tomscy2000
Headphoneus Supremus
Quote:
I've forgotten how the UM2 sounds, but I did A/B the BA200 directly against the W2 and SE425 once, and I found the BA200 quite a bit better than the W2 in tonal balance and detail, while being similar (slightly superior) to the SE425 in detail retrieval. I personally also consider the UM3X to be a little better than the BA200. It's just that the BA200 is more pleasant for personal listening; the UM3X feels like a musicians' tool through and through (I think I stated that in my review? haha... don't remember, too long ago). Again, I want to reiterate to people that I personally believe that the one "flaw" the BA200 has is that it doesn't have triple-driver detail capability, but it does come close. Presentation-wise, it also doesn't have triple-driver fullness, but depending on one's preferences, that may or may not be a good thing.
When I had the BA200, I thought they had more in common with the UM2 than the UM3X soundwise and in detail retrieval.
I've forgotten how the UM2 sounds, but I did A/B the BA200 directly against the W2 and SE425 once, and I found the BA200 quite a bit better than the W2 in tonal balance and detail, while being similar (slightly superior) to the SE425 in detail retrieval. I personally also consider the UM3X to be a little better than the BA200. It's just that the BA200 is more pleasant for personal listening; the UM3X feels like a musicians' tool through and through (I think I stated that in my review? haha... don't remember, too long ago). Again, I want to reiterate to people that I personally believe that the one "flaw" the BA200 has is that it doesn't have triple-driver detail capability, but it does come close. Presentation-wise, it also doesn't have triple-driver fullness, but depending on one's preferences, that may or may not be a good thing.