Audio-Technica ATH-M50S

The highs and the lows are, for lack a better descriptor "dry".  There are people who "like" this sort of leanness, but it's never sounded "real" to me.  It's the difference I hear in vintage (dry)Teac/Tascam analog tape gear vs. the better Pioneer machines from the mid-'70's forward. (The better European machines as well, even though reliability problems are legion, depending on brand.) How something measures and how it sounds are sometimes very counterintuitive.  I was disappointed and let's leave it at that.

 
There's always one.  Every good thing has a dissenter, and that's me.  The ATH-M50 cannot handle songs with lots of different lower frequencies going on at once because of the artificial bass extension.  For example, Nine Inch Nails' "Heresy" is a very challenging song to play on headphones; it sounds like crap on my car stereo because the subwoofer is confused on which notes to play, so too low of frequencies overpower what should be playing louder.  The M50s do the same on the FLAC version of it.  The impacts of the kick-drum are far quieter than the bass in the verses.  It's incredibly annoying.  The bass is so sloppy and uncontrolled.  Another good example, Smashing Pumpkins' "Thirty-Three", in which there is a subtle background bass that tends to get incredibly emphasized to the point it's unlistenable on car subwoofers/headphones with poor bass response.  The ATH-M50 do this.  Luckily, they have really nice mids and respectable highs.  Yet, it's shocking they bill these as monitors, they're horribly unbalanced towards the lower-end.  These headphones main competitor, the HD280Pro, are superior in every way, except for the clamping force.  Not a producer I can think of uses these, either.  NOT monitors.
 
The build quality is a joke.  I went through three earpads in a year before the right speaker stopped working and the connector to the iPod got frayed.  They seem big and durable, but I've had lesser headphones be more durable.  I thought they were comfortable.  But the praise on here is sickening and misguided.  Do y'all get paid by Audio-Technica?  And at their new price, they are an even worse deal.

After reading all the glowing reviews on youtube and amazon, I thought I would give these cans a try.
 
For the first half an hour I loved these cans, I thought they were fun, engaging and detailed enough for my liking. Then my ears started to hurt, more and more, to the point where I had to take them off my head and let them rest for an hour. At low listening volumes, these headphones are decent, but if you raise the volume above 40% (on an iPhone), the treble becomes so aggressive it feels as though knives are stabbing your ear, particularly with electronic music. The bass gets very muddy and bleeds into the midrange on certain tracks.
 
Clamping force out of the box was pretty strong, and the stock pads are rubbish.
 
Swapping with velour hm5 pads drastically increased the comfort, but worsened the sound. The treble's harshness amplified and I had to take off these headphones every 5 minutes due to listening fatigue. I added toilet paper between the pad and the driver, and the treble calmed itself down, but now all the details were missing. The headphone now sounded incredibly blurry, but listenable.
 
These are NOT studio monitors, I would go as far as to call them mildly V-shaped.
 
The m50x I would call the "gateway" headphone into the audiophile world, because most people either owned Beats or EarPods before, and growing tired of the poor sound, go look on youtube and amazon for a superior audio alternative and find these. When I walk around the city, the m50x's are the third most popular headphone I see (behind beats and EarPods). I find it at least somewhat commendable when I see people wearing these in public, not because they are a good choice, but because it tells me they are at least trying to get better sound quality than from EarPods.

First and foremost, I didn't buy these. Put in bogus purchase dates or it won't let me submit.
 
It was a really short audition, roughly 15 minutes. 
And this will be an equally short review.
 
In fifteen minutes I found out six good/bad things about the M50
 
1) Boring sound signature.
2) Very clampy head band.
3) Uncomfortable ear pads.
4) They are not as revealing as some say they are.
5) Loved the coiled cable. Very thick and solid.
6) collapsible, iirc.
 
I suppose point 2 and 3 aren't deal breakers since headphones
do get more comfortable over time.
 
