Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › [REVIEW/COMPARISON] ATH-AD900X vs ATH-AD1000X vs MDR-MA900 - It's STILL over 900!!!!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[REVIEW/COMPARISON] ATH-AD900X vs ATH-AD1000X vs MDR-MA900 - It's STILL over 900!!!! - Page 22

post #316 of 320
Hey guys I can get the ad900x for 120USD do you think i should buy it?
I've heard it has problems with imaging and positioning would it be a problem if I was gaming? I'm mostly using it for movies, games and music.
post #317 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by face2k View Post

Hey guys I can get the ad900x for 120USD do you think i should buy it?
I've heard it has problems with imaging and positioning would it be a problem if I was gaming? I'm mostly using it for movies, games and music.

 

I think for gaming, the AD900x would be a good headphone - mainly due to its soundstage when it comes to width.  It's been awhile since I've had the AD900x but have been playing in the AD2000x and AD2000 territory.  However, I found that many others also felt that the "x" series didn't really equate to an improvement.  When it comes to the AD2000 vs. the AD2000x, the AD2000x seems to be missing the mid-range punch that the AD2000 was noted for.  IMO, I'd expect a lot more from a $999 (list price) headphone like the AD2000x.  Street prices and used are quite a bit lower.

 

With what I've stated above, it still wouldn't push me from the ATH-AD900x to the ATH-AD900.  The previous version (non "x"), I found that the pads would easily bottom out and get compressed over time.  This would mean that one's ears would come close to, or even actually touch the driver.  The newer pads on the "x" series have addressed this issue.  If money were in abundance for me, I would love to hear what the ATH-AD900 would sound like with the newer pads from the "x" series.

 

Finally, getting back to the ATH-AD900x.  While I haven't heard the ATH-AD900x at the same time as the ATH-AD700, from what I remember of the AD700, it was a bit better.  Some might say a bit less bass.  Others might say a bit more of a narrow soundstage.  I'd hate to tell anyone that the ATH-AD900x should be passed over at the price of $120.  In that case, it might be a safe buy.  If you don't like what it features, I feel that you'll easily get your money back if you had to resell it. 

post #318 of 320

I feel like a lot of people were expecting only a bass increase to deal with the ATH-AD900's roll off. I guess it was reasonable to expect with how the closed "x" versions were changing.

 

Maybe after EQing they'll sound better.

post #319 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by HybridCore View Post
 

I feel like a lot of people were expecting only a bass increase to deal with the ATH-AD900's roll off. I guess it was reasonable to expect with how the closed "x" versions were changing.

 

Maybe after EQing they'll sound better.

 

That's a good possibility.  Then again, when you have a 53mm driver in a headphone cup with a fully open back, it's hard to get bass below 35Hz or so - I believe that's what I've ready.

 

The ATH-A900x, being a closed headphone is a different beast.  While the bass can go lower, you'll lose the airiness and soundstage that the "AD" open series offers.  Additionally, the A900 / A900x have pleather pads, which can equate to more heat and discomfort over extended listening periods.  I had my pair of ATH-A900x headphones for a few months and used them a fair amount.  Also believe with the newer "x" model, Audio Technica had initially stated that the pads would be leather and not pleather.  I really couldn't confirm that leather was on my pair.

 

When you read reviews of the Sony MA900, it's an open headphone.  However, they have a disc behind the driver which is supposed to aid in the bass response.  Those headphones have the mega 70mm drivers too.  If it's bass you want - and would like to achieve it in an open headphone, I'd go for the HE-400.  It has some of the best bass you'll hear and feel, aside from going to something in the next league like Audeze.

post #320 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by wje View Post

I think for gaming, the AD900x would be a good headphone - mainly due to its soundstage when it comes to width.  It's been awhile since I've had the AD900x but have been playing in the AD2000x and AD2000 territory.  However, I found that many others also felt that the "x" series didn't really equate to an improvement.  When it comes to the AD2000 vs. the AD2000x, the AD2000x seems to be missing the mid-range punch that the AD2000 was noted for.  IMO, I'd expect a lot more from a $999 (list price) headphone like the AD2000x.  Street prices and used are quite a bit lower.

With what I've stated above, it still wouldn't push me from the ATH-AD900x to the ATH-AD900.  The previous version (non "x"), I found that the pads would easily bottom out and get compressed over time.  This would mean that one's ears would come close to, or even actually touch the driver.  The newer pads on the "x" series have addressed this issue.  If money were in abundance for me, I would love to hear what the ATH-AD900 would sound like with the newer pads from the "x" series.

Finally, getting back to the ATH-AD900x.  While I haven't heard the ATH-AD900x at the same time as the ATH-AD700, from what I remember of the AD700, it was a bit better.  Some might say a bit less bass.  Others might say a bit more of a narrow soundstage.  I'd hate to tell anyone that the ATH-AD900x should be passed over at the price of $120.  In that case, it might be a safe buy.  If you don't like what it features, I feel that you'll easily get your money back if you had to resell it. 
thank you very much for your answer
i got them in the mail this morning
im still trying to get a feel for the sound since im too used to using my CAL2
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › [REVIEW/COMPARISON] ATH-AD900X vs ATH-AD1000X vs MDR-MA900 - It's STILL over 900!!!!