[Pianist]

  That's the core of your posting. You describe your subjective experiences with the MSR-7. However it might sound bright to other persons due to different anatomical factors (resonance of the ear canal). The MSRs upper mids are indeed a bit forward compared to other frequencies which is also shown by the measurements of the frequency response.

 
Well, ok. I was just about to post the following:
 
The volume of mid bass at 150 Hz relative to the highs from ~3-10 kHz is very similar between MSR7 and HD600 as you see on these graphs:
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/SennheiserHD600.pdf
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/AudioTechnicaATHMSR7.pdf
 
In fact, it looks like HD600 is brighter than MSR7 between 2 and 3 kHz and also does seem to have better presence after 10 kHz - more air.
 
I am comparing to HD600, because it's considered as one of the most neutral and balanced headphones by many people, including audio pros and it's used for recording in many studios.
 
Regarding our ear anatomy and hearing differences, that's a different matter, but I assume that the MSR7 and HD600 will sound similar to the same person in the way I showed above. So if a person considers MSR7 bright above 2 kHz, then HD600 should also sound bright above 2 kHz to that person. I have only seen very few people describe HD600 as bright in the highs though. In fact, quite a few people find them a bit too polite and recessed in the highs, even "veiled." You know, that famous "Sennheiser veil."

 

[Pianist]

double post

 

[JungleApe]

Well the reason for this phenomenon is in my opinion that the frequency response of the HD 600 is in general close-to-balance whilst the MSR has the bump between 800 Hz and 2kHz which makes him more forward sounding. 
 

In fact, it looks like HD600 is brighter than MSR7 between 2 and 3 kHz

Huh? How did you come to this conclusion?

 The difference here is the fact that the MSR starts rolling off at 2kHz and has its low mark ~4kHz which results in a brighter impression
 
I have some issues explaining this due to the fact that english isn't my native tongue. Sorry for that!

 

[Pianist]

  Well the reason for this phenomenon is in my opinion that the frequency response of the HD 600 is in general close-to-balance whilst the MSR has the bump between 800 Hz and 2kHz which makes him more forward sounding. 

 
Exactly! That's what I am saying too. People think it's bright mainly because of that bump. However, the emphasis is not treble - it's upper, or even mid-upper mids. So MSR7 is, in proper terms, a mid centric headphone that is bright due to mid emphasis.
 
Quote:

Huh? How did you come to this conclusion?

 The difference here is the fact that the MSR starts rolling off at 2kHz and has its low mark ~4kHz which results in a brighter impression

 
Look at 100 Hz compared to 3 kHz on the compensated graphs - 3 kHz is slightly more recessed on MSR7. It's probably something you will hardly be able to hear in practice though.
 
Quote:

  I have some issues explaining this due to the fact that english isn't my native tongue. Sorry for that!

 
Your written English seems better than that of quite a few young native English speakers these days. lol So don't worry. English is not my native language either BTW.

 
 
Also, notice that both MSR7 and HD600 have a similar dip around 6 kHz that reduces sibilance. I can confirm from my experience that MSR7 is never sibilant, unless the recording is terrible.
 
I do need to admit that the upper midrange bump on MSR7 can make it quite hard to listen to at times.

 

[oopeteroo]

mt220 vs msr7

 

[JungleApe]

@oopeteroo Personally i think those confrontational "questions" are rather pointless since the most important aspect about a headphone is if the signature fits your personal taste. Try a bunch of headphones out and pick the one which suits best. But hey, just my two cents.

 

[ithilienrp]

  Can someone translate this?
 
"そしてトップグレードの「ATH-WS1100」。2万5000円という予想価格ですが…主観で言わせてもらえればリーズナブル。2万円台でこの音か…！ 

 
Hope it's not too late for this.
 
It basically says "The price of 25K JPY is, IMO, reasonable. You get this sound for 2xK?"
 
A high praise indeed. It implies that it sounds like a much more expensive headphones. (2万円台 means pricing in 20k - 29k range).

 

[chongky]

   
The Detail retrieval you are suggesting comes only because the MSR7s have been EQ'd to be bright, which of course allows for the slightly fake - extended- "articulation".
But if you need that then get the R70xs and just increase the 5khz-10kHz on your fav player's EQ and you can have it all day and all night for as long as you like.
But if you want balance and no fake'd high end that gives you false "detail retrieval" as the expense of audiophile natural sound, then get the R70x's.

 
So are you suggesting MSR-7 sounds more resolving than R70x mainly because of its hyped-up sound? And it is possible to EQ the R70x to achieve the same level of clarity?
 
