[Airstripone]

Great review. I personally don't like the way of both male and female vocals that K550 plays, especially listened to it after took off my HE500. But I can listen to K550 like 5 to 6 hours without feel any discomfort. It's a great designed, slightly toned headphone.

 

[MoSXS]

Well, it's been many months since I even posted on this forum. My A900X has gotten a lot of use in that time. "A lot" is an understatement.
 
In the last several months the way the headphones fit and feel has changed dramatically. Out of the box they are a bit on the stiff side and not very comfortable. But now, after almost a year of heavy use, I barely feel anything when I put them on. They go from being stiff and pushing down to.. well, I can only really describe it as floating on your head. They're incredibly comfortable now. The earpads are soft and block out a significant amount of noise. There really isn't any words to describe how comfortable they are.
 
The sound quality has improved drastically as well. Describing the difference as night and day when discussing how they sound versus out of the box and even in the first 100 hours is an understatement.
 
Now that the A900X is so cheap, they're definitely some of the best headphones money can buy.
 

 

[Digital DJ]

Quote:

Well, it's been many months since I even posted on this forum. My A900X has gotten a lot of use in that time. "A lot" is an understatement.
 
In the last several months the way the headphones fit and feel has changed dramatically. Out of the box they are a bit on the stiff side and not very comfortable. But now, after almost a year of heavy use, I barely feel anything when I put them on. They go from being stiff and pushing down to.. well, I can only really describe it as floating on your head. They're incredibly comfortable now. The earpads are soft and block out a significant amount of noise. There really isn't any words to describe how comfortable they are.
 
The sound quality has improved drastically as well. Describing the difference as night and day when discussing how they sound versus out of the box and even in the first 100 hours is an understatement.
 
Now that the A900X is so cheap, they're definitely some of the best headphones money can buy.
 

I'm actually gonna buy my first pair this Friday. I'm very eager to experience the sound of these cans.

 

[3ternalDr4gon]

Quote:

This comparison strikes me as biased.

Yeah, reviews like this make me wonder if companies pay people to write up reviews on forums to help sales versus their competitors or something. I'm finding a hard time trusting any review I read from here ever since I read this review. I understand it's unfair for a new poster like me to criticize someone for their elaborate review that they clearly worked hard on, but I own both headphones, and certain aspects of this review objectively seem like they're FOS imho.
 
In the "Battle of the Flagships", David Mahler gave the AD900 an A+ in value (1 of 5 headphones that have been given such a grade) at the price of $270. The A900X is simply the closed version with an extension in bass. As far as I have read, everyone seems to agree that the "X" series is a clear upgrade from the regular series. The HIGHEST price on eBay for the A900X is $310, but most prices range from $150 - $200 (however you can still find them for lower prices). But even if someone may prefer the AD900 over the A900X, you go from an A+ in value at perhaps a B at the lowest.
 
This review makes the A900X seem like a waste of time when compared to the K550 that is priced from $200 - $250. To imply that the A900X isn't even worthy of being in the same discussion as the K550 is appalling and I take great offense to it, even though we are all entitled to our on opinion in this subjective hobby we have all decided to take up. I truly feel sorry for the people that went with the K550's because of this review, even though they are most likely still pleased with their purchase.
 
I understand that I'm setting a double standard by saying I'm skeptical of all reviews but then making references to David Mahler's review, but it does provide a decent reference as to how flawed this review is, even though it is arguably impossible for someone to make a flawed review on their opinion. I also understand that we all hear things differently, but damn, you've got to be kidding me.
 
Perhaps part of MY bias is that I'm sensitive to brightness and I find the K550 piercingly bright, but there are so many other aspects of the A900X that make it my preferred can in regards to SQ over the K550, such as bass presence, instrument separation, and better defined mids. Even now, I'm currently using my K550's + Fiio E07K with trebble at -6, and I would still prefer the A900X unamped 

 

[Digital DJ]

Quote:

Yeah, reviews like this make me wonder if companies pay people to write up reviews on forums to help sales versus their competitors or something. I'm finding a hard time trusting any review I read from here ever since I read this review. I understand it's unfair for a new poster like me to criticize someone for their elaborate review that they clearly worked hard on, but I own both headphones, and certain aspects of this review objectively seem like they're FOS imho.
 
