[About7Narwhal]

Before coming here and talking with you guys I have only had basic headphones (Turtle Beach X-Ray, Turtle Beach PX5, Razer Chimaera) that did not require an amp or a mixer because they came with the set. Now that I have (or will have, soon) my new gear, I have a question.
 
This may be a stupid question, but I would rather sound stupid than blow a new pair of $400.00 phones: What is the proper order for connecting and disconnecting my phones from my amp? Do I need to power the amp off prior to adding or removing? Should I leave the phones plugged in or should I unplug them when not in use? Any general information would be great. Thanks.

 

[davidsh]

If you really want to be careful, you should just turn the volume to zero before inserting/powering off/removing/etc. Not everyone do it, but in some cases it can save the headphone for example with tube amps messing up etc.

 

[theOmni]

Alright, so my Q701 came in yesterday and I tried some BF3 and listend to some Massive Attack. Mind you, this is just on my laptop. My high end desktop with a soundcard is not in yet. I have an E11 amp on the way that was supposed to be delivered yesterday, but the stupid post office is derping around too much. Anyways, I tried it and HOLY CRAP!!! WHAT A FRIGGEN DIFFERENCE!! Even while its setup with my crappy laptop, the sound had so much clarity to it. I can tell what's left and right and even what's behind me. And listening to Teardrop by Massive Attack, the vocals are just so pronounced. Although I used to use my Ultrasone 750 Pros for the past few months, I have a feeling that the q701 will easily replace them. To be fair though, I haven't listened to the Ultrasones amped, and I hear that makes a big difference. I think I might just use the Ultrasones for rock music and movies, while the q701s can handle gaming, and orchestral music. 
 
My only concern with these headphones is that in some songs, I can hear some crackling and popping in the left ear. I'm not sure if that's because of the source (it was from my phone) or because of the song file itself. 
 
But thank you MLE and everyone on this thread!!

 

[cbiscuit90]

Mad Lust Envy,
 
Was directed here from another head-fier... I'm new here. Great guide by the way, I went with the DT990s.
 
I have a question, and it's probably really simple--If I use Dolby Headphone with a Xonar DX, would a Schiit Magni amplifier limit the sound to stereo (two channels)? To put it differently, the Schiit Magni won't alter the sound output from the DX except to increase the volume, correct?
 
Thanks!

 

[ethan7000]

The latter, it would just increase volume

 

[Evshrug]

Alright, so my Q701 came in yesterday and I tried some BF3 and listend to some Massive Attack.

My only concern with these headphones is that in some songs, I can hear some crackling and popping in the left ear. I'm not sure if that's because of the source (it was from my phone) or because of the song file itself. 

But thank you MLE and everyone on this thread!!

Heliogoland, or something more classic like Mezzanine or Blue lines? I love Massive Attack, some say Mezzanine wasn't mastered well (blue lines was recently re-mastered, hoping Mezzanine will get the same treatment, I'd buy the album for the fourth time ) but it does have some nice bass rumble, and in Angel with the Q701 you really cut away all the one-notey bass into something more "live," it's been one of my test songs for years. And yes, they are amazing with gaming.

The crackling may be due to amping problems, but pay attention to what songs it happens with, and if it still happens after your E11 arrives it may be prudent to seek service. Check for hairs on the driver too.

 

[chicolom]

Quote:

Sony MA900 or Fidelio X1. The MA900 is easier to drive, more balanced, and won't be affected by output impedance. The Fidelio X1 is more refined, and more bassy. Both are open, and both are great for all around gaming.

With the MA900 around, you can forget about the PC360, HD558/598. The MA900 is superior to them.

Quote:

Seriously, for gaming purposes I'd choose the MA900 over the Q701. Super light and comfy, well balanced and even more fun. Not picky like the Q701 to drive, and less fatiguing in the upper mids.

 
 
While I like the MA900 I'm not quite as enamored with it as you are yet.
 
I think the MA900's soundstage does sound more out-of-head than most headphones, but at the same time the imaging isn't quite as sharp as either AKG or the X1.  I think the MA900 has a better signature than the HD5xx/PC360, but I think the latter still has better imaging. 

 

[Evshrug]

I do agree that the Q701 doesn't work "well" powered just by an iPod or something, in fact some songs sound fatiguing if the AKG is underamped, but it scales up well with a $100-$200 amp. I think a good amp is appropriate for this class of headphone. When it IS amped properly and fed quality music, it sounds VERY clear but also fun in the sense that some notes (and especially openings or endings to songs) send shivers up my spine/head. I'll give the Sony's a good listen, but no rush sending them to me because I'm getting over the tail end of a cold.

Chico, I dunno if I'm next or whatever, but definitely take the week Mad suggested.

