Sony MDR-XB50: All of your basses...all of them.
Jul 4, 2017 at 12:36 PM Post #76 of 93
  • Calibration graphs from Golden Ears ('SPECIAL THANKS'). If you have a 'Q' setting found in your EQ options set it to 4.3. Refer to my UPDATE post.

01.AD_Sony_MDR-XB50AP.png
01.FRM_Sony_MDR-XB50AP.png


Frequency Original Applied Difference
32Hz +6.5 +2.5 -4.0
64 +9.0 +1.5 -7.5
125 +10.0 +0.5 -9.5
250 +6.0 +0.5 -5.5
500 +0.5 -1.0 -0.5
1000 +1.0 +1.0 +1.0
2000 -5.0 -2.0 -3.0
4000 -8.0 -1.0 -7.0
9500 +2.0 +3.5 +1.5
16000 -14.0 -14.0 -14.0​

Q Factor = 4.3 (1/3 Octave)
 
Last edited:
Jul 24, 2017 at 12:07 PM Post #77 of 93
The XB50 is alright but not worth the money anymore imo. ED9 offers up a completely different sound. Much brighter and notably less bassy.

Any of the recommendations in prior posts are good (VSD3, AS800AP). Might also want to check out something from JVC if you want budget bass head; HA-FX102/FR202 in particular.

I found the 202 on clearance in Winners for 7.99 CAD the other day. If I didn't already own them I would have bought them on the spot.

The XB50 isn't a bad earphone, just that it isn't great either. If you get them you'll probably enjoy them. Still, other options exist.

Hi, sorry if this is coming to you a little late, but decided to add my 2 cents on your problem.
If you feel the need to upgrade and you're finding some earphones a little harsh but only have access to big brands, perhaps consider the Sennheiser CX series. I've tried the CX 5.0 and though it's a little expensive and isn't the absolute "best value for money", it was smooth, rich and pleasant sounding with a thick, warm bass. I'd imagine the CX 3.0 would sound very similar, and both come with an in-line mic and remote for phone use.
If thick bass isn't an absolute priority, maybe the Audio Technica ATH-IM50 would suit your preferences for a slightly lower price. The IM50 has a thick upper bass, though low-end starts to roll off around the mid bass section. Unique sound, comfortable and a decent value for money, it's widely available and is most likely accessible to you in India.
Focusing on the XB50AP, it has killer bass... And that's about it. I wouldn't recommend it any longer due to sibilance (harsh S notes). I got it for free and even then that wasn't convincing enough for me to use it. It's just not quite worth your money.
Final note - I know most people on this thread, including myself, would be saying, "Perhaps try this, consider that, and buy this, etc." But the truth of the matter is, if you like your Earpods, I don't see any reason why you should find it absolutely necessary to buy another earphone. If you're satisfied, save the money. I've used two sets of Earpods (before they both broke) and though they certainly aren't the best, they were good enough. Don't pressure yourself into buying more if you don't want to, and just enjoy some music.
Hope I've helped. :)

I really missed to read your posts and now after a year, I got the XB75AP (equivalent to XB70AP) and I'm seriously disappointed. Even the bass isn't adequate without EQing and the sibilance is too much.
What do you recommend for something that is the least sibilant in the price range and the best bass ? I can trade some bass for some clear high res audio.
 
Aug 13, 2017 at 12:41 PM Post #80 of 93
I already have xb50 and I'm basshead, and interested in JVC 102 and ATH CKS55 / CKS77, for a more bass sound than XB50 grab JVC 102 or Audio Technica ATH CKS55 / CKS77

The xb70 are also a step up in bass from the 50's while sounding a bit cleaner too....JVC have those marshmallows I wouldn' t mind trying out but that foam style is not for me.....I thought about trying AT(ATH-CKS550BT) but with less retail presence and no comparisons/reviews on youtube I decided against it and grabbed the xb70bt instead...

I'm very happy with their sound/comfort though I wish they charged faster than 2.5 hours but they are rated for 9hrs and last me long time...The AT's are only rated for 5hrs while costing $20 more
 
Last edited:
Aug 14, 2017 at 5:26 PM Post #82 of 93
I want to try a product other than sony and I am interested in JVC 102 and ATH CKS77, and many reviews ATH CKS77 is more bass than the best sony headset XB90ex
With a smaller driver and less battery life I would think that unlikely for my blutooth models anyway...That said I still wouldn't mind trying an AT model as well

my sony xb70bt uses a 12mm driver with the bass going a bit deeper than any previous sony extra bass model I have heard This is my first bluetooth pair though

The AT I want to try uses a 9mm and doesnt' go as low in freq according to specs of both
 
Last edited:
Sep 25, 2017 at 11:37 AM Post #86 of 93
I rate the headphones 8/10. I listen to mostly soundtrack music. The bass is too much. High notes of violin and guitar don't sound realistic. The sound isolation and cable quality are great.