The M50 wasn't worth S$240. It surely didn't sound like $240
to me. I auditioned the M50 and the Grado SR80, and I preferred
SR80's sound signature. 
 
The M50s are not overly revealing headphones. I suppose this could
be largely due to my mediocre DAP (fat PSP). They just sounded flat.
Didn't stand out in any department.
 
 
I suppose this is how Studio Monitor headphones should sound like...
I haven't tried the Sony MDR V6 or 7506 which are recommended quite
often to those looking to produce/mix music.
 
Btw, I was auditioning this at the time when everyone was recommending M50
to newcomers - June/July of 2011? I was like "Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat" when
I put them on. They're decent headphones but they certainly are not worth US150
or SGD240. 
 
I'm not a fan of the design either.
 
 

Level: Amateur Mostly
Experience: First Personal Pair
 
We can all agree it's been reviewed too much?
Good.
My turn please...
I'm aware of the reputation these carry, how audio should sound to a newbie, and the relative price point for most people is fairly affordable.
But after having such a long rep, and being the most top recommended headphone out there, I see where some things are wrong in my book, and that I, obviously as every other soon-to-be/experienced audiophile have different preferences per sound.
They lack to me, but I see where a newbie could melt over these if it were their first on ear.
Female Vocals are a shiny whistle, the bass isn't too much, but enough to give a good bite if you want something with better sound quality than a pair of Beats, which makes these a sensible choice.
Love shiny guitars? Lossless albums really cater to these, if it's a Rock subgenre, or something of the same nature.
Vocals aren't too candy coated, sound doesn't leak, acoustics sound fine, vocals can be breathy on tracks.
 
With all this positive said, what's my issue?
I can argue that my issue was mistakable in buying these, but then I'm looking back on my year of 20.
I had no audio experience, I'd seen these headphones given high ratings, and I'd always been searching to get the best for my habits, and some suitable to my listening habits. Come on, we aren't all rich.
So, here's my small input on issue, don't let these silly opinions void your purchase.
I feel as if these are chaser headphones. They're great, but the mids lack, I feel as if I'm trying to find more value by changing my preference in kbps.(256 kbps, VBR v2, or FLAC is what I prefer)
Another issue that kinda killed me off after my Six Month Period with these was more personal. I don't just listen for quality, I generally revisit a bunch of albums over and over, and when I do, I get caught in long listening hours. So why am I whining? The M50s' are strenuous, I could/can only get through a max of 3 listening hours before my head has enough. 
With all said, they're my only present set I have, if I had a job, I'd probably have more headphones.
 
 
So, with all of my personal complaints out, what's my verdict?
#1. They're Monitors for sure, keep in mind, a Monitor Headset to you isn't always going to be a monitor set to somebody else.
#2. If you personally enjoy the feedback given on them, BUY THEM, only as a beginner headphone.
#3. If you're new, headphones you buy for serious listening need to be something that'll last you a while, especially if it's your first set.
 
My feedback is this, they're gonna please someone who generally wants to get into serious listening habits, unmasking hidden instruments in songs, and hearing backgrounds.
Someone who's coming from a headphone a bit lower scale? I came from the ATH-WS55, they're a moderate upgrade, but before you commit to the purchase, go out and listen to different headphones, frequent them, see if they are gonna be what you truthfully want.
 
Last words, these headphones have somewhat of a "Cult Following", and they're recommended to anyone who wants to take their listening seriously.
I feel this needs to stop, we need a chart, a chart of headphones around $200 range to show people options, not force them into something they may have not completely read up on. 

A headphone originally designed to monitor, Yet has been pushed to audiophile territory as a beginner headphone.
 
Although recommended, The ATH m50 is actually very boomy in it's presentation and will always be aggressive. It's primary goal is to give you an adequate amount of detail during mixes in a studio and NOT  to enjoy/listen to music.
 
Yet people STILL recommend it, claiming it competes with headphones at twice its price range, and offering it to people that don't know any other headphone but their skullcandy earbuds or Beats by Dr Dre.
 
