[ostewart]

well in that case, get the panasonics, as they are much cheaper than the sonys, and they are bassy

 

[Shotor102]

Which Panasonic Model was that?

 

[ostewart]

RP-HTX7
 
retro style, very comfy, isolate great, and big bass, with great highs

 

[Shotor102]

Oh, the old-school retro looking ones..

 
There's some mixed reviews on those.. Good for movies but not so much for extensive portable use...
Some find them comfortable and some don't...   $25 online while $84 at bestbuy... What the hell? Why the big difference in price...
 
Oh well... Yeah, I'd say they're a good alternative..  why not.
I wish I could afford the Shure SRH440.

 

[ostewart]

im after some 440's too, but i hear they arent big on bass, more balanced/bright (my kinda sig)

 

[bradhyper]

Quote:

Oh, the old-school retro looking ones..

 
There's some mixed reviews on those.. Good for movies but not so much for extensive portable use...
Some find them comfortable and some don't...   $25 online while $84 at bestbuy... What the hell? Why the big difference in price...
 
Oh well... Yeah, I'd say they're a good alternative..  why not.
I wish I could afford the Shure SRH440.

If you save up I hear the denon 1001 have great bass (very "fun"). I think they sell for around 100 USD but they seem to be out of stock at Amazon right now. =\

 

[Shotor102]

Well as of now I will stick with my Shure SRH240M+ (same as the SRH240 plus the controls and mic for phone calls, made for ipod/iphone)
I will save up for the next 1-2 years for Either Shure-SRH440 or the SRH840.  I am actually getting used to the design and what Shure refers to as their 'Legendary sound'.  Of course I will always look for deals, but hey, if I'll save up specifically for that cause, they I don't mind pouring in the dough. Right now I wanted some good sounding budget headphones, and among all the ones I've tried, the Shures seem to fit the bill mostly. After all, can you beat the SRH240 for $59 retail (not online)?  I doubt that there is a set of headphone that can, perhaps a few.. but I couldn't find any. 
 
And yes, I know about the SRH440 being the most balanced headphones among. But sometimes that is a good thing.  I like bass, but I prefer an overall brilliant sound that doesn't color the track I am listening to like the beats do (although I like how they sound.)  The problem is that the higher you go in the pro level, the more likelihood that you'll need to use a portable pre-amp for the headphones to produce the full scale and potential sound.. otherwise, you're at risk of owning a professional grade headphones that sound tinny on your mp3 player, which sucks. 
 
That said, I am very interested to find out how the XB700 sound like, and further, how the monstrous XB1000's sound like (available only in Japan as of now)  Though I am weary of their construction, namely the headband as I've had this one bad experience with the XB500. Hopefully it's an isolated scenario.  In fact, I don't mind testing the Beats Pro for a while just to hear why they're hyped so much.
 
Hell, if I could afford it, I'd get the Prestige series by Grados... But that's me dreaming... I think the most I'll allow myself to spend on headphones would be $250 - $300, which may result with either Bose, High End Sennheiser, Denon, Beyedynamics or Shures.

 

[bradhyper]

If you spend 300$ on headphones I would stay away from the bose QC. They isolate really well but the sound doesn't stack up to my denons.
 
Also I have the srh 840s if there's anything you want to know about them. Everything sounds pretty good, very neutral imo. That can be good or bad depending on what you want out of your cans.

 

[Shotor102]

I listen mostly to electronic music, mainly Trance and Full-Psy trance.
I listen to dance as-well which carries vocals in addition to electronic sound (you know, the tweeks, proings, pops, bells and whistles)
 
That said, having headphones that can faithfully reproduce accurate bass is important, but it doesn't have to be the overly colored bass that XB500 or 700 series will do.. As much as I liked it, it was slightly overpowering. As far as it goes, I prefer accurate flat response headphones that could be easily manipulated by eqing.
 
How are the 840's without being amped.. for portable use like iphone or ipods. I know it doesn't match to being played through an amp DJ equipment, but will they still reproduce a good sound with the ipods and iphones?

