HipHopScribe
Headphoneus Supremus
Audeze has already confirmed that the attachment is the same as LCD pads
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/audeze-mm-100.967558/page-68#post-17729172
Audeze MM-100
- Thread starter DigitalJust
- Start date
Audeze has already confirmed that the attachment is the same as LCD pads
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/audeze-mm-100.967558/page-68#post-17729172
Hi MLE
Thanks for this information. In a footnote to your post you write: "Audeze rep since July 2021. My opinions outside of Audeze related topics are my own and should not reflect Audeze in any capacity" - and we also see that you're sponsered by Audeze. Don't know how close you are to the decision making process at the company?
We've seen a few issues reported here by early adopters that have caused concern among members interested in buying the MM-100:
(1) Some cans made it through QC with a wiring problem on the left side connector that causes L and R audio channels to be reversed. Audeze have not been willing to admit to this in their posts here, claiming it's caused by user error. Are you able to look into this and give us the real story on the reversed channels?
(2) Chris B. told us at the NAMM show earlier this year that the MM-100 would be fitted with leather earpads. We've since learned that the actual pads are fake leather imported from the Far East. Am I wrong in thinking that ordering real leather pads from the Far East wouldn't be that much more costly and shouldn't have influenced the listed price much? So why not go with leather as first announced?
(3) The missing Audeze 3.5mm adapter. The MM-100 has low impedance and should work fine with laptops, smartphones etc. Music production folks, gamers, video editors and others need that from time to time. I'm sure users would gladly pay a bit more for an Audeze quality adapter, so why decide against including it? The marketing department apparently also thought it would be included.
I know that cutting costs is an important aspect of running a successful business - but so is keeping your customers happy, isn't it?
Thank you
Last edited:
squibble
New Head-Fier
I took a few more measurements with different equipment.
The driver impedance is very flat. I've only ever measured typical moving coil drivers, so it's interesting to see how planar magnetic drivers behave. The impedances are within a 6% tolerance of nominal 18-ohm impedance, and within a 3% tolerance of each other. Not too shabby.
This next measurement is done with a CrySound 6151. I don't know how well it measures absolute curves. It's mainly for finding inconsistencies in driver performance in a production line setting. It's not like using the Audio Precision headphone test fixture that's lab-calibrated and a fairly consistent test setup that many people can use as a point of reference. Maybe the information is useful for some, though my frequency response plot using a measurement microphone from the last page of posts might be a more appropriate representation. That frequency response used 200 averages, where this graph is a single sweep without any averaging. The curves can change quite drastically based on position of the headphones relative to the artificial ears.
It's a bummer to see the absolute polarity is incorrect. Positive transients cause the drivers to deflect away from the ears. Maybe try a polarity flip on your audio output and see if one feels better to you while listening.
Ear cup outer diameter = 98.5 mm (it's a circle)
Ear cup depth without pad = 21 mm
Pad depth = 21 mm
Pad outer diameter = 100 mm (basically a circle)
Pad inner measurements = 46 mm x 64 mm (rounded rectangle)
Head band width = 25 mm
Head band thickness with padding = 8 mm
Height from bottom of ear cup to top of head band = ~200 mm
Width from L ear cup hinge to R ear cup hinge = ~195 mm
The driver impedance is very flat. I've only ever measured typical moving coil drivers, so it's interesting to see how planar magnetic drivers behave. The impedances are within a 6% tolerance of nominal 18-ohm impedance, and within a 3% tolerance of each other. Not too shabby.
This next measurement is done with a CrySound 6151. I don't know how well it measures absolute curves. It's mainly for finding inconsistencies in driver performance in a production line setting. It's not like using the Audio Precision headphone test fixture that's lab-calibrated and a fairly consistent test setup that many people can use as a point of reference. Maybe the information is useful for some, though my frequency response plot using a measurement microphone from the last page of posts might be a more appropriate representation. That frequency response used 200 averages, where this graph is a single sweep without any averaging. The curves can change quite drastically based on position of the headphones relative to the artificial ears.
It's a bummer to see the absolute polarity is incorrect. Positive transients cause the drivers to deflect away from the ears. Maybe try a polarity flip on your audio output and see if one feels better to you while listening.
Ear cup outer diameter = 98.5 mm (it's a circle)
Ear cup depth without pad = 21 mm
Pad depth = 21 mm
Pad outer diameter = 100 mm (basically a circle)
Pad inner measurements = 46 mm x 64 mm (rounded rectangle)
Head band width = 25 mm
Head band thickness with padding = 8 mm
Height from bottom of ear cup to top of head band = ~200 mm
Width from L ear cup hinge to R ear cup hinge = ~195 mm
Last edited:
How about inner measurements ?
To asses ear comfort
To asses ear comfort
musicforants
New Head-Fier
how does this headphone compare to he6se v2?
exsomnis
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2012
- Posts
- 256
- Likes
- 148
TLDR;
Cons: The tuning is so damn weird, they're the antithesis of neutral audio engineering gear. Picky with the kind of music played through them.
