[chailee80]

  Hi all,
 
I'm hoping for some comparisons and impressions of the HP50 versus of few other headphones on my list.
 
First, I just got rid of a pair of SoundMagic HP150s.  Very detailed sound, *great* sub bass, but a little thin, and extremely bright for my taste.  Some EQ tamed a lot of these things, but I found myself not liking numerous songs that have little bass, or lots of highs as the SoundMagics made them seem harsh, overly bright, and sometimes kinda painful.  Then the SoundMagics *broke*; so now I'm after new headphones.
 
I want a sound that is pleasing, but detailed.  Something sort of like the sound of an electrostatic *speaker*.  Good instrument separation is important to me.  I guess "natural and real" are what I'm after more or less.  I would normally describe this sound as "warm", but I've been told that means extra bass, which isn't necessarily what I'm after, but I *do* like sub bass.
 
I'm considering a pair of Mad Dogs, the NAD HP50s, maybe another set of SoundMagics, and anything else in this price range that would suit me.  From what I've read, the NAD HP50 is probably nearly exactly what I'm after.  I wonder how the sound of the Mad Dog compares?
 
Thanks for any opinions. 
 
Brian.

I'd also suggest checking out the the oppo pm-3, a bit more expensive than the hp50 but very good imo.

 

[diamondears]

I'd also suggest checking out the the oppo pm-3, a bit more expensive than the hp50 but very good imo.

Could you kindly explain the substantial differences?

 

[shabta]

 
I'd also suggest checking out the the oppo pm-3, a bit more expensive than the hp50 but very good imo.

+1 Actually, it's definitely on my list of a headphone to check out...

 

[peterinvan]

Hi all,

I'm hoping for some comparisons and impressions of the HP50 versus of few other headphones on my list.

I want a sound that is pleasing, but detailed.  Something sort of like the sound of an electrostatic *speaker*. 

I'm considering a pair of Mad Dogs, the NAD HP50s, maybe another set of SoundMagics, and anything else in this price range that would suit me.  From what I've read, the NAD HP50 is probably nearly exactly what I'm after.  I wonder how the sound of the Mad Dog compares?

Brian.

I have been listening to my modded Fostex T50 RP more than my NAD HP50s. More comfortable and better imaging. If you are handy with tools and have a steady hand, these are hard to beat at around $150. You ask for an electrostatic speaker sound... Then consider planars. The HP50s are now my choice for travelling.

See http://www.head-fi.org/t/452404/just-listened-to-some-fostex-t50rps-today-wow/11040#post_11438592


Peter

 

[tarsonis]

I love my NADs as well BUT I do have a closed-back headphone that I know of which does beat the NAD at near the price.
Mr. Speaker's Mad Dogs for $300 or so is crazy value. Sadly, I'll say it beats the NADs in all ways. However, I do use the NADs outside of my house at places such as at work.

Can't agree with that. The MDs arent tuned to translate neutral. There is a large downfall starting at 2-3khz thats is typical for the T50 driver. It can be solved with the right damping material. Its not large but its enough to call the mids recessed.

Its clearly audible if you switch back and forth.

It may be your sound preference but its not the same aim as the NAD which tries to aim a balanced sound signatur. So my opinion there is noc competition as both cans have a different signatur aim.

 

[bgentry]

Thanks for the replies.  So far I'm 99% decided on the HP50...
 
Brian.

 

[diamondears]

Thanks for the replies.  So far I'm 99% decided on the HP50...

Brian.

Not to knock the HP50, in fact I love them so much I bought 2 for my kids, but if you have a biggish head, suggest you try them on first as the headband is designed is such a way that you'll experience bit annoying pressure on top of your head in a short period.

But I like its sound so much that I tried to look for a replacement and the closest candidate is of course is its brother the PSB M4U 1, which is also designed by Paul S. Barton. The sound is very very similar, but with a bit larger enough design to fit my head and remove the on top of head pressure/pain issue.

