[communic]

   
Bass lovers do not particularly enjoy huge midbass humps. Especially for hip hop, you need, and I mean NEED, the sub-bass to be potent. Hip hop basslines are in the 45Hz and below region, with quite a heavy amount of bass-heavy trap/drill rap sitting down around 30Hz (and I have several tracks in my collection that go into the 20s). I really don't know who could possibly enjoy that big midbass boost. 

 
A midbass hump of some sorts for that warmth is definitely preferred for hip-hop if going by anecdotal evidence. It would be to sterile otherwise. Hard rap is a different story.

   
My first thought was also broken headphone but after asking around on internet the X1 is said to be a dark and not that clear headphone. There was users that said that my reaction to X1 sounded correct based on coming from bright headphones. The X1 I got was brand new and a faultet headphone that just did not played as clear seems a bit farfetched, its a lot bigger risk that a element is faulted or somthing more obvious like that. 
 
Yes the HD598 is not a vary clear headphone, not compare to the DT880 or the DT990 but one of the top ranges(mid or trebel) did bring a bit more clearnes then the X1 did. The X1 seemed more "balanced" in mid and trebel (same muffled setting).

 
Coming from a bright headphone is one thing. A direct compare to the 598 is another.
 
While I didn't have the benefit of a direct compare I can say that they were definitely 'muddier' than the X1's. I wouldn't have sold them so shortly after purchase if they weren't. They definitely had a large hump which encroached not only the midrange but lower bass as well making it impossible to analyse heavily layered basslines.
 
The  X1's didn't exhibit this flaw though didn't possess the prominent midrange the 598's had (which didn't bother me as vocals could get a bit 'hot' at times). Could it be this that bothers you as someone who may prefer brighter cans?
 
Rhetorical question in any case as it is clear we are definitely not hearing things the same way!

 

[Head1]

 
 
You are right, I can´t know how the artist heard it. BUT If I listen to songs from diffrent artists and compares them with diffrent speakers/headphones I would get a feel of how the products are coloring the sound. From what I read "real" artists try to use as natural headphones as possible when mixing for example DT880. When a headphone destroys the track with to much bass without even touching the EQ I can be quite sure that this is probably not what the artist intended. Besides its nothing I would like to listen on. The Philips L2 is a good example of a headphone that colors the sound alot in the bass range.

 
I think you're better off staying away from the fidelios. Don't worry about earpads and what not, they won't help if the headphones already destroy the sound (for you). Sounds like the DT880 is the one for you.

 

[Jimmy80]

   
A midbass hump of some sorts for that warmth is definitely preferred for hip-hop if going by anecdotal evidence. It would be to sterile otherwise. Hard rap is a different story.
 
Coming from a bright headphone is one thing. A direct compare to the 598 is another.
 
While I didn't have the benefit of a direct compare I can say that they were definitely 'muddier' than the X1's. I wouldn't have sold them so shortly after purchase if they weren't. They definitely had a large hump which encroached not only the midrange but lower bass as well making it impossible to analyse heavily layered basslines.
 
The  X1's didn't exhibit this flaw though didn't possess the prominent midrange the 598's had (which didn't bother me as vocals could get a bit 'hot' at times). Could it be this that bothers you as someone who may prefer brighter cans?
 
Rhetorical question in any case as it is clear we are definitely not hearing things the same way!

I can agree on that the lower range was "muddier" then the X1 but it hade something in the upper range that made that part(vocals) a bit clearar.
 
For me the X1 is equality "moddy" in mid and high range.
 
But as usally, it is probably a taste thing, we was however 2 at the side by side test and our conclusion was almost the same but it looks like we like the same type of characteristics of sound.

 

[Jimmy80]

   
I think you're better off staying away from the fidelios. Don't worry about earpads and what not, they won't help if the headphones already destroy the sound (for you). Sounds like the DT880 is the one for you.

As I said before, if the X2 would get a step up in clearnes I would be interested, its after all a high qulity build.
 
I supose I could get a more clear sound with EQ but right now its just to much to solve with EQ for ME.

