Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Surprise TDK MT-300: $4.97 of AWESOME...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Surprise TDK MT-300: $4.97 of AWESOME... - Page 10

post #136 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by KEP1 View Post

Are the highs on these guys ever harsh? One thing I love about my MH1C is they're almost impossible to get harsh highs out of.

 

As per this previous post of mine, the high's are never harsh to me.

post #137 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwinQY View Post

 

Trim the tips off the foams (unless you have those yellow Shure foams), the treble damping is greatly lessened. Nothing but pure enjoyment with these! I think they take EQ (except in the lower mids) much better than the Philips, FXD40s, or the Monos. Might be time to let go of the JVCs and 8320 to create the ultimate budget IEM combo (VC02/MT300 + Clip Zip + 64GB microSD). 

 

Based on your above post, I started looking into the VC02''s here. They sound good. Would it be safe to say that they are more on the bright side (like the FX40's)?

post #138 of 365
Thread Starter 

vs HA-FX40

This was tough because the FX40 is such a fun, but wasn't as hard as I thought.  However, I'm now getting into the price range ~$20 where the MT300 is playing.

 

The FX40 is a big "U", but the sub-bass drops off where the MT300 is flat and keeps going down smoothly.  Treble on the MT300 is noticeably smoother, while in the mids the FX40 is somewhat recessed.  Sibilance can rear its head on the FX40, as treble seems spikey.  Overall the MT300 is very natural, something that would take a lot of EQing to come close to on the FX40.

 

On comfort the FX40 is a little hard to insert due to its smaller size, but microphonics is quite well controlled also and it also has a slider.  The cable is thicker than the MT300 too.  It also comes with the best clip I've ever seen.

 

 

BTW it looks like we've run Amazon out of stock!

http://www.head-fi.org/products/tdk-life-on-record-mt300-high-definition-in-ear-headphones

Happy New Year!


Edited by inline79 - 1/1/13 at 2:39pm
post #139 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by inline79 View Post

BTW it looks like we've run Amazon out of stock!

http://www.head-fi.org/products/tdk-life-on-record-mt300-high-definition-in-ear-headphones

Happy New Year!

I picked up the last one today atsmile.gif

post #140 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by inline79 View Post

vs HA-FX40

This was tough because the FX40 is such a fun, but wasn't as hard as I thought.  However, I'm not getting into the price range ~$20 where the MT300 is playing.

 

The FX40 is a big "U", but the sub-bass drops off where the MT300 is flat and keeps going down smoothly.  Treble on the MT300 is noticeably smoother, while in the mids the FX40 is somewhat recessed.  Sibilance can rear its head on the FX40, as treble seems spikey.  Overall the MT300 is very natural, something that would take a lot of EQing to come close to on the FX40.

 

On comfort the FX40 is a little hard to insert due to its smaller size, but microphonics is quite well controlled also and it also has a slider.  The cable is thicker than the MT300 too.  It also comes with the best clip I've ever seen.

 

Thanks for the impressions. I had the fx40's for about 3 weeks. I burned the crap out of them, and I put foam tips on them in an attempt to dampen the highs. I loved the detail, but due to my sensitivity to brightness I suppose, they didn't work for me. I have to say that your description above of the MT300's appeals to me much more. Which I suppose is why the MT300's appeal to me so much! smile.gif

post #141 of 365

Hey guys. I got gifted a pair of MT-300's, I believe for Christmas, so I figured I'd chip in my two cents on the subject. I've got maybe 5-8 hours of on head time with these so far. Also, I'd like to state that I've yet to read anyone's review of these so far so if my thoughts are congruent with others' then maybe we're on to something.

 

Overall. Silly good for $5, imo. It's actually hard for me to rate this headphone at times. Easily, there are areas for improvement throughout the entire sonic presentation, but then I remind myself that these are $5... I mean, irrespective that my pair actually were given to me, if I was buying these for myself I'd basically write the expense off as "free." It's hard to critique something you got for basically free.

 

Detail. Pretty good. Being an orthonaut I feel it's difficult to wow me in this area, but it easily passes imo as a damn good $5 headphone. Not quite sure at what price point you could outperform these, but I'll blindly guess an average of 10x their cost. More on this later.

