[jamesjames]

Yes, looking again at my earlier post, I think I probably I got a little carried away with the attractions of the MA900. I do agree with some comments I've seen to the effect that it doesn't seem to scale really. And I agree there are better phones - the T1 and ADX5000 are better, as are the MySphere and HD800S - and detail is part of the reason. But it's still unusually good I think, and genuinely enjoyable - and a real bargain these days - particularly when it offers so much quality from even the most basic sources.

I've been listening again to these phones and felt I needed to revisit this post. I'm not at all sure now that I was too positive about them. I think they are spectacularly good for classical music - and in my view do indeed compete with the Sennheisers and the Beyers and the other phones I've mentioned. I might actually prefer the Sony to all of them! They have a lovely balance of weight and detail that in my experience is very rare. And the imaging is first class. Obviously, personal preference plays a major role - but I can't recommend them strongly enough to anyone who listens to classical music. They are still available used so far as I can see - at hundreds rather than thousands of dollars.

 

[Saberpunch]

The MA900 is not just good with classical, they are amazing with Jazz music as well. Listening to the “Jazz At The Pawnshop” album, the MA900 does a great job delivering each musician and audience placement in the cafe making it more immersive when listening to this album. I highly suggest giving this album a listen with the MA900 even if you are not a fan of jazz

http://open.qobuz.com/album/7392004677788

 

[CaptainFantastic]

That's a lovely photo.

I received mine just yesterday and starting to enjoy it. But I have a problem with the headphone extension mechanism. Although the headphone is in excellent condition, the left side keeps retracting by itself whenever I take it off or even before I manage to put it on. Is this a known issue with the MA900? The right side seems to stay in place better, not perfect, but better.

 

[Saberpunch]

I never had that issue and I had my MA900 since January this year (I think I am the 2nd owner). That sounds annoying, hopefully you can get that issue resolve because the main selling point of this headphone is comfort and ease of carrying for me. It’s a very comfortable headphone and it’s easy to take around with me thanks to its lightweight structure and little bag it comes with.

 

[jamesjames]

I've posted here to the effect that these are great phones - among the best out there I think for classical music. I've recently thought that a very big part of their appeal for me is that the presentation is remarkably like loudspeakers (ie, 'real') - particularly when used in combination with crossfeed. I can't think of any other phones which better them in this regard. Even the HD800S sometimes seems to present in a more artificial, headphone-like way. There are however some consequences, I think. The presentation is less immediate than many other phones - even the HD800S which is often cited for its 'distant' perspective. And the higher frequencies in particular are somewhat softened - lacking something of the presence and refinement generally found in phones tuned to the diffuse-field reference (which I generally prefer). But I'm now inclined to think these characteristics may sometimes feel more 'natural' in mirroring the experience at a concert or recital - where instruments on the whole can seem quite 'warm' in comparison to modern recordings through phones like the HD800S. The presentation is decidedly more veiled than some phones, but I think this may be part of the remarkably convincing imaging. On the other hand, there is good detail - once again reminding me of a live performance. The differences between period and modern instruments, for example, remain obvious and striking. At the end of the day, I find the remarkable image of instruments in space which these phones create to be surprisingly convincing, with all the perspective and lack of hype this implies. I guess a final thought here is that, in my experience, headphones generally don't sound entirely convincing. It's a matter of trading off deficiencies between models. But I do think that the MA900, while certainly not perfect, is one of the most convincing headphones I've found.

 

[Portioli]

Apple Music and spatial audio have revived my Sony MA900 headphones. This combination is amazing.
I don't think any other headphones will ever surpass them in terms of comfort and the immersive 3D feeling they provide.

 

[CaptainFantastic]

Do you use them with the stock pads?

 

[jamesjames]

Do you use them with the stock pads?

Yes.

 

[Sp12er3]

I've posted here to the effect that these are great phones - among the best out there I think for classical music. I've recently thought that a very big part of their appeal for me is that the presentation is remarkably like loudspeakers (ie, 'real') - particularly when used in combination with crossfeed. I can't think of any other phones which come close in this regard. Even the HD800S seems to present in a more artificial, headphone-like way. There are however some consequences, I think. The presentation is less immediate than many other phones - even the HD800S which is often cited for its 'distant' perspective. And the higher frequencies in particular are somewhat softened - lacking something of the presence generally found in phones tuned to the diffuse-field reference (which I generally prefer). But I'm now inclined to think these characteristics may in fact be more 'natural' in mirroring the experience at a concert or recital - where instruments on the whole can seem quite 'warm' in comparison to modern recordings through phones like the HD800S. The presentation is decidedly more veiled than some phones, but I think this may be part of the remarkably convincing imaging. On the other hand, there is abundant detail - once again reminding me of a live performance. The differences between period and modern instruments, for example, remain obvious and striking. At the end of the day, I find the remarkable image of instruments in space which these phones create to be surprisingly convincing, with all the perspective and lack of hype this implies. I guess a final thought here is that, in my experience, headphones generally don't sound entirely convincing. It's a matter of trading off deficiencies between models. But I'm coming to think that the MA900, while certainly not entirely convincing, may be the most convincing headphones I've found.