In the "Battle of the Flagships", David Mahler gave the AD900 an A+ in value (1 of 5 headphones that have been given such a grade) at the price of $270. The A900X is simply the closed version with an extension in bass. As far as I have read, everyone seems to agree that the "X" series is a clear upgrade from the regular series. The HIGHEST price on eBay for the A900X is $310, but most prices range from $150 - $200 (however you can still find them for lower prices). But even if someone may prefer the AD900 over the A900X, you go from an A+ in value at perhaps a B at the lowest.
 
This review makes the A900X seem like a waste of time when compared to the K550 that is priced from $200 - $250. To imply that the A900X isn't even worthy of being in the same discussion as the K550 is appalling and I take great offense to it, even though we are all entitled to our on opinion in this subjective hobby we have all decided to take up. I truly feel sorry for the people that went with the K550's because of this review, even though they are most likely still pleased with their purchase.
 
I understand that I'm setting a double standard by saying I'm skeptical of all reviews but then making references to David Mahler's review, but it does provide a decent reference as to how flawed this review is, even though it is arguably impossible for someone to make a flawed review on their opinion. I also understand that we all hear things differently, but damn, you've got to be kidding me.
 
Perhaps part of MY bias is that I'm sensitive to brightness and I find the K550 piercingly bright, but there are so many other aspects of the A900X that make it my preferred can in regards to SQ over the K550, such as bass presence, instrument separation, and better defined mids. Even now, I'm currently using my K550's + Fiio E07K with trebble at -6, and I would still prefer the A900X unamped 

Excellent point. And not only that, but what is the point of doing a comparison review if you're just going to give "all" the merits to the K550? I do a lot of reviews and comparisons on video games on Gamespot.com, and when I do, I compare games that have both strengths and weaknesses. But this review/comparison is totally biased in nature because he didn't give the A900X a fair comparison in respect and mind set. The way this article is, he "should" have titled it "Why I like the K550 more than A900X", and that would have been totally acceptable seeing as how he gives all the merits to the K550 as mentioned. There's really no point in doing a comparison review if you're just going to give all the accolades to one product.
 
I'm not saying that it's not okay to like one headphone over the other so much, but the nature of this review/comparison isn't the least bit fair, not to mention professional... I don't mean to hack on the individual who made this article, I just wish that some people knew how to properly write comparisons. Writing a comparison article with the premeditated intentions of giving all the scores to the K550 was a mistake, it naturally comes off as a biased opinion. That's why published articles of comparisons in magazines try their best not to do this, accusations of a biased opinion can go a long way in the publishing world...

Regardless. Nobody is perfect, and even I've mad dodgy articles before. But please be aware that the A900X is the 3rd from the best headphones that Audio Technica makes, these headphones are located in the "Audiophile" section of their website. Considering how high Audio Technica holds these cans, I'm here to reassure everyone that the ATH-A900X's are a very high end product in the line of Audio Technica headphones. And is a worthy contender to ANY sealed/closed headphone on the market.


 

 

[gelocks]

Quote:

I'm finding a hard time trusting any review I read from here ever since I read this review...
 
This review makes the A900X seem like a waste of time when compared to the K550 that is priced from $200 - $250. To imply that the A900X isn't even worthy of being in the same discussion as the K550 is appalling and I take great offense to it, even though we are all entitled to our on opinion in this subjective hobby we have all decided to take up...
 
I also understand that we all hear things differently, but damn, you've got to be kidding me.
 
Perhaps part of MY bias is that I'm sensitive to brightness and I find the K550 piercingly bright...

 
Well, you can't just read 1 review you know?
Also, you would need to look into the reviewers biases or preferences and see if they are "synced" to yours. There's a bunch of reviews of both cans here and you can see that most definitely agree that the A900x just sounds better. Still, you can't battle out the OPs preferences. I was a bit skeptical myself (I had posted here before... probably the initial pages...) and wanted to try the AKGs, in the end... meh... found more reviews of posters I trust (their tastes/sound signature are similar to mine, etc.) and I opted out.
 
LOL (bold above made me chuckle!)
 
