[LoryWiv]

Interesting. Thanks for sharing your findings I will definitely tinker with the clamp force.

Can this be achieved just by going higher on the sliders to loosen fit rather than more elaborate approach like foam spacers?

 

[Kevintj604]

Finally got some headtime with these today. I started this thread back in May which seems like a lifetime ago. I compared them directly to my LCDX 2021 and man are a lot of the reviews on these different from my impressions. I absolutely love how these sound.

Are they mid forward? Yup
Do they sound a lot like the LCD5, especially in the mids? Yup
Are they more of a technical listen compared to the LCDX 2021? Yup

I spent quite a bit of time A/B'ing back and forth and I think these will probably earn a spot in my collection. The biggest difference is in the image separation and stage depth.

I also didn't find them overly clampy at all. They are more clampy compared to the LCDX but it bother me. The MM's weight is 100 grams less on paper but on the head it feels considerably lighter.

 

[sirocco]

Updates on my systemwide SoundID calibration as of right now:

-Only correcting under 1.3k using LCD-X (original rev) profile
-Low end shelf boost around 3.5 DB at ~250hz
-Linear phase
-100% mix

I feel above 1.3k doesnt need any EQ, it just sounds so good to me.

 

[pataburd]

Ms. Hamada's deft and subtle touches are beautifully rendered with the MM-500! (This entire album is worth staying up for an extra hour or so.)

 

[snapple10]

Finally got some headtime with these today. I started this thread back in May which seems like a lifetime ago. I compared them directly to my LCDX 2021 and man are a lot of the reviews on these different from my impressions. I absolutely love how these sound.

Are they mid forward? Yup
Do they sound a lot like the LCD5, especially in the mids? Yup
Are they more of a technical listen compared to the LCDX 2021? Yup

I spent quite a bit of time A/B'ing back and forth and I think these will probably earn a spot in my collection. The biggest difference is in the image separation and stage depth.

I also didn't find them overly clampy at all. They are more clampy compared to the LCDX but it bother me. The MM's weight is 100 grams less on paper but on the head it feels considerably lighter.

Those LCD-X are sick with the chrome grill… Nice!!

 

[LoryWiv]

I realize cable discussions lead to differences of opinion re.: sonic impact, but even from a purely aesthetic point of view I am VERY happy with the Norne Audio Skollvar v2 paired with MM-500:

 

[pataburd]

Nice Norne!
For my ears/brain aftermarket cables bring welcome improvements to the listening experience.
I highly regard/favor Neotech UPOCC solid cores cable for all my headphones, whenever possible (e.g. Stax presently excepted).
Enjoy!

 

[baneand]

Hey guys, for those who own both mm-500 and focal clear MG - in my region I have option to get the MG for about 1400$ and mm-500 for 2100$ which is big difference.
How do you compare those two? I only see they are both highly analytical and small staged but I didn't find more detailed comparison.

 

[pataburd]

What are your listening preferences?
What headphones have you listened to so far that you especially like?
What kind of music do you prefer?
What source and amp will you be using?

(FWIW, I have owned both, but sold the Clear MG, in favor of the Clear OG, a while back.)

 

[baneand]

What are your listening preferences?
What headphones have you listened to so far that you especially like?
What kind of music do you prefer?
What source and amp will you be using?

(FWIW, I have owned both, but sold the Clear MG, in favor of the Clear OG, a while back.)

70% of time electronics, drum and bass and progressive - so I like sub-bass rumbling, not basshead brain mashing (usually people think of that first when I talk about bass), 30% jazz, funk etc. Usually I end up pulling up 40-80Hz few db above on all headphones just to balance out in the electronics I am listening.
Current headphone I am using is Meze Liric and only thing I like about it is imaging and sub-bass. Everything else I don't feel is justified by it's price. Previous were BD 1990Pro, those were fine also after eq.
So now I want to go back to open back and kind of narrowed down to these 2. I like what I read about mm-500 natural sounding description by people on this topic.

 

[Beagle]

For anyone who’s heard both, I’d be interested in how the MM-500 compares to the MX4.

 

[LoryWiv]

Hey guys, for those who own both mm-500 and focal clear MG - in my region I have option to get the MG for about 1400$ and mm-500 for 2100$ which is big difference.
How do you compare those two? I only see they are both highly analytical and small staged but I didn't find more detailed comparison.

I own and enjoy both. They are very different sound signatures. If you want the "bassier" of the two, that is Clear MG but they are both a joy to listen to.

Yep, Clear MG is definitely warmer, very present bass but it is well-controlled and does not bleed into midrange. It is a fun listen but with enough technicalities and detail retrieval to satisfy more critical listening needs as well. That said, I would not call it analytical.

MM-500 is more analytical. Imaging and instrument separation are a major strength. Smaller stage but everything is so well-positioned it is very compelling. Definitely less overall bass prominence than Clear MG but on tracks where bass is featured it makes it's presence known, impactful and controlled. Despite being purpose built for mixing, MM-500 has a healthy dollop of euphony which makes them highly enjoyable and more than musical enough for recreational listening.

To contrast them, think of Clear MG as a fun, warm-leaning headphone with good technicalities as a plus, and MM-500 as an analytic, more neutral headphone with the added capability of strong musical engagement.

 

[baneand]

I own and enjoy both. They are very different sound signatures. If you want the "bassier" of the two, that is Clear MG but they are both a joy to listen to.

Yep, Clear MG is definitely warmer, very present bass but it is well-controlled and does not bleed into midrange. It is a fun listen but with enough technicalities and detail retrieval to satisfy more critical listening needs as well. That said, I would not call it analytical.

MM-500 is more analytical. Imaging and instrument separation are a major strength. Smaller stage but everything is so well-positioned it is very compelling. Definitely less overall bass prominence than Clear MG but on tracks where bass is featured it makes it's presence known, impactful and controlled. Despite being purpose built for mixing, MM-500 has a healthy dollop of euphony which makes them highly enjoyable and more than musical enough for recreational listening.

To contrast them, think of Clear MG as a fun, warm-leaning headphone with good technicalities as a plus, and MM-500 as an analytic, more neutral headphone with the added capability of strong musical engagement.

thanks for detailed comparison!

 

[pataburd]

thanks for detailed comparison!

So . . . did you decide upon one or the other or neither or both of these headphones?

 

[skeeb23]

I've decided to sell my MM-500 for anyone interested. I still think they have an excellent frequency response and accurate presentation. At the end of the day however, they are not the signature I was looking for. I suppose it's the same reason the Arya SE didn't work out for me too. Call me a dynamic driver guy I suppose! To each their own. If you are interested, I have them for sale on the classifieds here at:
https://www.head-fi.org/classifieds/audeze-mm-500-mint-condition-1200-00-shipping.36115/

I will say that for being someone who has a bigger head that I was ok in the end on the comfort. Still I can see these being more preferred with those with smaller heads in general.