or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Yamaha hph mt220 thread (Merged)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Yamaha hph mt220 thread (Merged) - Page 17

post #241 of 3140
I went out for a cuppa coffee, took 220 along with my android...
Hit a few Batman Returns soundtrack, this Yamaha churned out the low 5-10hz rumble with ease indeed.
Very sensitive n easy to drive, I think the Sansa clip will do a great job too..
Where's my Sansa....

Edited by Lorspeaker - 5/23/14 at 10:22am
post #242 of 3140

http://www.amazon.com/HiFiMan-Leather-Earpads-Series-Headphones/dp/B006695A8G/ref=cm_cr_pr_pb_i

 

i swapped in this pair of hifiman FLAT pleather pads, ( since the drivers are already angled);

slightly firmer n thicker than the yammie stockpads,

u need to pull out the plastic fixing base that came with the hifiman pads..

n then just stretch it over the yammies..v easy.

 

Gave slightly more space for my eartips to relax :P

Soundwise, still the same signature...

slightly tighter, more focused. slight improvement in isolation.

 

Didnt try the Alphapads, think it is too angled. The sound might get crossfed>??? :P

post #243 of 3140
Well I was right, these are quite similar to the GR07....they have more in common than they don't. The MT's are warmer, have better dynamics, and more height to the soundstage, but they present themselves in a similar way......you can tell these are both set up as monitors.

Anyway this has been an excellent purchase, will be saying goodbye to the D2K smily_headphones1.gif
post #244 of 3140
Tried watching a few movies on my iPad, this headphone sounded as if I m in a home theatre..
The vocals n sound effects are very tall , upfront, enveloping. Very involving for a small screen:-)
post #245 of 3140
so do these put the soundstage somewhat in front of you?
post #246 of 3140

kinda reminds me of AT cans....very near the stage, but more lightfooted. Easily powered. 

For my taste, i like this can with simple/small ensemble, jazz, vocal live performance,

where i want to be near the stage/singer.

 

For big orchestra pieces, i prefer a broader/ more distant presentation afforded by the DT770 type.

post #247 of 3140
I wouldn't say it's in front of you but more enveloping, just more intimate than a lot of other cans. I'm not a listener of orchestra bit I can imagine wanting more air. For rock and metal however, they're on it!
post #248 of 3140
Lol....describing sound is fun!

I dun want more air, I want more space..as in to sit further back, for the big orchestra ;p
If I can get that off the mt220, it would hv been like a hd800 in closed format...
That tallwall of a sound.
post #249 of 3140

Seems like I'm the only one that didn't like the MT220, can't either say it's extremely up-front either particularly because the lower-midrange doesn't get pushed forward enough compared to the somewhat rough textured slightly emphasized highs making it miss slight amount body.

For me the problem is the rough texture of the highs and it's a very slightly bit more forward in the highs than I ideally want and it's slightly grainy too, and the subbass was slightly bit too bloated/uncontrolled/loose and I'd just want a more "in-your-face" lower-mids (300 - 1000Hz) in particular for slightly thicker and intimate sound. Therefore I couldn't get engaged with my music compared to listening with for example the M-Audio Q40 which is even more up-front / in-your-face sounding due to slightly bit less highs presence at which the midrange takes more presence instead. The subbass or the whole bassrange for that matter has much more control and texture and punchiness with the Q40 which is particularly important for the music I listen to and it's free from any grain.

With the MT220 I didn't "feel" anything, when listening with Q40 I get so engaged with the music that I'd tap my foot, do some headbobbing and singalong which didn't unfortunately happen with the MT220. The more engaged with the music I get, the more I enjoy it! It has a sound signature which work well for classical though (classical to me does seem to benefit by very gentle V-shape sound with slight bit emphasized highs and slight bit of boost especially in the deep bass) because it makes it less in-your-face sounding and illusion of a larger soundstage when the mids aren't pushed up-front (500-2000Hz in particular) but it's not the sound I'm looking for, I'm more after the soul-ful intimate jazz listening (I don't listen to jazz though but it's a good example of what kind of sound I enjoy).


Edited by RPGWiZaRD - 5/28/14 at 2:03pm
post #250 of 3140
Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD View Post
 

Seems like I'm the only one that didn't like the MT220, can't either say it's extremely up-front either particularly because the lower-midrange doesn't get pushed forward enough compared to the somewhat rough textured slightly emphasized highs making it miss slight amount body.

For me the problem is the rough texture of the highs and it's a very slightly bit more forward in the highs than I ideally want and it's slightly grainy too, and the subbass was slightly bit too bloated/uncontrolled/loose and I'd just want a more "in-your-face" lower-mids (300 - 1000Hz) in particular for slightly thicker and intimate sound. Therefore I couldn't get engaged with my music compared to listening with for example the M-Audio Q40 which is even more up-front / in-your-face sounding due to slightly bit less highs presence at which the midrange takes more presence instead. The subbass or the whole bassrange for that matter has much more control and texture and punchiness with the Q40 which is particularly important for the music I listen to and it's free from any grain.

