[acsantos]

well, came back from the store.
 
the only hd-25 they had were broken and had to be sent back
The tma-1 was out of stock.
 
Came back without hearing any os them. Sorry I couldn't be of more help (for both of us).
 
OTOH, I'm leaning towards the hd25, as I think it would be better with my (and your) kind of music. But sibilance worries me...
 
Good luck

 

[jferreir]

Oh well, thanks for reporting back. Do you intend to audition them in the future, or just buy a pair now and hope for the best?
 
Not to throw another monkey wrench in your plans, but episode 4 of HeadFi TV (or whatever it's called) reviewed the Sennheiser HD 25-1 II and Beyedynamic DT 1350. The reviewer ultimately preferred the DT 1350 as it was said to be more of a reference headphone, which responded well to amplification. The build quality looked to be slightly superior to the HD 25 as it was metal construction and both earpads swivel. The reviewer ultimately recommended the HD 25 for the more "in-your-face" type of music, such as electronica and pop/rock, as it has a slight edge to the top end (if I remember correctly). He preferred the DT 1350 for various other genres, noting that they were sensitive to placement on the head. I really wish he commented more on the mid-range, as I don't have the opportunity to audition the DT 1350 in an A/B with the HD 25 (not to my knowledge, anyway). The price difference was about $100 more for the DT 1350, give or take a few.
 
Argh, just when you think you have a winner...

 

[jerg]

Quote:

Oh well, thanks for reporting back. Do you intend to audition them in the future, or just buy a pair now and hope for the best?
 
Not to throw another monkey wrench in your plans, but episode 4 of HeadFi TV (or whatever it's called) reviewed the Sennheiser HD 25-1 II and Beyedynamic DT 1350. The reviewer ultimately preferred the DT 1350 as it was said to be more of a reference headphone, which responded well to amplification. The build quality looked to be slightly superior to the HD 25 as it was metal construction and both earpads swivel. The reviewer ultimately recommended the HD 25 for the more "in-your-face" type of music, such as electronica and pop/rock, as it has a slight edge to the top end (if I remember correctly). He preferred the DT 1350 for various other genres, noting that they were sensitive to placement on the head. I really wish he commented more on the mid-range, as I don't have the opportunity to audition the DT 1350 in an A/B with the HD 25 (not to my knowledge, anyway). The price difference was about $100 more for the DT 1350, give or take a few.
 
Argh, just when you think you have a winner...

 
Don't decide anything unless you actually audition them yourself, especially since these cans are readily available in most music / guitar stores.

 

[LizardKing1]

Quote:

You're right on the mark with Grados as far as isolation and mids go.

LOL
 
Anyway, OP, I think you should be looking at supra-aural, over-the-ear headphones. They isolate better than most full-size, if not all, and tend to be slightly more comfortable in some aspects (they don't bother your neck or jaw, which I get with full-size, but they can hurt your ears a bit). Even with comfort limitations, they are miles away from the lack of comfort people report in IEMs - I never complainted about IEMs, I'm just stating a common opinion.
 
I don't know how good you can say the mids on the Senn HD-25-1-ii are, since when I tried them I had no idea what good mids were

but the bass response is very good and they isolated very well - IEM-like - while resting on my head and ears just fine. My suggestion to you.

 

[jferreir]

Quote:

Don't decide anything unless you actually audition them yourself, especially since these cans are readily available in most music / guitar stores.

I never claimed I was going to purchase a pair of headphones without auditioning them first. By the same token, I want to evaluate all reasonable options (i.e. DT 1350) before I make a decision.
 
I don't know where you live, but I haven't seen the DT 1350 in many stores. The one place I know of that does carry that model is not an authorized Sennheiser dealer, so an A/B comparison is out of the question. As far as I'm concerned, there is no use in auditioning headphones individually when trying to determine which best meets your needs. Perceptual memory is horribly weak and I would be hard pressed to pass a blind listening test even if I heard the headphones only 5 minutes prior.

 

[jferreir]

Well, I auditioned a few headphones today. Not what I was expecting... not in the least. 
 
The first pair of headphones I grabbed were the Sennheiser HD 25 Original (Adidas version), which are supposedly the same as the HD 25-1 II. This was by far the biggest disappointment of the lot. There was almost no attenuation of external noise; I was completely distracted by the conversation of the sales person next to me. In terms of build quality, it simply felt like cheap plastic. The sound was muffled from top to bottom, with a mid-range that was anything but neutral; soundstage and imaging was non-existent. I was also surprised at how seemingly inefficient these headphones are. I had to crank the volume on the iPod just to hear a moderate amount of detail. I tried repositioning the headphones several times, but to no avail. I would choose skull candy earbuds over these headphones. Seriously. Apologies if I stepped on anyone's toes.
 
In defence of the HD 25's, every other headphone in its price range was just as poor, if not worse. After a while, I decided to randomly try on different headphones and see if I could find a pair that I liked. I paid no attention to price, make or model. After trying about 10 different pairs, the Sennheiser HD650 emerged as the top contender (go figure). Surprisingly, the runner-up was a pair of Denon headphones whose soundstage was slightly smaller, imaging not as precise, but had a very neutral mid-range that was very similar to the HD650. The model in question was the 100th anniversary edition AH-A100. They looked a little too elegant for my liking, but damn, they sounded good.
 
