ATH-A700 vs. M50
Nov 12, 2008 at 5:39 AM Post #2 of 16

1Time

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jun 1, 2005
Posts
4,661
Likes
23
FWIR...

The A700 will be easier to drive than the M50. You may want an amp with the M50.

The M50 comes in a straight cable version, the M50S.

The bass of the M50 will be better than the A700.

The A700 will be more comfortable with a looser fit; the M50 clamps tighter.

Headroom's M50S review

I have not read any disapproving posts or reviews of the M50, but I have of the A700.
 
Nov 12, 2008 at 6:32 PM Post #3 of 16

nullPointerException

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Posts
121
Likes
12
Quote:

Originally Posted by 1Time /img/forum/go_quote.gif
FWIR...

The A700 will be easier to drive than the M50. You may want an amp with the M50.

The M50 comes in a straight cable version, the M50S.

The bass of the M50 will be better than the A700.

The A700 will be more comfortable with a looser fit; the M50 clamps tighter.

Headroom's M50S review

I have not read any disapproving posts or reviews of the M50, but I have of the A700.



Thanks, this clears up everything for me
 
Nov 13, 2008 at 3:03 AM Post #4 of 16

WittyzTH

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 26, 2007
Posts
1,366
Likes
10
You can't go wrong with M50. I own it for long time and would used it constantly if I didn't buy ESW9.
biggrin.gif
 
Nov 13, 2008 at 11:13 PM Post #5 of 16

sidtai

New Head-Fier
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Posts
37
Likes
10
Quote:

Originally Posted by WittyzTH /img/forum/go_quote.gif
You can't go wrong with M50. I own it for long time and would used it constantly if I didn't buy ESW9.
biggrin.gif



How would you compare the sound quality of these two?
 
Nov 14, 2008 at 12:21 AM Post #6 of 16

WittyzTH

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 26, 2007
Posts
1,366
Likes
10
I think they are quite on par in the term of SQ, but I prefer the sound sig of ESW9 - smoother mid and bigger bass although it has the smaller sound stage (L/R). (I don't care about it much since I listen to pop and rock music the most when I use either of them.)

M50 has more focus on high and tighter bass, but the mid is a bit roll off which makes me choose ESW9. Overall sound sig leans toward the cold side.

Detail and separation are about on par but M50 seems taking the place because of its sound signature - more clinical than the smooth as silk ESW9.

Isolation is on par - quite bad comparing with Senn HD25-1 and HD280. Actually, I bought M50 to replace my broken HD25-1 and really like them for SQ. Overall SQ, M50 blows HD25-1 (even with the after market cables) out of a water, but only thing I prefer HD25-1 is the isolation.
smily_headphones1.gif



Another reason I prefer ESW9 over M50 is portability.
smily_headphones1.gif
I use them on the go only. M50 is foldable but it's still big and sometimes it looks too geeky.
redface.gif


Hope this help.
biggrin.gif
 
Nov 14, 2008 at 1:14 AM Post #7 of 16

nullPointerException

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Posts
121
Likes
12
Quote:

Originally Posted by WittyzTH /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I think they are quite on par in the term of SQ, but I prefer the sound sig of ESW9 - smoother mid and bigger bass although it has the smaller sound stage (L/R). (I don't care about it much since I listen to pop and rock music the most when I use either of them.)

M50 has more focus on high and tighter bass, but the mid is a bit roll off which makes me choose ESW9. Overall sound sig leans toward the cold side.

Detail and separation are about on par but M50 seems taking the place because of its sound signature - more clinical than the smooth as silk ESW9.

Isolation is on par - quite bad comparing with Senn HD25-1 and HD280. Actually, I bought M50 to replace my broken HD25-1 and really like them for SQ. Overall SQ, M50 blows HD25-1 (even with the after market cables) out of a water, but only thing I prefer HD25-1 is the isolation.
smily_headphones1.gif



Another reason I prefer ESW9 over M50 is portability.
smily_headphones1.gif
I use them on the go only. M50 is foldable but it's still big and sometimes it looks too geeky.
redface.gif


Hope this help.
biggrin.gif



thanks for the info. for the m50's, what are the size specs? specifically the diameter and width of the earcups. how long could you ear them comfortably? how would they sound with a band such as streetlight manifesto unamped on an ipod? how good is the sound isolation? and lastly how would you campare sound quality to an ath-a700?
 