When coming from a headphone as bad as BEATS or skull candy, the M50 sounds like an open-aire headphone. In my opinion, This is where all the hype comes in. Since you have never heard a halfway decent headphone in your life you tend to assume this thing sounds like it's 300$. But it's really not the case.
 
 
In the world of audio fidelity, The more you pay for something, The better it sounds (well, usually if you buy from a good brand). My un-amped  HD600 does a better job than the ath-m50 for casual music listening...But that headphone IS actually double the price of the M50.
 
I know, comparing it to a headphone double it's price is not really fair, But In my opinion there are better options for 100 bucks. You can get a  Sennheiser HD 558, or even a GRADO sr 80i which are both better options. 

A friend picked up the ATH-M50s as his first decent headphone, and we spent a couple of days swapping back and forth between them and my DT770 Pro 80ohm.
 
- Build
 
I found the M50s to be quite well built considering how much plastic was on them. They felt solid, and the folding mechanisms were smooth and felt quite good.
 
The pads were very soft, and the pleather felt rather nice and sealed very well. The headband, however, was not padded very well, and along with the high clamping force of the M50s, lead to comfort issues.
 
- Sound
 
I would describe the M50s as having a very V-shaped sound signature.
 
The bass extension, quality and quantity easily competes with my DT770s (although this could be because the M50s seal better, I think if I put (p)leather pads on my Beyers they would get a fairly significant bass increase).
 
The mids are quite recessed, and maybe a bit thin sounding. Very detailed though, when not overshadowed by the other two ends of the spectrum.
 
The highs are what ruined this headphone for me. Listening to Pendulum's "Showdown", the cymbals in the first 30 seconds as well as any S sound from the singer made me cringe. They came off as very harsh, especially in combination with the lack of mids. I may just be more susceptible to highs than most people, but I really couldn't enjoy much of my electronica or any music with a lot of high frequencies without a pretty significant EQ.
 
 
- Conclusion
 
After a week, my friend brought the M50s back and got some DT770 Pro 250ohm instead, which we both preferred much more. These could be decent headphone for around $100-$120, especially in regards to build quality, but certainly not for their current price of ~$150, in my opinion.

Worse then HD600, HD650, AKG 701, Ultrasone 780, HD595..So theres better. Its good for the price...Anything above 150 is getting very high.

EDIT: The M50x update now fixes quite a few issues actually. Do check that out. This review is about the old version.
 
The age-old flagship "bang-for-buck" all rounder closed back ATH M50s are a good, but not great headphone. If this was years ago, it would be great. But today it struggles to compete with less expensive alternatives.
 
Build Quality, Design, Comfort
Heavy plastics make up a sturdy, well-built, and heavy duty headphone with a solid feel. Albeit chunky, it somehow looks both professional and fun with the "dj style" factor mixed in. 
The leather pads are very soft be designed for smaller ears considering how shallow they are. Great for using em for two hours at a time, not much more than that.
The included cable is quite excellent for a stock cable. Thicker than average. The plug is top-notch standard for a stock, just like most of Audio Technica's headphones.
 
Overall well built and designed, but comfort may vary.
 
Sound - Highs, Mids, Lows, Soundstage
The overall feel is a v-shaped signature that blends the imaging and detail retrieval of a studio monitor with the fun, punchy dynamics of a mainstream headphone. Albeit muddy and/or fatiguing at times, it is packed with fun and is my comparison standard for budget closed backs.
 
Highs: 
For this price level, the sparkle and detail of the M50s is excellent. It extends well, but can be over-sibilant and harsh at times. The highs have almost the "wow" factor; it gives off lots of mid-high energy, but is not very backed up by the lower-highs. In tracks, male voices sound sometimes thin and as a drummer myself, cymbals are unrealistic. 
 
Mid: 
A vacuumed feeling or almost sucked up feeling in this region. It is clear and feels somewhat neutral, but is severely lacking as compared to the rest of the range. 
 