The NAD HP50 has a clearer sound, I'd say more precise, while the PSB M4U 1 has better bass extraction and definition as well as more sibilance and sparkle. However, I have to use an OCC headphone cable to replace the stock cable on the PSB to remove what I find very small excess on the sibilance/treble. With the OCC cable, I find the PSB's SQ to be actually slightly better than the HP50 overall due to better bass to sub-bass definition, more articulation. HP50 has clearer mids and treble though, better separation of instruments on the mids and treble. IMHO. YMMV.

 

[diamondears]

Can't wait for the improvement models on both the PSB and NAD...lol

 

[Jeff Y]

Can't agree with that. The MDs arent tuned to translate neutral. There is a large downfall starting at 2-3khz thats is typical for the T50 driver. It can be solved with the right damping material. Its not large but its enough to call the mids recessed.

Its clearly audible if you switch back and forth.

It may be your sound preference but its not the same aim as the NAD which tries to aim a balanced sound signatur. So my opinion there is noc competition as both cans have a different signatur aim.

True, it is true in some respects but trying both with different music, the person who asked for recommendations asked for good sub-bass and the MD has more of that for sure. Mid-bass response is harder too. Everything hits harder but is very quick, quicker than the NAD. Soundstage is much bigger all around and there's clearer separation of instruments. (I have the latest version of the MD btw so YMMV) The mids on the HP50 is great but the MD is more strident and clearer. Like I said, it is true the MD is not as neutral as the NAD so there are more of the highs on the MD than the NAD but it never gets annoying or overwhelming like certain Audio-Technicas. Neither is for everyone but in the end both the NAD and the MD are good choices for a closed back under $300
 
Yes, the NAD is great and is tuned for the Harman Target Curve if one wants to call that neutral but at home, if someone wishes for great subbass and soundstage the MD is quite great as long as there is great amplification to feed it with. If you want to use it outside of home though, the MD might be a little bulky. MD's got better fit and comfort all around. Pretty good isolation as well.
 
Both are like different cups of tea and one has to try it out for oneself to figure out which is better. MD is like the NAD on steroids in a way if you are careful with the amplification. Like I have said, NAD=more neutral MD= not so much but more dynamic, fun, and detailed.

 

[Stig-san]

  True, it is true in some respects but trying both with different music, the person who asked for recommendations asked for good sub-bass and the MD has more of that for sure. Mid-bass response is harder too. Everything hits harder but is very quick, quicker than the NAD. Soundstage is much bigger all around and there's clearer separation of instruments. (I have the latest version of the MD btw so YMMV) The mids on the HP50 is great but the MD is more strident and clearer. Like I said, it is true the MD is not as neutral as the NAD so there are more of the highs on the MD than the NAD but it never gets annoying or overwhelming like certain Audio-Technicas. Neither is for everyone but in the end both the NAD and the MD are good choices for a closed back under $300
 
Yes, the NAD is great and is tuned for the Harman Target Curve if one wants to call that neutral but at home, if someone wishes for great subbass and soundstage the MD is quite great as long as there is great amplification to feed it with. If you want to use it outside of home though, the MD might be a little bulky. MD's got better fit and comfort all around. Pretty good isolation as well.
 
Both are like different cups of tea and one has to try it out for oneself to figure out which is better. MD is like the NAD on steroids in a way if you are careful with the amplification. Like I have said, NAD=more neutral MD= not so much but more dynamic, fun, and detailed.

I just picked up a pair of NADs today from Amazon.  Took me a while, but I finally went for it.  I was looking for a replacement for my Ultrasone HFI-780s and I haven't been disappointed so far.  They are in every way better than the 780s I think.
 
