[Pianist]

   The M70X is hugely superior to the MSR7.
Its night and day, its not even a contest.
The M70X is an audiophile headphone and the MSR7 is a  very good "tweeked" consumer  headphone.
So, if you like bright and extended trebles and a little bit of tweeked bass =  the usual Audio Technica  slight V shape EQ presentation then the MSR7 is your excellent headphone. It sounds very good, but its the typical ATechnica sound, which is to say bright and a bit of a "V" Eq'ing.
If you want incredible affordable audiophile sound, especially regarding jazz vocals or any type of pure vocal music, then you definitely  want the M70x.
 
check out this review.....
 
http://tapeop.com/reviews/gear/108/ath-r70x-open-back-reference-headphone/

 
I am sure you meant R70X instead of M70X. In any case, MSR7 is not a V-shaped headphone - it's a mid-centric headphone. This is clearly visible in measurements.

 

[FullBright1]

 
From what I've read the MSR7 was found "Superior" then the M70x and your review is for the open back R70x.
You probley need a DAP and amp to get the best out of them not so with the MSR7.

 Yes, 
 
the open back R70x.
 
Other then Grados, Ive pretty much owned every "highly reviewed"  closed back headphone you can buy that costs between $199 -$399, and a few that are more expensive.
Ive owned the Hifiman HE400, 400i, & the B&W P7.
And of course the Senn HD 600 and 712, and BeyerDynamic stuff and AKG 702s.
Recently got the Fostex T50RP MK3s, and the AT-MSR7
So the essences is, ive tried nearly everything to find out what is the best sound for the money.
The best for the money is the Fostex TH-500RP if you want to spend $700 USD.
If you dont, but want the best Audiophile sound for your money, then get the ATech-M70x open.
There is nothing that competes with their sound, however, not everyone likes natural clarity and honest realism.
Many people like an etched treble and a stretched bass response that is very good sounding but is not an audiophile sound.
If you want that sound then there are a few good choices, with one of the very best being the MSR7.
And if you want the best plug into your laptop Dac and Headphone situation then run, do not walk but run and buy the Tascam UH-7000 while they are still making them.
And ive owned the Concero HP and the Woo Fireflies and others, and nothing touches the Tascam that is $0-$1000 affordable.
Get the Tascam and the Open R70x if you want a 3 mile wide soundstage and utter realism, and get the MSR7 also if you want surgical trebles and analytical presence.

 

[FullBright1]

   Yes, 
 
the open back R70x.
 
Other then Grados, Ive pretty much owned every "highly reviewed"  closed back headphone you can buy that costs between $199 -$399, and a few that are more expensive.
Ive owned the Hifiman HE400, 400i, & the B&W P7.
And of course the Senn HD 600 and 712, and BeyerDynamic stuff and AKG 702s.
Recently got the Fostex T50RP MK3s, and the AT-MSR7
So the essences is, ive tried nearly everything to find out what is the best sound for the money.
The best for the money is the Fostex TH-500RP if you want to spend $700 USD.
If you dont, but want the best Audiophile sound for your money, then get the ATech-M70x open.
There is nothing that competes with their sound, however, not everyone likes natural clarity and honest realism.
Many people like an etched treble and a stretched bass response that is very good sounding but is not an audiophile sound.
If you want that sound then there are a few good choices, with one of the very best being the MSR7.
And if you want the best plug into your laptop Dac and Headphone situation then run, do not walk but run and buy the Tascam UH-7000 while they are still making them.
And ive owned the Concero HP and the Woo Fireflies and others, and nothing touches the Tascam that is $0-$1000 affordable.
Get the Tascam and the Open R70x if you want a 3 mile wide soundstage and utter realism, and get the MSR7 also if you want surgical trebles and analytical presence.

 

   
I am sure you meant R70X instead of M70X. In any case, MSR7 is not a V-shaped headphone - it's a mid-centric headphone. This is clearly visible in measurements.

 
 
Well first of all, im not slagging the MSR7 when i say its no match for the R70x.
The MSR7 is a quality gear, and well worth the money, but its not going to produce an audiophile sound.
Its not designed to offer a natural sounding sound.
Its apparently designed to be very analytical and profoundly precise.
However, that is not audiophile, that is Audio Technica.
 
