Pianist
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2007
- Posts
- 3,994
- Likes
- 113
I don't think we should rely on spectral decay graphs so much. I mean EtyKids 5 have a faster decay than HD800 and HE500 overall, but that sure doesn't mean they are better sounding, does it. Or maybe they are better in a way?
Subjectively, I found M50 too bloated in the bass, too glossed over/lacking detail in the mids and with a very apparent "metallic" coloration to the highs. Moreover, they often sounded "cupped in" to me. Not natural at all. I much prefer Shure SRH840 or even SRH440 which I think offer tighter bass, better midrange detail and more natural treble from the strong coloration that M50 has. I also never felt that the Shures sounded as though the sound was trapped in the cups as M50 often did. For similar reasons, I often preferred M-Audio Q40 to M50 when I had both and several other closed cans as well. I would take AKG K271, Roland RH300, Beyer DT770 Pro, Fostex T50RP, Sony V6 and probably many others over M50 for similar reasons. May be it's just a preference thing, or maybe I got a bad pair, who knows.
Subjectively, I found M50 too bloated in the bass, too glossed over/lacking detail in the mids and with a very apparent "metallic" coloration to the highs. Moreover, they often sounded "cupped in" to me. Not natural at all. I much prefer Shure SRH840 or even SRH440 which I think offer tighter bass, better midrange detail and more natural treble from the strong coloration that M50 has. I also never felt that the Shures sounded as though the sound was trapped in the cups as M50 often did. For similar reasons, I often preferred M-Audio Q40 to M50 when I had both and several other closed cans as well. I would take AKG K271, Roland RH300, Beyer DT770 Pro, Fostex T50RP, Sony V6 and probably many others over M50 for similar reasons. May be it's just a preference thing, or maybe I got a bad pair, who knows.