 

[Head1]

  As I said before, if the X2 would get a step up in clearnes I would be interested, its after all a high qulity build.
 

But that would have to be a big step up since there is obviously something that offends you in the current fidelios. Tyll says the X2 sounds a bit better than the X1 but in all likelihood it will still be open headphone with bass emphasis.
 
Quote:

 
I supose I could get a more clear sound with EQ but right now its just to much to solve with EQ for ME.
 

Well, that was my point. Ignore the fidelios and choose a different headphone closer to your preference and then EQ if needed. Doesn't the DT880 have excellent build quality? Follow your own ears, not the herd.

 

[maricius]

Have you guys seen this? 
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/important-reading-headphone-measurement-and-diy-geeks 
 
"It's come to my attention over the last week or so as I've been working on my review of the Philips Fidelio X2 that my understanding of headphone measurements is severely lacking. For example, I had been making the assumption that that when we find the right target curve for headphones, it would have some sort of elegant beauty, and that it would be broadly applicable. 
 
And then I got the X2. 
 
This is a very good headphone as I'll soon report, but to my layman's eyes (a fairly sophisticated layman, but still not a headphone engineer) the measurements of the X2 looked worse than the X1. And yet, when I listen, the X2 is clearly superior. I spent some time exchanging emails with one of Philips' headphone engineers, and have come to the conclusion that the issues we're dealing with here are just horrifyingly complex. Headphones are way more complicated than speakers in terms of the acoustic problems that need to be addressed."
 
*edit* My bad. I didn't see Tyll's post while skimming the past few pages!!

 

[Bulldog]

Hi Tyll,
Do you feel the treble of the X2 is much improved, compared to the X1?
In your reveiw of the X1 on Innerfidelity your remark was that the treble is a bit gritty sounding, a bit unnatural. Last year I was able to own an X1 for a short period and I had the same conclusion. For me it was the BIG put off. I own a Beyerdynamic DT880 which has an extremely good treble and the difference was too big for me. But a X2 with good treble could be very interesting.

 

[Jimmy80]

 
Hi Tyll,
Do you feel the treble of the X2 is much improved, compared to the X1?
In your reveiw of the X1 on innerfidelity your remark was that the treble is a bit gritty sounding, a bit unnatural. Last year I was able to own an X1 for a short period and I had the same conclusion. For me it was the BIG put off. I own a Beyerdynamic DT880 which has an extremely good treble and the difference was too big for me. But a X2 with good treble could be very interesting.

This sounds a bit like my problem with X1 but while im a noob Im not that good at explainning.

 

[Head1]

 
 
This is a very good headphone as I'll soon report, but to my layman's eyes (a fairly sophisticated layman, but still not a headphone engineer) the measurements of the X2 looked worse than the X1. And yet, when I listen, the X2 is clearly superior. I spent some time exchanging emails with one of Philips' headphone engineers, and have come to the conclusion that the issues we're dealing with here are just horrifyingly complex. Headphones are way more complicated than speakers in terms of the acoustic problems that need to be addressed."
 

 
It makes me wonder how companies tune the sound to arrive at the final product. It probably involves a mixture of measurements and listening. But what if the graphs look bad and they sound good do they reject it? Or vice versa, do they accept it?

 

[CoiL]

 

 
Hi Tyll,
Do you feel the treble of the X2 is much improved, compared to the X1?
In your reveiw of the X1 on innerfidelity your remark was that the treble is a bit gritty sounding, a bit unnatural. Last year I was able to own an X1 for a short period and I had the same conclusion. For me it was the BIG put off. I own a Beyerdynamic DT880 which has an extremely good treble and the difference was too big for me. But a X2 with good treble could be very interesting.

This sounds a bit like my problem with X1 but while im a noob Im not that good at explainning.

Seriously, get a proper good matching amp for X1 and Your "muddy" & treble problem goes away. Like I have told many times already, X1 need better cable (not all good low-impedance cables seem to fit well btw) and good matching amp/dac to sound great. 
 

Most users will probably just conect the headphones to a smartphone, computer or a receiver.

