[Random Lunatic]

anyone here who has heard or owns the HD800S, does the Audeze MM-500 have more or less detail and which of the 2 do you like better if you can only own one?

HD800 all day for sound. The benefit of MM500 is more so the build and easy EQ. Unless you mainly want mid focus/emphasis.

 

[Kevintj604]

Severely disagree - MM-500 is not competition to the 800 imo. MM-500 lacks soundstage, bass physicality/impact and treble extension. They're ok, but without EQ they're not competitive with HD800 in my book in much of any area I can think of. Their tuning is ok, but left a lot to be desired, even compared to the also not flawless HD800. The build is a lot more solid feeling though, and probably easier to EQ.

All good. We absolutely disagree if you think HD800 has bass. It’s absolutely devoid of mid bass and has virtually no sub bass. The only reason it’s even relevant today is its soundstage which is basically all it’s known for. I’d use it if I was a competitive gamer but for music its timbre is awful. Too bright and sibilant with no bass is not my kind of headphone.

That’s my personal opinion but I index heavily for sub bass, timbre and no EQ.

I think MM-500 from a tuning standpoint destroys it. The HD800 is a bit stronger for technicalities but I think that has more to do with its FR in the treble.

 

[silversurfer616]

One headphone destroying another one…lingo, pleeese!

 

[Kevintj604]

One headphone destroying another one…lingo, pleeese!

Okay. Let me rephrase. From a tuning standpoint I think the MM-500 is a much more enjoyable listen. It’s considerably more balanced and a lot more neutral.

 

[Kevintj604]

@silversurfer616

I noticed that we’ve both once owned the MM-500 and sold them so that speaks more volumes than our words do. Obviously for one reason or another we both thought they weren’t special enough to keep in our collections.

At the end of my two months spent with the MM-500 I was finding that they were a great, balanced, studio neutral headphone but a master at nothing. I need a bit more coloration. I’m not a studio engineer and the MM just doesn’t fit my use case.

 

[Random Lunatic]

All good. We absolutely disagree if you think HD800 has bass. It’s absolutely devoid of mid bass and has virtually no sub bass. The only reason it’s even relevant today is its soundstage which is basically all it’s known for. I’d use it if I was a competitive gamer but for music its timbre is awful. Too bright and sibilant with no bass is not my kind of headphone.

That’s my personal opinion but I index heavily for sub bass, timbre and no EQ.

I think MM-500 from a tuning standpoint destroys it. The HD800 is a bit stronger for technicalities but I think that has more to do with its FR in the treble.

I don't "think" HD800 has bass - its about as linear as the MM500, with only about 3dB difference all the way down at 20hz (both are off by ~8db compared to fx harman), and about equal all the way above that, though with the benefit of HD800 having dynamic punch/bass impact, which most planars consistently lack compared to dynamic drivers - but they gain control instead. Until 1k where the MM500 has an weird/unnatural elevation relative to normal targets, causing its presence there, giving an impression of detail, similar to some abyss/focal headphones. Frollowed by an overly present midrange. And then most of the treble is just rolled off, causing the relarive midrange glare or honk. Where as the HD800 has the opposite issue, of overshooting targets slightly in this region.
For no EQ mm500 definitely isn't a winner - arguably neither are. For sub bass its got similar extension raw, but lacks impact, and if calibrated to a target, its effectively rolled off just as the HD800 and most open backs tend to be.

Main difference between the two stems from one having rolled off treble and 1khz/3khz honk, and the other having extra treble energy causing some potential glare. Both have similarly linear bass extension - and are similarly weak in bass compared to preference targets.

You personally preferring the MM500 personally is totally fair, but saying it destroys the HD800, with how many flaws the MM500 has in tuning, is a bit wild to me, and rather misleading.
The reason HD800 is still relevant, like it or not, is because new flagships like MM500/LCD-5 and others remain just as flawed, and are simply different flavours - until someone actually nails a proper FR that doesn't have just as many issues, it'll likely keep being relevant, depending on which compromises one prefers and personal taste.

Anyway, agree to disagree on semantics I guess.

 

[Random Lunatic]

Banter regarding personal taste aside, I'm curious to see if EQ can save MM500/LCD-5 for me, because I love the actual fit, weight and feel of the headphones so much that I would like to give them another chance, now that I'm more open to EQ than I used to be. I'd still prefer not having to, but since it seems to be hard to avoid, I might as well give it another try.
I personally prefer headphones with more dynamic punch and bass presence, as well as soundstage, like Biodynamics, so I wonder if a bass lift, and managing the midrange and treble a bit can bring the Audezes in line with that, whilst retaining their low distortion and control.