 

[PurpleNinjaX2]

So I am brand new to this whole PC headset thing, and I am in need of some help.  I am going to be doing gaming, skyping, and watching youtube videos.  I want to know if i should go with the ad700 and a zalman mic or save up an extra 50 dollars and get a pc360?  If anyone could help me out that would be great! 

 

[Mad Lust Envy]

I do agree that the Q701 doesn't work "well" powered just by an iPod or something, in fact some songs sound fatiguing if the AKG is underamped, but it scales up well with a $100-$200 amp. I think a good amp is appropriate for this class of headphone. When it IS amped properly and fed quality music, it sounds VERY clear but also fun in the sense that some notes (and especially openings or endings to songs) send shivers up my spine/head. I'll give the Sony's a good listen, but no rush sending them to me because I'm getting over the tail end of a cold.

Chico, I dunno if I'm next or whatever, but definitely take the week Mad suggested.

Lol, I haven't sent them to anyone yet. Chico bought it himself.

Chico, that's because you're too used to your AKGs. Like I said, they're not better than the AKGs. They're a cheaper, less amp dependent, and more fun headphone (Q701, not Annie). If you have a Q70x or Annie, no real reason to go with the MA900. However, if you dont wanna rely on strong amping, and source matching, the MA900 is a safer choice and to me sounds nearly as good.

If you're referring to imaging/stereo, I can't agree. The MA900 to me is god tier for imaging in music. The AKGs have always been known to be mostly extreme left/right proficient, but a bit diffused in between. Now, I don't really pay that much attention to soundstage and imaging in music. A pair of closed headphones with a good balance is just fine for me. I only truly play attention to those things for virtual surround gaming. Not even the AKGs stuck oht for me in music for imaging or otherwise.

That being said, the MA900 is one of the first headphones to make me pay attention to such cues in music. It really stuck out.



Again, if you're gonna drive them properly, the Q70x and Annie are better than the MA900. If you're looking for cheaper, all purpose, not finicky, super light, less fatiguing in the upper mids and even more comfy, as well as cheap, the MA900 is the best recommendation I can make.

 

[Evshrug]

Lol, I haven't sent them to anyone yet. Chico bought it himself.

Ok, well... XD
But anyway, IF you are hoping to get some of our opinions, I need a bit of time before I put my best ear forward, so to say.

Would you give me your opinion on my M-100, if I leant it to you? I like it for a lot of the same reasons you stated about the MA900, tho the soundstage is limited by being a closed headphone, it IS very good for closed and has pretty great imaging, easy to drive tho it scales a bit, non-fatiguing sound with fun, etc. Since it's closed and pleather, it's really best kept to 1 hour sessions before giving your head a break, but what it gains is in portability and social acceptance. The Matte Black isn't aesthetically loud, but build materials and design oozes high quality, and as my coworkers (manager) recently said as they were teasing me about my Q701 [It looks like a helmet! Like a pilot's helmet!], "Why buy headphones that aren't portable?" We like audio enough to understand the high-value proposition of big headphones over big speakers, but still, portability IS a strong benefit.

Chico, that's because you're too used to your AKGs. Like I said, they're not better than the AKGs. They're a cheaper, less amp dependent, and more fun headphone (Q701, not Annie). If you have a Q70x or Annie, no real reason to go with the MA900. However, if you dont wanna rely on strong amping, and source matching, the MA900 is a safer choice and to me sounds nearly as good.

If you're referring to imaging/stereo, I can't agree. The MA900 to me is god tier for imaging in music. The AKGs have always been known to be mostly extreme left/right proficient, but a bit diffused in between. Now, I don't really pay that much attention to soundstage and imaging in music. A pair of closed headphones with a good balance is just fine for me. I only truly play attention to those things for virtual surround gaming. Not even the AKGs stuck oht for me in music for imaging or otherwise.

That being said, the MA900 is one of the first headphones to make me pay attention to such cues in music. It really stuck out.

Again, if you're gonna drive them properly, the Q70x and Annie are better than the MA900. If you're looking for cheaper, all purpose, not finicky, super light, less fatiguing in the upper mids and even more comfy, as well as cheap, the MA900 is the best recommendation I can make.

My Etymotic IEMs are at the top of my god-tier for imaging. Not the biggest (exaggerated?) soundstage, but imaging is so good it often transcends the valley of disbelief. They feel weird till you find your right eartips, then they disappear, which can be unnerving because you can forget that the only sounds you can hear come from the canalphones and your sense of touch/jaw vibrations/air on the hairs of your body. And you'd better believe binaural sounds incredibly "live" and accurate. The only thing (besides ear wax cleaning) is that they are impractical if you DO want to hear the real world. There's an app for that, lol.