The problem? The Denon's cost twice as much as my initial budget, even though they're on sale. They were selling for $399 CAD + tax, down from $550 CAD. Does anyone know if they can be had for cheaper? 
 
Sadly, I feel very dejected after this experience. I was expecting my first foray into full-sized headphones to yield better sound, but found quite the opposite. In fact, I would go so far as to say that $50 IEMs probably sound better than the majority of $200 headphones. At this point, I don't even know if it's worth spending $300+ on headphones when most are only marginally better in sound quality to IEMs costing a fraction of the price. The biggest advantage, by my lights, was the comfort... but I don't know if comfort can justify such a huge disparity in price. 
 
I paid $100 (sale) for the Monster Turbines IEMs, which I would rate at 7/10. I would give the Denon's a score of 8.7/10, but they cost four times as much. Perhaps only the super rich get to enjoy good portable sound... this sucks.

 

[DaBomb77766]

I'll just assume that your iPod was simply not powerful enough to power the HD25...a portable amp would likely help.

 

[jferreir]

I thought the same thing too, but that same iPod powered other headphones sufficiently. I'm not entirely opposed to buying a portable amp, but I have to draw the line somewhere... I want to keep the rig portable. I was actually expecting the inexpensive headphones to sound better because I thought the more expensive models would almost certainly require proper amplification. As it turns out, the Denon's were among the easiest to drive and sounded the best. They were definitely the most comfortable, too... on par with the HD650s, I reckon.
 

 

[DaBomb77766]

Quote:

I thought the same thing too, but that same iPod powered other headphones sufficiently. I'm not entirely opposed to buying a portable amp, but I have to draw the line somewhere... I want to keep the rig portable. I was actually expecting the inexpensive headphones to sound better because I thought the more expensive models would almost certainly require proper amplification. As it turns out, the Denon's were among the easiest to drive and sounded the best. They were definitely the most comfortable, too... on par with the HD650s, I reckon.
 

It is odd you said the HD25s gave you absolutely no isolation though.  Most people comment on how good its isolation is.  Maybe you had them adjusted incorrectly?  Or maybe they just didn't fit on your ears?  Or maybe you're just spoiled by IEMs.  Full-sized headphones will never isolate as well as a good pair of IEMs.

 

[jferreir]

This is the weird thing... I knew all of this before I tried them. I was expecting brain crushing clamp force, but nada. I know headphones will never isolate as well as IEMs, but I literally had difficulty focusing on the music because I could hear every word of a conversation directly behind me. I adjusted the headphones endlessly, but noticed little to no difference. It really left me wondering what all the hype was about... 
 
And yes, I was spoiled with Comply T-400 tips, but I knew this going in. My expectations were reasonable, but still weren't met. Ah well, life's a bitch. 

 

[azcactus]

If you go more full-size, what about the Audio-Technica ATH-M50? Shure SRH440 or SRH840? For a smaller set with iPhone mic/remote, Marco Arment likes the Sennheiser PX 200-IIi.

 

[roma101]

What's the bit rate on your music files? Ideally it should be 320 kbps (AAC) or higher (ALAC = lossless). Just wondering why the HD-25's sounded so bad to your ears but everyone's preferences/ears are different.

 

[jferreir]

My entire library is ripped at 320kbps, so the source isn't the issue (save, perhaps, for the lack of portable amplification). I'm beginning to think that my reference may be the cause of the dissatisfaction. I have tremendous speakers that are very much in the BBC tradition, excelling at midrange neutrality and pinpoint imaging. Perhaps my expectations were too high based on what I'm used to hearing and what others are describing? That's the only logical explanation I can think of, anyway. 
 
I really don't know, but the HD 25s were extremely underwhelming... and I wanted to fall in love with them.

 

[kn19h7]

How about Sony ZX700? It really don't need to be amped to sound best, isolation and comfort are nice too. Soundstage.. not my focus in headphone comparison so can't comment much, but instrument separation is definitely excellent.
 
..or maybe you can go with custom iems like acs which uses medical-grade silicons, I don't have experience on it though
 

 

[DemonicLemming]

At $200, it's going to be hard to get a set of cans that's truly neutral with great imaging, especially when open cans are factored out due to external noise attenuation requirements.  If you can bump your budget up some (to $350 - I know, double the price, but...), the Beyerdynamic DT48 would be well worth looking at - I've never heard them myself, but they're supposed to have an exceptional midrange...although bass is lacking.
 
Quote:

My entire library is ripped at 320kbps, so the source isn't the issue (save, perhaps, for the lack of portable amplification). I'm beginning to think that my reference may be the cause of the dissatisfaction. I have tremendous speakers that are very much in the BBC tradition, excelling at midrange neutrality and pinpoint imaging. Perhaps my expectations were too high based on what I'm used to hearing and what others are describing? That's the only logical explanation I can think of, anyway. 
 
I really don't know, but the HD 25s were extremely underwhelming... and I wanted to fall in love with them.