 

Bass. Reaches pretty deep. Nice bloom making a lot of music fun to listen to. I'd say it's on the verge of being one-note-ish, but I feel it's more simply a lack of texture. It sounds very realistic in attack and tonal character with a lot of percussion, imo. Electronica music tends to reveal its flaws, however. While it maintains a dynamic level of bass that's astonishingly clean for a $5 pair of buds, it lacks the tactile "blap blap" that you often get on complex bass passages in this genre. I'd take a tighter bottom end for a small sacrifice in overall output.

 

Midrange. Magic. Not too upfront, not too recessed, just right. No overly obvious funky coloration going on that I can tell. These guys nailed it. The only thing I can really even point my finger at is that the upper-midrange is my limiting factor on volume. I find that these buds like to be played at moderately loud volumes, but once you get past a certain threshold the upper-mids get shouty for me. Some headphones with very flat response can basically get louder until the SPL just hurts in general (read permanently damaging your hearing), but with these there's a definite peak in the response which may hinder people from pushing all the way into "fully rockin' out" mode.

 

Treble. Slightly recessed and slightly fuzzy. This is the reason I want to turn up the volume, I want more top end. With this in mind, however, it'd take one hell of a hot track to get shrill on you. These have yet to get sibilant on me. Speaking to the "fuzzy" remark, I feel cymbals have a certain "shhh" where I'm used it sounding like "tshhh." I feel there's a lack of resolution in this range which could be said for the entire frequency spectrum -which I guess I just did- but I feel as though it's most obvious in this region.

 

Build quality/aesthetics/etc. It's hard for me to judge these, I've only had them for a few days. I like the buds themselves, they feel solid, and I feel like you'd have to make a pretty big oops in order to break them. I like the included tips, they fit well, and they feel like they'll last many baths in the faucet. They do tend to slide up on the ear bud fixture upon insertion, however, which can force me to either have to push the buds in further (which can lead to an unbalance between channels sometimes) or remove and reposition the tips. I haven't had any issues with the cord so far, but it is thin and the rubber doesn't feel very strong. I sort of wince internally when I pull these guys out of my ear by the cord, I'm just imaging the strain relief giving way or something. This could be a completely unjustified remark altogether, and hopefully it is, but that's just an early observation of mine. I'm scared for that accidental snag. All that said, the cord is very soft and not microphonic very much (almost at all) which is awesome especially if you know how bad buds can be in this department. I've worn these for a few hours continuously with no discomfort. If you're not used to buds, though, I'm pretty sure these will take the normal break-in time for your ears to acclimate to IEM/canalphones. My ears were sore for a week after I got my first pair of IEM's. Some days I'd just use cans to give my ears a break, it was that bad. I don't expect these to be quite that bad, but I would expect some discomfort for newbies. Give them a chance.

 

Recap. Hopefully I didn't sound too negative through all that because honestly: Awesome buds for $5. I'd have 100% no problems using these as my primary portables. They really are that good, and the price tag is just icing on the cake.

post #142 of 365

How are these vs the she3580?

post #143 of 365
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilboozy View Post

How are these vs the she3580?


I put a hyperlinked index in Post #1 to comparisons and other review throughout the thread.  Hope it helps!

post #144 of 365
Quote:

Originally Posted by inline79 View Post
 

vs. Philips SHE3580

To add to what I said above, not only is highest treble rolled off, there's a definite canyon in the mids.  It makes the SHE3580 sound very bass heavy and almost causes the bass to be distracting as you're trying to pick out all the details in the mids and looking for your top end.  While in both IEMs the bass is fairly well controlled, I got the impression that on the SHE3580 the bass actually is even more boosted the lower you go, rather than being relatively flat like on the MT300.  The SHE3580 profile feels like a very steep "V", with the treble side of the V a bit lower, while the MT300 sounds much more balanced.

 

So while the SHE3580 gives a great first impression of being "fun" because you get hit with lowest lows, and some highs, it can quickly get tiring compared to the MT300 which is a better all-rounder.  In fact, the MT300 is a breath of fresh air after time with the SHE3580.  Suddenly you can hear vocals effortlessly and the bass is no longer beating up your ear drums.  They can almost sound bright, but they're not - it's the mids, the bulk of the instruments, coming out of hiding.  I don't want to go back to the SHE3580s!

 

Microphonics is also no where near as well controlled as on the MT300, this could also be because there's no cinch or clip.  I don't know why on head-fi this isn't a bigger factor - does nobody around here move while wearing IEMs?

