[jerhowe]

I am posting this a few months late, but I wanted to share my impressions compared to my LCD-X.

I was interested in having an LCD-X I don't need to EQ. But to me, the 500 sounded a little too warm. I was running them out of an RME ADI-2. After adding a few simple adjustments, primarily a high shelf, I EQ'd them to greatness. The soundstage seemed wider to me than the LCD-X, but with the same level of transparency in placement. It was also lighter but more clampy as others have stated. I felt like my EQ'd LCD-X has sharper transients, but that might be a result of my EQ profile (modified SonarWorks) than technical differences in the headphones.

After trying them out, I personally did not feel the desire to purchase them. With EQ profiles applied, it was a trade-off of soundstage vs transients (which I often find to be the case. Focal is known for great transients but smaller soundstage. HifiMan Ananda and up and the HD800 are the opposite). Without EQ, the 500 is the clear winner without a doubt. However, for how rarely I listen without EQ it's just not financially worthwhile for me. The HD600 is still the king in that regard.

If I didn't have either headphone, I could see the appeal of it. I also listened to the LCD-5 a few months before the 500 was released. My impressions at the time were the LCD-5 had a much more precise soundstage, but I was comparing from memory, not A/B. I was floored by the LCD-5. The only other headphone I enjoyed more was the Stax X9000 with a blue Hawaii amp and Chord DAVE DAC.

This, along with the LCD-5, are the Audeze products for those that don't like EQ.

 

[Alex May]

Man, this headphone is criminally under-repped here.

My review:



I couldn't stop thinking about the MM-500 after CanJam and ended up buying one back in September. Finally got around to reviewing it after a viewer loaned me his Focal Utopia 2022 for comparison. On paper, their FRs are actually not too far off, but in listening the MM comes across more relaxed, with surprisingly organic timbre. I am not big on "planar timbre" memes, but if anything the Focal sounds more traditionally planar -- light, plucky, digital / metallic -- and the Audeze more dynamic -- rich, organic, natural.

No real problems with the clamp of the MM-500 here, but I am a long-time HD 600 wearer so YMMV. Overall, I just really love this headphone from top to bottom. Some frequency response graph comparisons for the curious:

https://squig.link/headphones/?share=Super_OE_Target,Audeze_MM-500

Your graphs show exactly what I hear in MM-500: a huge peak at 2.7-3K with a much later rise than Harman intended, then a steep fall at 4K that never reaches Harman until 12K. It sounds horrible to me. I wrote about it earlier.

I agree! I (Ryan Ho) was the one who posted on live stream that the MM-500 sounds very close to the hd6xx! Nice to see your final review come out! I demo it in local store and do think it’s one of my favorite headphones period, it has one of the best planar tunings with very dynamic bass sound too

As far as the graphs show, the HD650 has a much smoother FR, if not for the sub-bass roll-off.

The soundstage seemed wider to me than the LCD-X

Can you explain why the MM-500 sounds absolutely claustrophobic to me even compared to the LCD-X? Just curious 'cuz I can't explain such a drastic difference in hearing. Mind you, I don't have a hearing damage, I'm a sound engineer, so not the worst hearing I guess. But for some reason I hate how the MM-500 sounds, therefore I can't use it neither for work, nor for pleasure. I just don't understand what's happening...

 

[Kevintj604]

Your graphs show exactly what I hear in MM-500: a huge peak at 2.7-3K with a much later rise than Harman intended, then a steep fall at 4K that never reaches Harman until 12K. It sounds horrible to me. I wrote about it earlier.

As far as the graphs show, the HD650 has a much smoother FR, if not for the sub-bass roll-off.

Can you explain why the MM-500 sounds absolutely claustrophobic to me even compared to the LCD-X? Just curious 'cuz I can't explain such a drastic difference in hearing. Mind you, I don't have a hearing damage, I'm a sound engineer, so not the worst hearing I guess. But for some reason I hate how the MM-500 sounds, therefore I can't use it neither for work, nor for pleasure. I just don't understand what's happening...

