Latest Thread Images

NAD Viso HP50 : Another superb headphone from Paul Barton?
Jun 28, 2015 at 5:00 AM Post #2,131 of 3,345
mwavguy said:
  I asked this question in the Oppo thread, but in the spirit of neutrality, I'll ask here as well.
 
Between Oppo PM-3 and NAD VISO HP50, which has the better tonality, bass response (tight and impactful), comfort, and lack of sound leakage?
Click to expand...

I have tried both. They are like apples and oranges in a way. The Oppo is more holographic sounding and has more impactful bass although its tightness is about the same. HP50 is more neutral and midrange is a bit more forward with more linear highs. Oppo's highs are more airy. Oppo is more comfy for sure but I can't say anything about sound leakage because when I tried them, I didn't really pay attention to that.
hth
 
Jun 28, 2015 at 5:56 AM Post #2,132 of 3,345
jeff y said:
  I have tried both. They are like apples and oranges in a way. The Oppo is more holographic sounding and has more impactful bass although its tightness is about the same. HP50 is more neutral and midrange is a bit more forward with more linear highs. Oppo's highs are more airy. Oppo is more comfy for sure but I can't say anything about sound leakage because when I tried them, I didn't really pay attention to that.
hth
Click to expand...


Wow, the PM-3 has more bass? I had been reading they are fairly neutral, so I assumed the amount of bass would be far lower (seeing the +10 dB bass curve of the NAD at http://www.headphone.com/pages/build-a-graph).
 
Jun 28, 2015 at 7:09 AM Post #2,133 of 3,345
mwavguy said:
 
Wow, the PM-3 has more bass? I had been reading they are fairly neutral, so I assumed the amount of bass would be far lower (seeing the +10 dB bass curve of the NAD at http://www.headphone.com/pages/build-a-graph).
Click to expand...

Yes, they certainly are more punchy (given the right amplification) especially in the mid-range version. The presentation of the bass itself in the NADs are more linear and 3D but ultimately, they are not really in your face or fun (relatively) compared to other headphones. This does help the NADs deal with all types of music since bass blends in with other frequencies better this way (due to roomfeel probably).
 
graphs: they can be deceptive.
 
Jun 28, 2015 at 7:20 AM Post #2,134 of 3,345
jeff y said:
Yes, they certainly are more punchy (given the right amplification) especially in the mid-range version. The presentation of the bass itself in the NADs are more linear and 3D but ultimately, they are not really in your face or fun (relatively) compared to other headphones. This does help the NADs deal with all types of music since bass blends in with other frequencies better this way (due to roomfeel probably).

graphs: they can be deceptive.
Click to expand...

No they're not deceptive. The NAD just don't emphasize the mid-bass relative to the mids and sub-bass, while the PM-3 emphasize the mid-bass relative to its sub-bass; another way of putting it is the PM-3 lacks sub-bass. The sub-bass ain't impact, it's rumble.
 
Jun 28, 2015 at 8:06 AM Post #2,136 of 3,345
Have you signed up for the PM-3 loaner program? It would at least give you the chance to listen to the Oppo headphone 
redface.gif

 
Jun 28, 2015 at 8:34 AM Post #2,137 of 3,345
diamondears said:
No they're not deceptive. The NAD just don't emphasize the mid-bass relative to the mids and sub-bass, while the PM-3 emphasize the mid-bass relative to its sub-bass; another way of putting it is the PM-3 lacks sub-bass. The sub-bass ain't impact, it's rumble.
Click to expand...

I think you slightly misunderstood my badly worded sentence. I'm trying to say what you have said but what I meant is that graphs aren't too easy to really understand when you don't have much experience looking at graphs (which I really enjoy doing).
 
Jun 28, 2015 at 8:35 AM Post #2,138 of 3,345
mwavguy said:
Back to square one then! It's hard to decide between HP50, PM-3, and Shure 1540 for a good closed "bass impact" can!
Click to expand...

For bass "impact" go for the PM-3 imo. HP50's got really good sub-bass but mid-bass's impact is not the strongest.
I would not consider Shure 1540's either because they don't fit my head hehe. I've listened to them before as well but they're not as airy as the Oppos.
 
Jun 28, 2015 at 9:04 AM Post #2,141 of 3,345
Jun 28, 2015 at 9:06 AM Post #2,142 of 3,345
jeff y said:
For bass "impact" go for the PM-3 imo. HP50's got really good sub-bass but mid-bass's impact is not the strongest.
I would not consider Shure 1540's either because they don't fit my head hehe. I've listened to them before as well but they're not as airy as the Oppos.
Click to expand...

 


Interesting. Isn't sub-bass + mid-bass better than mid-bass alone? I've not listened to either headphones though! I've had the Senn HD-600, Beyer T1, Ultrasone Sig Pro.
 
Jun 28, 2015 at 8:28 PM Post #2,145 of 3,345
jeff y said:
I think you slightly misunderstood my badly worded sentence. I'm trying to say what you have said but what I meant is that graphs aren't too easy to really understand when you don't have much experience looking at graphs (which I really enjoy doing).
Click to expand...

All I'm saying is the HP-50 doesn't lack anything on the mid-bass. It's very accurate in there. I've compared its sub-bass to mid-bass to upper bass to speakers and I find it to be very accurate. I'm saying its just that it doesn't emphasize mid-bass nor lack sub-bass. So if the recording has sub-bass, it wouldn't sound like an impactful mid-bass, it would sould like a more rumbling or enveloping kind of sub-bass, which is what it should be.

Again, haven't heard the PM-3, but I haven't heard a HP that is inconsistent with its FR graph. Zero.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Back
Top