cable IMHO.  Since I installed the Pipeline, any grain--when it comes across at all--is usually traceable to the recording or upstream gear changes (like tubes, interconnects, etc.).  

 

As many of us have observed, the Mikros 90 do scale up well.  And as several of us have reported, perceptible improvements follow from a cable upgrade with these headphones.  Graininess is one characteristic that I did notice with the stock cable, but not with the Pipeline.  It could boil down to basic differences in the way you and I perceive treble, too.

 

Anyway, I am curious to hear how the FiiO RC MH1 affects the MLs' output.   

 

Not in any way intending to put my "HYPE" on here, but to me the Mikros 90 resolve detail just as well--no, better--than every other set of headphones that have come through my stable.  Ditto for clean, deep, textured bass.  I found that even my HE-6--as good as they were--could not go as deep and remain as flat, clean and dynamic as the MLs.


Edited by pataburd - 1/31/14 at 11:01pm
post #728 of 6488
Quote:
Originally Posted by pataburd View Post
 

Treble grain could be an artifact of the stock cable IMHO.  Since I installed the Pipeline, any grain is usually traceable to the recording or upstream gear changes (like tubes, interconnects, etc.).  

 

As many of us have observed, the Mikros 90 do scale up well.  And as several of us have reported, improvements follow from a cable upgrade with these headphones.  

I understand that, but for those of us who want to hear stock cable of the martins vs stock cable of the re700s, I have to compare it equally.

 

Then once I get the pipeline, I'm putting it on the martins, but also on the re700s to make a fair comparison.

 

Thanks for letting me know!

 

I can't use the re700's cable to replace the martin logan's cable. :(

 

But to make it even fairer, I'm using martin's cable on the ath to hear a difference.

 

EDIT: no difference...though I might hear a bit of a difference in treble's....detail I think. That's it.


Edited by vlenbo - 1/31/14 at 11:46am
post #729 of 6488
Quote:
Originally Posted by vlenbo View Post
 

I understand that, but for those of us who want to hear stock cable of the martins vs stock cable of the re700s, I have to compare it equally.

 

Then once I get the pipeline, I'm putting it on the martins, but also on the re700s to make a fair comparison.

 

Thanks for letting me know!

 

I can't use the re700's cable to replace the martin logan's cable. :(

 

But to make it even fairer, I'm using martin's cable on the ath to hear a difference.

 

EDIT: no difference...though I might hear a bit of a difference in treble's....detail I think. That's it.

 

Awesome that you got them now vlenbo! Looking forward to your ongoing impressions for sure.

 

It sounds like you are getting the pipeline then? That would be cool.

:beerchug:

post #730 of 6488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trunks159 View Post
 

I will buy them.  Listen more closely to the ML.  WIth good recordings you'll hear some crazy stuff. The detail is retarded good.

x2

 . . and musicality is in no way compromised in the midst of all that detail IMHO.  This is, to me, one of the most remarkable qualities about the Mikros 90. It sets them apart from other fast, detailed cans I have owned in past, like the Sony MDR-SA5000 or the Grado SR-325i.  With the Sony and Grado I would tend to get distracted by the detail and lose track of the music (plus they were both treble-dominant and would therefore draw your attention to the high frequencies).  With the Mikros 90, the detail retrieval actually enhances/reinforces the musical experience.  (And to be honest--NOT getting my HYPE on, either--I think the Mikros 90 surpasses both the SA5000 and the SR325i in detail retrieval/resolution).  Amazing and delightful.


Edited by pataburd - 1/31/14 at 12:05pm
post #731 of 6488
Quote:
Originally Posted by pataburd View Post
 

x2

 . . and musicality is in no way compromised in the midst of all that detail IMHO.  This is, to me, one of the most remarkable qualities about the Mikros 90. It sets them apart from other fast, detailed cans I have owned in past, like the Sony MDR-SA5000 or the Grado SR-325i.  With the Sony and Grado I would tend to get distracted by the detail and lose track of the music (plus they were both treble-dominant and would therefore draw your attention to the high frequencies).  With the Mikros 90, the detail retrieval actually enhances/reinforces the musical experience.  (And to be honest--NOT getting my HYPE on, either--I think the Mikros 90 surpasses both the SA5000 and the SR325i in detail retrieval/resolution).  Amazing and delightful.

+1 on both. I just heard one of my favorite jpop songs, and I hear guitar strings better on the martins than the re700s. It's night and day difference. Almost night and day anyways.

 

I'd give them this amount of clarity

 

Instrument clarity + Detail

 

Martin logans >> re700s

 

The re700s do fall behind, but not to the point where you'd agonize of the quality differences. Well you might, since the instruments sound cleaner and thinner on the martins, which helps you hear the strumming better on the logans.