I’m not sure what you’re hearing as well. I own both the LCDX 2021 as well as the MM-500 and on A/B I’m not finding the MM claustrophobic at all. I find the MM’s stage a bit more on the narrow side but it sits right in line with most of the LCD series. None of the Audeze’s are known for their staging capabilities.

I find the 600s detail retrieval and overall performance sitting right at its price range and it doesn’t scale anywhere near what some would suggest. On tubes it scales a bit more and with the right source pairings it scales better than it should but I would never chose it over most of the other options above $500. The bass is too anemic, especially in the sub bass and EQ doesn’t ever fix that enough for it to be satisfying. The MM to me sounds similar to the 600 series and you can see that in the graphs but comparing them in the same sentence is pretty laughable. They’re not at all in the same tier of product.

 

[jerhowe]

Can you explain why the MM-500 sounds absolutely claustrophobic to me even compared to the LCD-X? Just curious 'cuz I can't explain such a drastic difference in hearing. Mind you, I don't have a hearing damage, I'm a sound engineer, so not the worst hearing I guess. But for some reason I hate how the MM-500 sounds, therefore I can't use it neither for work, nor for pleasure. I just don't understand what's happening...

I am a sound engineer too. Because of headphone's interactions with the architecture of our ears, it seems that there are surprises every once in a while with a particular headphone on a particular head. Luckily for us with lots of audio experience, we have an acute awareness of what sounds right to us. It didn't take me long to find what works for me and what sounds the closest to what I am used to from my monitors. Sounds like the MM-500 doesn't work for you. I thought I'd like an EQ'd HD800 and then I felt like it had very soft transients and other strange artifacts. It wasn't for me. Other engineers swear by it.

 

[cloudconnected]

Should i give the MM500 a try as a Hifiman HE1000V2 User?

 

[Alex May]

Should i give the MM500 a try as a Hifiman HE1000V2 User?

It certainly won't do you any harm if you listen to the MM-500 in a store in order to decide whether you like it or not. I'd never pick the MM-500 over the HE1000V2 personally.

 

[Kevintj604]

It certainly won't do you any harm if you listen to the MM-500 in a store in order to decide whether you like it or not. I'd never pick the MM-500 over the HE1000V2 personally.

I would. The MM-500 is a much smoother, laid back listen. The HE1000V2 is quite a bit brighter. They're very different in sound signature so they are actually quite complimentary. The HE1000V2 is super source dependant to sound it's best though so in my case it was an easy sell but I owned it for a couple months and put maybe 50 hours to come to that conclusion. I vastly prefer the treble and overall package on the Arya Stealth and think it's the best of the egg shaped HiFiMan's.

 

[Alex May]

The HE1000V2 is quite a bit brighter.

But not sibilant. Which means it's airy and extremely clear. And then, which is even more important for me, it's got holographic soundstage, and a lot of it. I personally love my Arya too, so I agree with you that the Arya as more preferable for my tastes as well than HE1000V2. It's more relaxed and not in your face sound, albeit still bright. However, I've got Arya V2, not Stealth. I can't stand the excessive energy above 10K in the Stealth. The famous peak is merely shifted from 4.5 to 5.3 KHz, not eliminated unlike many people say, just 1 dB lower if it makes a difference. So is the bass which is just 1 dB raised from 60 to 200 Hz, if 1 dB makes a big difference for some. But the stage again is more enjoyable for me in the Arya V2.

As for the MM-500, I already explained why I hate it. I sincerely think it sounds twice cheaper than it costs. I watched Audeze for many years and came to a conclusion that their management and engineering staff regressed dramatically after Alex Rosson had gone. It took them many years to fix those stupid phase-related flaws in the LCD-X and other LCD line and now the LCD-X is one of the best sounding Audeze headphones. It is still not for my personal head and ears configuration because it produces a lot of ringing at different frequencies on my head which masks a lot of resolution. Therefore, I can't appreciate resolving capabilities in any of the LCD headphones. I simply don't hear it unlike in Hifimans, Fostex, ZMF, etc. Audeze is not compatible with my head at all. However, I still like my LCD-X 2021, a strange sounding but still pleasurable headphone, the best sounding of all the LCDs in my opinion. But I still can't use it for serious sound engineering work because I can't rely on the technicalities of the LCD-X on my head. The MM-500, in turn, is simply out of the equation. At all.