Lows:
Fantastic extension into the sub-bass region as well as a good mid-bass feel to it. Attack sometimes is slow, but the body is very detailed. In no way is it delicate; the bass is upfront. The upper bass can get muddy sometimes, but that can be ignored for such excellent extension and body at this price range.
 
Soundstage:
Above-average for a closed back at this price range.
Has some width, but no real depth of any sorts.
Not much to say here.
 
Conclusion:
The position of the M50s as the King of Budget is slowly fading; the series needs to be refreshed and refined. Overall it can be muddy, "raw," conjested, and harsh, but the fun-factor and its great extension in both sides still puts the M50 at a good position. No, this isn't the best for the money, but as a whole, it's still up there with the best.

I think the sq is good but personally i dont like flat sounding headphones.

I love the sound quality, one of my first good pairs of headphones for music.
Soundstage is very lacking, don't even try to play a game with it (Could pinpoint enemy footsteps better with a mono speaker haha)
 
The folding is sort of nice, but annoying at the same time.  I let my friends try them on and they always manage to flip the earcups the wrong way and get confused.
 
Sometimes the highs are overbearing.  My ears tend to be hurt by some youtube videos and some music.

The M50's have developed a reputation as "the starter headphone" for aspiring audiophiles and they deliver for their price.

Design:

These headphones are built like a tank. Solid construction is always a plus. They do have the famous AT clamp and without some stretching, can be a bit too much. The cable is not detachable, and there is a small spring near the jack that without special care, becomes dislodged and eventually comes off. Aesthetically, and cosmetically, these cans are gorgeous IMO.

Sound Quality: For their price, these headphones are amazing, there are definitely others out there that can compete at the price range though.

Highs: I am torn by the highs on these headphones. They come across clearly, slightly grainy, with minor sibilance when handling female vocals. When listening to Propane Nightmares-Pendulum, it was difficult to listen at an elevated volume as the cymbals and synth were slightly harsh, overall I'd rate them at a 7/10.

Mids: Slightly recessed, but present and IMO forward. Vocals a clear and present, guitars sound wonderful, and instruments across the spectrum sound great. Male vocals sound decent at best, and female vocals can be sharp. 7/10

Lows: The M50's shine with their bass response. Punchy, tight and fast. Extension is decent, but sub-bass is entirely present. When listening to electronic with a large dependence on mid-bass, these cans deliver wonderfully without bleeding entirely into the midrange. 10/10

Soundstage: Great soundstage for a pair of closed cans, instrument separation is average at best. 7/10

Detail: I would describe these headphones as fast. Detailed nicely, but forgiving. You won't notice imperfections on a 128kbps track I compared directly with an mp3 file greatly, if at all. 9/10



Overall these cans are great for the price, if you are looking for a slight bass-emphasis, by all means grab these. But don't immediately reach for these without some research. These headphones run around the same price and will satisfy other tastes.

M-Audio Q40 - Bass, and lot of it. Fun sound signature. ($100~)
Beyerdynamic DT770/80ohm - Basshead's delight! With a clear SS, recessed mids ($140~)
Shure SRH-840 - Slightly bassy, neutral SS. ($125~)

Thanks~

the m50 was released a few years ago by audio technica as the flagship of their "m" studio monitor line. 
and, like all audio technicas, it is colored in one way or another.
this particular headphone definitely has more bass than a strictly neutral set of cans should.  but, the bass is quite impressive for a phone of this caliber and price range.  using the "heartbeat" test track from the "Open Your Ears" headphone test album, the m50 produces more low frequency rumble than any headhpones i own or have heard.  (bear in mind i have not heard denons or ultrasones).
 
the general sound is warm.  the headphones are colored forward in the mids such that the bass does not step on them too much.  this creates a fairly engaging sound signature.  the highs are recessed just a tad, fortunately, because they are just a tad grainy as well.
 
the imaging and soundstage are pretty respectable for closed cans.  but, the soundstage doesn't really "take off" until they are amped and turned up pretty loud.
 
when listening to these extensively, you get used to the presentation, and the one drawback that reamins is the mid-bass is just a tad unresolving.  i wouldn't go so far as to call the mid-bass "sloppy", but it doesn't have the attack and decay of higher end headphones.
 
overall, the m50 performs very well for a headphone that you can buy for around $100. 
it's biggest drawbacks really don't come so much in the form of sound quality as they do in the region of comfort.  As the clamping force is a bit much, and prevents me from wearing them longer than a couple hours at a time.
 
