[intlsubband]

   
Which have the biggest amount of space for ears and the biggest pads? I was going to buy some M4u2 but was a bit put off by the build quality problems, if they are a bit brighter than the hp50, have more bass and fit better, then I would probably like them, anyway I will be getting the Shure SRH 1540 tomorrow so might make the decision for me, but if I don't like them for some reason the M4u2 look interesting... IF the pads are a bit bigger / deeper and more comfortable than the HP50, or possibly work with other pads from another manufacturer?

 
I have both with me now (I gave the HP50 to my workmate who sits next to me), here are some further impressions:
 
1. pads size - they really are very close in size. HP50 pads a bit firmer / M4U2 a bit squishier. I feel that both encapsulate the ear very well, maybe a tiny bit of extra room in the HP50, but I feel like the M4U2 has a slightly better seal. Neither of these have the biggest earpads and I don't know which aftermarket pads may fit these ,but both are enveloping the ears very well and both work very well as portable over-ears: comfy and a good seal.
2. Headband, design, and comfort - the HP50 are significantly lighter, but I actually find the M4U2 more comfortable. Especially because of the headband - it is padded very well and rests very comfortobly on the top of the head, while the HP50's headband rests a bit strangely on the head and can get slightly uncomfortable after awhile. I don't have any issues with the extra weight of the M4U2 as the design makes it super comfy, and I never had any comfort issues. Although maybe I'm less sensitive to weight of headphones compared to other users, based on reviews of other headphones (I have no problem with the HE-500's weight for example, while some others do).
3. Portability - again, despite the M4U2 clearly being heavier, it actually folds much better and can fit in a smaller case much more easily.
4. Sound - Listening again back and forth between the two, the sound is quite close. All the details are there in the HP50, but in general, the M4U2 sounds lusher and more full-bodied, while the HP50 sounds a bit weaker, if that makes any sense. The M4U2 has just got this touch of lushness to the mids that I'm just addicted to. I think the treble in both is very similar, detailed enough and satisfying, but neither of these is overtly bright.
 
I never listened to the Shure so I can't compare.

 

[CriticalTodd]

I don't have any experience with the M4U1 or M4U2 but I've had the NAD PH50s for a couple of months now and I'm very happy with them. I really like their bass-- sounds nice and tight to me.

 

[GearMe]

Edge? What edge? Been listening to the M4U 1 non-stop since Friday and I can safely say no matter what the source was, they have beautiful treble that is sparkly, crisp, detailed yet laid back, very much like the Momentum (which I have also compared). Far less aggressive treble than both my SR60 and T70.

Also, don't worry about construction quality of the M4U 1, yes in the beginning they had issues but NONE since they were initially reported. Very much like what the HD598 went through shortly after launch. The M4U 1 are very solid.

 

Edit: FYI, Paul Barton helped design the NAD HP 50 before designing the M4U 1 with his own company PSB.

Great to see the passion for the PSBs! As I mentioned earlier, they're both great headphones.

Really think this boils down to differences in hearing/sound preferences. To me the HP50s sound a little better...tighter bass, better timbre, more balanced across the spectrum.

That said, the back and forth in this thread made me dig deeper for other opinions...below are some from other Head-Fi folks including Tyll, Jude, etc. To balance the PSB crowd!

Tyll - On his Wall Of Fame..."I keep trying to dig up a circumaural sealed headphone that I think sounds better...but I can't."
"In a word: Fabulous! I keep on wanting to write that these are a warm and punchy sounding headphone, but it's just not quite true...well, they're warm and punchy when the music is, and the bass is well extended and very tight, but they're also articulate and clear in the treble, and well balanced throughout the mids. They're as open sounding and coherent as any sealed headphone I've heard, delivering fairly good depth and imaging; and they do a great job of delivering a very balanced transition from upper-mids through the mid-treble, which gives vocals and acoustic instruments a lively and natural voice."

Jude - from the Head-Fi Buying Guide
"After his success with his own PSB headphones, Paul Barton turned his attention to a headphone for NAD Electronics. The resulting headphone--the NAD VISO HP50--is, in my opinion, his best headphone yet. To my ears, there's a familial sonic resemblance to the PSB M4U 1, both of which use Barton's "RoomFeel" technology, which is intended to provide the rich and natural experience of listening to a set of high-end loudspeakers in a room.

Like its PSB siblings (I call them siblings since they have the same father in Barton), the NAD VISO HP50 sounds outstanding, with impactful bass that is very taut and well controlled. The overall balance of the VISO HP50 is, to my ears, just slightly on the warmer side, but still very resolving. Again, listening to it reminds me at times of its PSB sibs, but with greater refinement and a smoother presentation."


Again, don't think you could go wrong with either. It'd be nice if you could listen to them yourself to choose!

On a side note...will be interested to see what you think of the 1540s and how their sound compares to the SE215s. Depending on your preferences, you might find them better than either the HP50s or M4U1s.

 

[Bansaku]

Great to see the passion for the PSBs! As I mentioned earlier, they're both great headphones.


Again, don't think you could go wrong with either. It'd be nice if you could listen to them yourself to choose!

 

 
Yes, my thoughts exactly. For myself it came down to the sale price on the M4U 1 which I got for $125 (bloody steal). Regardless, I am excited to see what Paul Barton has up his sleeve. For a first dabble into headphones he not only nailed it, he hit it out of the park into the next county. IMO what he has done in a first attempt took beyerdynamic and Sennheiser decades to accomplish. Then again, the guy did write the book on how loudspeakers are supposed to sound, and from what my ears have heard, doing the same for headphones.
 
Addition: Perhaps it was the M4U 2 that came before the NAD, or maybe I am dyslexic? Regardless, the both raised the bar. 

 

[potterpastor]

i have the se 210 and they are thin and lacking in tone. Are the 215s different?

 

[GearMe]

i have the se 210 and they are thin and lacking in tone. Are the 215s different?

Never heard the SE210s but the SE215s are neither thin nor lacking in tone. Have cut and paste this Headroom graph which seems to confirm the differences between the two

 

[nicholars]

i have the se 210 and they are thin and lacking in tone. Are the 215s different?

 
The 215 are good, they are definitely not thin and the tone sounds realistic, I have had quite a few pairs of IEM and always end up keeping the SE215 for the build quality, comfort, good all round performance.