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 23

post #331 of 2936
Quote:
Originally Posted by Change is Good View Post

 

I have only heard the 840 and M50... the MD has more bass quantity/depth than either of them.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nicholars View Post

 

The 840 was a bit bass light for me but the M50 had quite a lot of bass, not very good bass, but quite a lot of it, maybe the mad dogs will have enough bass for me then. Also if the rest of the sound is excellent then I can live with a bit less bass.

 

Maybe it's just me but when I hear someone say they want bass quantity I immediately think of them wanting a lot of bass slam. The MD, in the 3.0 version, doesn't have this. I can't imagine the 3.2 is "night and day" from it in terms of bass slam. 

 

While the bass is detailed and very good, it won't slam like an M50 or a D2000. The MD is not going to rattle your skull, so to speak but will have very controlled and present bass.

post #332 of 2936
Quote:
Originally Posted by nam3less View Post

 

 

Maybe it's just me but when I hear someone say they want bass quantity I immediately think of them wanting a lot of bass slam. The MD, in the 3.0 version, doesn't have this. I can't imagine the 3.2 is "night and day" from it in terms of bass slam. 

 

While the bass is detailed and very good, it won't slam like an M50 or a D2000. The MD is not going to rattle your skull, so to speak but will have very controlled and present bass.


This says it pretty much as I was going to respond.  Nicholars, I've been reading your posts the past couple of weeks - you seem like you want the slam of a D2000.  Mad Dogs, tho a great phone, will not give you that. 

post #333 of 2936
Quote:
Originally Posted by nam3less View Post

I can't imagine the 3.2 is "night and day" from it in terms of bass slam. 

 

From what I've read it is a significant leap from the 3.0 version. I purchased the MD recently only because of the bass boost that was applied. It's lack of bass in the earlier versions is what kept me from purchasing it months prior...

post #334 of 2936
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oregonian View Post


This says it pretty much as I was going to respond.  Nicholars, I've been reading your posts the past couple of weeks - you seem like you want the slam of a D2000.  Mad Dogs, tho a great phone, will not give you that. 

 

While it will never have that D2000 slam, it does have significant more slam the the 840 which he owns... and a bit more than the M50, arguably.


Edited by Change is Good - 6/27/13 at 12:02pm
post #335 of 2936
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicholars View Post

 

The 840 was a bit bass light for me but the M50 had quite a lot of bass, not very good bass, but quite a lot of it, maybe the mad dogs will have enough bass for me then. Also if the rest of the sound is excellent then I can live with a bit less bass.

After reading through the recent comments posted in regards to your search for bass information with the Mad Dogs, I'd have to suggest that this is not a particularly good match for you.  I'm like you in that I love my D5000 for bass and consider the M50 to have a lot of bass, just poorly implemented.  Those that seem to enjoy the AKG models are typically claiming that the Mad Dogs have plenty of punch, even for EDM and bass-heavy songs.  The AKG K701, to my ears, had almost no bass presence and it sounded very thin.  I also ditched a pair of Senheisser HD-595 for lack of bass quantity.  

 

The Mad Dogs have very good bass, but at low volume listening the mids are too prominent without EQ.  They sound excellent with a lot of music, but they lack the bass slam that I enjoy with my D5000, and if I had to keep only 1 pair it would be the Denon's, as they come closer to the Mad Dog's strengths than the Mad Dog comes to the Denon's strengths, to my ears.

 

Mad Dogs are supremely comfortable, they isolate extremely well, and they essentially have no weakness throughout the frequency spectrum, but when compared to the bass quantity that you seem to enjoy, there would be a significantly noticeable difference that you may be able to improve with EQ and proper amplification.

 

Something to think about, though, is that you should have no problem reselling these if they didn't work out for you.  I wouldn't be too concerned about not being able to return them.

post #336 of 2936
Quote:
Originally Posted by Change is Good View Post

 

While it will never have that D2000 slam, it does have significant more slam the the 840 which he owns... and a bit more than the M50, arguably.

