[Centigonal]

I'm trying to decide between these two, and, strangely enough, I can't seem to find any full-featured comparisons!
They're in the same relative price range, and are both known for detailed bass, so I'm surprised that I can't find anything. Maybe my searching skills are bad?
 
Does anybody own both? If so, how do they compare?

 

[Roller]

From what I've been reading around, the TMA-1 is on the same league of the M50s, meaning a step down from the Ultrasones. Also, they seem to have a darker sound, while the Ultrasone Pro 750 has a brighter sound, while having a more impactful and detailed bass.
 
If you're actually looking for quality bass and those are your two choices, then the Pro 750 might be a better option.
 
Though, I find it curious that you mention the Pro 2500 as they are open headphones, which by itself means less bass presence.

 

[sesshin]

I wouldn't say the TMA-1s have detailed bass at all. They have a huge hump in the bass frequencies, which definitely makes them bass heavy cans, but at the expense of muddying up the lower-mids.

 

[Curly21029]

 
Quote:

I wouldn't say the TMA-1s have detailed bass at all. They have a huge hump in the bass frequencies, which definitely makes them bass heavy cans, but at the expense of muddying up the lower-mids.

Definitely never heard my TMA-1's bass muddy up the mids.  I'd describe the bas as pronounced, well-textured, decently extended, controlled, and varied.  It's not a "bass monster" per se, but it does bass very well from my experience.  Mids are also nicely detailed, full, and just a touch forward.  As stated previously, they do have an overall dark presentation, but I've found that EQing the treble works fairly well to achieve a better balance.
 
Unfortunately, I can't compare to the Ultrasone models you've mentioned since I've never owned them.  I've had both the ALO-780 and PRO-900 and found the treble to shrill to enjoy on either one of them but have no idea if this is a shared trait with those that you're interested in.

 

[Acix]

There is plenty of info about the Ultrasone models...anyway check this out http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/401879/an-ultrasone-comparison

 

[sesshin]

Well I guess it just depends on what you compare them to. If you look at the freq. response graph you'll see that the bass levels are extremely elevated and basically swallow up the mid-bass and mid region. There is no delineation.

 
If you compare the sound of the TMA-1s to, say, the HD 25-1 iis it's like a veil has been lifted from the bass. The Senns don't have as prominent of bass, but it is clearer.

 

[Curly21029]

 
Quote:

Well I guess it just depends on what you compare them to. If you look at the freq. response graph you'll see that the bass levels are extremely elevated and basically swallow up the mid-bass and mid region. There is no delineation.

 
If you compare the sound of the TMA-1s to, say, the HD 25-1 iis it's like a veil has been lifted from the bass. The Senns don't have as prominent of bass, but it is clearer.

And, as we've all come to figure out, graphs never tell the entire story.  I have to ask: how long have you owned them for and what did you listen to them through?  I found that they amped quite well.
 
The TMA-1 was originally purchased as a replacement to the M50.  I preferred the TMA-1, so they stuck around.  I still have them, but they haven't gotten much use as of late.  The only other headphone I've owned at the same time and the only other one I currently have in my possession is the Ultrasone Edition 8.  Obviously comparing the two isn't anywhere close to fair, but the TMA-1 is still actually decently enjoyable despite the extremely stiff competition.

 

[sesshin]

I owned the TMA-1s for about two weeks before selling them. Amped with a uDAC-2. I purchased both the TMA-1s and the HD-25-1 ii's at the same time to try and determine which was best for my needs. The HD 25-1 iis won out.
 
And while I know graphs always have to be taken with a grain of salt depending on testing variables, HRTF, etc.. this particular graph pretty much perfectly mimicked what my impression of the TMA-1 sound signature was; overly boosted bass frequencies which muddied the midbass region. And while you can boost the treble after the fact to try and compensate and add air, I don't feel you should have to do that. A good headphone should be well-balanced to begin with, imo.

 

[Curly21029]

 
Quote:

I owned the TMA-1s for about two weeks before selling them. Amped with a uDAC-2. I purchased both the TMA-1s and the HD-25-1 ii's at the same time to try and determine which was best for my needs. The HD 25-1 iis won out.
 
And while I know graphs always have to be taken with a grain of salt depending on testing variables, HRTF, etc.. this particular graph pretty much perfectly mimicked what my impression of the TMA-1 sound signature was; overly boosted bass frequencies which muddied the midbass region. And while you can boost the treble after the fact to try and compensate and add air, I don't feel you should have to do that. A good headphone should be well-balanced to begin with, imo.

Subjective taste is a beautiful thing.
 
Thank you for justifying your opinion and being one of the good guys.  Whether you've seen it or not, there seems to be a rampant problem where HD-25 owners like to crash any thread (not just on Head-Fi) discussing the TMA-1 and bash it despite the fact that many have never heard it or only had a limited audition in an audio shop.  The HD-25 has a long-established fanbase, a portion of which seemed to act threatened even before the TMA-1 was released assumedly because it's targeting a similar DJ market.  My apologies, but coming into a TMA-1 thread and defaulting to the HD-25 as superior aroused suspicion on my end.  I've always wanted to but have never heard the HD-25 II, but given its insane longevity and well-established fanbase I'm sure it's doing a whole heck of a lot right.  The TMA-1 has also shown itself to be a surprisingly good performer, so live and let live.

 

[lyons238]

I know this is an old thread but I am bumping for anyone else who may have interest in this.
 
I own both the TMA-1's and Ultrasone Pro 900's. I thought about selling one or the other but I couldn't. What was stated above about the TMA-1's is true they are a bit dark, and the bass does muddy up the mid bass a bit, but i still love them for portable use, DJ'ing and casual listening. However my Ultrasone Pro 900's are a bit superior, extremely detailed, and have a better balance than the TMA-1's. I keep these for music production and more immersive listening.