You ears will tell you that the ATMSR7, is quite bright.
So, when we are talking about how the ears hear frequency, then you may be able to prove that the MSR7 has a bump in the mids, but when you hear it, you will find the bump is in the high end and the bass response.
The mids are pretty articulate but they are not pushed or dominant as are the trebles and the bass.
Im not sure if Tyll at Inner-F measured them the same as you, but what he hears is the same as me.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rd8bleLsSfU
 
He hears the MSR7 as bright and very analytical because this is the typical AT sound that they present.
It sounds etches at both ends which causes the mids to seem "there" but not out front.
They are certainly not recessed, but with this headphone, you get the bright and the bottom as your sound, with the mids being nicely displayed but not dominant. 

 

[Ra97oR]

Not entirely sure how you came into conclusion that AT house sound is V shaped... If anything they are mostly mid centric instead of mid recessed.

 

[FullBright1]

Not entirely sure how you came into conclusion that AT house sound is V shaped... If anything they are mostly mid centric instead of mid recessed.

 
 
If you do a lot of headphone buying, or if you do a lot of headphone reviewing, then you'll notice that the AT sound, with regards to the $0- $399 line, is always described as "bright".
This is especially true regarding the affordable closed back models.
AT headphones, the closed back consumer or prosumer phones, are always reviewed as being "bright".
So, no matter the make of the phones.......once a headphone presents etched trebles, then the mids are going to appear to the ear as "V" shaped.
See, the only way a headphone can be considered to be "bright" is if the trebles dominate, and once that happens, as it happens with the affordable AT's, then the perception is that the phone is a "V".
You are welcome to go to any M-series or any affordable AT Headphone review in general, and you'll always read where they are described as "bright"., and this is because AT headphone's sound tends towards an upper frequency clarity., and this is achieved  at the cost of a more natural sound.
This is one of the remarkable things about the R70x's, in that its the anti- Audio Technica sound, even tho its an AT product. !!
If you review IT, you'll note how AT junkies who love AT, will say..."well, it SOUNDS nothing like an AT"..
And that is a fact, it sound nothing like AT headphones, which typically have an etched treble and mids which sound bright.
 
The R70x,@ $350 is a giant killer.
Its a transcendent listening device that floats you away on sonic clouds of bliss.
When you first see it and then  put it on you think,......""""""hummmm, its not very impressive, it looks anything but expensive, and yeah... this certainly is a very light headphone.""""
Then you put on your fav CDs you've used over the YEARS to check out your new phones and then its 3 hrs later and you are still listening<> trying to decide if these are as great as you first thought.
By the next day you still cant believe that anything that costs $350 and looks that cheap and feels that light and comfortable can be as good as you think it is......yet....it is.
Soundwise they take a little getting use to, (about 15 mins) as you at first notice that the trebles do not sizzle and the upper mids do not dominate, so you think......"thats new for AT"....
But then......you just keep listening and listening as these may be the easiest headphones to listen to that you've ever used.
In my experience with many many headphones, the Fostex Th-500RPs are a great feeling headphone(s), but the best feeling headphone is the Sony MDR-MA900.
Now that headphone is the feather on your head- cant feel it- masterpiece of good wearing-feeling headphones that nothing else can match, and if those phones had some bass and a bit more AT -Treble zing, then they would be among the best H-Phones ever created.........tho, they are very good, just quite non-dynamic and just a little bit lacking in energy<>presentation.
However the R70x's  and the  TH-500RPs........are just too darn good........Once you use them and then try to go back to the too bright, too forward, too uncomfortable, sets that you own, that you use to love

..... .....well, there's no going back

 

[Pianist]

