[skyles]

if your into hip hop go for the px-200, they are the best headphones i've come across for an ultra portable application under $150, i suppose they would work just as well for rock and/or pop music.

 

[Duncan]

Quote:

Originally posted by adhoc people, could we define boominess? i get this feeling we're all looking at it differently because we're not even looking at the same thing.

Okay... the boominess on the PX200s for me was an excess of midbass that was just too prominent to be heatlhy...

....The KSC35s are classed as bassy, but it is, in direct comparison - very well controlled and maintained... there is nothing at all about the PX200 bass that excited me, except for on rock tracks where bass is one of the more important parts of the mix...

...on gentler music, the bass overpowered everything, making it a fatuiging listen...

The PX100s on the other hand, the bass goes low, but without the apparent mid-bass hump... much more KSC35 sounding

I'm sorely tempted to pick up a pair of PX100s, but never again a pair of PX200s

 

[Jasper994]

That's funny I have a very different opinion than Duncan. In my opinion, the px200's have very tight bass when compared to the px100's... and the PX100's seem to over emphasize the bass, especially mid-bass.

-EDIT-

Not that this is necessarily bad though, I really like them for watching movies when it's hot and I don't want big circumaural headphones on.

-EDIT 2-

I've been listening to PX100's for an hour now (haven't really listened to them in about a week). I have to say, they also have a warmth to them that is very nice. the PX200's don't have this warmth.

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

Originally posted by Jasper994 That's funny I have a very different opinion than Duncan. In my opinion, the px200's have very tight bass when compared to the px100's... and the PX100's seem to over emphasize the bass, especially mid-bass.

This is exactly my impression, as well, having listened to several different PX 100s and PX 200s. Even HeadRoom has mentioned the more prominent bass in of the PX 100 compared to the PX 200.

Maybe the UK PX 200 is different from the US model? I just can't imagine the PX 200 being "boomy" or having prominent midbass -- with a good seal they're extremely flat and neutral, far moreso than the PX 100, and without a good seal they sound thin!

 

[bassballboy]

Man, reading this has me really confused, I'm looking for a pair of headphones to use with my laptop, and I was basically decided on using the 200's, but now I'm not sure...

I listen to rap mostly, and I do like bass, but I dont want it to make it so I can't hear the words. Which should I go with?

 

[lini]

bassballboy: The sonic impressions indeed seem to vary quite a bit, especially for the PX200. I guess, the small earcups make the results very dependant from individual fit and earform. For myself (I also own both...), the PX100 does better, although it's still quite a bit away from proper full-size sound. Wheras the PX200 sounds rather wimpy and too pronounced in the upper midrange for my ears. Nevertheless, if you need isolation, you'd have to try your luck with the PX200, anyway, or look for something else...

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini

 

[Jasper994]

Try and find the PX 200's somewhere with a good return policy, take them straight home and burn them in really good for about 2 days. I'd recommend having them up pretty loud with bassy music on the second day. At the end of the second day, try them and see what you think. If you don't like them, return them.

 

[fureshi]

There has been some talk that the PX200 are very finicky with placement on the ears. For those that didn't like the sound of the PX200, did adjusting the placement improve the sound any? Does the PX100 have any issues with placement on the ears?

 

[Jasper994]

Quote:

Originally posted by fureshi There has been some talk that the PX200 are very finicky with placement on the ears. For those that didn't like the sound of the PX200, did adjusting the placement improve the sound any? Does the PX100 have any issues with placement on the ears?

As far as the PX 200's go, how they are adjusted makes a huge difference in the amount of bass. The reason I didn't initially like them though had more to do with the fact that they seem to require heavier burn in than I'm used to. I almost returned them but as a last resort I tried cranking them up to nearly earsplitting levels and leaving them for a few hours (I had already done a normal burn in period of at least 48 hours). When I came back to them they had truely come alive, the mids became less prominate and the bass woke up. Once this happened I was able to figure out the correct fit for my head/ears to get a good seal and decent bass. The source they are connected to also plays a huge roll in the amount of bass that they put out.

The PX 100's don't have any issues with placement but have zero isolation.

 

[DLP]

I now have both headphones as well, and I'd thought I'd say I agree more with MacDEF and Jasper994 on this. The only thing I'd throw in is the amount of bass with the PX100 has me sometimes straining to hear any vocals in hip hop and some rock. That's with my portables with no bass boost on.

EDIT
Quote:

Originally posted by Jasper994 Try and find the PX 200's somewhere with a good return policy, take them straight home and burn them in really good for about 2 days. I'd recommend having them up pretty loud with bassy music on the second day. At the end of the second day, try them and see what you think. If you don't like them, return them.

Headroom. Not the best price on the net, but with a 30 day satisfaction guarantee, I'd say the $10 difference is worth it.

 

[iGig]

A little cheaper here:

$35

I had the same predicament when I started lurking here.
So many people said the px100 was better. ( I dont know)
But I chose the px200 to block some noise at the gym.
So far so good, and today they sound better than yesterday !

 

[markl]

OK, so I'm leaning toward the PX200 (with the sales going on, can't resist). I will be using this with my Walkman for running.

Questions:

1. Did I read correctly that the PX100 and 200 have *different* earpads? Which are preferable and why? Or are they the same? Can one purchase replacement earpads? How grungy do they get with workout use?

2. Do they keep a good grip on your head, or are they prone to jostle? Is one worse than the other in this regard?

3. I'm not a big fan of the Sennheiser house sound. which headphone is preferable for folks who prefer the CD3000 type sound over the HD600 type sound?

Thanks.

Mark

 

[Duncan]

Mark...

I can only answer question 1 and 2 for you...

The PX100s have foam / flat pads, whereas the PX200s have leatherette outer pads, much the same as a baby version of the CD3000s

In terms of fit, this probably depends a lot on head size, but their headband adjustment is very accurate, and once clicked into place (several clicks on each side) I personally find it hard to dislodge them - whether this is efficient for running - not quite sure, but - there is no fear of dislodging them walking around

as to number 3... I can say that to me, the PXs are much more punchy than the standard 'HD600' sound, as to whether its more like a CD3000 - someone else will have to take the reigns

Cheers!

 

[markl]

Thanks, Duncan. Can anyone else chime in? Thanks.

 

[erikzen]

I can only comment on the fit. The fit is quite good on the PX200s. Very firm. I would think it would be no problem jogging.

I haven't heard any other Sennheiser headphones but I don't find the sound vieled at all. The PX200 has a great midrange sound that works very well with rock, especially guitars and male vocals.