[graniteX]

Hi,
 
I'm looking for <$100 headphones primarily to watch movies (in an apartment where I can isolate sound). I'm debating between the NVX XPT100 and the Takstar Pro 80s. Which would you recommend?
 
Obviously my 3 main criteria are:
 
1) Isolation (noisy neighbors/roommates can ruin a good movie)
 
2) Comfort (so that I can watch a 2-3 hour long movies without feeling discomfort)
 
3) Sound (very big soundstage, solid bass)
 
Thanks!

 

[PurpleAngel]

  I'm looking for <$100 headphones primarily to watch movies (in an apartment where I can isolate sound). I'm debating between the NVX XPT100 and the Takstar Pro 80s. Which would you recommend?
Obviously my 3 main criteria are:
1) Isolation (noisy neighbors/roommates can ruin a good movie)
2) Comfort (so that I can watch a 2-3 hour long movies without feeling discomfort)
3) Sound (very big soundstage, solid bass)

I own the Brainwavz HM5 (NVX XPT100) and Gemini HSR-1000 (Takstar Pro 80).
I personally prefer the Gemini (Takstar) over the HM5 (XPT100).
 
I would think the HM5's thicker ear pads offer more isolation over the Gemini.
I do not like the feel of the HM5's ear pads (too bulky?).
The HM5 might offer more sound stage, but the Gemini's have more bass.
 
I never use my HM5s anymore and use my Gemini's when using other's computer, at their residence.

 

[graniteX]

  I own the Brainwavz HM5 (NVX XPT100) and Gemini HSR-1000 (Takstar Pro 80).
I personally prefer the Gemini (Takstar) over the HM5 (XPT100).
 
I would think the HM5's thicker ear pads offer more isolation over the Gemini.
I do not like the feel of the HM5's ear pads (too bulky?).
The HM5 might offer more sound stage, but the Gemini's have more bass.
 
I never use my HM5s anymore and use my Gemini's when using other's computer, at their residence.

Hey thanks for the reply (and for all the great PM answers)!
 
Yeah, it seems that people have been commenting on the HMF5 (and XPT100)'s lack of bass. (Which wouldn't be the optimal for movie-watching.)

 

[tattoou2]

I've heard the XPT from an Audioengine D3 USB DAC/amp and it sounded pretty darn good with very decent bass, good mids, and a generous sound stage.  Not sure about the HM5, but I believe the XPT does come with 2 sets of pads and 2 cables.  Properly amped (it doesn't need oodles of power) it provides a good bang-for-the-buck HP.  I didn't listen long enough to recall whether changing out the supplied pads had any effect on the SQ.

 

[graniteX]

  I've heard the XPT from an Audioengine D3 USB DAC/amp and it sounded pretty darn good with very decent bass, good mids, and a generous sound stage.  Not sure about the HM5, but I believe the XPT does come with 2 sets of pads and 2 cables.  Properly amped (it doesn't need oodles of power) it provides a good bang-for-the-buck HP.  I didn't listen long enough to recall whether changing out the supplied pads had any effect on the SQ.

Thanks! That's nice to hear about the XPT.
 
Hmm, though, I don't currently have an amp. And if I do spend the money on an amp and DAC in addition to the XBT (could pile up to $150 or more), I'm thinking that I might as well buy higher-budget cans for a similar price (e.g. DT-770, HP-100, K550, etc). Or unless there's a decent amp + DAC that I can get for very cheap?
 
I know you didn't listen for very long, so this might be a hard question to answer, but did you feel that the properly amped XBT matched the sound of headphones in the <$200 range? 
 
 
fyi--the main source will be a TV, not a computer

 

[tattoou2]

Well, I didn't try the XPT amp-less, but I believe its impedance is 64 Ohms and its sensitivity is around 100 dB, so you just might be OK without investing in an amp.  Out of your computer and perhaps an Ipod you are probably fine.   I'm a firm believer in trying to get the very best sound possible without expending a lot of money. If I were in your situation, I would buy one of the headphones in which you're interested.  Listen to it for a while and then if you decide on a DAC/amp, keep your eye on the classifieds here.  For example, the Audioquest Dragonfly has really dropped in price, and there are always the E-07 and E-17 offerings from Fiio.  
 
Well, I've listened to quite a few low-fi and mid-fi HP's, and my feeling is that the Chinese XPT  is pretty competitive with the likes of the ATH M50, etc.   Listening is a very subjective exercise and no two people will hear exactly the same nuances of bass, mids, highs, and sound stage.  The brief time I had with the XPT left me impressed, but that was in conjunction with a pretty decent DAC/amp.  Good luck and welcome to Head-Fi.  Your ears will be the final judge.

 

[alphaproject]

The funny thing is.....those HM5 are clones of the $200 Fisher FA-003 Cans. Yet...time and time again people seem to like the Takstar/Gemini clones better...
 
So really...by getting the Gemini HSR 1000 for under $50 how much of a steal are they... it's insane.
 
They blow away my DT 770's. I've heard them sound better than some $500+ headphones.
 
The only drawback to them is the cord and stock pads. I can wear them pretty long...but eventually I get a tad fatigue.
 
I do like the sound of the HM5 pads though simply because they are deeper and that's usually where my issues lie.

 

[cel4145]

The funny thing is.....those HM5 are clones of the $200 Fisher FA-003 Cans. Yet...time and time again people seem to like the Takstar/Gemini clones better...