That being said, I used to own the MDs as well with the Alpha Pads.  I have to agree with everything Jeff Y said, they are pretty much a beefed up version of the NADs with the focus tilted toward the low end as long as you have something decent to drive them.  When I had the MDs they were being pushed by a Fiio E09K.  I remember that being good enough to handle the load, but that was a year or two ago so my memory may not be super accurate.
 
Also, when I first gave the NADs a listen earlier, they sounded a little bright to me.  I prefer my highs a bit toned down compared to what I heard.  I also happen to own the ADs which comes with some felt pads.  I slipped a felt pad into each cup and that toned the highs down just where I like them.  So, if you get the NADs and think they are a little bright, pick up the Doggie Treats from their store.  You won't be disappointed.

 

[mandrake50]

  I just picked up a pair of NADs today from Amazon.  Took me a while, but I finally went for it.  I was looking for a replacement for my Ultrasone HFI-780s and I haven't been disappointed so far.  They are in every way better than the 780s I think.
 
That being said, I used to own the MDs as well with the Alpha Pads.  I have to agree with everything Jeff Y said, they are pretty much a beefed up version of the NADs with the focus tilted toward the low end as long as you have something decent to drive them.  When I had the MDs they were being pushed by a Fiio E09K.  I remember that being good enough to handle the load, but that was a year or two ago so my memory may not be super accurate.
 
Also, when I first gave the NADs a listen earlier, they sounded a little bright to me.  I prefer my highs a bit toned down compared to what I heard.  I also happen to own the ADs which comes with some felt pads.  I slipped a felt pad into each cup and that toned the highs down just where I like them.  So, if you get the NADs and think they are a little bright, pick up the Doggie Treats from their store.  You won't be disappointed.

I always marvel at how differently we hear things.. and the differences in our audio "tastes". I have never found the HP50 to be at all bright. More on the neutral/mellow side of things... maybe even just a little bit warm. But, if it works for you, that is all that matters.

 

[Stig-san]

I always marvel at how differently we hear things.. and the differences in our audio "tastes". I have never found the HP50 to be at all bright. More on the neutral/mellow side of things... maybe even just a little bit warm. But, if it works for you, that is all that matters.

It's probably a function of one's ears/brain and the headphones that one has listened to in the past. I think I've always preferred my highs a bit toned down or deemphasized (HD555, MD, AD with one disk, DN1k to some extent). That's the main reason I don't really care for the 780s.

 

[Jeff Y]

  I just picked up a pair of NADs today from Amazon.  Took me a while, but I finally went for it.  I was looking for a replacement for my Ultrasone HFI-780s and I haven't been disappointed so far.  They are in every way better than the 780s I think.
 
That being said, I used to own the MDs as well with the Alpha Pads.  I have to agree with everything Jeff Y said, they are pretty much a beefed up version of the NADs with the focus tilted toward the low end as long as you have something decent to drive them.  When I had the MDs they were being pushed by a Fiio E09K.  I remember that being good enough to handle the load, but that was a year or two ago so my memory may not be super accurate.
 
Also, when I first gave the NADs a listen earlier, they sounded a little bright to me.  I prefer my highs a bit toned down compared to what I heard.  I also happen to own the ADs which comes with some felt pads.  I slipped a felt pad into each cup and that toned the highs down just where I like them.  So, if you get the NADs and think they are a little bright, pick up the Doggie Treats from their store.  You won't be disappointed.

I would definitely say that it's because of the burn in. Once the NADs burn in the highs settle down and sub-bass get a bit better.

 

[amigomatt]

My HP50 have the least fatiguing highs of all my headphones.  The treble is definitely tilted downwards.  They are engineered specifically like that.  Great, natural, warm sounding headphones with detail, separation and one of the best closed back soundstages on the market.

 

[diamondears]

My HP50 have the least fatiguing highs of all my headphones.  The treble is definitely tilted downwards.  They are engineered specifically like that.  Great, natural, warm sounding headphones with detail, separation and one of the best closed back soundstages on the market.

Yup. Arguably the most accurate cans on the market.