Sorry but this is head-fi and probably its mostly opposite - ppl here use standalone DACs and AMPs. Imho Samsung S3 and a Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi 5.1 soundcard are not adequate enough to draw "final" conclusion that X1 is muffled/muddy etc.
 
Oh, sorry, this is X2 thread. Won`t comment about X1 anymore.

 

[Jimmy80]

  Seriously, get a proper good matching amp for X1 and Your "muddy" & treble problem goes away. Like I have told many times already, X1 need better cable (not all good low-impedance cables seem to fit well btw) and good matching amp/dac to sound great. 
 
Sorry but this is head-fi and probably its mostly opposite - ppl here use standalone DACs and AMPs. Imho Samsung S3 and a Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi 5.1 soundcard are not adequate enough to draw "final" conclusion that X1 is muffled/muddy etc.
 
Oh, sorry, this is X2 thread. Won`t comment about X1 anymore.

 
Pleas, dont rage, I thought you was a pro!?
 
We have tested the X1 with hardware for about $65-$1300(External soundcard, Smartphone, Computer amp, 2 diffrent computers and a high-end receiver) price range and compared it side by side to about 4-5 other headphone and X1 was far from the best(I would say at the bottom). I can accept that its all about taste but to say that its the hardware is just ridiculous. Wounder what Philips would say if I asked them if my $1300 receiver is enouth to get X1 performing (X1 is considered to be a in the home headphone right?)? And wounder how the other headphones would performe on a better or specialized hardware? worse?
 
About the cable, from what I read the sound will only be sligtly brighter. It needs alot more to compete acording to us.
 
Yes we are on a head-fi forum but that does not mean that I have to buy a special amp to all my headphones, if the headphone is not complatible with the mainstream(but yet hi-end) equipment then it´s not woth alot of points to me. If I would recommend a headphone to non hi-fi neerd friends I would avoid headphones that needed special amps for sure, I would not say that X1 is one of them.

 

[grizzlybeast]

^ the x1 is only a little scalable. Also when ppl are calling it muddy they are calling it muddy in comparison to other headphones they believe to offer more clarity. So if they compared the same two headphones on higher end gear they are would get the same results with hp A being clearer than headphone B.

No need to defend the x1 so intensely. Ppl are here because they appreciate much about the x1 and hope the x2 is an improvement.

Cheers

~ Grizz

 

[mandrake50]

That's a really odd track considering the only sub-bass in it is that wobble effect that shows up twice and in both cases it doesn't really... do much.

You want to see what a headphone has for sub-bass, even if you don't really like rap, this is a track that will let you know how much deep extension it has: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfqXw3Op_i0 That bassline dances deep and should have some POWER to it. 

Thanks.. and to s0ckpupp3t.
I will definitely check those suggestions out!

 

[ozyx]

  Seriously, get a proper good matching amp for X1 and Your "muddy" & treble problem goes away. Like I have told many times already, X1 need better cable (not all good low-impedance cables seem to fit well btw) and good matching amp/dac to sound great.

 
I was planning to buy an X1 or X2 but if what you say is true I would reconsider.
 
I understand that most good headphones can benefit from a good amp/dac, but to say that the X1 needs such equipment more than other headphones in its category is an issue to me.
 
Changing the cable on the other hand is an easy fix, and the X2 shouldn't have this problem to begin with. Could the cable alone be responsible for Jimmy's negative experience?

 

[Funambulistic]

   
I was planning to buy an X1 or X2 but if what you say is true I would reconsider.
 
I understand that most good headphones can benefit from a good amp/dac, but to say that the X1 needs such equipment more than other headphones in its category is an issue to me.
 
Changing the cable on the other hand is an easy fix, and the X2 shouldn't have this problem to begin with. Could the cable alone be responsible for Jimmy's negative experience?

I run my X1 out of either an HRT microStreamer, NuForce uDac-2 or the HP out of my integrated amp - all three sound awesome. I switched out cables and actually prefer stock. I do not believe the X1 needs "such equipment more" than any of my other headphones - it is pretty easy to drive, though I would suggest avoiding cell phones, etc. Now, as with any mid to high end headphone, the better the source...