Pharmaboy
Headphoneus Supremus
Update on the Marantz Pro MPH-2's: I've had them burning in for ~80 hrs now, and tonight plugged them into the Lake People G109A (a truth-telling HP amp) and took them for a spin. And wouldn't you know--they sound very good.
These $39.99 headphones basically do nothing outright wrong, and get many things right. They're less "U-shaped" in frequency than my other cheap headphone fave, the Yenona's. Indeed, an expressive/accurate midrange is the Marantz' best quality IMO. With them, I hear a wider range of subtle sounds, especially percussion and various effects buried in softer instrumental tracks, than I have with any other headphones (the Yenona's, TH-X00's, Fidelio X2's, JVC HZ-1000's).
Comfort was decent to begin with and got better after they were stretched open during burn-in; their initially bothersome clamping pressure has been reduced to a large extent. The center/underside of the headband does press somewhat on the top of my head--not extreme, but noticeable, the kind of thing that may become annoying. Bet if I put a ZMF Pilot Pad on these headphones, they'd be above average in comfort. The 1" deep pleather pads are relatively firm and seal well against the head. Eventually I may try different pads, but there really isn't any comfort or frequency range anomaly that needs correcting here.
Overall, I'm impressed with the top-to-bottom clarity and balance of these headphones. They give plenty of detail without sounding bright or objectionable. There is no drama, no obvious frequency issues here--just straight ahead music reproduction. The Marantz' bass sounds relatively flat and uncolored. On one or two cuts, the thought crossed my mind that perhaps they're a bit bass-shy (their bass is surely more controlled than the Yenona's, which can get boisterous/boomy on an amp that boosts low frequencies). But when I played cuts that have a great deal of bass energy & impact, suddenly it was all there on the Marantz'. They don't show off the bass, as some closed headphones do; they don't sound bottom-heavy (this may be why their midrange is so clear). But they transmit all the bass that's on recordings.
The worst thing I can say about the Marantz' is they don't produce much of a soundstage. That's not a big surprise for closed headphones. Still, the equally closed Yenona's produce more "space" and a feeling of 3D sound placement. This is a performance quality that may be modified by angled earpads...won't know unless I experiment.
Re sturdiness & long-term reliability: others here commented on questionable build quality of the Yenona's. I don't really agree with that assessment, but there is a lightweight quality to the Yenona's that is very different from the Marantz' somewhat heavier design. While all "DJ-style," articulating earcup designs should be handled with care to prevent stress on swivel hardware, the Marantz' feel relatively strong to me. I suspect they'll be trouble-free. Though the cord is detachable, its proprietary locking mechanism at the earcup jack probably means aftermarket cords are out of the question. I regard this cable design as a reliability plus.
I'll compare the Marantz' and Yenona's more in coming days. But it's already clear that, despite their similarities (closed, DJ-style design; 50mm drivers), these headphones have different natures. The Yenona's are the more "fun" headphones: bass is strong, impactful, and somewhat elevated; midrange a bit recessed; highs slightly forward (though they're hardly treble cannons). The Yenona's lack that last measure of control, but are definitely engaging, easy to like. The Marantz' are somewhat more composed and restrained--not as much fun, but sure-footed & reliable. They have a competent, unflashy quality that suggests they'd be very useful in studio monitoring work.
I think the Marantz Pro MPH-2's are very solid, good-sounding headphones, worth well more than the $39.99 I paid for them.
These $39.99 headphones basically do nothing outright wrong, and get many things right. They're less "U-shaped" in frequency than my other cheap headphone fave, the Yenona's. Indeed, an expressive/accurate midrange is the Marantz' best quality IMO. With them, I hear a wider range of subtle sounds, especially percussion and various effects buried in softer instrumental tracks, than I have with any other headphones (the Yenona's, TH-X00's, Fidelio X2's, JVC HZ-1000's).
Comfort was decent to begin with and got better after they were stretched open during burn-in; their initially bothersome clamping pressure has been reduced to a large extent. The center/underside of the headband does press somewhat on the top of my head--not extreme, but noticeable, the kind of thing that may become annoying. Bet if I put a ZMF Pilot Pad on these headphones, they'd be above average in comfort. The 1" deep pleather pads are relatively firm and seal well against the head. Eventually I may try different pads, but there really isn't any comfort or frequency range anomaly that needs correcting here.
Overall, I'm impressed with the top-to-bottom clarity and balance of these headphones. They give plenty of detail without sounding bright or objectionable. There is no drama, no obvious frequency issues here--just straight ahead music reproduction. The Marantz' bass sounds relatively flat and uncolored. On one or two cuts, the thought crossed my mind that perhaps they're a bit bass-shy (their bass is surely more controlled than the Yenona's, which can get boisterous/boomy on an amp that boosts low frequencies). But when I played cuts that have a great deal of bass energy & impact, suddenly it was all there on the Marantz'. They don't show off the bass, as some closed headphones do; they don't sound bottom-heavy (this may be why their midrange is so clear). But they transmit all the bass that's on recordings.
The worst thing I can say about the Marantz' is they don't produce much of a soundstage. That's not a big surprise for closed headphones. Still, the equally closed Yenona's produce more "space" and a feeling of 3D sound placement. This is a performance quality that may be modified by angled earpads...won't know unless I experiment.
Re sturdiness & long-term reliability: others here commented on questionable build quality of the Yenona's. I don't really agree with that assessment, but there is a lightweight quality to the Yenona's that is very different from the Marantz' somewhat heavier design. While all "DJ-style," articulating earcup designs should be handled with care to prevent stress on swivel hardware, the Marantz' feel relatively strong to me. I suspect they'll be trouble-free. Though the cord is detachable, its proprietary locking mechanism at the earcup jack probably means aftermarket cords are out of the question. I regard this cable design as a reliability plus.
I'll compare the Marantz' and Yenona's more in coming days. But it's already clear that, despite their similarities (closed, DJ-style design; 50mm drivers), these headphones have different natures. The Yenona's are the more "fun" headphones: bass is strong, impactful, and somewhat elevated; midrange a bit recessed; highs slightly forward (though they're hardly treble cannons). The Yenona's lack that last measure of control, but are definitely engaging, easy to like. The Marantz' are somewhat more composed and restrained--not as much fun, but sure-footed & reliable. They have a competent, unflashy quality that suggests they'd be very useful in studio monitoring work.
I think the Marantz Pro MPH-2's are very solid, good-sounding headphones, worth well more than the $39.99 I paid for them.
