[firev1]

Quote:

 
Hmmm I am suprised because after you hear something with textured bass, open soundstage, non recessed midrange, non sibilant spitty vocals, non boxed in sound then the M50 sound a bit mediocre.... They do have a decent sound and a good FR out of the box and they are also quite exciting to listen to but they are not very refined at all compared to better headphones.

You do realise that you are comparing the M50s with something costing much more? I had the M50s for a period of time and I thought they were pretty decent for the price and features wise for a full sized portable headphone, they are/were pretty much the best out there. I would not hesitate springing for them a second time if I find one cheap.

 

[nicholars]

Quote:

You do realise that you are comparing the M50s with something costing much more? I had the M50s for a period of time and I thought they were pretty decent for the price and features wise for a full sized portable headphone, they are/were pretty much the best out there. I would not hesitate springing for them a second time if I find one cheap.

 
Yes I do realise that but I was responding to his comment which was saying he owns akg k701 blah blah some other headphones and he said he still likes the M50. I said I am suprised he does not find the M50's obvious faults irritating after owning better headphones.

 

[National]

 
Yes I do realise that but I was responding to his comment which was saying he owns akg k701 blah blah some other headphones and he said he still likes the M50. I said I am suprised he does not find the M50's obvious faults irritating after owning better headphones.

Yeah, I don't find them irritating. There are obvious faults, but they're definitely not irritating. It's not like you'll go "Oh, the mids sound recessed, and it's seriously annoying!" I could go on describing the pitfalls in my 598's, K701's, etc. etc. But for all the cans I still own, none of their shortcomings are so negative that it interferes with my listening experience. 
 
Yes, the headphones listed above are better headphones. But that doesn't mean the M50's aren't good headphones.
 
 

well the rest are open. m50 is closed. So it is an unfair comparison. I think m50s are way too bloated in the bass, recessed midrange and not only shrill highs, but also metallic and piercing. 

 
I used to own the Brainwavz HM5 and I still have the Beyer DT770's. And even with that in mind, the M50's are still good headphones. Good enough to the extent that I have difficulty choosing which one I like the most out of the three (I sold the Brainwavz HM5 to buy the K701s).
 
 
I'll agree that they might be "overrated" since a lot of people talk about them as if they're better than much more expensive headphones. But since there's a thread on them being "overrated" and a lot of discussion of them being mediocre, they're pretty much headed towards the path of "underrated". They're not bad, or mediocre. They're good. 

 

[cdnhacker]

I've been seeing more of them nowadays, but id rather see people wearing those than beats anyday

 

[takato14]

Quote:

I've been seeing more of them nowadays, but id rather see people wearing those than beats anyday

This. Forever. I'd love to be personally responsible for the annihilation of every pair of Beats ever produced.

 

[Gezzaman]

Quote:

 
Yes, the headphones listed above are better headphones. But that doesn't mean the M50's aren't good headphones.
 
----------------
 
I'll agree that they might be "overrated" since a lot of people talk about them as if they're better than much more expensive headphones. But since there's a thread on them being "overrated" and a lot of discussion of them being mediocre, they're pretty much headed towards the path of "underrated". They're not bad, or mediocre. They're good. 

can't agree more

 

[talisman42]

Quote:

......  
 
I'll agree that they might be "overrated" since a lot of people talk about them as if they're better than much more expensive headphones. But since there's a thread on them being "overrated" and a lot of discussion of them being mediocre, they're pretty much headed towards the path of "underrated". They're not bad, or mediocre. They're good. 

 
+1 

 

[takato14]

Quote:

I'll agree that they might be "overrated" since a lot of people talk about them as if they're better than much more expensive headphones. But since there's a thread on them being "overrated" and a lot of discussion of them being mediocre, they're pretty much headed towards the path of "underrated". They're not bad, or mediocre. They're good. 

+2

 

[PLUSSOUND]

Not overrated at all.

 

[Eargasmo]

I've been lurking on these forums for quite a while, and I find that a lot of "recommendations" sound absolute, but we all know there is nothing absolute about the way we hear sounds.  I have friends who love their beats and bose.  I don't try to tell them otherwise.  I'll let them listen to my headphones and see if they like them.  And if they prefer beats, so be it.  It is not my place to tell people what they should or should not enjoy.  I love sharing my love of acoustics with others, but I try to avoid being holier than thou.  We don't buy headphones to measure our ep33ns; we buy headphones b/c we love to put them on and drift away for a while.  And if people love to experience the Bose or Beats sound, then more power to them.  Doesn't mean they aren't audiophiles.  After all, by definition, audiophiles means those who like sound.
 
And M50s to many are amazing headphones, so to them they are not overrated.  If you prefer a diff sound, they are overrated.  heck, i'm one person and find myself liking different sounds depending on the mood i'm in.  That's why own the headphones I do.  So I can only imagine how other people hear vastly different than me.

 

[Dragunov-21]

What is it, exactly, that they do well?

And what do they do poorly?

I have had some for a few years and... I just don't get it. Their bass is capable, if muddy, the highs ate noticeably present, but slightly harsh, amped our not.

The sound signature isn't particularly clear, detailed or musical, but at the same time they're not thinking bass monsters...

So what exactly is it that people who love them love?

 

[area51]

I have tried Senn HD600 , Ultrasone 580 , Bose , and the M50 is much better then these.At least they have bass...

 

[rayjuodas]

Quote:

What is it, exactly, that they do well?
And what do they do poorly?
I have had some for a few years and... I just don't get it. Their bass is capable, if muddy, the highs ate noticeably present, but slightly harsh, amped our not.
The sound signature isn't particularly clear, detailed or musical, but at the same time they're not thinking bass monsters...
So what exactly is it that people who love them love?

 
Here you go, my 2 cents, if you've got time for a lengthy explanation
 
I can also add another monitor, beloved my many audio engineers, which is PMC TB2+. And the M50 replicate its signature even closer than that of the Dynaudio BM15. In my book, this says a lot. M50 are not tiresome to listen to, have a good bass extension, they sound like if you were listening to high end studio monitors. Some other headphones appear to sound "cleaner", with "dirty" frequencies removed, and "clean" frequencies boosted, so that the audiophiles can enjoy them and buy more and more expensive stuff. To me, so far only one headphone has surpassed M50 for the sheer music enjoyment, while still being very natural sounding. It's the German Maestro GMP 8.35D. Its only drawback is non existent soundstage, but it's still a very exciting listening experience. And that does not necessarily mean they will translate well if worked on / mixed with. But the M50 hold their ground very well, IMO.  

 

[defrenchguy]

Precisely.
 

 

[Dyaems]

m50 not overrated people wins this thread