Do they? That has not been my impression. Seems they both have their fans.

And the HM5s and XPT100s are NOT clones of the FA-003s. There is one company that makes the drivers and cups, and then they are branded for the different names. So not a clone, but the exact same components.

 

[Music Alchemist]

I loved everything about the NVX XPT100...except the sound. Not a fan.
 

And the HM5s and XPT100s are NOT clones of the FA-003s. There is one company that makes the drivers and cups, and then they are branded for the different names. So not a clone, but the exact same components.

 
That's what people mean by clone. XD

 

[cel4145]

That's what people mean by clone. XD

No. That's how a lot of noobs to the hobby misuse the term. By definition, a clone is a copy, a good knockoff. So it's when one company copies another companies product. Some clones are more exact copies than others, and a company might even source some of the same parts. Here's an example of a good clone: http://www.cnet.com/news/are-the-energy-take-classic-and-monoprice-9774-the-same/. Monoprice was eventually stopped from making those due to an injunction from Energy. Now Monoprice has a new clone that's just slightly different so that they aren't violating any patents or design copyrights.

But there's no cloning going on here with this particular headphone. ONE company makes the Brainwavz HM5 and Fisher FA-003, and then they add the branding for the company that wants to sell it. It's the exact same headphone, not a copy, not a clone.

This also happens with IEMs as well. One company makes the IEM in China, and then other companies buy it with their branding put on it. Or consider the Donscorpio Bass Colours which are the same headphone as the Velodyne vPulse 1st generation version. Apparently, Donscorpio was the OEM for Velodyne, and when Velodyne moved to a revised version (likely from a different source), Donscorpio began selling it under their own name. Not a clone because it's the same headphone made by the same manufacturer.

 

[Music Alchemist]

No. That's how a lot of noobs to the hobby misuse the term. By definition, a clone is a copy, a good knockoff. So it's when one company copies another companies product. Some clones are more exact copies than others, and a company might even source some of the same parts. Here's an example of a good clone: http://www.cnet.com/news/are-the-energy-take-classic-and-monoprice-9774-the-same/. Monoprice was eventually stopped from making those due to an injunction from Energy. Now Monoprice has a new clone that's just slightly different so that they aren't violating any patents or design copyrights.

But there's no cloning going on here with this particular headphone. ONE company makes the Brainwavz HM5 and Fisher FA-003, and then they add the branding for the company that wants to sell it. It's the exact same headphone, not a copy, not a clone.

This also happens with IEMs as well. One company makes the IEM in China, and then other companies buy it with their branding put on it. Or consider the Donscorpio Bass Colours which are the same headphone as the Velodyne vPulse 1st generation version. Apparently, Donscorpio was the OEM for Velodyne, and when Velodyne moved to a revised version (likely from a different source), Donscorpio began selling it under their own name. Not a clone because it's the same headphone made by the same manufacturer.

 
Clone as in it uses the same drivers. No one means it is a 100% literal clone. It's just an easy way to refer to the phenomenon, and commonplace in other sectors as well. When something is the same or similar, "clone" is what people often say when talking about it.

 

[cel4145]

Clone as in it uses the same drivers. No one means it is a 100% literal clone. It's just an easy way to refer to the phenomenon, and commonplace in other sectors as well.

That's not what a clone is, and it confuses things. Why muddle the definition of what a clone is just because you didn't understand the definition to begin with? Clones are copies. And that distinction is important because clones are typically not identical. Now, the Takstar HI2050 is a clone of the DT880. It's not made by the same company.It's not identical.

Moreover, the HM5, FA-003, and the Lindy HF-100 are all identical drivers, cups, headband--everything is the same because it's the same headphone made in the same factory. Now the XPT100 is made by the same company but has a different headband. Still not a clone because it's all one manufacturer.

Really, you have said you are in marketing, right? You should be able to understand why this differentiation is important without having someone explain it to you at length. Now that you know the right definition, use it.

 

[Music Alchemist]

That's not what a clone is, and it confuses things. Why muddle the definition of what a clone is just because you didn't understand the definition to begin with? Clones are copies. And that distinction is important because clones are typically not identical. Now, the Takstar HI2050 is a clone of the DT880. It's not made by the same company.It's not identical.

Moreover, the HM5, FA-003, and the Lindy HF-100 are all identical drivers, cups, headband--everything is the same because it's the same headphone made in the same factory. Now the XPT100 is made by the same company but has a different headband. Still not a clone because it's all one manufacturer.

Really, you have said you are in marketing, right? You should be able to understand why this differentiation is important without having someone explain it to you at length. Now that you know the right definition, use it.

 
Two drivers with the same design are by definition copies. Two beings created in a laboratory by the same company are also clones.

 
The main reason they are referred to as clones is because they are marketed by different companies, with slight differences between them as well.
 
Nonetheless, marketers understand that how people normally communicate is what is important -- not always the literal (and only just one of many) definition of a word.

 

[cel4145]

Two drivers with the same design are by definition copies. Two beings created in a laboratory by the same company are also clones. :rolleyes:

So, every copy of the HD598 for sale at the store is a clone by this definition. Epic fail!

 

[Music Alchemist]

So, every copy of the HD598 for sale at the store is a clone by this definition. Epic fail!

 
I never said that. Read my edit to get what I meant.