Headphones you regretted buying the most
Dec 10, 2011 at 2:01 AM Post #796 of 1,852


Quote:
 
 
Hum strange. You must like headphones with some laid back. Pro2900 isn't a very sibilant headphone in Ultrasone line and bass never disappear with volume up. There is no distortion at all.
 
A defective unit? a very bad synergy with your amp? I have M50/xb700, i had DT770pro...pro2900 SQ is much, much better than these without hesitation.
 
If you don't like them with 20 hours of break in, 200 hours ll not change this.



I bought the 2900's based on owners feedback, and was fully expecting them to beat the m50's (which so far are the best ones). At low volumes they are better than the m50's (more meaty sound, without sacrificing mids/highs and becoming "bass cans" like the XB's, and a bigger soundstage) but "S" sounds are at their limit even here. Turning the volume up (doesn't matter what amp: schiit asgard, denon rcd-m38 or denon pma-700ae) to around 35-40% of what the amps can give you, the bass starts fading away and "S" starts to become "SCH" instead. I really don't expect them to become any better with time, and I'm leaning towards "defective" myself, but I'll give them some more time because returning them won't be worth it due to shipping and customs fees.
 
I really love the audio technica m50's sound, and I can see you've got some different AT models in your signature. Have you done any reviews or comparisons between the different AT models you own/have owned? I'd be really interrested to read about how they compare to eachother. I've already got the A900's on the way, but I'm looking hard at the w1000x (and denon 5000/7000 and beyer t70's for that matter...)
 
Dec 10, 2011 at 4:11 AM Post #797 of 1,852


Quote:
I bought the 2900's based on owners feedback, and was fully expecting them to beat the m50's (which so far are the best ones). At low volumes they are better than the m50's (more meaty sound, without sacrificing mids/highs and becoming "bass cans" like the XB's, and a bigger soundstage) but "S" sounds are at their limit even here. Turning the volume up (doesn't matter what amp: schiit asgard, denon rcd-m38 or denon pma-700ae) to around 35-40% of what the amps can give you, the bass starts fading away and "S" starts to become "SCH" instead. I really don't expect them to become any better with time, and I'm leaning towards "defective" myself, but I'll give them some more time because returning them won't be worth it due to shipping and customs fees.
 
I really love the audio technica m50's sound, and I can see you've got some different AT models in your signature. Have you done any reviews or comparisons between the different AT models you own/have owned? I'd be really interrested to read about how they compare to eachother. I've already got the A900's on the way, but I'm looking hard at the w1000x (and denon 5000/7000 and beyer t70's for that matter...)



I like my M50, and don't like the Ultrasones I have tried myself (HFI 580 - piece of crap, only good for midbass IMO, HFI 680 - didn't like in the store, though I didn't own these). I upgraded to the Denon D2000 and don't regret it a bit. Denons have a fairly larger soundstage and overall slightly better sound quality as in increased clarity and less recessed mids. A little more laid back sound than the M50. I'd say go for the D5000 if you have the money, or the D2000 which supposedly isn't completely different from the D5000. The differences are supposedly wooden cups - which makes the sound a little warmer och the mids a little less recessed.
 
Dec 10, 2011 at 4:15 AM Post #798 of 1,852
Gotta add the Panasonic HTX7.

They LOOK great.

They sound like a muddy, muffled, boomy, artificial piece of crap. I would take the craptastic Sony V150 over these. There is no redeeming quality about its sound whatsoever.
 
Dec 10, 2011 at 5:47 AM Post #799 of 1,852


Quote:
I like my M50, and don't like the Ultrasones I have tried myself (HFI 580 - piece of crap, only good for midbass IMO, HFI 680 - didn't like in the store, though I didn't own these). I upgraded to the Denon D2000 and don't regret it a bit. Denons have a fairly larger soundstage and overall slightly better sound quality as in increased clarity and less recessed mids. A little more laid back sound than the M50. I'd say go for the D5000 if you have the money, or the D2000 which supposedly isn't completely different from the D5000. The differences are supposedly wooden cups - which makes the sound a little warmer och the mids a little less recessed.



 
He is complaining about pronounced sibiliance in his Ultrasone, and you recommend him the king of sibilance, aka D2000
confused.gif

 
If I ever regrettet buying a headphone, it was the D2000, as I wrote before in this thread.
Mainly because of the annoying exaggerated sibilance, sometimes harsh treble, untextured bass and recessed mids, especially vocals.
And no isolation to boot.
All IMHO.
 
Dec 10, 2011 at 5:52 AM Post #800 of 1,852


Quote:
 
He is complaining about pronounced sibiliance in his Ultrasone, and you recommend him the king of sibilance, aka D2000
confused.gif

 
If I ever regrettet buying a headphone, it was the D2000, as I wrote before in this thread.
Mainly because of the annoying exaggerated sibilance, sometimes harsh treble, untextured bass and recessed mids, especially vocals.
And no isolation to boot.
All IMHO.

I have never, ever noticed any sibilance in my D2000s. I might not be prone to hearing (or reacting to) sibilance the same way that people seem to be.
 
Dec 10, 2011 at 9:35 AM Post #801 of 1,852
My worst disappointments was definitely the HD595. Initially I thought it was a quite decent headphone, but after listening to a few other similarly priced headphones I thought they were decidedly mediocre, had grainy highs and were very expensive for the money. The headband also started cracking after only having them for 2 months...
 
The second disappointment was the Shure SE310s. While these were pretty accurate and otherwise very comfortable, they just sounded really really boring to my ears. Think either the SE210s and SE420s would have been a much better buy.
 
Dec 10, 2011 at 2:12 PM Post #802 of 1,852


Quote:
i find that the sound of the buds....are too...they have no depth at all. the highs make me want to cringe, i can just hear the vocals in the mids, and there is no such thing as bass. it's..like a blank state. no signature or anything. the smokin' buds at least deliver ok bass, ok mids, ok highs. when i say ok, i mean compared to the apple earbuds. the colored and bass infused heavy sound to me is more preferable than the far away sounding earphones. 
 


 
I see where your coming from. To sum up, they are extremely thin sounding.
 
Dec 10, 2011 at 3:54 PM Post #804 of 1,852
Sennheiser HD215, I paid €100 for it going by the "It's Sennheiser and a bit pricey, must be good".
I still can't see what all the 5 stars are about, ******* there was no redeemable quality about that headphone. Except durability, never breaks.
 
Dec 10, 2011 at 4:12 PM Post #807 of 1,852


Quote:
Ultrasone HFI-680. After I got my hd598's I realized the ultrasones were uncomfortable and I didn't care for the sound at all. The HD598's weren't much more than $20 more expensive too


 
I pretty much had the same experience with the pro750's. Except I had the hd598's before the pro750's. I tried the pro750's for a day, and I couldn't stand the discomfort of the circular pads so i returned them =/
 
Dec 10, 2011 at 4:56 PM Post #809 of 1,852
Grado S80's - my first real headphones.

Everyone said they were the cat's meow for <$100 headphones.

The earcups hurt your ears after 15 minutes, but that's a lot longer than I could even tolerate listening to them since they're so overly aggressive, sibilant and spitty.
 
Dec 10, 2011 at 7:42 PM Post #810 of 1,852
Ditto on the SR80's. I thought there must have been something wrong with mine as nothing could sound that bad while working as designed.
 
But there wasn't, and they do.
frown.gif

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top