 

Nice work adding the hyperlinks! I re-read your comparison (above). I can't speak for the SHE3580's, but what you are said about the MT300's sure resonates. Love those mids and the overall SQ.

post #145 of 365

I received my pair of MT-300 ear buds in the mail today, courtesy of a fellow Head-Fi member.  I don't have a lot of ear time just yet - only into the 3rd or 4th song on B.B. King's greatest hits.  So far, I'm being very patient as I listen and wind down from my work day.   I'm just running them out of my Sansa Fuze at the moment, but will move them over to the Xonar U3 to see how the signature changes.  I'm really sensing a balanced sound and the highs are not screeching like many of the IEMs of this caliber and price category are sounding.  Also, I'm eager to move from the standard issue silicone tips and review some of the others that have been discussed to date here in the forum.  I'd love to see where these can go with burn-in time, tip options, etc.  However, using the mid-sized silicone tips from TDK, the fit is really quite well.

 

More to follow with more time logged on these with more music, too.

post #146 of 365

Requesting the link to my review to be called "Outline Review" or something since it is anything but in depth--considering I made comparisons by memory redface.gif

And because I just somewhat followed joker's outline.

 

Interesting TDK lineup there, btw...

post #147 of 365
Thread Starter 

It's now your "general impression"!  But I still think you did a really "in-depth" job of describing what you think of them.  Thanks again!
 

PS. Tonight at midnight we see if they go back down to $4.97 from $9.99!

XSCargo TDK MT-300

post #148 of 365

I have a brief update before heading to bed.  I'm still in the process of trying these ear buds / IEMs out in many different situations.  Normally, I've just used IEMs along with my Sansa Fuze.  Boy, was I missing a lot.  I then moved them over to my Asus Xonar U3 card and fired up Foobar with the WinsAPI drivers and used the IEMs for at least a good hour.  The Sansa Fuze, while normally a bit better in sound than the iPod touch devices, but possibly a bit lower in sound quality than the 30GB or 60GB iPod Classic which last featured a Wolfson DAC and sounded very good - in fact, the opinion of many was that the Classic 5, or Video was one of the best as that was when Apple last used the Wolfson DACs.  Anyway, the sound from my Xonar U3 improved the sound quite considerably with these IEMs.  A better source, and better amplification is not just for full sized headphones, but also for IEMs or ear buds, too.  Clearly, these TDK ear buds really like it when driven by some better source components.

post #149 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by wje View Post

I have a brief update before heading to bed.  I'm still in the process of trying these ear buds / IEMs out in many different situations.  Normally, I've just used IEMs along with my Sansa Fuze.  Boy, was I missing a lot.  I then moved them over to my Asus Xonar U3 card and fired up Foobar with the WinsAPI drivers and used the IEMs for at least a good hour.  The Sansa Fuze, while normally a bit better in sound than the iPod touch devices, but possibly a bit lower in sound quality than the 30GB or 60GB iPod Classic which last featured a Wolfson DAC and sounded very good - in fact, the opinion of many was that the Classic 5, or Video was one of the best as that was when Apple last used the Wolfson DACs.  Anyway, the sound from my Xonar U3 improved the sound quite considerably with these IEMs.  A better source, and better amplification is not just for full sized headphones, but also for IEMs or ear buds, too.  Clearly, these TDK ear buds really like it when driven by some better source components.

 

Hmm... I'm very happy with the way they sound out of my not better sources (SGS2 which sadly does not have the Wolfson chip, and my clip zip, and my laptop). But what you are saying makes me think that possibly a better source is in order! At least I am getting and ele dac for my laptop soon, so we'll see how that does.

 

Anyway, I'm appreciating your impressions (here and in the S500 thread)  smile.gif

post #150 of 365
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by WAYNENUMM View Post

 

Nice work adding the hyperlinks! I re-read your comparison (above). I can't speak for the SHE3580's, but what you are said about the MT300's sure resonates. Love those mids and the overall SQ.


Thanks Wayne, the MT-300s have kicked the SHE3580 and FX40 out of my regular use.  But I never liked the SHE3580's sound anyways.  The FX40 i was having some fun with, but sometimes the highs would really start to hurt.  The FX40 thread people keep saying to burn them in, and I have been, but I'm not hearing the improvement.  Why should I have to burn in an IEM for 500hrs when the MT-300 sounds great overnight???

 

Now onto the M6, my former "all-rounder"...

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Surprise TDK MT-300: $4.97 of AWESOME...