[betula]

Is the bass as enjoyable on the HP50 and/or the PM3 as it is on the X2? Most of the reviews say bass is not where those headphones excel.

 

[jincuteguy]

 
Let us know about your impressions compared to X2, when the NADs arrive.

What is NADs?

 

[peter123]

What is NADs?

Check five posts back.

 

[sikki-six]

  Quote:
 
Modded or stock D2000? I disliked stock D2000. It has a lot of sub bass, but it's very bloated and intrudes into the higher frequencies. The highs on stock D2000 are too sharp, grainy and a bit steely/metallic. The mids are somewhat recessed and not very natural... I actually preferred my modded HD555s and sold D2000 after a few days of owning them. X2 is far more natural and even sounding than stock D2000. However, I could hear potential in those D2000 drivers, so if modded properly, they could be really good sounding.
 
 
 

 
I own both the X2's and D2000's and I prefer the (stock) Denons. The highs sound much more alive and natural to my ears. X2's have too little treble for me, minus that 10k boost, that is too high to really affect the real meat & potatoes of music (vocals, guitars, snare & kick etc.). Distorted guitars and snare drums can sound dull, lacking crack & crunch. This isn't a problem with the Denons.
 
X2 is far from even sounding, especially in treble, which often sounds a bit off to me. All over, they are very much in the "fun camp" with the D2000's.

 

[Pianist]

  Is the bass as enjoyable on the HP50 and/or the PM3 as it is on the X2? Most of the reviews say bass is not where those headphones excel.

 
I haven't heard PM-3, but HP50 has a satisfying bass - it's tight and slightly elevated above flat. I think the bass quantity on the HP50 is about perfect. Bass quantity is also about perfect on X2, but X2 also has extra warmth in the ~300-900 kHz range and I don't like that - it adds unnecessary "fat" to the sound, warming things up just a bit too much for my liking. It can work well with some music, but doesn't do any favors for vocals and live instruments. It's a nitpick though and that emphasis is really quite slight (under 5 db). HP50 sounds more neutral and natural in the bass and mids IMO and is more accurate with vocals and live instruments. X2 is quite natural, but a bit warmer than than perfectly natural, which is not necessarily bad of course, especially if you like tube coloration. HP50 is also a bit on the warm side, but not as much as X2 and I think the extra warmth of the HP50 makes it sound closer to how good speakers sound in a well treated room. Any less warmth than HP50, and we are getting into "not enough body/too thin" territory IMO, while any extra warmth than HP50, like what X2 has, and we are getting into "too warm/thick" territory. I consider HP50 to be a reference for natural tonal balance in headphones - at least the best I've heard thus far in this regard.
 
Also, HP50 sounds cleaner than X2, less grainy and has less distortion in the sub bass, so I think HP50 sounds a bit tighter in the low end, but it's a close call. Both have roughly similar amount of impact down there. X2 is more technically capable overall - more resolving, more refined, more spacious, dynamic and effortless than HP50. However, I prefer HP50 most of the time for its cleaner, more controlled sound. X2 is technically brilliant for the price, but a bit sloppy sounding and I don't like its extra warmth that makes live instruments and vocals less natural sounding.

 

[shuto77]

Let us know about your impressions compared to X2, when the NADs arrive.

I certainly will!

 

[obsidyen]

  Is the bass as enjoyable on the HP50 and/or the PM3 as it is on the X2? Most of the reviews say bass is not where those headphones excel.

PM-3 bass is different than X2's.
 
X2 bass is mid-bass focused and even though there's some sub-bass, extension is quite poor and bass rolls off pretty quickly.
 
PM-3 has less mid-bass quantity than X2 but bass extends lower, sub-bass extension and slam is better, its bass is also tighter and quicker. I listen to lots of EDM and other electronic, and I would prefer PM-3 for that genre any time. Attack and decay is much quicker and this is very important for EDM. X2 bass feels sluggish in comparison.
 
PM-3 also scales more. I liked it with iDSD Micro but PM-3 bass is much better with Chord Mojo. Mojo is a far superior dac/amp than iDSD Micro. Some say PM-3 is bass-light but I disagree and would doubt anything else they would say. Because they either have problems with their ears or use very low quality dac/amp.

 

[jincuteguy]

 
PM-3 bass is different than X2's.
 
X2 bass is mid-bass focused and even though there's some sub-bass, extension is quite poor and bass rolls off pretty quickly.
 
PM-3 has less mid-bass quantity than X2 but bass extends lower, sub-bass extension and slam is better, its bass is also tighter and quicker. I listen to lots of EDM and other electronic, and I would prefer PM-3 for that genre any time. Attack and decay is much quicker and this is very important for EDM. X2 bass feels sluggish in comparison.
 
PM-3 also scales more. I liked it with iDSD Micro but PM-3 bass is much better with Chord Mojo. Mojo is a far superior dac/amp than iDSD Micro. Some say PM-3 is bass-light but I disagree and would doubt anything else they would say. Because they either have problems with their ears or use very low quality dac/amp.

Isn't X2 is way more bass than the PM-3?  

 

[obsidyen]

  Isn't X2 is way more bass than the PM-3?  

 
X2 has more mid-bass, mid-bass quantity is higher.
PM-3 bass extends lower (more sub-bass), is tighter and quicker. I would say better bass quality.
 
I prefer PM-3 bass but ymmv.

 

[jincuteguy]

   
X2 has more mid-bass, mid-bass quantity is higher.
PM-3 bass extends lower (more sub-bass), is tighter and quicker. I would say better bass quality.
 
I prefer PM-3 bass but ymmv.

You m ean more "mid bass" as in more "boomy"?

 

[betula]

Thanks for the helpful comments @Pianist and @obsidyen!

 

[jamor]

  Is the bass as enjoyable on the HP50 and/or the PM3 as it is on the X2? Most of the reviews say bass is not where those headphones excel.

 
 
X2 will have much wider/3D soundstage since it's open headphone.   PM3 will have smaller soundstage and is a closed headphone.   But if you're that concerned about Bass then there are much better options than the PM3 or the X2.  X2 has slightly boosted bass which is how I like it because most open headphones are very bass neutral.  But neither come close to Basshead phones.   You'd want something like a Fostex. 

 

[obsidyen]

  You m ean more "mid bass" as in more "boomy"?

I wouldn't call X2 bass as boomy, but it's less tighter than PM-3's.

   
 
X2 will have much wider/3D soundstage since it's open headphone.   PM3 will have smaller soundstage and is a closed headphone.   But if you're that concerned about Bass then there are much better options than the PM3 or the X2.  X2 has slightly boosted bass which is how I like it because most open headphones are very bass neutral.  But neither come close to Basshead phones.   You'd want something like a Fostex. 

Then they'd have to give away mids and tolerate sharp highs... Some people like that, but many don't. I would recommend a flatter sound signature with somewhat boosted bass instead of V-shaped headphones. What you gain in bass with those, you lose in other areas.

 

[AKG240]

Absolutely love these headphones. However the volume imbalance has made it very difficult for me to enjoy them.
Debating what to do...

 

[betula]

   
 
X2 will have much wider/3D soundstage since it's open headphone.   PM3 will have smaller soundstage and is a closed headphone.   But if you're that concerned about Bass then there are much better options than the PM3 or the X2.  X2 has slightly boosted bass which is how I like it because most open headphones are very bass neutral.  But neither come close to Basshead phones.   You'd want something like a Fostex. 

Thanks. I know the difference between PM3 and X2, but only from reviews. It is always good to hear some personal experience from fellow head-fiers.
I like X2 for the same reason.