Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Upgrading from ATH-A900 to M-100?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Upgrading from ATH-A900 to M-100?

post #1 of 7
Thread Starter 
I own a pair of A900's and they are starting to fall apart after years of daily use. I primarily listen at home through the headphone out of a Native Instruments Komplete Audio 6 and I use it for general listening of primarily electronic genres, though some jazz, and for producing electronic music. My two main questions are: 1) How much of an upgrade is it to go from A900 to the M-100? 2) Is the M-100 very hyped compared to A900? I want to be able to have some semblance of accuracy since I will be using these as backup monitors in producing music (more like a second reference point) and some of the reviews highlight the M-100 as a "basshead" can. The problem with the A900 for me is they do not produce sufficient bass to hear a lot of the music I produce and listen to - an 808 kick barely registers unless I have headphone volume at fatiguing levels - so I think this may be a good thing. Anyone have experience with both?

Thanks in advance for any help!
post #2 of 7
Thread Starter 
bump
post #3 of 7
Thread Starter 
bump
post #4 of 7
Thread Starter 
anyone?
post #5 of 7
The M-100 is honestly the best portable headphone I've heard, barring the Momentum from Senn. They have noticeable bass emphasis, but unlike most consumer lines, place this emphasis in the sub-bass region rather than the mid bass. Mids are slightly recesse and highs are smooth. The recession in the mid range is not as noticeable as that of the M50 or DT770 though. I found them to be an enjoyable, and sexy pair of cans.

That being said, you said you wanted studio monitors for production, that's where I would dis-recommend the M-100's, although they are detailed, they aren't quite "fast" enough and won't reproduce the midrange needed for most production settings adequately in my taste.

Have you looked toward the DT880's or SRH-840/940?
post #6 of 7
Thread Starter 
A lot of reviews I saw on the DT880's and SRH-940's criticize their lack of bass presence. Given that most of the music I produce and listen to is very bass heavy this wouldn't work well for me. I don't need exaggerated bass necessarily, but I already feel like A900's don't have sufficient bass at comfortable listening volumes, so I am afraid these may be step in wrong direction, despite them being more accurate. Are the M-100's incredibly colored? How do either of them compare to ATH-A900's?
post #7 of 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris9181 View Post

A lot of reviews I saw on the DT880's and SRH-940's criticize their lack of bass presence. Given that most of the music I produce and listen to is very bass heavy this wouldn't work well for me. I don't need exaggerated bass necessarily, but I already feel like A900's don't have sufficient bass at comfortable listening volumes, so I am afraid these may be step in wrong direction, despite them being more accurate. Are the M-100's incredibly colored? How do either of them compare to ATH-A900's?


Believe me when I say that the claims of baseless-ness on the SRH-940's are completely false. I find that mine tend to almost be too heavy on the low end for some tracks. I produce progressive house/Dubstep, and they are perfectly balance for studio work. The DT880's I have heard and the also have enough bass, they both lack a bit of mid-bass, but a simple EQ will fix that no problem.

The M-100's are warm, very warm. They tend to have a colored texture and when coupled with EDM, they shine. You will also tend to see that they work dramatically better when used portably. They do this by coupling external interference with the bass emphasis, which drowns out excess bass and keeps the entire SS controlled and delightful.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Upgrading from ATH-A900 to M-100?