And, there you go... you said it, YOUR bias automatically takes the AKG out of the equation... the OP probably didn't mind (or just didn't hear the same inconsistencies/flaws like you did).
 
Anyway, my next Audio Technica set will probably be the W1000X or W3000Ann just to get a feel for them and their mid-centric goodness
 
Bye.

 

[wangdiddy82]

I think the a900x sounds better when it comes to video games. I had both for about 2 weeks and ended up returning the akg 550s. Build and comfort the 550s win for sure but im starting to get use to the a900x.
 
The bass and sound stage just seem better on the a900x.

 

[Makiah S]

Quote:

 
Well, you can't just read 1 review you know?
Also, you would need to look into the reviewers biases or preferences and see if they are "synced" to yours. There's a bunch of reviews of both cans here and you can see that most definitely agree that the A900x just sounds better. Still, you can't battle out the OPs preferences. I was a bit skeptical myself (I had posted here before... probably the initial pages...) and wanted to try the AKGs, in the end... meh... found more reviews of posters I trust (their tastes/sound signature are similar to mine, etc.) and I opted out.
 
LOL (bold above made me chuckle!)
 
And, there you go... you said it, YOUR bias automatically takes the AKG out of the equation... the OP probably didn't mind (or just didn't hear the same inconsistencies/flaws like you did).
 
Anyway, my next Audio Technica set will probably be the W1000X or W3000Ann just to get a feel for them and their mid-centric goodness
 
Bye.

Actually I own the w1000x, but mins has been modded to high hell an back. Non the less in about 4-5 days I will be reviewsing the K550 [thanks to a head fi'r for a loan won't say who] and a ATH a900x that I purchased. I paird $93 for a USED Ath A 900x, the K550 still runs about $170+ Yea that K550 is about twice as much as the ATH A900x, that being said price aside I will listen to both of them. But at the end of the day the cheaper ATH A900x will stay with me
 
I'm also going to try the comfoy w1000x Stock pads with em! [my W1000x has L3000 pads ^^] 

 

[gelocks]

Quote:

Actually I own the w1000x, but mins has been modded to high hell an back. Non the less in about 4-5 days I will be reviewsing the K550 [thanks to a head fi'r for a loan won't say who] and a ATH a900x that I purchased. I paird $93 for a USED Ath A 900x, the K550 still runs about $170+ Yea that K550 is about twice as much as the ATH A900x, that being said price aside I will listen to both of them. But at the end of the day the cheaper ATH A900x will stay with me
 
I'm also going to try the comfoy w1000x Stock pads with em! [my W1000x has L3000 pads ^^] 

 
Excellent!
I'll be sure to read your thoughts!

 

[Mani ATH 87]

I can wear my A900X for hours without even noticing they are there. I think I'm in the minority with this, I just find the A900X extremely comfortable. Probably the most comfortable headphones I've ever worn...the pleather ear pads need to be replaced, but the fit for me is flawless.

It's unfortunate so many people have issues with the comfort, because they are good sounding headphones for the price.

I didn't really like the k550's myself, I like the k702's A LOT though.

 

[Makiah S]

I can wear my A900X for hours without even noticing they are there. I think I'm in the minority with this, I just find the A900X extremely comfortable. Probably the most comfortable headphones I've ever worn...the pleather ear pads need to be replaced, but the fit for me is flawless.


It's unfortunate so many people have issues with the comfort, because they are good sounding headphones for the price.


I didn't really like the k550's myself, I like the k702's A LOT though.

thank gawd u i own the W1000 as they allowed me to master the fit. although i dont mind rubber banding the wings on this if need b. i am buyin the a1000 pads. n ill review these with stock n my w1000 stock pads. although the w pads r bassy... not what im wanting i think

 

[Makiah S]

Quote:

thank gawd u i own the W1000 as they allowed me to master the fit. although i dont mind rubber banding the wings on this if need b. i am buyin the a1000 pads. n ill review these with stock n my w1000 stock pads. although the w pads r bassy... not what im wanting i think

Bad news... the Akg K550 are in [got them for a total of $164 at days end]
 
And wow... it's just what I wanted from a closed can. Delicate yet punchy mid warmth, TIGHT bass and nice highs. I will say how ever... treble is not as bright as I like. It is indeed very neutral and very smooth, how ever I like a little sharp bright treble <3 
 
But the bass destroys the w1000x, it's SO much tighter.
 