MSR7 doesn't have "etched" treble. It's some of the best highs I've ever heard from any audio system - extremely resolving, clear, refined. MSR7 has a generally neutral sound with a fairly minor, but noticeable emphasis in the upper mids around 800 Hz - 2 kHz, that gives vocals and other instruments in this range a bit of extra presence and bite. It also has a small dip centered at 500 Hz. The rest of the spectrum is quite neutral, so overall, I consider MSR7 to be a generally neutral headphone with some midrange emphasis. The mid-bass can stand out a little because of the 500 Hz dip and the highs can seem emphasized because of their extreme clarity and resolution. The bass is a straight line from ~50 Hz - 200 Hz and the highs are fairly neutral from 3 kHz on up. I would consider MSR7 to be almost, if not quite as good as my HD800 in bass and treble quality and while the mids are a little uneven, the quality of them is also about on par with the best headphones of today - at least the best dynamic and planar headphones, as I haven't heard any stats yet. Where MSR7 falls behind the best closed back and any good open backs is in soundstage, sense of space and dynamics, but that is to be expected from a pretty inexpensive, portable closed headphone. In terms of overall technical capabilities however, especially resolution and clarity, MSR7 is one of the best headphones out there. In terms of clarity/focus, it even beats out HD800, but MSR7 does have some artificial added clarity due to that midrange boost and its forward, aggressive presentation.

 

[FullBright1]

  MSR7 doesn't have "etched" treble. It's some of the best highs I've ever heard from any audio system - extremely resolving, clear, refined. MSR7 has a generally neutral sound with a fairly minor, but noticeable emphasis in the upper mids around 800 Hz - 2 kHz, that gives vocals and other instruments in this range a bit of extra presence and bite. It also has a small dip centered at 500 Hz. The rest of the spectrum is quite neutral, so overall, I consider MSR7 to be a generally neutral headphone with some midrange emphasis. The mid-bass can stand out a little because of the 500 Hz dip and the highs can seem emphasized because of their extreme clarity and resolution. The bass is a straight line from ~50 Hz - 200 Hz and the highs are fairly neutral from 3 kHz on up. I would consider MSR7 to be almost, if not quite as good as my HD800 in bass and treble quality and while the mids are a little uneven, the quality of them is also about on par with the best headphones of today - at least the best dynamic and planar headphones, as I haven't heard any stats yet. Where MSR7 falls behind the best closed back and any good open backs is in soundstage, sense of space and dynamics, but that is to be expected from a pretty inexpensive, portable closed headphone. In terms of overall technical capabilities however, especially resolution and clarity, MSR7 is one of the best headphones out there. In terms of clarity/focus, it even beats out HD800, but MSR7 does have some artificial added clarity due to that midrange boost and its forward, aggressive presentation.

 
The MSR7 is not a neutral headphone.
Its a bright headphone, with some xtra sizzle on the top and just a tad of punch in the bass.
The mids are not particularly neutral and the headphone is very dynamic, so, i cant imagine that you would think its basically a flat headphone with no dynamics, as this is exactly what the headphone is not.
What it is, is a very good headphone, that is a little bright and tight sounding.
Does it have more clarity or focus then the Senn 800?......not on its best day on steroids.
I'll tell you what will surprise you, and this is, that its not on the same playing field with "the best planar headphones"......as a matter of fact the Fostex TH-500RP slays it., as does the non-planer ATH-R70x.
And what will really rock your mindset is if you get yourself a pair of Fostex T50RP Mk 3's and compare....and you'll wonder how Fostex charges $100 less then the MSR7 as the Fostex sounds as good if not better, and actually quite similar.

 

[Pianist]

  The MSR7 is not a neutral headphone.
Its a bright headphone, with some xtra sizzle on the top and just a tad of punch in the bass.
The mids are not particularly neutral and the headphone is very dynamic, so, i cant imagine that you would think its basically a flat headphone with no dynamics, as this is exactly what the headphone is not.
What it is, is a very good headphone, that is a little bright and tight sounding.
Does it have more clarity or focus then the Senn 800?......not on its best day on steroids.
I'll tell you what will surprise you, and this is, that its not on the same playing field with "the best planar headphones"......as a matter of fact the Fostex TH-500RP slays it., as does the non-planer ATH-R70x.
And what will really rock your mindset is if you get yourself a pair of Fostex T50RP Mk 3's and compare....and you'll wonder how Fostex charges $100 less then the MSR7 as the Fostex sounds as good if not better, and actually quite similar.