 

[Kevintj604]

But not sibilant. Which means it's airy and extremely clear. And then, which is even more important for me, it's got holographic soundstage, and a lot of it. I personally love my Arya too, so I agree with you that the Arya as more preferable for my tastes as well than HE1000V2. It's more relaxed and not in your face sound, albeit still bright. However, I've got Arya V2, not Stealth. I can't stand the excessive energy above 10K in the Stealth. The famous peak is merely shifted from 4.5 to 5.3 KHz, not eliminated unlike many people say, just 1 dB lower if it makes a difference. So is the bass which is just 1 dB raised from 60 to 200 Hz, if 1 dB makes a big difference for some. But the stage again is more enjoyable for me in the Arya V2.

As for the MM-500, I already explained why I hate it. I sincerely think it sounds twice cheaper than it costs. I watched Audeze for many years and came to a conclusion that their management and engineering staff regressed dramatically after Alex Rosson had gone. It took them many years to fix those stupid phase-related flaws in the LCD-X and other LCD line and now the LCD-X is one of the best sounding Audeze headphones. It is still not for my personal head and ears configuration because it produces a lot of ringing at different frequencies on my head which masks a lot of resolution. Therefore, I can't appreciate resolving capabilities in any of the LCD headphones. I simply don't hear it unlike in Hifimans, Fostex, ZMF, etc. Audeze is not compatible with my head at all. However, I still like my LCD-X 2021, a strange sounding but still pleasurable headphone, the best sounding of all the LCDs in my opinion. But I still can't use it for serious sound engineering work because I can't rely on the technicalities of the LCD-X on my head. The MM-500, in turn, is simply out of the equation. At all.

I agree with you on the HE1000V2. It’s an end game headphone and I really loved my time with it. I just don’t have the right source equipment to get the best out of it and the Arya Stealth fits my preferences more.

It’s a shame that you don’t like the MM-500 but glad that you’re finding the LCDX 2021 to be a good enough fit to keep in your collection. I personally love them both but probably lean more towards the LCDX because I vastly prefer the old Rosson House Audeze sound.

 

[jonathan c]

….but glad that you’re finding the LCDX 2021 to be a good enough fit to keep in your collection. I personally love them both but probably lean more towards the LCD-X because I vastly prefer the old Rosson House Audeze sound….

My LCD-X (2016: old headband) is still delivering the goods!….

 

[pataburd]

Wanted to ask if anyone is/was driving their MM-500 with the Schiit Lyr3, and if so what are/were your impressions?
[I have a Lyr3 scheduled for arrival on Monday (and a long-neglected box full of 6SN7 tubes).]

 

[pataburd]

The Lyr 3 (it arrived early) brings a fuller, more dense and musical tonality (which is much appreciated). A better pairing than with the S.M.S.L. SP400.
Do not like the deep recess of the tube socket, though. Would rather be able to grab at the base when seating or unseating a tube.

 

[jonathan c]

The Lyr 3 brings a fuller, more dense and musical tonality (which is quite appreciated). A better pairing than with the S.M.S.L. SP400.
Do not like the deep recess of the tube socket. Would rather be able to grab at the base when seating or unseating a tube.

Use an octal socket saver?…

 

[pataburd]

Yes. Thanks. Ordered one last week off eBay. Should be here next week.

 

[MacedonianHero]

Yes. Thanks. Ordered one last week off eBay. Should be here next week.

Congratulations...simply amazing headphones! I'm reviewing them now and for the Price-to-Performance, they are VERY hard to beat!