However I am happy to say I will have a used ATH a900x for sale for $100 dollars here on head fi! That's RIGHT the refurbished price, for a Used [WITH box] can ^^
 
I highly doubt the Ath a900x will beat the Akg K550 for my portable set up, as while I really LOVE the Audio Technica sound, I have a w1000x for that, and trust me the w1000x whoops the Akg K550 [except in bass] and honestly the lack of wood on the Ath a900x means it won't have the mysticly smooth and punchy woody mids of the w1000x. But, not to mention I wanted the A1000 Pads to tighten up the bass [which wouldn't even be as tight as the K550 with those pads] 
 
Still I have YET to hear them, with only my w1000x as a refrance for how a lower end Ath Can might sound. Ofc if I did not have a w1000x, I might have kept both Ath Cans, and sadly... the K550 fits and seals on my head SO MUCH easier than the w1000x. So for portable use I can TOTALLY slap the K550's on, where as the Wing System will not be as easy. Not to mention the isolation on the K550
 
Still, the Ath a900x should b here soon! When it hits I'll let you guys know exactly how they stack up , and worse comes to worse, some one will own a SUPER cheap USED Ath a900x! And my blog will have another beautiful can reviewed on it  

 

[Citizen13469]

Wow we must hear things very differently. I've had the 550,551 and 545 for the past couple of months and just got the a900x. The sound stage on the a900x is much wider and 3 dimensional than all of the AKG's I've had. In my case my favorite of the 3 AKG's was the 551 which I like a LOT. Having said that, the a900x is better in almost all ways. Mids are more natural highs less sibilant, sound stage a lot nicer. I'd say the a900x lose on bass though.
 
I do agree on build that the AKG feels more up market but comfort wise I'd put the a900x slightly ahead.
 
If anyone is interested in either of these headphones they should buy both and live with them for some time to see what they like. The AKG's lost detail and blurred instruments together on music with busy passages. The a900x maintain their instrument separation much better on busy passages.
 
It's much easier to hear reverb and digital delay reflections on the a900x than the AKG's to my ears. If I concentrate REALLY hard with the AKG's I can hear things that just jump out on the a900x's. Basically I can hear much deeper into the mix with the a900x than the AKG's. Maybe I just got a well built a900x or I got 3 AKG duds, but I'd say that having 3 AKG's that didn't hold up to the a900x I think that's pretty much what they AKG's sound like.
 
I don't mean this to sound totally negative on the AKG's. I like them a lot. I may still keep the 551 in my stable, however the a900x just beats it to my ears.

 

[Shaffer]

Wow we must hear things very differently. I've had the 550,551 and 545 for the past couple of months and just got the a900x. The sound stage on the a900x is much wider and 3 dimensional than all of the AKG's I've had. In my case my favorite of the 3 AKG's was the 551 which I like a LOT. Having said that, the a900x is better in almost all ways. Mids are more natural highs less sibilant, sound stage a lot nicer. I'd say the a900x lose on bass though.

I do agree on build that the AKG feels more up market but comfort wise I'd put the a900x slightly ahead.

If anyone is interested in either of these headphones they should buy both and live with them for some time to see what they like. The AKG's lost detail and blurred instruments together on music with busy passages. The a900x maintain their instrument separation much better on busy passages.

It's much easier to hear reverb and digital delay reflections on the a900x than the AKG's to my ears. If I concentrate REALLY hard with the AKG's I can hear things that just jump out on the a900x's. Basically I can hear much deeper into the mix with the a900x than the AKG's. Maybe I just got a well built a900x or I got 3 AKG duds, but I'd say that having 3 AKG's that didn't hold up to the a900x I think that's pretty much what they AKG's sound like.

I don't mean this to sound totally negative on the AKG's. I like them a lot. I may still keep the 551 in my stable, however the a900x just beats it to my ears.

Agree completely. I own both the K550 and A900x. Admittedly, the K550 is the worst sounding can I own, but it is pretty. The A900x is used almost daily to listen to music.