I must find some way of auditioning both cans. 

 I need a pair of cans for classical music. And I prefer a neutral but detailed sound, but it's so hard to find one under $500. I've been disappointed many times already...
 
R07s sounds very interesting but I find Fidelio X2 a bit too bassy for my taste. 

 

[FullBright1]

   
So are you suggesting MSR-7 sounds more resolving than R70x mainly because of its hyped-up sound? And it is possible to EQ the R70x to achieve the same level of clarity?
 
I must find some way of auditioning both cans. 

 I need a pair of cans for classical music. And I prefer a neutral but detailed sound, but it's so hard to find one under $500. I've been disappointed many times already...
 
R07s sounds very interesting but I find Fidelio X2 a bit too bassy for my taste. 

 
 The MSR-7 is not more "resolving" then the R70x.......I was just replying to the previous poster who was suggesting that because the MSR7 is "bright", that this has nothing to do with its hyped treble
Seriously tho.....the R70X is a much better headphone then the MSR7, BUT, it doesn't possess the signature sound that Audio-Technica usually provides, in that its not a bright sounding headphone like the MSR7 as described by our friend Tyll at Inner-Fidelity, and others.
But rather, its a very revealing headphone, >balanced-natural-audiophile<  which is why its in a class by itself and can be described as a "Reference" headphone, which by the way is how ATechnica describes it.
Its not a "consumer sound" in that it does not exhibit that slightly arched treble and lightly extended bass, however, it is a very revealing headphone because of its accuracy, and its one of the few headphones that ive ever experienced that you can wear for long listening sessions and you never fatigue from using it.

 

[woodpecker]

   
So are you suggesting MSR-7 sounds more resolving than R70x mainly because of its hyped-up sound? And it is possible to EQ the R70x to achieve the same level of clarity?
 
I must find some way of auditioning both cans. 

 I need a pair of cans for classical music. And I prefer a neutral but detailed sound, but it's so hard to find one under $500. I've been disappointed many times already...
 
R07s sounds very interesting but I find Fidelio X2 a bit too bassy for my taste. 

Actually the X2 and the R70x sound somewhat similar. Both are "Harmanized". The R70x are a better match for jazz and instrumental music, while the X2 are perhaps more fun for EDM. MSR7 have similar drivers as the R70x, but are tuned differently to make them sound more analytical. So If you're looking for a more natural X2 with more accurate/natural sound, the R70x are worth to try out. The bass is less boomy (less subbass) and more accurate, but still present.

 

[blueangel2323]

  The MSR-7 is not more "resolving" then the R70x.......I was just replying to the previous poster who was suggesting that because the MSR7 is "bright", that this has nothing to do with its hyped treble
Seriously tho.....the R70X is a much better headphone then the MSR7, BUT, it doesn't possess the signature sound that Audio-Technica usually provides, in that its not a bright sounding headphone like the MSR7 as described by our friend Tyll at Inner-Fidelity, and others.
But rather, its a very revealing headphone, >balanced-natural-audiophile<  which is why its in a class by itself and can be described as a "Reference" headphone, which by the way is how ATechnica describes it.
Its not a "consumer sound" in that it does not exhibit that slightly arched treble and lightly extended bass, however, it is a very revealing headphone because of its accuracy, and its one of the few headphones that ive ever experienced that you can wear for long listening sessions and you never fatigue from using it.

I think you can argue that the MSR-7 will sound more detailed than the R70x simply by virtue of the fact that it's a closed headphone, so all else being equal, details will sound more obvious compared to an open headphone with similar resolving power. Not to speak of the more analytical sound signature that emphasizes certain details. So the MSR-7 is not technically more resolving than the R70x, but micro details will be more in your face on the MSR-7, which can lead to the subjective impression of greater detail. Very useful for professional applications when you want any flaws in the recording to be exaggerated.

 

[exeth]

I think you can argue that the MSR-7 will sound more detailed than the R70x simply by virtue of the fact that it's a closed headphone, so all else being equal, details will sound more obvious compared to an open headphone with similar resolving power. Not to speak of the more analytical sound signature that emphasizes certain details. So the MSR-7 is not technically more resolving than the R70x, but micro details will be more in your face on the MSR-7, which can lead to the subjective impression of greater detail. Very useful for professional applications when you want any flaws in the recording to be exaggerated.