 

[scompton]

To me, you're confusing expensive with good.  Unless you're listening to music that has not much besides bass, turning a sub up to overwhelm the mids, ruins the music, makes it boring.  That's not what live acoustic music sounds like. 

 

[RPGWiZaRD]

You can have both (very strong bass and very clear/strong beautiful mids) if you use the right setup & settings, who says you have to choose between one of them? (It doesn't however come in plug-n-play form)

 

[Shotor102]

"To me, you're confusing expensive with good.  Unless you're listening to music that has not much besides bass, turning a sub up to overwhelm the mids, ruins the music, makes it boring.  That's not what live acoustic music sounds like."
 
 
Trust me that I am not confusing expensive with 'good'. Though due to the inherit nature of marketing, expensive tends to be better than cheaper majority of times. And I do say Majority of the times as opposed to ALL the times, since we've certainly see cases where that is not the case (Beats by Dr Dre for one example) And it's not that I listen to music that has nothing but bass, however naturally Dance and electronic and as-well as hip hop and rap contain much more prominent bass than Rock, Jazz acoustic or classic.  But the was not the point. Personally I never actually turn the bass in any of my systems over half way as it gets loud and distracting, either movies or music. However, to each his own and their taste. After all, the setting is available and is there for a reason.     But again, I think you're missing the point. If you listen mainly to acoustic live music type or rock, or anything with mainly real instruments, then you need to have the sensibility to know that headphones like XB500's are not for you. You'd be better off with Sennheiser, Beyerdynamic or Shure or similar cans like that. They produce that flat response that stays true to the track you're playing.  But again, you're looking at spending 4-6 times the amount to get a decent sound.  And again, non of this proves or indicates that the XB500's generate inferior sound. They're simply geared for different music and taste. 

 

[Shotor102]

"You can have both (very strong bass and very clear/strong beautiful mids) if you use the right setup & settings, who says you have to choose between one of them? (It doesn't however come in plug-n-play form)"
 
 
That is true, but that's exactly where the issue arises. I take my music mostly in portable use, and therefor want headphones that will support that habit as best as possible. What's the use of having brilliant headphones that cannot be optimized for an mp3. I mean slightly difference between amped and not is a sacrifice I am willing to make, but when the difference is night and day, it's simply not worth spending the money on. I'm not running a studio and I am not a DJ (although I have been in the past). And from the last few months, by going through several different headphones, I have to say that it's not that easy to find those balanced headphones that pleased me, considering the budget I was under.  But I heard quite a few good things about the Kicker HP541.
They were compared to headphones that were 4-6 the price range... So perhaps, once my Shures break, I'd consider something like that.

 

[matt_wants]

Just taken a punt on the 500s given how people say they're ideal for bassheads and I'd consider myself to be one at almost all times. They were in a clearance sale at Play-dot-com for £40 so seemed like a worthwhile investment.
 
I came looking for comparisons with the RP-HTX7s and was interested to see them mentioned in this thread as they're what I'm using right now. I don't own any mid to high-end phones, but towards the end of my iPod's battery charge, they really start to sing. For an album like Songs for the Deaf they are just great. Tight bass, good vocal and overall an enjoyable listen. I do have some bass-heavy music on my iPod though and I find that the kick I'd love hasn't quite got through on the Pannys, although you can sense sub-bass in the chest cavity if you're really attentive to it. I've had them for about 2 years and with burn-in, no range seems to overpower the other, although I'm using the original line-out iPod dock with no EQ to play AIFF.
 
So anyone experienced both who could give an idea if they're different enough to cater for my hard rock/metal needs as well as my occasional bassier needs?
 
Thanks.

 

[titaniumx3]

I thought they sounded pretty poor when I listened to them, the typical bloated one note bass, recessed mids and grainy highs. It's was still fairly listenable especially with pop/dance/hiphop, but for anything that made good use of the midrange, it was awful - most rock and metal quickly became a congested mess.