[can007]

Quote:

Originally Posted by xnor /img/forum/go_quote.gif Answering your own questions?

+1
LOLZ

it's my OP after all. I'm neither a sound professional or audiophile. I'm just a basshead just like i said .

 

[xnor]

Look, just head into the next store and give the XB700s a listen.

More bass means not so much mids/highs, there's no way around that. But if you were looking for balanced sound you wouldn't ask for a bass-heavy headphone in the first place.

I can imagine how some bass heavy genres (I don't listen to such stuff) would really suck with the Shures. So it makes sense to "upgrade" to something like the XB700s. Btw, there's another SRH440 thread where the reviewer also switched to the Sonys or at least preferred them.

 

[can007]

Quote:

Originally Posted by xnor /img/forum/go_quote.gif Look, just head into the next store and give the XB700s a listen. More bass means not so much mids/highs, there's no way around that. But if you were looking for balanced sound you wouldn't ask for a bass-heavy headphone in the first place. I think that some bass heavy genres (I don't listen to such stuff) would really suck with the Shures. So it makes sense to "upgrade" to something like the XB700s. Btw, there's another SRH440 thread where the reviewer also switched to the Sonys or at least preferred them.

I'll try to make sometime tomorrow

 

[ktsai1283]

Did you try searching the forum for "xb700"? You can find lots of threads with impressions there. Here's one...

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f4/son...eviews-395231/

From what I've heard (from a friend) and read (this forum), some people say the XB700 is suprisingly balanced and its bass is not nearly as overwhelming as it's marketed to be, so other frequencies are safe from the mud.

You should also read up on the beyerdynamic DT 770 Pro, which is infamous for its bass.

 

[mibutenma]

Quote:

Originally Posted by can007 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yes, i did and it sounds terrible. IMO i don't like music EQ'ing because it usually ruin the mids/highs.

I don't own a Ipod so I don't know its features.
But a Sony Walkman MP3 player you can just EQ the bass and the mids/highs don't suffer.

But it might just be the Ipod I heard its a bad player for bass.
I just heard though. So I don't know.Maybe someone else can comment on that.

Maybe someone else who has heard the 440 could also come here and share their experience with bass.
I myself own Shure 840 and it has very good bass.

But I don't maybe you want bass like when people drive their cars its so LOUD and rattling and you think man that person has to be deaf or near it.

 

[xnor]

Another suggestion would be the AH-D1001, has very deep bass, hifi-ish sound, isolation is on the "adequate" side for a closed headphone (lol).

 

[Kukuk]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ktsai1283 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Did you try searching the forum for "xb700"? You can find lots of threads with impressions there. Here's one... http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f4/son...eviews-395231/ From what I've heard (from a friend) and read (this forum), some people say the XB700 is suprisingly balanced and its bass is not nearly as overwhelming as it's marketed to be, so other frequencies are safe from the mud. You should also read up on the beyerdynamic DT 770 Pro, which is infamous for its bass.

Yeah, by default they actually are somewhat balanced. Probably not by an audiophile's definition of balanced, but the bass is definitely lacking without being EQ'ed up.

Also, in case you're curious about how the frequencies stack up to the Shure's.

 

[xnor]

Don't take that measurement too seriously. Bass seems to be a bit off compared to other measurements..

 

[Graphicism]

The XB500 are slightly better as in slightly more balanced than the XB700. If you want even better balance with some bass take a look at the JVC RX700, they're like a better controlled D2000, a decent all-rounder.

To explain the XB 500/700 is laymans terms; It's almost as if the bass has been turned up by 30-50% it's original volume leaving the rest of the SQ in the background. Or perhaps just a series bass hump in the EQ as can be seen from the HeadRoom charts.

 

[3602]

XB700, for $200 CAD (as I bought it), is quite nice. Not producing too much bass when directly driven by an iPod Classic (don't use the Pod's EQ, terrible), when properly amped the XB700 produce very full bass, impactful, enough control to not to muddy the spectrum, but still quite slow so you can't listen to rapid rock with this.

 

[3602]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graphicism /img/forum/go_quote.gif The XB500 are slightly better as in slightly more balanced than the XB700.

FAIL. The other way around. I have both, directly driven, the bass on the 500 is much less textured, albeit much more in quantity. Vocals sound much less clear.

 

[Graphicism]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3602 /img/forum/go_quote.gif FAIL. The other way around. I have both, directly driven, the bass on the 500 is much less textured, albeit much more in quantity. Vocals sound much less clear.

There is nothing textured about the Sony XB range, they are for and marketed towards bass heads. The bass on the XB500 is way over the top and the XB700 even more so. Both the 500 and 700 are for D&B and hip-hop, if you're looking for good vocals look elsewhere.

 

[Mad Lust Envy]

Hmm, let's see.

I own:

DT880
DT770 Pro/80 (considered the bassiest of the DT770s)

Owned:

XB700
M50s
AD700

I can EASILY say the XB700s are the funnest, bassiest headphones of the bunch. No kidding. Yes, the bass is MONSTROUS, but they have a pretty good level of clarity in the mids and highs. They are not audiophile headphones, but easily my favorite sounding of the bunch. I found the DT770 to be muddier/less clear than the XB700s.

If you want destructive, PUNCHY bass, the XB700s will be fine. It's just that people here are spoiled by overall balance, that anything less than that is considered crap. The XB700s are NOT crap. They are AWESOME, and not ONCE they I find them unclear in their sound. For $80 they are a steal. I had to give them up because the stitching on the pads didn't agree with the side of my head where they rest. If it wasn't for that, they would be my go to headphone for getting lost in the music. No doubt about it.

My ABSOLUTE FAVORITE sounding headphone, ever. Just remember, the bass is definitely HEAVY to the point of making you lose focus on everything else. If you want balance, look elsewhere.

 

[jjmai]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ourfpshero /img/forum/go_quote.gif i have had both. absolutely did not like the xb700. muddy, overdone bass with recessed everything else. a better choice would be the jvc harx900. awesome sweet bass and plenty of it. still recessed in the highs though. the lower end harx700 is better balanced but needs a little amp to bring the bass out. these are only 55$ and 35$ too! for 100$, consider an audio technica ath-m50

I find harx700 to be a little underwhelming in bass when unamped. Using Fiio E5 did wake up the bass somewhat.
I am in the same boat of considering getting xb700 - just waiting for a good price now. I don't want to buy off ebay, as there appear to be fakes from china....

@can007:
When you hear someone says bass is "adequate" here at head-fi, it usually means it's not enough for a basshead (or one that just came off a mainstream mass-market headphone). I learned that people's tastes are so different here. One person's decent bass may be another person's excruciatingly overwhelming bass.