[reckca]

I use an Headstage arrow, but i think that pro 900 sounds good also with a powerful player, for me it is impossible compare pro 900 with beats pro.

 

[stevenswall]

Bass wise, has anyone mentioned the XB500 or XB1000? As far a slamming and thick bass, those are the best I've heard under $300, and the Beats Pro cost $400! I haven't heard the Ultrasone PRO900 mentioned, but if it's anything like the Edition 8, stay well enough away... That flagship was worse sounding to me by far than the Koss PortaPro. I would prefer it (The Edition 8) only slightly over the Beats Solo.

 

[jiggawhat]

XB1000 is a waste of money, I've tried it, it's way too big, even if it was the best headphone in the world it wouldn't matter. But it isn't even that great and certainly not worth the price tag.

XB500 I disliked, I loved the XB700 in comparison, but XB500 is dirt cheap.

 

[reckca]

Pro 900 is different from Ed 8, but if you prefer PortaPro to Ed 8 is even better that you stay away from pro 900.
You are lucky enough to be content with mediocre headphones.

 

[stevenswall]

XB1000 is a waste of money, I've tried it, it's way too big, even if it was the best headphone in the world it wouldn't matter. But it isn't even that great and certainly not worth the price tag.
XB500 I disliked, I loved the XB700 in comparison, but XB500 is dirt cheap.

According to charts on headphone.com, the XB500 is superior as far as smooth bass response and square wave response go:

http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=1153&graphID[]=1193

http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=3&graphID[]=1153&graphID[]=1193

Pro 900 is different from Ed 8, but if you prefer PortaPro to Ed 8 is even better that you stay away from pro 900.
You are lucky enough to be content with mediocre headphones.

^How would you rank the Edition 10? Have you actually listened to it or the Edition 8? It's not that I'm content with 'mediocre' headphones, which the PortaPros are not, it's that the Edition 8 actually sounds bad after actually having listened to it. Apparently the Edition 10 sounds even worse going off the video review by Tyll Hertsons, a sound expert who measures frequency response of headphones professionally.

 

[jiggawhat]

I don't know much about those graphs, but I'm going to call 100% BS on that. I had the XB500 and XB700 simultaneously and I spent A LOT of time with them. The XB700 had SIGNIFICANTLY better sound quality in all aspects.

The XB500 had boomy, overpowering bass, less sound stage, and lacked the bass extension of the XB700.

 

[stevenswall]

It's not male bovine fecal matter... its objective measurements of headphones. For a subjective review, look at this:
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/sony-mdr-xb300-mdr-xb500-and-mdr-xb700-extra-bass-headphonespage-2
 
"The XB700 has a slightly brighter treble than the other two headphones, and as a result sounds a bit more detailed. Unfortunately, that also means that the mids seem more distant then the other two, and for me was less satisfying as a result. I also feel that the quality of urban music especially in the high frequencies is often poor and overly harsh, and the XB700 coloration would not hide the problem well.
The XB300 has the most uneven response of the three, and sounded the most ... honky. I really didn't like the sound of these cans.
The XB500 suffered least from unevenness, though they were significantly colored. These were the tightest and most dynamic sounding of the bunch: a slightly rolled off treble allowed the volume to rise without being harsh, the low-mids and bass were delivered with eyeblinking impact."
 
-Tyll Hertsons

 

[jiggawhat]

I've seen that review before I even purchased those two headphones. And I don't think one subjective review means anything. There are countless other people who will attest to the superiority of the XB700 to the XB500.

I would hope that he burned in the headphones before listening. Treble was very high initially on the XB700, then it got much better later on. I suspect he hasn't given his description of the XB700 as harsh at high volumes. That simply isn't the case after 100 hours of listening.

Has he even tested anything other than hip hop? No, not rock, or whatever - how about electronic music? Nothing in his review indicated he has. Modern hip hop, with its excessive use of a kick beat like what you hear in "Teach Me How to Dougie", will always make a mid-bass can like the 500 sound better than a sub-bass can like the 700.

I think the sub-bass on the XB700 combined with better clarity and less boominess makes the XB700 a better buy than the XB500.

 

[Deki]

Beats suck poo. I love my Sennheiser HD25-1 II's but the pro 900s are great too. if your going in public id get the hd25's because of amazing isolation but if not then get Grado SR60i/SR80i depending on your budget.