That veiled nature in the end is the one thing that made me sold mine, it was bought new when supply of it is dwindling everywhere, basically my first serious headphone purchase. I only had a SR60e and M40x before it, basically my first trifecta of cans.
Kept it for 5 ish years, after years of collecting many other cans around, I ended up not using it even once a month. whenever i put it on, I have a feeling I'm missing detail, even compared to HD650.

That lack of immediacy IMO is what make it to not be a "home-y" listen for most. Something that HD600/650 manage to be (sticking around in people's collection even when they have more expensive, more comfortable and better sounding cans around).

The MA900 is a memorable can for sure, but I think if you just want to have a speaker-like headphone you should just buy a speaker. There're lots of good 2 channel system for the same MSRP MA900 used to run at, Both passive and active ones. You'd get the most difference in experience of music listening than collecting just another headphone.

 

[jamesjames]

That veiled nature in the end is the one thing that made me sold mine, it was bought new when supply of it is dwindling everywhere, basically my first serious headphone purchase. I only had a SR60e and M40x before it, basically my first trifecta of cans.
Kept it for 5 ish years, after years of collecting many other cans around, I ended up not using it even once a month. whenever i put it on, I have a feeling I'm missing detail, even compared to HD650.

That lack of immediacy IMO is what make it to not be a "home-y" listen for most. Something that HD600/650 manage to be (sticking around in people's collection even when they have more expensive, more comfortable and better sounding cans around).

The MA900 is a memorable can for sure, but I think if you just want to have a speaker-like headphone you should just buy a speaker. There're lots of good 2 channel system for the same MSRP MA900 used to run at, Both passive and active ones. You'd get the most difference in experience of music listening than collecting just another headphone.

I can understand your reservations. But I think there's more to it than that. I have some experience in recording (and being recorded) and have owned and used many loudspeaker and sound reinforcement systems professionally and domestically. I've monitored and mastered using near-field speaker systems and headphones. I enjoyed a loudspeaker system at home for many years, cycling through many different kinds of driver arrangements and amping. The main difficulty with home systems, as I'm sure you know, is the room itself, but also the major problem of providing enough power to control the driver properly. In my view that generally can't be done adequately with domestic systems (at least without spending a great deal and accommodating hefty amplification). A major advantage with phones is the reduced power requirement and better control of the driver. Another is control of the driver housing (the virtual 'room'). Phones are capable of delivering greater fidelity than loudspeakers in my experience. Even so, there's a big problem I think in achieving any kind of realism with phones. They generally don't present recorded information in the way it was meant to be presented. That can be addressed with binaural recording or crossfeed. But another closely related problem I think is imaging. To my ear most phones are completely uninteresting because they don't present anything like the impression of music played in a performance space at some distance from me - that includes virtually all of the 'flagship' phones out there. That's hardly surprising - most music is now amplified and reinforced when played and recorded in studios on multi-track systems - a 'wall of noise'. The 'super-stereo' effect and hyper-realism of playback on phones is initially striking but completely synthetic to my ear. There are some phones, however, that sound better to me - the HD800S, the T1, the K812, the MySphere and the MA900 are examples. I guess it's no coincidence they're made by firms historically associated with recording acoustic music: Sennheiser, AKG, Beyerdynamic, Sony. So, to return to your point, I persevere with phones that appeal to me because I think they can do what loudspeakers do - but better. They certainly don't sound like most other phones - and they might well be seen as comparatively 'veiled' or 'distant' for example. But it seems that's often what I'm looking for.