 
MSR7 is not neutral and it is indeed bright, but not because it has extra sizzle up top, but because it has some emphasis in the upper mids. If you look at the square wave response in the measurements, the 300 Hz square wave has almost perfect shape, which, if I am not mistaken, indicates a near perfect tonal balance. Headphones with bass emphasis show an upward tilt on the 300 Hz square wave, while lean/bright headphones show a downward tilt. MSR7's square wave response is near flat, meaning that it's neither bright, nor bassy and the frequency response confirms this. The only area where MSR7 deviates significantly from neutrality is the upper midrange and perhaps the bottom and top octaves, where it is just a bit rolled off. I can't possibly see how MSR7 has bass emphasis, but it is certainly bright because of that upper midrange boost. To me, slightly bright headphones are Denon D2000 or Beyer DT880, slightly bassy headphones are NAD HP50, or Fidelio X2 and slightly V-shaped is something like SRH1540. MSR7 is a slightly mid-centric headphone, or more precisely, upper mid-centric headphone, so it's a bit bright,
 
I haven't heard the T50RP MK3, but based on the measurements at Innerfidelity, it rolls off in the bass and doesn't sound quite as clean as MSR7, considering that the 300 Hz square wave is more noisy and distortion levels are much higher. I can guarantee just by looking at the graphs that the T50RPs, while pretty good on paper for a headphone in their price range, is not in the same league as MSR7 in sound quality. At least not in their stock form.
 
As for a headphone "slaying" MSR7 in sound quality, I personally have yet to hear one. Even HD800 can't do it IMO, although it does sound much more natural overall, because of much better soundstage. Technically, in terms of clarity, precision, speed, control, etc, MSR7 is very close to the best dynamics and planars available, if not up there. I do think that the lack of spaciousness and some lack of dynamics prevent MSR7 from sounding as good as the best headphones. In terms of dynamics, I think MSR7 is actually very good, if not great, for a headphone in its price range, just not on the level of an HE-500, HD800 or a T1.

 

[oopeteroo]

I bought msr7 for 130 USD and r70x for 263 USD both Inc shipping..... did I do good ?

ah what I wanted to know was msr7 vs m70x

 

[FullBright1]

   
MSR7 is not neutral and it is indeed bright,
 
I haven't heard the T50RP MK3, but based on the measurements at Innerfidelity,
As for a headphone "slaying" MSR7 in sound quality, I personally have yet to hear one.

 
First let me say that if people here are going to rate headphones against other headphones, and they've never owned them or heard them, and are using "measurements" as their criteria and proof, then i have a word for that kind of nonsense, but, i'll not use it in such polite company.
So, let me be clear........Unless you've owned the phones, you dont know what they sound like, and this goes for people who tried them briefly in a shop or at a show.
You literally have to buy them, own them, and use them for a while to know how they sound., and this is why i'll never post a review or a comment about a gear which i've never owned and try to judge its value and sound based on online measurements.
Frankly, thats ridiculous.
Here is the thing about "measurements"....
They are just numbers and numbers are fine if you are a computer, but when you are using ears in real world testing situations to determine what sounds best, then just get rid of the numbers as they are basically useless  "in real life" criteria.
For example, this idea you have that that R70x has bass rolloff, because of numbers...
Well, thats fine for a computer to say, but if you hear the phones you'll discover that the bass reaches deeper, is larger,  and is more profound in resolution then the bass offered by the MSR7s.
Thats a fact that your ears will prove which will dispute "numbers" or "measurements" every single time.
And that you've not heard the R70x is the literal reason you can say that you've not heard a headphone that can slay the MSR7 in sound quality.
But i have heard it, as ive owned them both, and tested them both, and so i can tell you that the MSR7 is a  great headphone, that is bright, analytical, and does not have a natural sound in the upper mids, or overall.......It has a very good sound, but it does not reproduce music without adding its particular tweeked upper mids to the sound, and it has a slight bump in the bass.
So, when we talk about good sounding headphones, then often we are describing how a certain headphone recreates the music according to ITS particular EQ'ing and that is what you have with the MSR7..........However, when we are speaking about 'audiophile" sound, then we are discussing a different concept, as "audiophile" does not mean "great sounding", but rather it means perfectly accurate related to transmitting the source accurately.............In other words, it means...."this is how the music sounds"....vs, "this is how the headphone recreates it to sound according to how the headphone has been EQ'd to reproduce sound".
So, with the MSR7, you get the bright and very very present EQ'd sound which sounds great, but with the R70x you nearly get the straight wire and THAT is why its a better headphone and a truer headphone and a audiophile- reference headphone as compared to the MSR7 or as compared to nearly any other headphone that you can buy.
 