Also, as a result of them being closed cans with a tight seal, your ears will require quite a bit of adjustment when putting these on.  after a few minutes, the pressure will equalize, but at first it feels like your ears need to pop.
 
as for audio quality.  i struggled between giving these 3.5 stars and 4 stars.  but, i have to be honest here.  if 3.5 stars is "very good" and 4 stars is "excellent", then 3.5 stars it must be.  they sound very good to my ears.
 
edit:  after a couple months constant use, it seems to my ears that the midrange took a backseat after burn-in.  i'm not certain whether burn-in is real or placebo, but either way, the mids on the m50 afer a few hundred hours use are now somewhat recessed, possibly even slightly veiled.  not too objectionable, but noticeable.

I'm an older fellow whose been listening to headphones for 30 years and I've enjoyed the AT house sound of treble enhanced yet fairly realistic sound. I've owned and used many of their phono cartridges and headphones over the years and generally find that it's good practice to stand up and take notice of any product from any company who has been involved in vinyl sound reproduction, Grado and AT come first to mind. The m50 however are not the typical musically bright sound but have a fatter, more rolled off sound.........Regardless, these are a great all'rounder that offers the average man/woman something to use for many purposes. I find the bass a bit too 'fudgey' for me and not enough 'air' but both of these are part and parcel of a closed back phone perhaps. I can't recommend these for those who are critical listeners or who demand ultimate accuracy in sound reproduction, but for the most part, all instruments come across sounding more or less as they do in reality and there is a good sense of dynamics. The price point as they say is right on and these are great for musicians who just need something to throw in the rehearsal bag etc. Long live AT.

I bought these cans about a year ago and they sound pretty good. as many reviews say they are fairly flat sounding with a slightly recessed mid and slightly elevated bass, with good highs. another thing is the sound stage isn't that great but overall these are great cans. about seven months in i bought a Fiio E11 amp for them. by the way i use them on average of 5 to 7 hours a day. now a lot of people say these already operate at max which i found to be completely false. i am using a 4th gen ipod touch with the eq off. (flat) i have the amp set on high power high gain and its eq off as well. honestly at first i didn't notice a difference with having the amp compared to no amp for a while other than the mids were slightly more present and the highs as well. after putting a hundred hours appx. on the amp i listened to the M50's without it. then i noticed that the amp also really filled out the m50's quite a bit. personally if your dissatisfied with the quality of the M50's id suggest simply getting different cans but the amp defiantly does fill them out and gave them a slight raise the mids and highs. now for the E11 I've seen complaints about a hissing sound that they produce, i can turn the dial to 6 before i hear the hiss (with nothing playing) and the M50's distort at about 5 and a half depending on what is being played anyways so i have not found that to be an issue. i cant pinpoint the difference between the high and low power setting on it. it doesn't increase the volume and there is a slight sound change but it is very minimal so i just left it on high. however the high low gain is a massive difference and high gain just blows the low gain out of the water. actually they sounded worse with low gain than they did without the amp all together. and the eq. on it is only for lows. 0 is natural sounding. 1 would sound pretty nice for slightly bass lacking headphones or if you just want that extra little bit of bass and 2 simply vibrates your face and unless you are a bass head or have cans with nearly completely lacking bass has no purpose. 