 

However, there is one thing I was biased and people here MAY HAVE, been biased on.

 

Vocals.

 

Sure, they don't compromise on detail while being musical, but I am sorry to say that these are headphones that are less musical than the re700s.

 

Once you hear the re700s, you will KNOW the amount of musicality these re700s contain.

 

The vocals are more airy on the re700s, more open, more emotional than the martins. The martins make the vocals sound...a bit repressed in a sense, but still does a great job at capturing the emotion, but the re700s are two steps ahead. It does depend on the recording, but dang...the re700s do have a difference here...

 

Vocal quality

 

Re700s>>Martin logans

 

Bass quantity wise, the re700s wins against logans, but also have that tight bass like the logans.

 

Re700s>=Logans

 

The instrument quality goes to Logans, and accuracy goes to logans as well. The treble also goes a bit to logans as cymbals also have a bit more detail than the re700s. At least by .5 to 1 db.

 

[based on the seven days song, By STING]

 

Cymbals sound somewhat thin on the logans, and the re700s sound warmer and a bit thicker, lusher. However, the logans do beat the re700s in clarity and detaill on the cymbals by a small step. You hear a TSK on the logans, you hear a TTSHK on the re700s. It's not that big of a difference though, I can't explain it well just yet.

 

Cymbals, treble

Logans>=Re700s

 

 


Test song, my favorite ones of all.

 

 

Piano sounds better on the re700s than the martins as it has a bit more thickness to it, I definitely hear a small difference here. The martins don't lack behind though, they do well here. The bass sound intoxicating on the re700s, the martins do it well, but not to the amount of power as the re700s. I'm not saying bass cannon levels, but I do hear it more prominent than the martins. By 2 decibels.

 

I heard a different recording that had ONLY acoustics.

 

 

it's this one.

 

Don't get me wrong though, the martins do vocals justice depending the recording, like the first one for instance. It touched my heart hearing the best female sing to her hearts desire. The re700s opened it up a bit more and made it even better for me, making me a very happy guy. 

 

Both headphones can compete, I'm amazed, simply amazed. 

 

The martins do leave the re700s in the dust at the string department though.

 

The martins impress me, the re700s impress me. Both are pretty capable headphones, I'm shocked and pleased to hear the differences between the two.

 

I expected the martins to win every department, but they both tie in everything almost. The highs are a tad better on the martins, but the bass is definitely better on the re700s, the vocals win on the re700s, but the instruments win on the martins, at least string instruments. Piano sounded lovely on the re700s.

 

Since I stayed up for an hour and a half last night comparing 4 headphones at once, I'm resting for now and will let the martins burn-in.

 

I can tell that the vocals will be the re700's favor, the instruments on the martins, the bass on re700's favor due to quantity (and yet has that nice ecstatic quality as well), but the highs will be in martins favor. Burn-in or not.


Edited by vlenbo - 1/31/14 at 12:34pm
post #732 of 6488

Excellent again vlenbo! Looking forward to seeing how your impressions change after burn in, and then again after you get the pipeline. :D

post #733 of 6488
Vlenbo, comments on soundstage, comfort, and isolation would be greatly appreciated.
post #734 of 6488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trunks159 View Post

Vlenbo, comments on soundstage, comfort, and isolation would be greatly appreciated.

martin pads are a bit more comfortable than the re700s, the isolation I can't say...I believe the martins have a light edge here, and the soundstage sounds similar to each other, but once I give it a fairer comparison, I'll make sure. The re700s sound bigger in comparison, and both have the 3Dness and imagery.

post #735 of 6488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ardian View Post


Thank you for helping 😊
Can I ask you which is better in realism of sound??! And Who wins in the following kind of music:
1- Pop - Hip Hop
2- Rock - Metal
3- Classical - Jazz

Thank you another time! 😊


I'd have to say the Amperiors are marketed as a DJ headphone, so Hip Hop is kinda it's roots, and it does it so very well . it has a fun bass that works great on Metal too. They work wonderfully on any acoustic music. The  ML's do every kind of music right, IMHO, because the speaker / transducer is so very quick and accurate, it will reveal little nuances of music you probably never noticed before, the Mikros may force you to replay all your old favorites and see what you might have missed, or how bad they were recorded. The ML's are very true to the source, and thrive and a good amp, where they really come into they're own. At the current prices I see getting a pair of Martin Logan Mikros 90's as an excellent investment in your music enjoyment future.But if you do get the Sennheisers, well you have made an excellent choice too, just a little less studio monitor and more street party.

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