 

[chicolom]

Quote:

Chico, that's because you're too used to your AKGs. Like I said, they're not better than the AKGs. They're a cheaper, less amp dependent, and more fun headphone (Q701, not Annie). If you have a Q70x or Annie, no real reason to go with the MA900.

If you're referring to imaging/stereo, I can't agree. The MA900 to me is god tier for imaging in music. The AKGs have always been known to be mostly extreme left/right proficient, but a bit diffused in between. Now, I don't really pay that much attention to soundstage and imaging in music. A pair of closed headphones with a good balance is just fine for me. I only truly play attention to those things for virtual surround gaming. Not even the AKGs stuck oht for me in music for imaging or otherwise.

That being said, the MA900 is one of the first headphones to make me pay attention to such cues in music. It really stuck out.

Again, if you're gonna drive them properly, the Q70x and Annie are better than the MA900. If you're looking for cheaper, all purpose, not finicky, super light, less fatiguing in the upper mids and even more comfy, as well as cheap, the MA900 is the best recommendation I can make.

 

Don't get me wrong -  I'm not saying the MA900 are bad or anything, I'm just saying they're not as good as the Anniversaries or X1.  I'm just saying people who were previously looking at getting the Anniversaries, K712, X1, etc. shouldn't instead opt grab the MA900 because they read FOTM things about it and begin to think it's a better headphone.

The MA900 probably don't have too much competition in their sub 200 bracket though.  Going off memory the MA900 has a better sig than the Sennheisers HD5xx, but I remember the Sennheisers as having a little sharper imaging.  There's the AD700 but the signature is way too thin IMO.  What else am I forgetting in that price bracket?  DT990 Pro, but I've never heard it.

The MA900s imaging is very good - I think it's better than the HE400, DT990, things like that.   For me though, it's still not quite as sharp as the AKGs and X1. There's some slight little inconsistency/disconnectedeness between the left and right channel that makes it a little bit harder to pinpoint sounds than with the others.  The imaging is just slightly more coherent and connected with the others for some reason. 
 
As far as stereo music, I don't think I'm hearing whatever your hearing with the MA900's imaging :\

Regardless, I still plan to sell them in a week or so because I know I won't ever reach for them when I've got the AKGs and X1 readily available.  I'll try and do a little mini-review before they go though.

 

[chicolom]

I keep forgetting that when double amping the mixamp or DSS that the M-stage somehow boosts the soundstage to be several feet larger than the iCan.  It's pretty cool and it's pretty easy to hear.  It's one of the main reasons I haven't sold the M-stage after getting the iCan.  It makes me wonder if a more expensive amp would further boost it....
 
For some reason the soundstage between the two isn't as different when listening to music though.
 
Too bad I can't combine the M-stage's amp section with the iCan's switches.  That would be one sweet amp.

 

[Mad Lust Envy]

Don't get me wrong -  I'm not saying the MA900 are bad or anything, I'm just saying they're not as good as the Anniversaries or X1.  I'm just saying people who were previously looking at getting the Anniversaries, K712, X1, etc. shouldn't instead opt grab the MA900

I agree with you. If you can afford the Annie, it's easily does what I like about the MA900 even better except comfort. But the Annie is more than 2x the price, more picky about amping, and heats up a lot more on the ears.

As for the X1, there are people who don't want that much bass, or dont wanna deal with the eventual issue of the pads needing to be replaced. For these people, the MA900 is as good as it gets in the price range.


This is why I'm referring them to the MA900. If you cant afford those two, or dont wanna deal with the bass/pads, the MA900 is the best alternative I can think of. The MA900 is fantastic for it's price. I'm giving it more head time than the X1, and I'm not mad about it. It's simply a great headphone with very little issues to deal with. You cant ask for much more. Well balanced, cheap, ultra comfy and light (more comfy than the X1 and Annies), easy to drive (and not picky), big soundstage.

Of course, there is zero sense on getting it if you can get the Annies or X1 without worrying about their caveats. Those two are better overall. Not denying that. But thats like complaining about me recommending the Q701 when you have the HD800. Of course it's not gonna match up. I have not once stated the MA900 is better than the X1 or Annie. But it does certain things better, like being less fatiguing than both.

This eclipses FOTM status. Just like the CAL, KSC35/75. It stands uncontested in it's price range, and are many benefits to it.

 

[crazyg0od33]

So my Beyerdynamic cops came in and I love them! They're very comfortable but I still need to get used to them. I tested them out with splinter cell blacklist and they were great (to me lol). I did however realize halfway through that I forget to change the speaker setup and that's why there was no center channel haha. I'll test more later