 

[Sp12er3]

I can understand your reservations. But I think there's more to it than that. I have some experience in recording (and being recorded) and have owned and used many loudspeaker and sound reinforcement systems professionally and domestically. I've monitored and mastered using near-field speaker systems and headphones. I enjoyed a loudspeaker system at home for many years, cycling through many different kinds of driver arrangements and amping. The main difficulty with classical music and home systems, as I'm sure you know, is the room itself, but also the major problem of providing enough power to control the driver properly. In my view that generally can't be done adequately with domestic systems (at least without spending a great deal and accommodating hefty amplification). A major advantage with phones is the reduced power requirement and better control of the driver. Another is control of the driver housing (the virtual 'room'). Phones are capable of delivering greater fidelity than loudspeakers in my experience. Even so, there's a big problem I think in achieving any kind of realism with phones. They generally don't present recorded information in the way it was meant to be presented. That can be addressed with binaural recording or crossfeed. But another closely related problem I think is imaging. To my ear most phones are completely uninteresting because they don't present anything like the impression of music played in a performance space at some distance from me - that includes virtually all of the 'flagship' phones out there. That's hardly surprising - most music is now amplified and reinforced when played and recorded in studios on multi-track systems - a 'wall of noise'. The 'super-stereo' effect and hyper-realism of playback on phones is initially striking but completely 'synthetic' to my ear. There are some phones, however, that to my ear sound better - the HD800S, the T1, the K812, the MySphere and the MA900 are examples. I guess it's no coincidence they're made by firms historically associated with recording acoustic music: Sennheiser, AKG, Beyerdynamic, Sony. So, to return to your point, I persevere with phones that appeal to me because I think they can do what loudspeakers do - but better. They certainly don't sound like most other phones - and they might well be seen as comparatively 'veiled' or 'distant' for example. But it seems that's often what I'm looking for.

Understandable, the difference is the expectation of what you want out of it I guess, The MA900 have a realistic presentation but has a tuning that doesn't really fit my preference so I proposed a 2channel system where there's many different options for vastly different experience to headphones.
Also the one headphone I compared the MA900 was the T1, it ended up kicking the Sony out of my daily use rotations.

About 2 channel, Mine is a small room and I find from the systems I've put there it's been quite great for most of them. But really if it's near field ones and you're sitting less than 1 meter from it, room won't be affecting them as much ain't it? The biggest one would probably be distance to the wall if it's back ported.

 

[jamesjames]

Understandable, the difference is the expectation of what you want out of it I guess, The MA900 have a realistic presentation but has a tuning that doesn't really fit my preference so I proposed a 2channel system where there's many different options for vastly different experience to headphones.
Also the one headphone I compared the MA900 was the T1, it ended up kicking the Sony out of my daily use rotations.

About 2 channel, Mine is a small room and I find from the systems I've put there it's been quite great for most of them. But really if it's near field ones and you're sitting less than 1 meter from it, room won't be affecting them as much ain't it? The biggest one would probably be distance to the wall if it's back ported.

Well, I agree there's more than one way to approach this. I also find the T1 to be up there among the best. I have a near-field monitor system that I still use at home - Sennheiser/Neumann - which is excellent, I think. And I agree it removes many room considerations when set up properly - very useful tool for monitoring. But my experience is conventional front-radiating speakers are less immersive than omnidirectional speakers - which were my preference when I was more involved with speaker systems. To my ear, good omnis were better at recreating the sense of being in the room with a quartet or in the hall with an orchestra - better even than multi-speaker surround-sound systems (which I found interesting, but not quite convincing) for recreational listening (as opposed to monitoring and mastering - very different). It's difficult to be sure (or measure) how signal quality and driver distortion relate to these questions of perceived 'image' involving reflected sound, but I'm inclined to think with loudspeakers their relative importance declines more quickly than with headphones. And, as I've mentioned, I do find phones are capable of a slightly more realistic presentation when the planets align ...

I recently re-read some interesting old reviews by Tyll Hertsens of Focal Utopia and DCA Ether phones (he followed up a few general thoughts across both reviews). You probably know that Hertsens was initially very impressed with the Utopia (although he seemed to me a little more cautious later on) - but an interesting point I thought was his speculation that very low levels of distortion might in fact work against some features of imaging. With the Utopia in particular he encountered a combination of very high-quality drivers but very 'small'/'close' imaging. As he pointed out, this ran counter to his earlier thinking that good transient quality was probably a central factor in achieving a well-structured and spacious image. This occurred to me when thinking about the MA900, and some of the particular characteristics we've covered. I'm not yet persuaded that low distortion can actually be a problem - I find, for example, the HD800S and the Audio Technica ADX5000 (my other preferred model) excellent when it comes to image (and the ADX5000 in particular is ruthlessly detailed). And I must say, for what it's worth, that I found the Focal phones that I've owned (Utopia and Clear) to be compromised by claustrophobic imaging and polite top-ends. Even so, food for more thought ... which is no bad thing.