      these were my first headphones and when i got them, at first i was really disappointed with the sound of these headphones and i made the mistake of buying a fiio e6 instead of an e11/e17/digizoid ZO/ibasso. No matter what sort of equalization i did i was not satisfied at all on how they sound. This headphone by itself sounded like it was trying to be a jack of all trades but failing at everything.
      I see everyone saying it is bassy but i barely felt the punch even with bass boost eq on and that also made a mess of the whole sound spectrum, everything became muddy and distorted filled with static at high gain. I have no issues with the trebles though, having no sibilance is what made me kept this headphone. NOTE: that this is after 80 + hours of burn in and using mainly music in the form of AFLAC ripped from cds and some 320bit mp3s on an asus xonar ds soundcard (weak trash amp inside the sound card). So they've been collecting dust, being used around ten times a month max.
       Then i was at my sister's house and she has a nice home theatre full sized amplifier, i tried plugging in the m50s and oh my god! the multiple eargasms i was looking for finally came. Higher volumes without muddiness or distortion, bass is pounding(not basshead level pounding mind you) without drowning anything out. The recessed and muffled mids were brought up front and fully detailed while the became even crisper.
     So the moral of the story is, dont go cheap in portable/at home amplifiers, The difference is day and night, people say you can listen to it without amping but sorry to say, it sounds like sh^$#t to me without proper amping. I mean you can listen to classical, vocals and soft RnB  without the amp and be satisfied but if your listening to rock, hip hop, metal, electro, mainstream pop, jazz, your music will basically sound lifeless.
     These are OKAY for mixing, a mostly flat basic factory eq on these cans but the shure srh840s do a better job for dj monitoring.
    ALSO if your a basshead, DONT LISTEN to people when they say this headphone is bassy or has a lot of bass, because they fail to point out, that they are not true bassheads first before making that statement, save your money, get the pro700mk2 because these barely have the basshead level of bass. the most it can do is rumble the earpads and yours ears like a v1br@t0r thats dying and running out of batteries, it also has no punch and the bass is not tight enough to keep up with your music. THERE IS NO BASS QUANTITY whatsoever listening to it by itself, unless you totally juice it up with a good amp with a clean bass boost eq, even then its not enough bass to satisfy true skull numbing bassheads.
             These are good for their balanced sound signature and should be used to multiple genres of listening if your an android user, good luck because htc's music player is horrible quality even with amps and there will be heavy sibilance and metallic highs, they sound like the beats by dre solos with a bad source, even apple products gave a lot better sound quality. Although these headphones aren't really meant to be portable.

To give my thoughts some context, I wouldn't call myself an audiophile.  I have an eclectic taste and appreciation for music, which I listen to on an iPod Classic.  The most "hi-fi" audio equipment I've ever owned is the pair of Ultimate Ears Super.f1 5 Pro earphones that I'd still be enjoying happily if the right 'phone hadn't developed an annoying buzz.  I can rarely discern an audible difference between songs encoded in 320 kbps formats and their lossless counterparts, but, the inferiority of sub-320 kbps files is often very apparent to my ears.
 
That said, I do enjoy well-presented music.  It might very well be my favorite thing in the whole world. 
 
After doing some light reading about headphones, I began my search for new ones with a conscious decision to avoid even auditioning open-air headphones.  I've never tried them, and I became convinced by my reading that I'd likely fall in love with all of the qualities that seem to have made them the consensus choice for audiophiles around the world, and I feared I would then end up spending far too much money (for me) on a pair of "36-24-36" Sennheisers or others like them.  The majority of what I read on the subject seemed to indicate that closed headphones offer the best value for the money, so that's the route I chose.
 
Please keep all of this in mind when judging my use of the superlatives that are bound to follow.  I may not use certain words the way others who are more experienced in this realm may use them.  Just bear with me on that.
 
These are fine headphones.  It's really as simple as that. 
 
They provide full-bodied bass that never loses its natural texture.  Whether you're listening to music in which the raw tactility of the bass tones is just as important as the notes being played or music that features a delicate and measured response, these headphones don't just reproduce those sounds, they reproduce them very, very well.
 