 

[Kevintj604]

I don't "think" HD800 has bass - its about as linear as the MM500, with only about 3dB difference all the way down at 20hz (both are off by ~8db compared to fx harman), and about equal all the way above that, though with the benefit of HD800 having dynamic punch/bass impact, which most planars consistently lack compared to dynamic drivers - but they gain control instead. Until 1k where the MM500 has an weird/unnatural elevation relative to normal targets, causing its presence there, giving an impression of detail, similar to some abyss/focal headphones. Frollowed by an overly present midrange. And then most of the treble is just rolled off, causing the relarive midrange glare or honk. Where as the HD800 has the opposite issue, of overshooting targets slightly in this region.
For no EQ mm500 definitely isn't a winner - arguably neither are. For sub bass its got similar extension raw, but lacks impact, and if calibrated to a target, its effectively rolled off just as the HD800 and most open backs tend to be.

Main difference between the two stems from one having rolled off treble and 1khz/3khz honk, and the other having extra treble energy causing some potential glare. Both have similarly linear bass extension - and are similarly weak in bass compared to preference targets.

You personally preferring the MM500 personally is totally fair, but saying it destroys the HD800, with how many flaws the MM500 has in tuning, is a bit wild to me, and rather misleading.
The reason HD800 is still relevant, like it or not, is because new flagships like MM500/LCD-5 and others remain just as flawed, and are simply different flavours - until someone actually nails a proper FR that doesn't have just as many issues, it'll likely keep being relevant, depending on which compromises one prefers and personal taste.

Anyway, agree to disagree on semantics I guess.

Yeah. I agree. We can both have a different point of view and neither of us are incorrect. I’m not a fan at all for the HD800 and I probably let my bias skew a bit too much into the conversation. Both the MM and 800 are tuned very differently which you’ve pointed out in your FR assessment.

 

[Kevintj604]

Banter regarding personal taste aside, I'm curious to see if EQ can save MM500/LCD-5 for me, because I love the actual fit, weight and feel of the headphones so much that I would like to give them another chance, now that I'm more open to EQ than I used to be. I'd still prefer not having to, but since it seems to be hard to avoid, I might as well give it another try.
I personally prefer headphones with more dynamic punch and bass presence, as well as soundstage, like Biodynamics, so I wonder if a bass lift, and managing the midrange and treble a bit can bring the Audezes in line with that, whilst retaining their low distortion and control.

I think with all Audeze’s you’re going to have to be okay with just EQing to get the most out of them. Sankar’s new tuning for his version of the Audeze house sound is focused heavily on mid range and rolled off treble. Both the LCD5 and MM aren’t great at wide staging so if that’s what you’re looking for they might not be the best fit.

 

[AlwaysForward]

Banter regarding personal taste aside, I'm curious to see if EQ can save MM500/LCD-5 for me, because I love the actual fit, weight and feel of the headphones so much that I would like to give them another chance, now that I'm more open to EQ than I used to be. I'd still prefer not having to, but since it seems to be hard to avoid, I might as well give it another try.
I personally prefer headphones with more dynamic punch and bass presence, as well as soundstage, like Biodynamics, so I wonder if a bass lift, and managing the midrange and treble a bit can bring the Audezes in line with that, whilst retaining their low distortion and control.

This will sound crazy because of the mixed gamer/studio/audiophile marketing but my experience with the VZR One is that it has the dynamic punch, sub bass and lovely mid/high. If you check out the thread you will find my raving comments and details.

While there are people who hear them differently than I do, they appear more rare than those who’s experience is similar to my own. For $350, they are one hell of a bargain.

 

[mikecheck95]

Banter regarding personal taste aside, I'm curious to see if EQ can save MM500/LCD-5 for me, because I love the actual fit, weight and feel of the headphones so much that I would like to give them another chance, now that I'm more open to EQ than I used to be. I'd still prefer not having to, but since it seems to be hard to avoid, I might as well give it another try.
I personally prefer headphones with more dynamic punch and bass presence, as well as soundstage, like Biodynamics, so I wonder if a bass lift, and managing the midrange and treble a bit can bring the Audezes in line with that, whilst retaining their low distortion and control.

While I personally think the LCD-5 is quite neutral as it comes and is just a little “darkened” in its colouration. I also think that you can do a lot with EQ on the LCD-5. Just keep in mind that LCD-5 is not an easy can to drive and if you’re thinking about doing some really radical EQ you may find that it doesn’t allow you to have as much headroom on the volume knob as you would expect. Although it will almost certainly get “loud enough”.

In terms of getting it to slam… it simply has a different presentation than those biodynamics and it will never compete directly with them. It still has an impressive bass presentation and you can absolutely get more of it if you add a bass shelf or bass tilt with EQ but its bass presentation is a little more refined and less “fun”.