Pros: Dynamics when you feed them power, that planar magnetic resolution.
If there was one sentence I would use to describe the MM-100 it's that they have their own reality distortion field. The best example I've found of this that is quickly reproducable are the rim hits in the opening seconds of Love Came Here. With an LCD 3, this is a sound that is somewhat in the background to my right, and with the MM-100 they are almost up against centre but what really throws me off is that it gives me the impression that the pitch is actually lower - or at least that this rim shot sound has more emphasised lower frequencies than it should have. The MM-100 is so strange that even my HD 6XX has more in common with the LCD 3 than the LCD 3 has with the MM-100. This is definitely a tuning speciific to Mr Manny M, as the LCD 2, Mobius and Sine are also more in alignment with the LCD 3 and the classic Audeze house sound. I haven't heard the MM-500 or the LCD 5, so can't comment on them.
@squibble's measurements seem to corroborate my experience. The MM-100s will tell you in no uncertain terms that they are mids HEAVY and that chunk dug out of the presence region makes the soundstage sound both closed in and contradictorily also spread out more due to parts of treble getting psychoacoustic emphasis. I'd say this was to counter the classic closed in Audeze sound.k It's done in such a way that it still suits modern synth saturated music but play enough music that you know well with real life instruments playing (or not) and the deviation is stark. Bhaskara's Wheel is a well recorded modern jazz track that I've used forever as a reference for natural cymbal hits and tambourines - the MM-100s make them sound artificial. Bubbles sounded so wrong compared to the other headphones and my stereo rig. Epic trance/future rave tracks like Satisfaction lose their epic scale.
In fairness, the clarity and resolving ability is befitting of what you expect from planar magnetic drivers. And when the song isn't messed up by the weird tuning, this is clearly demonstrated in vocals. What Was I Made For? has an apt focus on Billie Eilish's breathy voice, bringing out the subtle details and clearly separating each part of the mix. And if you continue to listen to the MM-100s it is possible to adjust to the sound and forget about everything that you know about how things should sound. It is possible to be immersed in this sound with the right songs and a bit of a lucky streak.
I think of this as a headphone editorial, tuned to subjective preferences, which is perfectly fine in its own right. What rubs me the wrong way about this is that they are marketed as a professional studio/mixing headphone. I shudder to think of the resulting tracks produced on them.
Will I keep them? I don't seem to be able to get rid of any of my Audeze gear, being the constrained fanboy that I am, so they'll stay. But I really doubt that I will listen to them all that much, being an audiophile first audiophile.
Would I recommend them to my friends? Nope.
edit: PS. Probably a huge deal breaker for people who haven't pre-ordered and are looking to get these. There are only 3 adjustments for the head-band. I'm lucky to have my big head fit the loosest setting.
Cons: The tuning is so damn weird, they're the antithesis of neutral audio engineering gear. Picky with the kind of music played through them.
Pros: Dynamics when you feed them power, that planar magnetic resolution.
If there was one sentence I would use to describe the MM-100 it's that they have their own reality distortion field. The best example I've found of this that is quickly reproducable are the rim hits in the opening seconds of Love Came Here. With an LCD 3, this is a sound that is somewhat in the background to my right, and with the MM-100 they are almost up against centre but what really throws me off is that it gives me the impression that the pitch is actually lower - or at least that this rim shot sound has more emphasised lower frequencies than it should have. The MM-100 is so strange that even my HD 6XX has more in common with the LCD 3 than the LCD 3 has with the MM-100. This is definitely a tuning speciific to Mr Manny M, as the LCD 2, Mobius and Sine are also more in alignment with the LCD 3 and the classic Audeze house sound. I haven't heard the MM-500 or the LCD 5, so can't comment on them.
@squibble's measurements seem to corroborate my experience. The MM-100s will tell you in no uncertain terms that they are mids HEAVY and that chunk dug out of the presence region makes the soundstage sound both closed in and contradictorily also spread out more due to parts of treble getting psychoacoustic emphasis. I'd say this was to counter the classic closed in Audeze sound.k It's done in such a way that it still suits modern synth saturated music but play enough music that you know well with real life instruments playing (or not) and the deviation is stark. Bhaskara's Wheel is a well recorded modern jazz track that I've used forever as a reference for natural cymbal hits and tambourines - the MM-100s make them sound artificial. Bubbles sounded so wrong compared to the other headphones and my stereo rig. Epic trance/future rave tracks like Satisfaction lose their epic scale.
In fairness, the clarity and resolving ability is befitting of what you expect from planar magnetic drivers. And when the song isn't messed up by the weird tuning, this is clearly demonstrated in vocals. What Was I Made For? has an apt focus on Billie Eilish's breathy voice, bringing out the subtle details and clearly separating each part of the mix. And if you continue to listen to the MM-100s it is possible to adjust to the sound and forget about everything that you know about how things should sound. It is possible to be immersed in this sound with the right songs and a bit of a lucky streak.
