A Concise View of Why The ATH-M50 is No Longer King
May 21, 2012 at 6:08 PM Post #181 of 856
idk I have the white version, but i still have the old rigid pads :/

and well I can kind of agree, the m50 doesn't sound very very good in any specific genre, but i love it because of how versatile it is. Unfortunately I can no longer enjoy the bass as much because I keep getting a rattling in one of the cans at a certain frequency, but that aside they are still great cans. I don't think anything can really dethrone the M50 at under 150$. 
 
Jun 22, 2012 at 4:13 PM Post #184 of 856
Quote:

Very deep. You've really torn his argument apart. I'm impressed.
 
tongue.gif

 
Jun 22, 2012 at 4:20 PM Post #185 of 856
I certainly do not feel the M50 are a bad headphone. Though, I feel as if their introduction to the forums has brought along a lack of variety. The M50 is so commonly recommended to the point where it is obnoxious. There's no doubt better headphones than the M50's in the same price range, though are never recommended.
 
Jun 22, 2012 at 6:30 PM Post #188 of 856
A share Dennito's frustration regarding your comment. I agree there are probably comparable or better headphones in that price range (I haven't lisetened to the m50s myself) but to say they are never recommended is false. I see headphones being recommended in this price range every day. V-modas, grados, senns... there are a lot of pretty good headphones for that price and they are all covered reasonably well in these forums IMO. But I'm new. Maybe I missed the m50s craze. Meh.
 
Jun 22, 2012 at 7:13 PM Post #190 of 856
Quote:
the m50s I liked a lot, but the hfi 580 does what the m50s do, and do it much better IMO

 
I hate the HFI-580 and HFI-780 with a passion. Those two headphones disappointed me so much that it basically gave me the stance that Ultrasone is just terrible. A lot evidence I've seen so far has backed up that stance. I'd never pick either of the M50. 
 
Jun 22, 2012 at 7:40 PM Post #192 of 856
Quote:
 
I hate the HFI-580 and HFI-780 with a passion. Those two headphones disappointed me so much that it basically gave me the stance that Ultrasone is just terrible. A lot evidence I've seen so far has backed up that stance. I'd never pick either of the M50. 

why do you think that? I have both of them and the 580s sound much better than the m50s.......
 
Jun 22, 2012 at 7:48 PM Post #193 of 856
Quote:
 
I hate the HFI-580 and HFI-780 with a passion. Those two headphones disappointed me so much that it basically gave me the stance that Ultrasone is just terrible. A lot evidence I've seen so far has backed up that stance. I'd never pick either of the M50. 

I own the HFI-580 and your statement brings me to two one of two conclusions:
1) i have no idea what sounds good
 
or
 
2) it really is true that everyone hears something different.
 
i picked mine up used for $100 and i think i got a phenomenal value. I would have payed over $150 for these and still thought i got a great value.
 
Jun 22, 2012 at 8:22 PM Post #194 of 856
Quote:
I own the HFI-580 and your statement brings me to two one of two conclusions:
1) i have no idea what sounds good
 
or
 
2) it really is true that everyone hears something different.
 
i picked mine up used for $100 and i think i got a phenomenal value. I would have payed over $150 for these and still thought i got a great value.

Here's a fun experiment. Equalize down the treble to a regular level. Get a real cheap, but good, headphone like the KSC75. Level match their frequency responses and volumes. Compare the overall sound detail level. The Ultrasones sounded pretty detailed to me at first, but I quickly realized it was all just emphasized treble. What I originally thought was nice highs? Just emphasized treble. Not to mention their soundstage is just weird. Like, the M50 has a narrow soundstage, but it doesn't feel wear. Ultrasone soundstage feels just weird. I'm sure that if I really wanted to and it was the only headphone I owned, I could get used to it, but it's not worth it. I did like the bass presentation, though. 
 
My opinion on the lower-end Ultrasones is just that they are overpriced, uncomfortable (such a high clamping force), weird sounding, overall undetailed headphones that I would pay $25 for, maybe $30. I think they're bested by many low-end headphones like the KSC75 and Incipio Forte F38. 
 
Edit: If you don't mind me asking, what $100-150 headphones have you heard other than the HFI-580? Have you compared it to others in its price bracket?
 
Jun 22, 2012 at 11:22 PM Post #195 of 856
Quote:
Here's a fun experiment. Equalize down the treble to a regular level. Get a real cheap, but good, headphone like the KSC75. Level match their frequency responses and volumes. Compare the overall sound detail level. The Ultrasones sounded pretty detailed to me at first, but I quickly realized it was all just emphasized treble. What I originally thought was nice highs? Just emphasized treble. Not to mention their soundstage is just weird. Like, the M50 has a narrow soundstage, but it doesn't feel wear. Ultrasone soundstage feels just weird. I'm sure that if I really wanted to and it was the only headphone I owned, I could get used to it, but it's not worth it. I did like the bass presentation, though. 
 
My opinion on the lower-end Ultrasones is just that they are overpriced, uncomfortable (such a high clamping force), weird sounding, overall undetailed headphones that I would pay $25 for, maybe $30. I think they're bested by many low-end headphones like the KSC75 and Incipio Forte F38. 
 
Edit: If you don't mind me asking, what $100-150 headphones have you heard other than the HFI-580? Have you compared it to others in its price bracket?

I have compared it to ATH M50, HD 380, HD 280, SRH 840 etc. and the hfi 580 owns all of them. This is my opinion. I stand my ground.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top