Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › **MrSpeakers Mad Dog: Impressions and Discussion Thread**
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

**MrSpeakers Mad Dog: Impressions and Discussion Thread** - Page 170

post #2536 of 2841
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ikarios View Post
 

 

I personally don't consider the Mad Dogs a portable headphone, the alpha pads bring the center of gravity of the cup assembly too far away from your head. In other words, when you turn your head, inertia makes the cups "swing" out, it's not the greatest for moving around. The isolation isn't bad, but I just don't think they were designed to be used anywhere other than sitting down. The NADs can fold flat, which is nice for tucking them away into a backpack, but the headband shape makes them look a little weird on your head. They're also tiny compared to the Mad Dogs - but what "portable" doesn't?

 

Sonically, they're both great neutral headphones, with the Mad Dogs lying a bit on the darker side of neutral and the NADs on the warmer side. Technically, the Mad Dogs beat the NADs in terms of soundstage, treble extension, speed, and accuracy, although only slightly on the last two. The NADs have a slight mid accentuation ( "n" shaped, you could say, but very slight) and don't extend as high in the trebles, although goes as low as the MDs and hits a little bit harder. You can't go wrong with the sound of either one, IMO, so pick the one that you think better fits your usage needs.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kendoji View Post
 

Phew I'm glad we got that sorted out.  :)

 

I still have a question for anyone that's heard both the Mad Dogs and the NAD HP-50.  I'm torn between them.  Ultimately I'm looking for something to replace my M100s as a portable / transportable can (with a more balanced sound).  I know the Mad Dogs are pretty bulky to lug around, but I could live with that.  Any thoughts would be welcome.  :)

I used my Mad Dogs as portable/transportable, and I still use my Alpha Dogs at school all the time. I only partially agree with Ikarios. They are not an easy phone to do vigorous actions with, but they will stay on your head with simple walking. I rarely walk with headphones on my head though as not hearing anything bugs me (I will listen to IEMs with just one ear in if I have to). The only thing that really bugs me is that they do not fit around your neck very well with the cups being bigger than your average headphone. However carrying them around is not that difficult. I generally carry them by hand as I do not want books in my bag smashing them. I use the little pouch included with the headphones to protect them from scratches and what not (I would melt the draw strings together with a lighter as they come untied all the time, but do not melt them too much where they fall apart). I carry them around by hand from class to class with my water bottle, and I just do not find it that big of a deal. For a transportable headphone neither the Mad Dogs or Alpha Dogs size have bugged me.

 

The only thing I disliked is the sound coming out of most portable set ups. It generally takes a decent amp to power them. The only thing I have been truly content with that I have listened to is my DX100. Which  drove both the MDs and ADs decently, not as good as a dedicated desktop Amp, but still within the range of being a very good sound. The Fiio E12 and Ipod combo was decent, but more of a bang for your buck set up over a very good sound (it would still best a lot of portable set ups imo).

post #2537 of 2841
I had the mad dogs 3.2 but sold them because they weren't really portable. The cups with the pads were really too hug to hang around you neck comfortably. I sometimes use my TH600 as a portable and although the cups are even larger, they hang better around the neck. The mad dogs try and choke you. Anyhow great SQ but not really recommended as portable
post #2538 of 2841

My Mad Dog Pro upgrades should arrive very soon... I will compare to Alpha Dogs (and to Mad Dog 3.2 from memory if possible).

 

I picked up the Timestretch EP to add a new test track (it even has a frequency sweep):

 

 

Should tell me whether a pair of headphones is good for EDM (although Equinox does well also).


Edited by kstuart - 3/26/14 at 8:56pm
post #2539 of 2841

^ bass sounds good on the pro def can be used for it but so could the MD 3.2

post #2540 of 2841
Quote:
Originally Posted by vatan View Post
 

I was curious if anyone knew how the Mad Dog Pros sounded vs the dt770 250ohm, I've had a chance to try out the Mad Dog 3.0 and dt770, and I found the 3.0 to be a bit lacking in the bass department but having really nice mids, while I enjoyed the bass of the dt770s, but wished the mids had been a bit more pronounced.  

 

I was wondering if the Pro's brought the Mad dog in line bass wise, which would make them perfect for my needs.


This is exactly what I'm looking for too. Like, word for word.