I disagree.Open back headphones, on the contrary, is capable of producing a far mroe detailed sound.One reason that dictates this is the fact that it is open backed, thus any sound created by the diaphragm is able to 'escape', and will not reverberate, as is the case in close back headphones.Reverberation is one core reason which causes closed back headphone to sound less detailed, and have a smaller soundstage.Even the most detailed headphpnes like the stax Sr009, hd800 and orpheus are open back

 

[exeth]

 The MSR-7 is not more "resolving" then the R70x.......I was just replying to the previous poster who was suggesting that because the MSR7 is "bright", that this has nothing to do with its hyped treble
Seriously tho.....the R70X is a much better headphone then the MSR7, BUT, it doesn't possess the signature sound that Audio-Technica usually provides, in that its not a bright sounding headphone like the MSR7 as described by our friend Tyll at Inner-Fidelity, and others.
But rather, its a very revealing headphone, >balanced-natural-audiophile<  which is why its in a class by itself and can be described as a "Reference" headphone, which by the way is how ATechnica describes it.
Its not a "consumer sound" in that it does not exhibit that slightly arched treble and lightly extended bass, however, it is a very revealing headphone because of its accuracy, and its one of the few headphones that ive ever experienced that you can wear for long listening sessions and you never fatigue from using it.

Dont mind me saying this but you seem strangely biased towards the r70x when you compare it towards the msr7, saying how artificial the msr7 is and how the r70x is leaps and bounds ahead of the msr7.You also make wild claims how the r70c can be more detailed than the msr7 should the sound signature be the same.Bow most of your wild claims are entirely subjective and based on your findings from listening to them both.However, many factors such as plain prejudice and most importantly, the anatomy of your ear can make your findings severely different from others.Now if you would want to make claims that the r70x has the latent ability to be more resolving than the msr7 should the sound signature be the same, then you should present facts.While graphs only tell a part of the story, they tell a part of the story that is constant for everyone , and is undoubtedly correct.Meaning to say the only way to justify your Claim is to show that the impulse response and transient response of the r70x, is for a fact, superior to the msr7.These two factors are the only objective way of comparing two headphones technical capability.While it is important to respect everybody's opinion, I do hope that you do not force your 'r70x is better than msr7' belief down everybodys throat because it sure seems like it, as virtually every of your post has that message going on.And I own both in case you were wondering and while I do prefer the r70x, I believe the the msr7 has its own merits.Just because a headphone has a coloured sound doesn't mean that it is inferior, after all all that matters is that you enjoy them.So, unless either headphone trumps the other in pure technical capability, it is pure blasphemy to claim that one is superior to the other

 

[woodpecker]

I disagree.Open back headphones, on the contrary, is capable of producing a far mroe detailed sound.One reason that dictates this is the fact that it is open backed, thus any sound created by the diaphragm is able to 'escape', and will not reverberate, as is the case in close back headphones.Reverberation is one core reason which causes closed back headphone to sound less detailed, and have a smaller soundstage.Even the most detailed headphpnes like the stax Sr009, hd800 and orpheus are open back

Agreed. As a long time dipole speakers enthusiast, this "loose" operation of the dynamic driver is what gives a certain quality and spaciness to the sound, usually at the expense of the subbass pressurization. Technically, the MSR7 are not entirely closed headphones as they have a small opening, which (apparently) does most of the trick in reducing THD levels and provide superb impulse response when you compare the curves with the M70x.

 

[FullBright1]

  I think you can argue that the MSR-7 will sound more detailed than the R70x simply by virtue of the fact that it's a closed headphone, so all else being equal, details will sound more obvious compared to an open headphone with similar resolving power. Not to speak of the more analytical sound signature that emphasizes certain details. So the MSR-7 is not technically more resolving than the R70x, but micro details will be more in your face on the MSR-7, which can lead to the subjective impression of greater detail. Very useful for professional applications when you want any flaws in the recording to be exaggerated.

 
 
When using  headphones to "mix", ...the ideal headphone is going to not exaggerate the sonics in the track or tracks, and in this way you dont overcompensate the EQ when you mix.
So, any headphone, such as the MSR7 that has a tendency to slightly exaggerate the treble and the bass will cause you to overcompensate your EQ'ing regarding how you balance your track or tracks.
That is exactly what you dont want.
This is why you want a headphone that is a "reference" sound, (R70X) a natural and balanced and non-artificial representation of what you are actually hearing in a mix, so that any EQ compensation you do will be accurate as that is the goal if you are going to use Headphones to mix.
This is why you buy GOOD studio monitors that are "flat" and not a studio monitor set that will give you a very good tho false reading of the sound, similar to what you get with the  excellent M7R7s.