And regarding the Fostex T50RP-Mrk3.......well, you've not heard them,you've not owned them so, its best that you dont review them or compare them, until you do.
I hope this makes sense to you.
However, Ive owned them and ive literally compared them to the MSR7 and im telling you and any reader that they are a ridiculous value @ $150USD and that they sound as good as the MSR7, but have a slightly wider sound with more air because they are not a closed headphone.. which results in a perceived very slight loss in resolution...BUT, if you listen to their sound, then you will notice how much they do sound like the MSR7.
The attractive MSR7 is better built, better accomplished, yet, the Fostex T50RP-Mk3 sounds very similar yet more open.....does it sound better?...No,.. but, for the money and if you are making the decision between the 2, then get the Fostex......However if you want the best for the money, then order the AT R70x as its much better then both of those.

 

[riposte]

I bought msr7 for 130 USD and r70x for 263 USD both Inc shipping..... did I do good ?

ah what I wanted to know was msr7 vs m70x

 
Great deals! That's why sometimes I'm jealous to other country because deals like that

. And jealous to Japan too because they have great audio stores 

 

 

[NobleNoob4Life]

I'm kinda curious how the W1000Z sounds, the W1000x with a few mods are pretty top notch! 

They sound great, a little bit smoother around the edges in terms of sound, a bit of a more warm tone.

 

[vman]

I bought msr7 for 130 USD and r70x for 263 USD both Inc shipping..... did I do good ?

ah what I wanted to know was msr7 vs m70x

Link to deals?

 

[oopeteroo]

  Link to deals?

sorry it was only on black friday and in sweden

 

[Pianist]

   
First let me say that if people here are going to rate headphones against other headphones, and they've never owned them or heard them, and are using "measurements" as their criteria and proof, then i have a word for that kind of nonsense, but, i'll not use it in such polite company.
So, let me be clear........Unless you've owned the phones, you dont know what they sound like, and this goes for people who tried them briefly in a shop or at a show.
You literally have to buy them, own them, and use them for a while to know how they sound., and this is why i'll never post a review or a comment about a gear which i've never owned and try to judge its value and sound based on online measurements.
Frankly, thats ridiculous.
Here is the thing about "measurements"....
They are just numbers and numbers are fine if you are a computer, but when you are using ears in real world testing situations to determine what sounds best, then just get rid of the numbers as they are basically useless  "in real life" criteria.
For example, this idea you have that that R70x has bass rolloff, because of numbers...
Well, thats fine for a computer to say, but if you hear the phones you'll discover that the bass reaches deeper, is larger,  and is more profound in resolution then the bass offered by the MSR7s.
Thats a fact that your ears will prove which will dispute "numbers" or "measurements" every single time.
And that you've not heard the R70x is the literal reason you can say that you've not heard a headphone that can slay the MSR7 in sound quality.
But i have heard it, as ive owned them both, and tested them both, and so i can tell you that the MSR7 is a  great headphone, that is bright, analytical, and does not have a natural sound in the upper mids, or overall.......It has a very good sound, but it does not reproduce music without adding its particular tweeked upper mids to the sound, and it has a slight bump in the bass.
So, when we talk about good sounding headphones, then often we are describing how a certain headphone recreates the music according to ITS particular EQ'ing and that is what you have with the MSR7..........However, when we are speaking about 'audiophile" sound, then we are discussing a different concept, as "audiophile" does not mean "great sounding", but rather it means perfectly accurate related to transmitting the source accurately.............In other words, it means...."this is how the music sounds"....vs, "this is how the headphone recreates it to sound according to how the headphone has been EQ'd to reproduce sound".
So, with the MSR7, you get the bright and very very present EQ'd sound which sounds great, but with the R70x you nearly get the straight wire and THAT is why its a better headphone and a truer headphone and a audiophile- reference headphone as compared to the MSR7 or as compared to nearly any other headphone that you can buy.
 