Nov 14, 2008 at 1:39 AM Post #8 of 16

WittyzTH

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 26, 2007
Posts
1,366
Likes
10
FYI: I'm the Asians, so I don't have such a big head.
biggrin.gif



M50 crank my head a bit. I found them uncomfy just out of the box. I let my PC case wearing them for a while
biggrin.gif
and the issue has gone. From what I remembered, I ever wore M50 for 4-5 hours.

For SQ, I've tried A700 couple times and still prefer M50 over it. When I bought the M50, I went to the store in Japan and try it along with a lot of AT cans, and finally M50 is the one I picked.
wink.gif



For the isolation, as I mentioned, it's not one of the best, but it doesn't leak the sound in and out like the open cans.

To me, if I want to have a can to use with iPod, I will pick M50 or ES7. Ax00 series is too big for me.

For the spec. you can take a look at headphone.com.

Quote:

Specifications

Acoustic Seal: Sealed

Driver Type: Dynamic

Ear Coupler Type: Full-Size

Coupler Size: Large

Cord Type: Coiled Left-Side

Cord Length: 8ft

Detachable Cable: No

Impedance @ 1kHz: 38

Isolation: -12dB

Weight: 10 oz w/o cord.

Connector Type: 1/8

Headphone Type: Head Set

Manufacturer Warranty: 1 year

Warranty: 1 year


 
Nov 14, 2008 at 9:30 AM Post #12 of 16

sidtai

New Head-Fier
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Posts
37
Likes
10
Thanks so much, I am really surprised that even ESW9 more than doubles the price of M50, they have similar SQ. I'm using HD25-1 exclusively right now, and I'm seriously tempted cuz you said that the M50 blows it away o.O

Quote:

Originally Posted by WittyzTH /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I think they are quite on par in the term of SQ, but I prefer the sound sig of ESW9 - smoother mid and bigger bass although it has the smaller sound stage (L/R). (I don't care about it much since I listen to pop and rock music the most when I use either of them.)

M50 has more focus on high and tighter bass, but the mid is a bit roll off which makes me choose ESW9. Overall sound sig leans toward the cold side.

Detail and separation are about on par but M50 seems taking the place because of its sound signature - more clinical than the smooth as silk ESW9.

Isolation is on par - quite bad comparing with Senn HD25-1 and HD280. Actually, I bought M50 to replace my broken HD25-1 and really like them for SQ. Overall SQ, M50 blows HD25-1 (even with the after market cables) out of a water, but only thing I prefer HD25-1 is the isolation.
smily_headphones1.gif



Another reason I prefer ESW9 over M50 is portability.
smily_headphones1.gif
I use them on the go only. M50 is foldable but it's still big and sometimes it looks too geeky.
redface.gif


Hope this help.
biggrin.gif



 
Nov 14, 2008 at 3:30 PM Post #13 of 16

WittyzTH

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 26, 2007
Posts
1,366
Likes
10
I guess it's because of portability and looks.

To me, ESW9 still beats M50 for SQ, but the different is not that much as the price.

I'd said it's quite on par because they have different sound sigs. M50 has something that ESW9 doesn't and vice versa.

and the biggest difference is the mid range that ESW9 has really good one while M50 is a bit roll-off.

sounds vague huh? ^^"
 
Nov 14, 2008 at 8:01 PM Post #14 of 16

nullPointerException

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Posts
121
Likes
12
Quote:

Originally Posted by WittyzTH /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I guess it's because of portability and looks.

To me, ESW9 still beats M50 for SQ, but the different is not that much as the price.

I'd said it's quite on par because they have different sound sigs. M50 has something that ESW9 doesn't and vice versa.

and the biggest difference is the mid range that ESW9 has really good one while M50 is a bit roll-off.

sounds vague huh? ^^"



no it makes sense actually, btw, ESW9 is more than double the cost... but i have to say, they look pretty sick with wood backs. i was actually thinking of getting the ew9 (clip ons) at $130 because of their wood finish, but I read that the sound quality is not all that great for rock music so i decided against it.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top