What does Q mean and where is it? I will try these EQ settings.

Hey Dipper, Let me know what you think. Seems everyone has moved on from this model since there hasn't been much feedback. With the GE calibration done we'll never see a low end IEM be calibrated so I was excited since I already had owned several of these. Recently these were $29.99 at BB. I use them with rockbox units and several of my high-end units that allow for EQ adjustments. I also remaster music and use 14LUFS as a general setting so I can really reach near -5dB volume in an outdoor setting and be pleasantly comfortable and yet hear wife later when she mumbles lol but ENJOYING dynamic music rather than always turning it down because of its loudness factor is my overall goal here. I choose to use none or lowest 'Q' factor because it does change the dynamics of the music since your changing its bandwidth. Since they used a 'Q' of 1/3 octave for calibrating there is no need for it. One would use 'Q' if they're using EQ without any calibration. ENJOY!!!!

The 'Q Factor Adjustment' is usually found in the EQ adjustment areas sometimes labelled as 'Advanced EQ Settings' depending on whether it is included or not.

Q is for 'Q Factor':
Q factor controls the bandwidth—or number of frequencies—that will be cut or boosted by the equalizer. The lower the Q factor, the wider the bandwidth (and the more frequencies will be affected).
The higher the Q factor, the narrower the bandwidth (and the fewer frequencies will be affected).
Most software-based EQ programs have a Q factor range of somewhere around 0.10 to 100; however, only a very small part of this range need be used.
Below is a partial list of Q factors paired with their approximate ‘width’ in octaves:
0.7 = 2 octaves
1 = 1 1/3 octaves
1.4 = 1 octave
2.8 = 1/2 octave
4.3 = 1/3 octave
8.6 = 1/6 octave
As you can see, even a Q as high as 4.3 has a very narrow bandwidth. Qs of this width are very useful for ‘surgical work’ (e.g. removing noise artifacts, such as clicks or string noise), but should be used very sparingly, as their over-use can cause the track to sound very unnatural.
Most boosts and cuts should be carried out with a much gentler Q factor, of somewhere between 0.6 and 1.0, as this tends to result in a much more natural sound.
 
Last edited:
Oct 4, 2017 at 11:40 AM Post #87 of 93
UPDATE: I seem to have overlooked several things and do apologize! GE calibration is done with a 'smoothed octave 1/3' and since I didn't see it mentioned in their 'FR Comparison graph' I understood to the leave 'Q Factor' off or at its lowest. NO, it should be set to 4.3 as indicated by the 'Q Factor' I posted above. It is very important that if you use any calibrations that are done with any type of smoothing, you need to apply the very same factor in your EQ device.
 
Last edited:
Mar 27, 2018 at 11:01 PM Post #88 of 93
@B9Scrambler

Will it be worth an upgrade from this(XB50) to iBasso IT01 / TFZ King Pro? I currently have the XB50 for years already, I love them, but after trying out new earphones (TFZ S2), came to realized how much mids and highs I am missing. I'm just currently using iPhone 6S Plus and Spotify, though, a little bass reduction and a bit of a bump on the highs on the equalizer helps a bit.

EdLQAg8.jpg
 
Last edited:
Mar 28, 2018 at 6:46 AM Post #89 of 93
@B9Scrambler

Will it be worth an upgrade from this(XB50) to iBasso IT01 / TFZ King Pro? I currently have the XB50 for years already, I love them, but after trying out new earphones (TFZ S2), came to realized how much mids and highs I am missing. I'm just currently using iPhone 6S Plus and Spotify, though, a little bass reduction and a bit of a bump on the highs on the equalizer helps a bit.

EdLQAg8.jpg

Haven't heard the IT01 but both it and the King Pro should be a massive upgrade from the XB50. Completely different signatures though. Was listening to the King Pro for a couple hours last night. It's a touch too polite for me, but it is definitely a strong performer. Ryan Soo wrote an awesome review of it that's worth checking out if you haven't seen it; https://everydaylistening.net/2018/02/21/tfz-king-pro-review-resolution/
 
Mar 28, 2018 at 8:47 AM Post #90 of 93
Haven't heard the IT01 but both it and the King Pro should be a massive upgrade from the XB50. Completely different signatures though. Was listening to the King Pro for a couple hours last night. It's a touch too polite for me, but it is definitely a strong performer. Ryan Soo wrote an awesome review of it that's worth checking out if you haven't seen it; https://everydaylistening.net/2018/02/21/tfz-king-pro-review-resolution/

Sorry, I'm still a newb.. But what do you mean by King Pro is 'touch too polite' for you?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top