And regarding the Fostex T50RP-Mrk3.......well, you've not heard them,you've not owned them so, its best that you dont review them or compare them, until you do.
I hope this makes sense to you.
However, Ive owned them and ive literally compared them to the MSR7 and im telling you and any reader that they are a ridiculous value @ $150USD and that they sound as good as the MSR7, but have a slightly wider sound with more air because they are not a closed headphone.. which results in a perceived very slight loss in resolution...BUT, if you listen to their sound, then you will notice how much they do sound like the MSR7.
The attractive MSR7 is better built, better accomplished, yet, the Fostex T50RP-Mk3 sounds very similar yet more open.....does it sound better?...No,.. but, for the money and if you are making the decision between the 2, then get the Fostex......However if you want the best for the money, then order the AT R70x as its much better then both of those.

 
I disagree that measurements are useless in real life. I think it's the other way around. In order to pursue accurate sound reproduction, we need objective evidence to explain what we hear or don't hear - without it, we'll never determine what's really accurate. This objective evidence consists of not only measurements of the audio equipment that we are evaluating, but also professional tests of our hearing. Once we have that evidence, we can proceed to evaluate audio gear by correlating subjective impressions with the objective data. A person with hearing loss will need to use EQ to boost the frequencies that his ears can't hear properly, or will need to keep this deficiency in mind when evaluating gear. It's also very important to train our ears to hear differences in audio, as untrained ears, even if they have perfect hearing, will be no better at judging sound than ears with hearing loss. By training ears, I don't mean that one has to be a musician or attend music school, but one needs to at least listen carefully and learn some basics about frequency response and other aspects of sound, so the person will know how each frequency sounds, how to judge tonal balance, etc. And of course, the more experience one has with audio equipment, the better one becomes at analyzing the equipment. However, our listening must always be correlated with measurements IMO - we need objective point of reference because even the most trained and perfect ears can be deceived by numerous psychological and physiological factors, like mood, ambient noise levels, various other distractions, biases, etc... Also, one has to listen to music that covers a sufficiently broad range of frequencies and is sufficiently well recorded to judge audio equipment properly, not to mention that one needs a decent DAC and amp as well. It's virtually impossible to meet all these conditions at once - a person may not have perfect hearing, the music may not be well recorded, source may not be good enough, one can be in a bad mood, tired, etc. Often, the person may not even be aware of these issues. So measurements are essential to keep us from being deluded by our subjective realities.
 
It's true that judging a headphone just by looking at measurements without actually hearing it may seem silly and wrong, but when you do listen to it, how do you know that your subjective experience may not distort the objective reality of how it really sounds? For example, measurements clearly show that T50RP Mk3 rolls off below 100 Hz rather quickly, while MSR7 rolls off far less in the low end. If you only listen to acoustic music, you may not notice much of a difference, but if you try some dance or techno, I am sure that the low bass deficiency of the T50RP will become far more apparent. Also, MSR7 is cleaner and has a lower distortion based on the measurements. Can you actually hear it? Well, that depends on how good your source, your ears and your music is and a bunch of other factors. Maybe some people can't hear such differences at all. However, it's a fact that the MSR7 is cleaner and you can see it on the graphs. Whether or not you can hear it is a different matter and is your subjective reality. Some people may simply prefer the planar sound and its smoother character, so they may say that T50RP sounds better, or can exaggerate and say that it "blows away" MSR7 or something. Well, it may well be true to them, but it's far from objective reality, other people are bound to disagree and then it'll just be a useless argument and we won't be getting anywhere.... You get my point hopefully.