[theuprising]

 
 
I just got done listening to HM3, Takstar Pro 80, Sennheiser 439, DT990, JVC HA-S400, foam-modded Senn HD558, and Philips SHP9500.  The HM3 beat everything for making me want to play air guitar during rock songs.  They're lively and fun and smooth and good clarity, and just... something. 
 

Oh wow, I wish I saw this earlier, I already ordered the Pro 80, how would you say it stacks up against the HM3? I'm selling my JVC s680 so that would allow me to get both. I really want to save up for the HM5 though since that seems like what I would ultimately enjoy with its wide soundstage.

 

[DangerClose]

  Go check the S500 thread, but from memory the S500 was considered higher quality than the S400, however the S400 had a MUCH more neutral sound signature. The S500 is supposed to contain some great bass, while the S680 is supposed to be similar to the S400, however with a much larger soundstage, and HUGE BOOMY bass.

 
I was about to say the HA-S400 already has boomy bass imo, but it doesn't.  It has boomy, or just overpowering, mids.  People say the S500 is V-shaped.  The S400 is mountain-shaped or upside-down V-shaped.  I try to pick out details in songs, or just try to enjoy songs, but I can't because the mids are shouting at me and making a big blob of noise that drowns out the actual music.    
 

  Oh wow, I wish I saw this earlier, I already ordered the Pro 80, how would you say it stacks up against the HM3? I'm selling my JVC s680 so that would allow me to get both. I really want to save up for the HM5 though since that seems like what I would ultimately enjoy with its wide soundstage.

 
Don't be concerned.  That's a specific situation I was talking about.  I was talking about rocking out and air guitar.  Those times you want the music aggressive and in your face, and for certain kinds of music.  Though HM3 tends to make most everything sound aggressive yet pleasant.  The Pro 80s do the aggressive and in your face thing well too, which is why at other times I've been disappointed in the size of their soundstage.  You can kind of get the HM3 sound I'm talking about by upping the lows and lowering the 1k area.  Or maybe just lowering the 1k area would do it.  The Pro 80s are bright around 1k, which helps with detail but hurts smooth pleasantness.  
 
I'm doing my best to describe this stuff how I hear it and without having to constantly A-B different headphones to make sure my words are absolutely 100% correct.  We're using words to describe complicated sounds, so being wrong happens sometimes, 

 especially when trying to very specifically describe sounds.  
 
In simpler terms, the HM3 are darker/warmer yet with a sparkle in the highs so cymbals and things still have life.  Pro 80 is brighter overall, and they're so bright around 1k it can get to me a bit.  I saw at least one other person in the Takstar thread say similar about the Pro 80s around that 1k zone, so maybe it's just us, but that's how it is.  
 
Pro 80 is the more accurate headphone.  But if everyone always only wanted accurate headphones, there'd be no bassheads, or no one would like the DT990, etc.  I'll also say Pro 80 is the "better" headphone.  It's hard to go too wrong buying a Pro 80. 
 
Though it depends what its intended use is.  I said I thought the Pro 80 weighs about 9 ounces, but I looked it up now and it's 12 ounces.  That's quite a way from the HM3's (just looked it up) 6 ounces.  (JVC S400 is 5.1 ounces.)  When I put on headphones, it tends to be for extended periods, so things like that matter.  People in the JVC HA-S500 thread have said similar about those for one of the reasons they use them so much.  If I'm just listening to talking audio of some kind, I might use my old low-end computer headset since it weighs 2.x ounces and has small pads and a light clamp.
 
My FA-003/HM5/clone weighs about 10 ounces, but there's something about the way the Pro 80s sit that they feel a good bit heavier than just an extra 2 ounces.  The Philips SHP9500 weigh 10.5 ounces from what I just looked up, but they don't feel like that much, maybe because the pads are huge and clamping pressure is so light, and maybe also because of air flow since they're so open.  There are open headphones, and then there is the open Philips SHP9500.  

 

[DangerClose]

To continue with somewhat random thoughts, it's also hard to go too wrong if you can get an HM3 or clone for under $30.  And it can fill that closed, light but strong, portable though doesn't fold up (but do you really need it to fold up?) need if you have one.  Or just as everyday, on-ear, lightweight closed cans.  Also for the HM3, I put HM5 pads on it again by double stacking over Senn 203 pads without screens in them, and I guess there was a reason I had left them off in the past.  They're obviously more comfortable, but the bass went from firm to boomy, and things had sort of a diffused, concert hall sound.  It's just not the same, and not what I think of when I think of rocking out with HM3.  Maybe it's just the pad seal was bad due to double stacking.    
 
You can probably eq the Pro 80 enough to get close to the HM3 sound if you care, so I wouldn't worry about it.  It's just there's always been something about the HM3 to me, especially for the low price you can sometimes get it for, and I had just listened to them again, so it's fun giving them some praise.  I've seen other people say it in FA-004/HM3/F38 threads... "I don't know what it is, but there's just something about them."  
 
The stock pads are still rocks though. 

  It makes me laugh thinking about that they come with two sets of pads.  Oh good, two sets of rocks!  lol.
 
Actually, I can eq the HM3 to get within around 85-90% of the Pro 80 sound.  When I first got the Pro 80, I was impressed by their detail.  But then I realized HM3 has almost as much detail, just it's hidden under the warm bass and mids.
 