 

[Deki]

Beats suck poo. I love my Sennheiser HD25-1 II's but the pro 900s are great too. if your going in public id get the hd25's because of amazing isolation but if not then get Grado SR60i/SR80i depending on your budget.

 

[stevenswall]

Quote:

I've seen that review before I even purchased those two headphones. And I don't think one subjective review means anything. There are countless other people who will attest to the superiority of the XB700 to the XB500.
I would hope that he burned in the headphones before listening. Treble was very high initially on the XB700, then it got much better later on. I suspect he hasn't given his description of the XB700 as harsh at high volumes. That simply isn't the case after 100 hours of listening.
Has he even tested anything other than hip hop? No, not rock, or whatever - how about electronic music? Nothing in his review indicated he has. Modern hip hop, with its excessive use of a kick beat like what you hear in "Teach Me How to Dougie", will always make a mid-bass can like the 500 sound better than a sub-bass can like the 700.
I think the sub-bass on the XB700 combined with better clarity and less boominess makes the XB700 a better buy than the XB500.

I'm not sure you understand who this person is. Tyll Hertsons is one of the most knowledgeable people on this entire forum. He is one of the 'go to' guys for reviews and headphone measurements, and is the creator of many articles on things such as frequency response graphs, and even burn in if you believe it. With his knowledge of the material he reviews, and the various things that influence how a 'phone sounds, you would do well to not assume things. That he doesn't understand or burn in the headphones he reviews is ridiculous, and to think that he would only listen to one genre of music with any 'phone is also a poor assumption to make. He had all three models together and listened to them head to head, and made a review based not only on his subjective opinion, but also on objective data as seen in the frequency response graphs.

If you wish to refute his claims, please do it with a little respect. I'm not attacking you, only sharing knowledge, so please don't attach the content of my posts by making assumptions based on information that is not there (Has he even tested anything other than hip hop? No, not rock, or whatever - how about electronic music? Nothing in his review indicated he has.)  If you feel that the XB700 and XB500 sound differently compared to what Tyll wrote in the review, feel free to say so without blowing off other reviewers. Something else you may consider doing to lend credence to what you are saying would be filling out your profile with the 'phones you have previously owned/own presently, and perhaps uploading a few pictures.
 

 

[jiggawhat]

I'm sorry I don't spend my time dressing up my forum profile. Can't wait to add an avatar with me and my duck face.

I also apologize that I'm not impressed by your idol. Tyler Durden, if you ever read this, I disagree. The XB700 was the better phone, and there wasn't really much ambiguity about it.

And lastly, one more apology that I don't hold much weight to a pretty graph. It looks really nice though, I love the sexy curves. Maybe I'll take a closer look when I'm actually listening to music, not studying it.

 

[Dubstep Girl]

Quote:

I'm sorry I don't spend my time dressing up my forum profile. Can't wait to add an avatar with me and my duck face.
I also apologize that I'm not impressed by your idol. Tyler Durden, if you ever read this, I disagree. The XB700 was the better phone, and there wasn't really much ambiguity about it.
And lastly, one more apology that I don't hold much weight to a pretty graph. It looks really nice though, I love the sexy curves. Maybe I'll take a closer look when I'm actually listening to music, not studying it.

phail.

 

[Eric_C]

jiggawhat: stevenswall's right, Tyll's basically an expert when it comes to headphones. His one review thus holds more weight than a whole lot of others'; he does his homework, and he is very rarely off-base on his judgements. Yeah, he's human and he can be wrong too--but it's just less likely. 
Your impressions may be different, but that could be due to a whole host of reasons, and in no way does it negate Tyll's, nor does Tyll's impression of the same headphone disprove yours. It's just that in terms of objective measurements and likelihood of how the majority's going to hear things, the subject matter expert holds more weight. It's not idolisation, it's recognition of expertise.

 

[WakiDabeast]

I mean the Beats pro Aren't THAT bad, but I mean headphones like the Dt770 and the M50 outclass them at half the price. Still the Pros have a distinct sound that some DJ's might like, but I mean for casual listening go with the Pro900, you may be focused on cranking that thing up, but with the Pro900 you will quickly appreciate that amazing sq and bass.