 

[buidoimiennui]

Sorry for my bad English. As of today I have listened to ma900 for about 100 hours. I feel the need to mod it. There are 2 things I plan to do. That is to remove the resistor. And mod ear pads and cushions. Like in a certain topic (I'm sorry I forgot that member) there are instructions for removing resistors. I did and it was quite easy. The next thing I did was completely remove the paper on the front and the foam on the back of the housing. I used another type instead, which is ink absorbing paper, used in painting. It has a thickness of ~2.5mm and I lined it on the back. And driver front. Next, I replaced the new ear cushions, about 25mm thick, which helps the driver stay farther away from the ear. After the mod is finished. Play familiar ambient music. I think I can end the game. It's amazing that before its sound was natural, now it's much more detailed and natural. The music I always listen to has now turned into another song. It makes me slowly, slowly enjoy the music. and it feels like I'm there, where my imagination flies. The sounds of ocean waves, birds, wind... everything is very vivid and surreal. The most expensive headphone I've ever tried is the HD800. I think after this mod. it beat the original hd800.

I don't want to talk about frequency bands. We use a headphone with a curve like Harman, but if we listen to music that doesn't feel good, has no emotion, and doesn't make us want to listen, it's meaningless.

 

[jamesjames]

Sorry for my bad English. As of today I have listened to ma900 for about 100 hours. I feel the need to mod it. There are 2 things I plan to do. That is to remove the resistor. And mod ear pads and cushions. Like in a certain topic (I'm sorry I forgot that member) there are instructions for removing resistors. I did and it was quite easy. The next thing I did was completely remove the paper on the front and the foam on the back of the housing. I used another type instead, which is ink absorbing paper, used in painting. It has a thickness of ~2.5mm and I lined it on the back. And driver front. Next, I replaced the new ear cushions, about 25mm thick, which helps the driver stay farther away from the ear. After the mod is finished. Play familiar ambient music. I think I can end the game. It's amazing that before its sound was natural, now it's much more detailed and natural. The music I always listen to has now turned into another song. It makes me slowly, slowly enjoy the music. and it feels like I'm there, where my imagination flies. The sounds of ocean waves, birds, wind... everything is very vivid and surreal. The most expensive headphone I've ever tried is the HD800. I think after this mod. it beat the original hd800.

I don't want to talk about frequency bands. We use a headphone with a curve like Harman, but if we listen to music that doesn't feel good, has no emotion, and doesn't make us want to listen, it's meaningless.

Your English is excellent! I'm interested in all of these ideas. Re the resistor, I understand its purpose is to equalise (to some extent) impedance fluctuations - and I can see the logic. What was your thinking behind removing it? Re the paper, what was behind your choice of replacement paper? I can understand the ear cushion alteration - I've thought myself that moving the driver further away might help. And it occurred to me that removing the fabric layer (on the stock cushions) between the driver and ear might also be useful. Can you say which cushions you found to fit?

 

[buidoimiennui]

Your English is excellent! I'm interested in all of these ideas. Re the resistor, I understand its purpose is to equalise (to some extent) impedance fluctuations - and I can see the logic. What was your thinking behind removing it? Re the paper, what was behind your choice of replacement paper? I can understand the ear cushion alteration - I've thought myself that moving the driver further away might help. And it occurred to me that removing the fabric layer (on the stock cushions) between the driver and ear might also be useful. Can you say which cushions you found to fit?

I think removing the resistor will leave the signal from the source, to the voice coil unchanged. Whatever the signal has to get through, and get to the voice coil. In theory, all are reduced or changed. My source is my phone. I even removed the original 3 meter cable, replacing it with another one that was only 80cm meter and smaller. What about paper, when removing the ma900. I found that it's not really an open back headphone. To be exact, it's only open about 50%.

Everyone can see that on its back, the area of the holes only for about 50% of the back area. I lined it with paper to increase this ratio to ~70%. The types of paper I use are quite tight. If brought into the dark using a light, the tiny holes are as sparse as the starry sky. Paper lining has made the ma900 a semi-open headphone. That still makes it retain the low frequencies, and the high frequencies are still bright enough. That kind of paper makes the sound full. It continues to resonate and doesn't disappear too soon...the most suitable type of ear cushion I think is the type with no holes or few holes, 20-25mm thick.