Mid-range tones are loud, clear, and so readily apparent that they're never muddied by the bass tones, no matter how far the two may occasionally overlap within the same sonic space.  They remain distinct at all times, moving freely within the mix whenever the music requires it.
 
I feel like these headphones really shine - pun semi-intended - when it comes to the high-frequency tones, even though my inexperience may prevent that from being a truly accurate statement.  I think it's easy to forget sometimes just how important those highs are to music.  Hi-hats and ride cymbals are, in fact, a major driving force.  Crash, trash and splash cymbals are, indeed, important punctuations.  Each singular stroke is just as important as the next, no matter how quickly it may follow.  And these headphones just do it every time with highs that are loud, clear, distinct and never harsh.
 
Perhaps most impressive of all is the ability of these headphones to expose the natural character of the instruments within the music, an effect far too often lost when listening to them through the many layers of any recorded media.  I believe that's referred to as transparency. 
 
A snare drum being struck no longer sounds like "just" that; what you hear instead is the complex interaction between the drum stick, the drum head, the snares and the shell, components whose construction and combination were expressly chosen by the drummer, being used in concert with his talents and technique to produce a desired effect only achieved with that singular formula.  You hear that with these headphones.  By the same token, guitars and basses become the glorious sum of the various woods, hardware and amplification chosen by musicians utilizing their myriad skills to play them rather than just the notes they chose to play.  I've found this quality present in every piece of music to which I've listened through these headphones, and the effect is positively magisterial.
 
When all of these elements are combined as harmoniously as these headphone combine them, I can't describe the joy I get from the music I hear, even that which is as familiar to me as the back of my hand.  These headphones are a revelation.
 
And for the price?  They're worth more than what I paid for them, especially when judged against others at the same price point and even those priced considerably above it.  I did that, and these headphones won with ease every single time.
 
I think the often-seen criticism that mid-range frequencies are recessed in these headphones is more rooted in the fact that mid-range tones are the easiest to reproduce and most headphones and speakers generally tend to get that part right.  However, low and high range sounds are an altogether different beast, and, as a result, aren't often presented correctly.  I think it's easy to merely perceive the mid-range to be lacking when sandwiched between low and high ranges that are not.
 
And I suppose it's only fair that a review also include any perceived negatives.  To that end, they have a nasty tendency to expose poor music production and mastering, but what can you really do about that?  They're also not the best-looking headphones I've ever seen.  In that regard, I guess it's good that they're headphones and not a hat or something.  And they do tend to warm my ears a bit.  Just a bit, though.  (But, they're nonetheless very light and comfortable, and I've found that the range of articulation provided by the swiveled cups, a feature often derided, is actually quite helpful for maintaining constant and even contact while wearing them.)
 
I awarded "only" 4.5 stars to these headphones for Audio Quality out of consideration for my lack of experience.  I didn't think it would be fair to give them a full five since, admittedly, I haven't listened to everything offered.  I honestly hope I don't ever hear something better, though, unless I can also afford to buy it, as I think such a tease would be equally unfair.  Luckily for me, I think these headphones are going to be extremely difficult to top.
 
UPDATE: Burn-in can be an evil mistress.  I'll elaborate later.

I love these headphones. They are extremely worth the price, and the balance of sound they offer is outstanding. The bass is just at the perfect level for the majority of the music I listen to (my tastes range from 1960-2011) and in no way do they take away from the overall quality of sound. The perfect balance of power and quality. The only complaint I have is that they are uncomfortable for me because the padding presses my glasses against my head, which after 2 hours is really uncomfortable.

I wanted a closed set of cans for work-- and I like to show off new headgear every so often because I live in headphones at work.  The flashy white pair of ATH-M50s fit the bill.  Take that Beat lovers!
 
First impressions when plugging them into my WA6 was -- "Are you certain they're not Beats-- relabeled?"  Wow the bass thumps!  Fun.  I was also pleasantly surprised by the amount of detail and clarity through the upper frequencies.
 