HM3 might be a headphone to get for people who don't believe in burn-in.  Mine out of the box sounded like nothing.  I can't remember exactly, but it's like remove the highs, remove the bass, and that's what they sounded like.  Reviews said they had firm but not a lot of bass, pleasant coloration of the mids, and sparkly highs.  They later sounded like that, and I liked them like that.  But even later than that, they turned dark and bassy (though not boomy).  I wouldn't call them basshead cans, but they're pretty strong, and far from the "polite" bass they were for a while.  And now I usually eq down the lower end.  It's interesting when I read opinions about them since sometimes you'll read how they have little bass and are somewhat bright, and then other people will say they are dark boom cans.

 

[DangerClose]

You mentioned the HM5.  I left that one out of the "HM3 is better at air guitar" list even though I have one.  I didn't happen to listen to that one yesterday, or lately.  I did today.  They're great.  I didn't A-B them for more than 20 seconds with HM3 so I can't say which would win for air guitar, but I enjoy them both.  
 
When I got the Pro 80, I wished I could have a similar sound as a general use closed can but with a bigger soundstage.  I got an HM5/clone.  The HM5/clones easily has more soundstage, but I was thinking about getting rid of them.  I didn't mind the polite bass and overall flatness, but overall they sounded a bit "thin," or tinny, or maybe too grainy.  Maybe that's good for monitoring, but I wanted a general use headphone.  A little extra dampening inside to warm and thicken them up just a little to add weight to notes, a few minor tweaks on the eq, and there they were.  

  I basically haven't listened to the Pro 80 since.  ...Actually, I had already stopped using the Pro 80 much due to the weight.
 
Maybe I'll enjoy a different closed headphone more at a later time, but for now, I'm not even looking.  I bought seven headphones in the last month, four in the last two days, and none of them are closed.  As far as I'm concerned at this time, the Fa-003/HM5/clone with a little modding and a little eq is my big soundstage, detailed but smooth without grain, sort of neutral but plenty of fun, everyday general purpose, closed headphone.  It's great.    
 
Plus, the pads come off with a 1/4 twist.  How cool is that?   

 

[kdava]

+1 to HSR-1000/Takstar Pro 80. You'll love it. Classical an ambient is great on Pro 80. Not sure about rock, I don't listen to that too much. Pink Floyd sounded amazing on it, tho.

 

[Music Alchemist]

For what it's worth, I owned the NVX XPT100 (which has the same drivers as the HM5) and hated the sound.

 

[theuprising]

  For what it's worth, I owned the NVX XPT100 (which has the same drivers as the HM5) and hated the sound.

Haha, but I'm weird, I've been raised on no-bass headphones so even the KSC75's bass seems overwhelming.
 
@DangerClose
Aw, the main reason I got the Takstar was because people were saying it had similar soundstage to the CAL/CAL2, which have been lauded for having expansive soundstages for closed headphones (its probably because the CAL is semi-closed). If I had known they had a small soundstage, I would have gotten the CALs, although they are 20 dollars more expensive.
 
Actually, in fact, the Pro 80's were said to have a more "accurate" soundstage, in that if the recording had an expansive soundstage, then you'll hear it, otherwise you won't. There was a review that stated it bested the M50 in instrument separation and neutrality, while the M50 was the more "fun" headphone, making me pull the trigger.

 

[DangerClose]

 
Actually, in fact, the Pro 80's were said to have a more "accurate" soundstage, in that if the recording had an expansive soundstage, then you'll hear it, otherwise you won't. There was a review that stated it bested the M50 in instrument separation and neutrality, while the M50 was the more "fun" headphone, making me pull the trigger.

 
As far as I've read, it's not too hard to best the M50 especially in neutrality.
 
I'd say the Pro 80 has good height and depth in soundstage, but I wouldn't call the width anything special.  I'd call it average at best.  The Senn 439 is wider, but the center suffers, so that's worse imo.  A more balanced soundstage is one reason I prefer the Tascam MX2 to the 439.  
 
I've never heard the CAL, but I didn't think that is supposed to have any great soundstage either.  I'll have to read up on it again later.  
But for the most part, most closed cans are similar in that most of them have lousy soundstage size.  That's just how closed headphones are.  And then once in a while there's something different, an Fa-003/HM5, maybe a DT770, etc.  But those might have their own problems.  And soundstage isn't everything.  My DT990 has a big soundstage, but that thing would drive me nuts unmodded.  And the K701 has a huge soundstage, (perhaps too huge), but the rest of it can be an acquired taste.
 
And in case anyone missed it, I praised the fa-003/HM5/clones, but I also said I was thinking of getting rid of it before mods because it sounded too bright and thin and tinny and grainy.  My DT990's highs were also grainy and would drill into my brain.  
 
The Pro 80 may not be exactly what you're looking for, but it's hard to go too wrong with one.

 

[DangerClose]

I don't understand why you are looking at Pro 80s and CALs if you actually want an HM5/clone.  If your Pro 80 is actually a Gemini, that's not bad then for something to hold you over for a while. And who knows, maybe you'll get the HM5 later but still prefer the Pro 80.