I think of this as a headphone editorial, tuned to subjective preferences, which is perfectly fine in its own right. What rubs me the wrong way about this is that they are marketed as a professional studio/mixing headphone. I shudder to think of the resulting tracks produced on them.
Will I keep them? I don't seem to be able to get rid of any of my Audeze gear, being the constrained fanboy that I am, so they'll stay. But I really doubt that I will listen to them all that much, being an audiophile first audiophile.
Would I recommend them to my friends? Nope.
edit: PS. Probably a huge deal breaker for people who haven't pre-ordered and are looking to get these. There are only 3 adjustments for the head-band. I'm lucky to have my big head fit the loosest setting.
Attachments
Last edited:
pk4425
1000+ Head-Fier
Thanks. Eeshk -- 21 mm may not be deep enough for me. I need to measure my LCD-X 2021 pad depth for comparison.I took a few more measurements with different equipment.
The driver impedance is very flat. I've only ever measured typical moving coil drivers, so it's interesting to see how planar magnetic drivers behave. The impedances are within a 6% tolerance of nominal 18-ohm impedance, and within a 3% tolerance of each other. Not too shabby.
This next measurement is done with a CrySound 6151. I don't know how well it measures absolute curves. It's mainly for finding inconsistencies in driver performance in a production line setting. It's not like using the Audio Precision headphone test fixture that's lab-calibrated and a fairly consistent test setup that many people can use as a point of reference. Maybe the information is useful for some, though my frequency response plot using a measurement microphone from the last page of posts might be a more appropriate representation. That frequency response used 200 averages, where this graph is a single sweep without any averaging. The curves can change quite drastically based on position of the headphones relative to the artificial ears.
It's a bummer to see the absolute polarity is incorrect. Positive transients cause the drivers to deflect away from the ears. Maybe try a polarity flip on your audio output and see if one feels better to you while listening.
Ear cup outer diameter = 98.5 mm (it's a circle)
Ear cup depth without pad = 21 mm
Pad depth = 21 mm
Pad outer diameter = 100 mm (basically a circle)
Head band width = 25 mm
Head band thickness with padding = 8 mm
Height from bottom of ear cup to top of head band = ~200 mm
Width from L ear cup hinge to R ear cup hinge = ~195 mm
squibble
New Head-Fier
Original post updated!How about inner measurements ?
To asses ear comfort
HipHopScribe
Headphoneus Supremus
Just FYI, you can make more fine-tuned adjustments by setting one side to a different level than the other (i.e. left side on loosest setting, right side on middle setting). Based on my experience with the Maxwell, this looks a little weird but feels fine while wearing.
Less spacious than Meze 109 Pro (50x70mm), but probably Ok.
squibble
New Head-Fier
Yeah, honestly I have nothing bad to say about the comfort. I had them on for about 4 hours while editing drums yesterday. I can feel the top part of my ear just start to touch the mesh screen, but it's not painful or bothersome at all. Probably due to the gentle clamping force.
YMMV
renji1337
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- May 27, 2011
- Posts
- 218
- Likes
- 42
Have you tried any EQ at all yet? I'm wondering how they would respond with EQ. I'm testing it with mine so far but i'm a novice
Last edited:
drothenberger
New Head-Fier
I've tried the oratory1990 preset for MM-500 with the 9th band (airiness) disabled. I like it much better than the stock tuning.
renji1337
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- May 27, 2011
- Posts
- 218
- Likes
- 42
These measurements look questionable because the ATH-M50X doesn't measure like that - no slight against you or how you created the chart - just an interesting thought when I looked up ATH-M50x measurements, but I bet the mids will still show a bump like this just not as pronouncedHere is a quick and dirty measurement using a Sonarworks measurement mic. I played pink noise through each ear cup, one at a time, and I had the headphones suspended in free air away from any surfaces. I moved the microphone around each ear cup, varying X/Y position and depth. These curves are a result of 200 averages each. The curves would surely change if the earcups could be sealed. I would ignore the accuracy below about 20Hz. Even below 100Hz gets iffy, since there is definitely handling noise from moving the mic. I also adjusted the overall curve Y positions to be 0dB at 1kHz as a reference point.
The driver similarity between Audeze L and R is very good! I was surprised to get a consistently odd result from the Audio Technicas, because they never sounded imbalanced to me. That peak between 100-300 Hz on the Audeze measurements matches the warm lower mid description I mentioned in my previous post. If I was a user scrolling this post, I might think that peak looks kind of offensive. While it's certainly present, It sounds more gentle than it looks.
PRACTICE CAUTION WHEN LOOKING AT MEASUREMENTS FROM STRANGERS ON THE INTERNET, PLEASE! INCLUDING MINE.
Last edited:
HipHopScribe
Headphoneus Supremus
As they mentioned their measurements were not done on a proper headphone measurement rig that simulates a head where you could get the earpads to seal, so it's best to look at that graph as a comparison with some rough data, not as a reference similar to most headphone graphs you'll see online
Last edited:
Users who are viewing this thread