With regards to the M50, the Mad Dogs have much stronger sub bass, but the M50 has a bit of a bass hump to its frequency response.  It is not natural sounding, but the bass quantity is fairly significant with a lot of music.  Similar to Beats.

post #337 of 2936
Quote:
Originally Posted by Change is Good View Post

 

From what I've read it is a significant leap from the 3.0 version. I purchased the MD recently only because of the bass boost that was applied. It's lack of bass in the earlier versions is what kept me from purchasing it months prior...

 

The bass difference is noticeable, but subtle. Much of the change is the illusion that the bass was somewhat boosted, but really the mids were pulled back a bit so that the frequency was more balanced, hence why many hear more bass. It is boosted maybe 2-3 db (?), but nothing close to the bass quantity of the D2K. 

post #338 of 2936
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greed View Post

but nothing close to the bass quantity of the D2K. 

 

I wasn't implementing that.

post #339 of 2936
Quote:
Originally Posted by Change is Good View Post

 

I wasn't implementing that.

 

Just mentioning it, in regards to the nicholars quest. My main point was... don't expect a substantial difference in bass from the 3.0 to the 3.2. 

post #340 of 2936

Unfortunately they do not have a seller in the UK for the mad dogs(?), so it makes it a bit difficult as I have to import from the USA. I could live with less bass than the D5000, I prefer the rumbling sub bass sounds over the punchy mid bass type sounds as they hurt my ears after a couple of hours. As an example I find the UE6000 in passive mode to be a little bit bass light, although just about OK. In active mode they have almost too much bass. Quite a lot of people have said "these are probably going to be dissapointing for you" and then someone says the 3.2 version have more bass so I am confused lol. If they have good extension down to about 20hz and as much quantity and impact as the M50 for example then I would be happy with that. Are the mad dogs a big improvement over just buying some T50RP and some Shure pads? They would cost me about twice as much.


Edited by nicholars - 6/27/13 at 12:45pm
post #341 of 2936
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicholars View Post

Unfortunately they do not have a seller in the UK for the mad dogs(?), so it makes it a bit difficult as I have to import from the USA. I could live with less bass than the D5000, I prefer the rumbling sub bass sounds over the punchy mid bass type sounds as they hurt my ears after a couple of hours. As an example I find the UE6000 in passive mode to be a little bit bass light, although just about OK. In active mode they have almost too much bass. Quite a lot of people have said "these are probably going to be dissapointing for you" and then someone says the 3.2 version have more bass so I am confused lol. If they have good extension down to about 20hz and as much quantity and impact as the M50 for example then I would be happy with that. Are the mad dogs a big improvement over just buying some T50RP and some Shure pads? They would cost me about twice as much.

 

I think you'll be satisfied with the MD 3.2, but the SoundMAGIC HP100 could be a safer purchase for you. It packs plenty punch for your tastes.

post #342 of 2936
Quote:
Originally Posted by Change is Good View Post

 

While it will never have that D2000 slam, it does have significant more slam the the 840 which he owns... and a bit more than the M50, arguably.


He also has had the D2K, which he referenced in a Basshead club post as what he was after. 

post #343 of 2936

I have owned and heard both the 3.0 and the 3.2.  The 3.2 bass is more present, more articulate deeper and more defined than the 3.2.  It is not night and day, but incremental improvement.  If the 3.0 is not enough bass slam for you, neither will the 3.2 be enough.  If you liked the 3.0 bass, and just wanted it to be "more", the 3.2 is your headphone.

post #344 of 2936
Quote:
Originally Posted by aamefford View Post

I have owned and heard both the 3.0 and the 3.2.  The 3.2 bass is more present, more articulate deeper and more defined than the 3.2.  It is not night and day, but incremental improvement.  If the 3.0 is not enough bass slam for you, neither will the 3.2 be enough.  If you liked the 3.0 bass, and just wanted it to be "more", the 3.2 is your headphone.

 

I have had both as well. To me, the 3.2 bass was "night and day". You could immediately tell that the 3.2's base is more prominent. Now the changes to the quality and characteristics of the bass I would say were incremental. This is just the way I perceived it. I thought you're description was right along with the changes I hear. 

post #345 of 2936

It is interesting how they can do so much with this one pair of headphones by modding them, seems like you can make them almost sound any way you want by modding the pads, cups etc. Should I buy a pair of T50rp and then return them to see if I like the sound? Or are the mad dogs very different?

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**