[Darkseth]

The m50 does sound v shaped to an extent but it really isnt a basshead can.

I found it pretty bassy and a bit dull - and VERY far from "neutral/natural". Even my SE 215 was a bit clearer in the mids than this.
But well, again preference. For me its too bassy, for someone else not bassy enough.
If the price is good, it indeed is worth a shot.
 
I personally liked the AKG K551/550 alittle better. Soundstage was bigger/wider, it was more balanced, but still a bit bassy - and so a pretty good allrounder. Would like to have one for a few days
(or maybe the new K545, which sounds kinda similar)

 

[zunehdrocks]

I found it pretty bassy and a bit dull - and VERY far from "neutral/natural". Even my SE 215 was a bit clearer in the mids than this.
But well, again preference. For me its too bassy, for someone else not bassy enough.
If the price is good, it indeed is worth a shot.

I personally liked the AKG K551/550 alittle better. Soundstage was bigger/wider, it was more balanced, but still a bit bassy - and so a pretty good allrounder. Would like to have one for a few days
(or maybe the new K545, which sounds kinda similar)

Dull?
I've always considered it a little bright and edgy.

The shure se215 also has a pretty warm sound (also known for its laid back highs on head fi) so its not like you are a neutrality freak. It really seems like you're blowing things out of proportion...

 

[Darkseth]

Not really. But the Shures also has raised mids, the ATH M50 not. That gave the Shures more clarity there.
 
And yea a bit dull (i had Superlux 681 at that time, DT 880 600 Ohm which got maybe already replaced by an T90. And even they arent too bright for me

 

[zunehdrocks]

  Not really. But the Shures also has raised mids, the ATH M50 not. That gave the Shures more clarity there.
 
And yea a bit dull (i had Superlux 681 at that time, DT 880 600 Ohm which got maybe already replaced by an T90. And even they arent too bright for me

The shure se 215 must be ultra dull for you then.

 

[OMGLadyGaga]

I know audio is subjective and all but I struggle to see how anyone can say the Shure SE215 is clearer than M50x. It's also a lot bassier too, very strange indeed.

 

[faisal2003456]

The Crossfade LP is complete garbage. Don't lump it together with the M-80, M-100, and XS. Also, he said he finds the XB400s too bassy. The Crossfade has "more" bass than the XB500, so I doubt he'd like it,

I returned my Crossfades after two days and bought the ATH-M50. No comparison, the M50 is VASTLY superior. I also have the SE215 find it to be less detailed then the M50 in every regard (and noticeably so), but its warm sound signature is wonderfully smooth. It's a fun IEM no doubt, but the M50 is a great first headphone.

The M50 fairly flat, so you'll get an idea of what kind of sound you'll prefer for future upgrades and almost every reviewer has/has had one so will reference it in a comparison section.

Note: After burn-in the SE215 becomes fairly harsh.

 

[zunehdrocks]

The Crossfade LP is complete garbage. Don't lump it together with the M-80, M-100, and XS. Also, he said he finds the XB400s too bassy. The Crossfade has "more" bass than the XB500, so I doubt he'd like it,


I returned my Crossfades after two days and bought the ATH-M50. No comparison, the M50 is VASTLY superior. I also have the SE215 find it to be less detailed then the M50 in every regard (and noticeably so), but its warm sound signature is wonderfully smooth. It's a fun IEM no doubt, but the M50 is a great first headphone.


The M50 fairly flat, so you'll get an idea of what kind of sound you'll prefer for future upgrades and almost every reviewer has/has had one so will reference it in a comparison section.


Note: After burn-in the SE215 becomes fairly harsh.

What did you burn it in with?
Some rock or metal music?
Try some pink noise or white noise instead
http://www.head-fi.org/t/466827/free-burn-in-files

 

[Darkseth]

  Not really. But the Shures also has raised mids, the ATH M50 not. That gave the Shures more clarity there.

 

 
The shure se 215 must be ultra dull for you then.

How exactly can you come to this conclusion, after what i wrote there?
I highlighted it for you there, why they aren't... Read the posts better
 
The M50 sounded way more dull and less detailed than the Shure SE 215. Or with other words, the Details in the mids sounded way too much in the background with the M50s, which was NOT the case with the Shures. And even less with my DT 880/T90.
And in my opinion also way too bassy --> thats why i said, they are basshead headphones.
 
But here again:

But well, again preference. For me its too bassy, for someone else not bassy enough.

Its all preference. i didnt liked it.

 

[zunehdrocks]

   
How exactly can you come to this conclusion, after what i wrote there?
I highlighted it for you there, why they aren't... Read the posts better
 
The M50 sounded way more dull and less detailed than the Shure SE 215. Or with other words, the Details in the mids sounded way too much in the background with the M50s, which was NOT the case with the Shures. And even less with my DT 880/T90.
And in my opinion also way too bassy --> thats why i said, they are basshead headphones.
 
But here again:
Its all preference. i didnt liked it.

By dull, I thought you meant less treble "detail" and overall presence (people usually say brighter headphones are usually detailed)
The Superlux 681 and DT 880 are both known to be very bright headphones

 

[zunehdrocks]

   
How exactly can you come to this conclusion, after what i wrote there?
I highlighted it for you there, why they aren't... Read the posts better
 
The M50 sounded way more dull and less detailed than the Shure SE 215. Or with other words, the Details in the mids sounded way too much in the background with the M50s, which was NOT the case with the Shures. And even less with my DT 880/T90.
And in my opinion also way too bassy --> thats why i said, they are basshead headphones.
 
But here again:
Its all preference. i didnt liked it.

I really don't see how you hate the bass quantity on the m50s but not the shure se215.
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/ShureSE215.pdf
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/AudioTechnicaATHM50.pdf
Both are warm and punchy headphones.
The slight lack of bass speed on the m50 may give the illusion of as bassier can but other than that...

 

[Darkseth]

 
I really don't see how you hate the bass quantity on the m50s but not the shure se215.
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/ShureSE215.pdf
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/AudioTechnicaATHM50.pdf
Both are warm and punchy headphones.
The slight lack of bass speed on the m50 may give the illusion of as bassier can but other than that...

I know the responses very well.
And believe me or not, but i was even more shocked and curious about that, how thats even possible xD
 
And i bet, it wasnt the treble, it was the mids. The Shures have raised bass AND Mids. Which means, the Mids are more in the background on the M50.
At least.. thats the only way, i can describe it.
Maybe, if i test the M50 now again, i will find them better... who knows ^^
 
Also, the bass quantity on the Shure SE 215 changes strongly, how far "in" you push them into the ears.
I probably didnt had them Very far in (but maybe just 1 mm difference...). But i had perfectly Seal.
 
But yes, i admit, for that price, the M50 bass is pretty punchy/good.

 

[Mattamatikk]

If I were you, I would have gone for the M-50's. They seem to fit your bill and reuquirement.

 

[OMGLadyGaga]

You can find Sony 1R for very reasonable prices near your budget. That's a great option given your intended purpose

 

[faisal2003456]

It is very simple. The SE215 is warmer, but the bass has more oomf of the M50s. The Shures are smoother and the M50s are clearer. It's worth owning both.

 

[gragx]

got m50x and the bass is much more than i expected which is good for my taste and also far far better than xb400 and px200II. I got to try sony MDR-10RNC before getting m50x and they sounded more muddy and with less bass.
m50x also sound good for movies.