 

[baneand]

Did someone experience this:

I was just using them ~5-6hrs per day since October, they never fell, never stretched. Clamp was never to hard on my head as other people say. I actually don't know when this started to happen it could be a month ago but I noticed just by accident.

Disappointed when I consider the price of the headphones even though I love the sound from them.

I understand I can order a replacement or send them back for fixing but I guess this will happen again soon.

 

[Kevintj604]

Did someone experience this:




I was just using them ~5-6hrs per day since October, they never fell, never stretched. Clamp was never to hard on my head as other people say. I actually don't know when this started to happen it could be a month ago but I noticed just by accident.

Disappointed when I consider the price of the headphones even though I love the sound from them.

I understand I can order a replacement or send them back for fixing but I guess this will happen again soon.

Yeah that’s a bummer. My experience with Audeze customer service has always been stellar so you shouldn’t have any problems getting a replacement part from them. It does give me pause on their new headband system though. I’ve never seen the original headbands crack or fail in any point of contact.

 

[Stefti]

Banter regarding personal taste aside, I'm curious to see if EQ can save MM500/LCD-5 for me, because I love the actual fit, weight and feel of the headphones so much that I would like to give them another chance, now that I'm more open to EQ than I used to be. I'd still prefer not having to, but since it seems to be hard to avoid, I might as well give it another try.
I personally prefer headphones with more dynamic punch and bass presence, as well as soundstage, like Biodynamics, so I wonder if a bass lift, and managing the midrange and treble a bit can bring the Audezes in line with that, whilst retaining their low distortion and control.

Happy Sunday
Short answer is yes
My Setup:
Marantz HD-CD1/Sony NW-WM1A both connected to a headphone amp Monolith Liquid Gold by Cavalli
Kef SL 50 Wireless (Speaker/Monitor) Campfire Andromeda (IEM) Audeze MM500
Music:
Il Trovatore (Verdi) Leontyne Price ,Domingo,(Zubin Metha Conductor) CD Media and Digital format 44/16 (Sony WM1A)
Listening to the Marantz Cd Player (w/MM500) VS Sony WM1A (W/ AndromedaIEM)
The Sony/Andromeda wins for Depth and perception ,lots more (stage details,noises,drums reverberations,celllos) OK soundstage ) !
The Marantz /MM500 is more recessed and Sterile
I swapped the CD Player with the WM1A (digital) Using the MM500 (via the Liquid Gold Amp):
Improvement in layering and intimacy (voices and soundstage) not as organic like the Andromeda but benefitting from the MM500 laser sharp precision
And for good measure I have tried the same (Marantz CD media format)
WM1A Digital format 44/16 with the KEF`s LS 50W(using the Audioquest Cinnamon cables straight to the Kef’s)
KEEP IN MIND!
The WM1A have few of the Sony`s tricks (vinyl processor ,Dynamic Normalizer,DC phase LInearizer,DSEE HX)
Drums rolls …..
The same results
The Marantz to the Liquid gold (headphone Amp)is connected to via a generic digital coaxial connection .To the KEF LS50W with a AudioQues Forest Toslink
The WM1A to the liquid gold (via a Audio Quest Cinnamon USB cable)

The Marantz CD shows to be the weakest link (better coaxial cable maybe?)
Hope it helps
Stefti

 

[Random Lunatic]

While I personally think the LCD-5 is quite neutral as it comes and is just a little “darkened” in its colouration. I also think that you can do a lot with EQ on the LCD-5. Just keep in mind that LCD-5 is not an easy can to drive and if you’re thinking about doing some really radical EQ you may find that it doesn’t allow you to have as much headroom on the volume knob as you would expect. Although it will almost certainly get “loud enough”.

In terms of getting it to slam… it simply has a different presentation than those biodynamics and it will never compete directly with them. It still has an impressive bass presentation and you can absolutely get more of it if you add a bass shelf or bass tilt with EQ but its bass presentation is a little more refined and less “fun”.

Yea, I like to use portable gear, so the power might be an issue - without eq it looks like 0.1w-1w should be plenty (110-120dB), which is doable with portable amps from either Topping, chord or iFi, but if I add another 10dB to that as headroom for the EQ, its suddenly 10w, which is a problem... With how much seemed in need of "fixing" in terms of tuning, I'm definitely going to need the 10dB extra.
As far as the bass presentation, I guess refined would be the nice word for it - but if its not enjoyable to listen to, no amount of semantics is going to make those 5000€ seem any more reasonable
Hopefully I get a chance to try them again, but with EQ. Or find a cheap MM500 as a middle point.