[SuperMario]

Hi, all

I'm trying to replace my old Sony MDR-65 whose cord my wife vacuumed two days ago (by accident!) and became completely dead since then.

I'm trying to choose between Senn HD 212 Pro and Senn PX 200 for use with my pcdp. My type of music is mostly classical.

Any type of guidance would be much appreciated.

Thanks

 

[hempcamp]

The PX-200 sound really good with classical music for being such a small, rugged, portable set of cans. The 212 Pro are a little less durable, and don't sound quite as clear in the midrange, IMO. The bass is also a little bloated -- more suitable for pop music methinks.

--Chris

 

[Davie]

To my ears the 212pro's bass is much more than a little bloated. In fact, I'd say it's basically unlistenable unless you use an equalizer. Of the two, I'd say the PX200 hands-down. Why has your decision come down to these two models?

 

[SuperMario]

Thanks, Hempcamp.

Thanks, Davie. To answer your question, I guess it was only because they sell at the same price.... I assumed they were in the same league. But I was tending to the PX 200 right from the begining.

What other cans would you suggest around the same price ($50-$60) better than the PX 200 for my kind of music?

I'll wait your comments

Best regards

 

[blessingx]

The Senn HD 497's are $53 a few places like Amazon. That would beat the PX200's and 212's and are decent for Classical.

 

[hempcamp]

Quote:

Originally posted by SuperMario What other cans would you suggest around the same price ($50-$60) better than the PX 200 for my kind of music?

None, really

But some people really like the Koss KSC-35 and KSC-50 instead of the PX-200, although they are open cans. I also understand that Sennheiser has a new pair of cans that resembles the KSC-50 (neckband style, open), but I'm not sure how they sound.

The PX-100 is another option if you don't mind open cans. A little less refined than the PX-200 though (again, in my opinion).

--Chris

 

[stevesolo]

What other cans would you suggest around the same price ($50-$60) better than the PX 200 for my kind of music?

The PX200's are decent portables and can be had at ecost for $30+ a few dollars handeling fee. I would also consider the Koss KSC-35's for $30 if ear clips dont bother you or for a few more bucks beyond your $50-60 price range, you might want to consider a full size headphone like the Sony V-6's or Sennheiser 280's.

 

[bahamut727]

I own the Senn 212's. Biggest waste of money ever. Some stuff is almost impossible to listen to on them. The sibilance is horrible on them.

I like the bass though (when it isn't bloated)

 

[SuperMario]

Thanks again, hempcamp.

Blessingx, do you think the 497's would beat the PX 200 hands-down or is it really just by a tiny difference? You know, I could use the PX 200's foldable feature. Thanks

Thanks for posting, Stevesolo.

I have indeed considered the V6 and the 280's, but they are no longer on the run. Thanks, anyway.

The question now is probably between 497's (open) and PX 200 (closed). The goal still is the best performance (for the price) on classical music.

 

[SuperMario]

Thanks, bahamut727.

I will steer clear of the 212's

 

[blessingx]

It's a major difference. I'm not the biggest fan of the PX200's (returned mine - but I'm certainly in the minority and my ear size and the PX200's fit may be the issue... maybe), but there's certainly not much competition in the portable arena. The HD497's are recommended, but sometimes clarified by price (good sub $100 phones). The PX200's are recommended, but clarified by price and portability. It's the good phone versus good portable phones separation. The former category is a higher standard. You decide how important that port factor is. The HD497's cans do separate from the headband for travels, though it's very unlikely you'll do that on a regular/daily basis. I think the HD497's also are better than the V6's and 280's, falling just slightly behind the SR60's (and probably right ahead with Classical). They're ugly as hell though, whereas the PX200's look and are designed extremely well. Very nice package.


bahamut727, I owned the 202's. Imagine those!

 

[hempcamp]

Quote:

Originally posted by blessingx The HD497's are recommended, but sometimes clarified by price (good sub $100 phones). The PX200's are recommended, but clarified by price and portability. It's the good phone versus good portable phones separation.

I generally agree with blessingx on this, I had almost totally forgotten about the HD-497! I was unimpressed by the HD-497, but that was only because they didn't make much sense for home use (where I have better options available), but couldn't be toted around without getting pretty banged up. They were great for stationary computer listening, though -- whereas the PX-200's cord is too short for this task.

They both handle classical much better than pop/rock, I think.

--Chris

 

[bahamut727]

Quote:

Originally posted by blessingx bahamut727, I owned the 202's. Imagine those!

Wait, you mean something exists that is WORSE than the 212s? I honestly got more enjoyment out of my stock headphones...

 

[SuperMario]

I thank each one of you for your inputs.

I guess I'll go for the 497's, despite the more appealing design of the PX 200's... (Besides, I must have a 3 m cord.)

Your help has been most appreciated.

Cheers

Mario

 

[blessingx]

Actually the HD202's, horrible as they were, actually sounded better than my earlier V200's

. Like the invention of negative numbers, it's amazing how far from base zero you can go back. Mark at least four cans (V150's & V100's anyone?) worse than 212's.

SuperMario, please don't let any of these comments enhance the 212's status. It's like saying Mussolini wasn't as bad as Hitler.