Not a very open sound-- The HD800 is wide and airy-- these are definitely about a closed in, personal experience.  This isn't a knock-- I like headphones with a point of view-- and these ATs favor a direct approach-- deliver the music.  
 
They're supremely efficient.  Not much power needed here.  They can easily be driven by an iPod, iPhone or any player, though amplification improves the sound, without question. 
 
They are a snug fit-- and barely qualify as an "over ear".  Again-- this is a part of that personal delivery of sound.  You are aware they are on your head-- it's a snug fit, but not overly clamped.  Decent sound isolation-- they should-- given that they are closed.  Pleather covers mean sweaty ears, but they are comfortable.
 
Negatives-- way too much midrange.  A quick trip to EQ window on iTunes fixed that, but they are mid-rangy out of the box.  It's a metallic mid range that without correction would wear on my ears.  There's not much in the way of detail and transients that the higher end headphones deliver.  They don't kill the reverb, but it's not that open feeling you get with higher end models.  While the bass thumps-- the deep deep bass trails off.  
 
The cable is coiled-- It's like a trip back to the '70s.  I scratched my head over that one.  But they do build both 1/4 and 1/8 jacks into the non-detachable cable.  
 
I'm going to hang on to these for a while-- they're fun, they thump nicely.  If I were a DJ, I'd think these were pretty much an ideal pair.  Not going to break the bank-- I can afford to break them-- and they sound nice.  The ATH-M50s are a forward, fast sounding set of cans.  
 
Comparison:  Jumping between the B&W P5 and the M50s-- immediately-- The 50's deliver much more bass-- the P5 is even more mid-rangy- but the mid range is much smoother than the 50s.  More upper end detail on the P5-- and the P5 wins on transients, but the M50s provide a better overall upper end experience-- it feels more balanced.  The P5 is more sensitive to adjustments on your ear.  A slight move changes the entire sonic signature.  The lack of bass and sub bass on the P5 and the over mid-range put the 50's much higher on my sonic scale over the P5 and the construction is better.  The P5 wins on comfort and looks.  If given the choice-- I'd take the ATH-M50 -- if given the choice at gunpoint.
 
 
 
 
 
 

The ATH-m50 is my first ever headphone, not including the $2 ear-buds of course.  Before the m50, I was just listening to ear-buds and didn't have much affection for music reproduction.  However, this has changed once I had the m50 in March 2014, which made my wallet quite unhappy as I made several other purchases such as the AUNE T1 DAC/AMP and the Focal Spirit One.
 
Comfort:
I think the m50's overall comfort is not bad, especially compared to my Focal spirit One.  You do feel the clamping force on your head as soon as you put it on and it does not disappear even after six months of use.  The clamping force didn't annoy me much, but when I listen to it for long session, I had to take them off every hour or so as the ear-pads were too sweaty and uncomfortable.  Another reason for this, is that the pleather ear pads are not very soft and changing it to the velour ear pads may be better.
 
Build Quality:
The m50 is build like a tank although it is full of plastic.  I do take a lot of care for my headphones, but after six months of use, there are still no dents or scratches that I can find!
 
Sound:
The bass is definitely emphasized which can be good or bad depending on the genres you are listening to, although emphasized, it is not bothering and is very enjoyable.  The treble is sometimes fatiguing as it reaches the higher notes, which is quite disappointing for me as I found the spirit one to be much better for my taste and music.  Soundstage is better than the Spirit one, and good for a closed back.  The soundstage is not mind blowing, but it does give a good overall presentation of where the music are coming from.  I THINK they do burn in, as I found the bass to be much tighter after a few months use, however it may just be more perception.
 
Conclusion:
The m50 is definitely a good entry to Hi-Fi although it is not a Hi-Fi headphone, it gave me an enormous difference in listening to music.  I can be sure of one thing, once you listen to the m50, you can never ever go back to your $2 ear-buds again!