Edited by paralas - 3/27/14 at 1:10pm
post #2541 of 2841

Note that the 3.0 lacks in bass as compared to the 3.2

post #2542 of 2841
Quote:
Originally Posted by kstuart View Post
 

Note that the 3.0 lacks in bass as compared to the 3.2

 

Agreed. I owned the 3.0, and the 3.2 was a very welcomed improvement when I heard a friend's pair.

post #2543 of 2841
Thread Starter 

You should hear the Pro. Dat bass. :blink:

post #2544 of 2841

[I accidentally posted this to the Alpha Dog thread, so better late than never.]

 

Mad Dog Pro first impressions:

 

It turns out that I cannot do a fair comparison with the 3.2 just from memory - the difference is too subtle.   Also, the Pro upgrade has "dots" and the 3.2 did not, so I cannot tell how much is from the dots and how much is from the Pro upgrade.

 

Overall, I am enjoying the sound of the Pro, it is very smooth and effortless.  The sound is easy to listen to, and I can see myself quickly forgetting the audio components, and paying attention to the music.

 

I did a few comparisons with my test tracks to the Alpha Dogs.  The Alpha has a clear advantage in clarity, detail,  timbre, imaging, soundstage and openness over the Pro (just as it did over the 3.2).  The Pro retains the fuller, warmer sound of the 3.2 and has more bass quantity than the Alpha, while the Alpha still has a little better bass quality.

 

I played the Bass Head track on both... and actually preferred the Alpha Dogs - probably because the track uses rich synth sounds, and the better clarity and detail of the Alpha works well with that.

 

I'm going to look through my collection for other modern tracks to compare with...

 

BTW, the Pro comes in a fancy retail box similar to the Alpha Dog retail box...

post #2545 of 2841

^ that makes a lot of sense because it would be very hard to tell the difference off memory without hearing them together. The balance is exactly the same but with a little more speed, clarity, depth, smoothness, and soundstage. The soundstage is the biggest difference and you need the right track to hear the bass difference but it is a little cleaner than the MD 3.2

post #2546 of 2841
Quote:
Originally Posted by kstuart View Post
 

[I accidentally posted this to the Alpha Dog thread, so better late than never.]

 

Mad Dog Pro first impressions:

 

It turns out that I cannot do a fair comparison with the 3.2 just from memory - the difference is too subtle.   Also, the Pro upgrade has "dots" and the 3.2 did not, so I cannot tell how much is from the dots and how much is from the Pro upgrade.

 

Overall, I am enjoying the sound of the Pro, it is very smooth and effortless.  The sound is easy to listen to, and I can see myself quickly forgetting the audio components, and paying attention to the music.

 

I did a few comparisons with my test tracks to the Alpha Dogs.  The Alpha has a clear advantage in clarity, detail,  timbre, imaging, soundstage and openness over the Pro (just as it did over the 3.2).  The Pro retains the fuller, warmer sound of the 3.2 and has more bass quantity than the Alpha, while the Alpha still has a little better bass quality.

 

I played the Bass Head track on both... and actually preferred the Alpha Dogs - probably because the track uses rich synth sounds, and the better clarity and detail of the Alpha works well with that.

 

I'm going to look through my collection for other modern tracks to compare with...

 

BTW, the Pro comes in a fancy retail box similar to the Alpha Dog retail box...

I didn't get a fancy box... I just got cardboard and a travel pouch.. :(

post #2547 of 2841
Quote:
Originally Posted by owendace View Post
 

I didn't get a fancy box... I just got cardboard and a travel pouch.. :(

If you got a black box with the logo on it then that is what he was referring to. Its all cardboard. Nothing fancy for real. 

post #2548 of 2841
Quote:
Originally Posted by grizzlybeast View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by owendace View Post
 

I didn't get a fancy box... I just got cardboard and a travel pouch.. :(

If you got a black box with the logo on it then that is what he was referring to. Its all cardboard. Nothing fancy for real. 

Yes, exactly.

 

It is fancy in comparison to the earlier Mr Speakers headphone boxes, which some have called "pizza boxes". :D

post #2549 of 2841

USPS international shipping is hilariously slow haha. Last update I had was several days ago saying it had arrived in the country. Probably stuck in customs. Fun.

 

#sadpanda

post #2550 of 2841
Thread Starter 

I added one disk to each cup yesterday and I really love the treble now on the MDP. There are two dots/pads on each driver. I didn't really get less treble but "smoothed" treble. Puts the this frequency in the perfect spot for me. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › **MrSpeakers Mad Dog: Impressions and Discussion Thread**