With the MT220 I didn't "feel" anything, when listening with Q40 I get so engaged with the music that I'd tap my foot, do some headbobbing and singalong which didn't unfortunately happen with the MT220. The more engaged with the music I get, the more I enjoy it! It has a sound signature which work well for classical though (classical to me does seem to benefit by very gentle V-shape sound with slight bit emphasized highs and slight bit of boost especially in the deep bass) because it makes it less in-your-face sounding and illusion of a larger soundstage when the mids aren't pushed up-front (500-2000Hz in particular) but it's not the sound I'm looking for, I'm more after the soul-ful intimate jazz listening (I don't listen to jazz though but it's a good example of what kind of sound I enjoy).

 

 

Sounds like you're criticizing these cans based on feel and fun factor....These are neutral monitoring cans...And at that they are are outstanding. 

post #251 of 3140
Quote:
Originally Posted by mustardisease View Post
 

 

 

Sounds like you're criticizing these cans based on feel and fun factor....These are neutral monitoring cans...And at that they are are outstanding. 


I think the subbass is too pronounced and highs slightly bit too emphasized. The Q40 does better job at mids vs highs balance for slightly lower price. Here's a measurement of the MT220 to backup that:



The subbass overshadowed some stuff that didn't happen with Q40 that I use for mastering EDM music.
 Tracks that would be neutrally balanced would sound somewhat grainy and fatiguing due to the rough texture of the highs. Note I'm talking texture here, I don't mean presence/boosted highs when I talk about roughness, the character of the highs of MT220 makes them seem more bright than they are so that there even is slight bump in the highs around 10kHz further emphasizes that roughness to come forth, if it was about 5dB or so lower at 10kHz it would sound balanced though and mids would be slightly more forward as a result. Currently the mids was slightly behind the highs in tonal balance so therefore I couldn't use the MT220, there was an excess amount raspiness in vocals and some leads. Many enjoys more "sparkle" than real life and more power to them but there was always a bit more sparkle than in real life with this headphone due to its rough/slightly grainy sounding highs which emphasizes that, for me that's not neutral, a neutral headphone sounds like real-life in terms of tonal balance. All in all it sounded slightly bit U-shaped like the graph suggests, I'm after ^-- shape personally with good bass control with roughly this amount bass but the highs were too present and the subbass lacked some control on MT220 for my needs.
 


Edited by RPGWiZaRD - 5/30/14 at 6:56am
post #252 of 3140
Well that's what makes this hobby interesting, everyone hears things differently. I don't find these U-shaped at all, and that graph doesn't either, strictly it's more of a W-shape....and even that's dependent on source (the HDMI is much flatter). But this could be because I'm coming from the D2K, not that I found them particularly recesses either it's just the presentation is distant in comparison. They do have some peaks up top but overall the presentation is not as bright as the D2K, not by far.
post #253 of 3140
Actually this is really interesting, if you look at the goldenears measurements of the Q40 they are fairly similar:

post #254 of 3140

^ That's the thing, the highs on mt220 has a very rough texture while Q40 has a more softer texture (ala. "Sennheiser" approach) and doesn't jump in-my face like on the mt220. They sound like totally different in the highs but if you see the Q40 already rolls of at 14kHz but those frequencies aren't that easily hearable but mt220 definitely has more air and better soundstaging as a result which is those few things I'm looking for upgrades but have a hard time to find due to the lackluster amount of focus on bass emphasized but otherwise neutral/flat midrange/highs headphones in any pricerange. The mt220 looked good on the paper but the on-hands experiences went a little worse than expected.

Fostex TH-900 for example has slightly bit too laid-back midrange for my tastes (especially the crucial low-midrange), I'm looking for one that is very much in-line with the highs.


Edited by RPGWiZaRD - 5/30/14 at 9:57am
post #255 of 3140

Listening to these on NFB10.32...as a consumer, 

(not a sound mixing pro, i cant figure out charts..:P )

 

Pavarotti ...Il Canto,

Kiri Te Kanawa....Summertime,

Ketherine Jenkins...Till There Was You,

Hayley Westenra....Pure

Izzy ....Lascia Ch'lo Pianga

Celine Dion...The Power of Love

 

I picked a selection of songs that goes wayupHIGH...

Their singing soar effortlessly thru this can..

with their individual textured voice, never did felt unnatural spikes,

or the need to cringe, or pull off my headfone when they hit their high notes...

nothing artificial, very enjoyable to my ears...lovely.

 

very hard for me to describe the sound as "grainy, fatiguing, rough texture" ..off my setup.

( i had sold off 3 AKGs cos my ears cant handle the vocals on them.. )

 

Just sharing what i am hearing...dun shoooooot me  "P

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Yamaha hph mt220 thread (Merged)