[Simple Mind]

Hi,
 
I'm planning on purchasing the AD900 or the AD900X soon, and am wondering how the bass and speed on those compare to the HD598, which I like. It's my understanding the HD598 does not have a lot of bass in general terms, but I like the amount it has, as I'm not a bass-head and don't want the sound over-saturated by the low end. I also like an upfront sound with good speed. The HD598 is a little laid back speed-wise, but I still like it for other reasons like its resolution and comfort.
 
From reviews, the AD900X has more bass than the AD900. But using the HD598 as a guidepost, does the AD900X have more bass than the HD598? About the same? Or less? And do the AD900 or AD900X have more speed compared to the laid back HD598?
 
Appreciate any help. I tried looking at reviews before posting.
 
Regards

 

[PurpleAngel]

I own the ATH-A900X (closed) headphone and the Senn HD558 (removed black rubber tape).
Your buying decision might come down to what source(s) your plugging the headphones into.
So source(s) are you plugging the headphones into?
 
The Sennheiser HD 5XX will usually work plugged into anything, my HD558 works fine plugged into my Yamaha receiver, where my ATH-A900X can not get loud plugged into a receiver.
 
My A900Xs (closed) headphones do have more bass then my HD558s.
I would also say I do enjoy music more with my A900Xs over the HD558s
I'm going to guess(?) the ATH-AD900X (open) headphones are have a better over all music quality, compared to the closed A900X

 

[GaryPham]

I've listened to the 598s before and previously owned a pair of AD900s.  They are both fantastic sounding headphones that sound great without needing any amping.  I would say that the AD900s were indeed faster and a bit more exciting than the 598s (while the 598s were smoother and more relaxing).  Bass wise, I would say that the AD900s were either equal or has VERY SLIGHTLY less bass than the 598s.  If the AD900x really has more bass, then I would imagine that it would beat out the 598s in the bass dept.

 

[Simple Mind]

Thanks for the feedback. I have heard good things about the AD900 and am leaning towards getting that one instead of the newer AD900X, as more bass than the HD598 may be more than I want. That is if the X does have more bass than the Sennheiser, and am not sure -which is why I posted. Has anyone compared the bass on the HD598 vs AD900X?
 
As for the source, would be using mostly with portable MP3 players, so the low impedance is a good point.
 
Regards 

 

[laon]

I'd say that the AD900X is a far more balanced phone than AD900 which is very anemic in bass and peaky in the upper region, both of which are alleviated on AD900X. Compared to HD598 AD900X is the more brighter phone with cleaner mid to high, and probably has about the same amount of bass with HD598, not sure since I didn't listen to them side by side, however both of them are not what I call bass heavy nor light phone so you don't have to worry about it.

 

[techboy]

I wish ATH products were readily available in India.

 

[ejong7]

Having listened to all 3, here's my 2 cents. If we compare the AD900 to the X version, the X version sounds thinner (slightly) but also has more bass (also slightly). They share similar sound signatures so I would get the AD900's, not because I have em, but I think you can get em cheaper than the X (and also because I prefer the AD900's sound)
 
If compared to the 598, I would say its slightly bassier (maybe equal when compared to the AD900X, if hearing memory serves me well) than the AD900, which I listened side by side (but not the X, that came later). I agree that the AD900 is slightly brighter than the 598, which sounds like the true laid back sennheisers. Both totally sucks at bass punch, more so on the AD900's.
 
If you're like me totally have no need for bass (in certain areas) then the AD900's is absolutely the headphone for you. Of course it's only fair if we're talking about headphones within the price range.