Ultrasone Pro 750 vs 900 question.
Feb 11, 2013 at 4:26 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 15

AzraelDarkangel

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Posts
580
Likes
20
The 900s are universally more popular but I Also notice that Ultrasone and the 900 are typecast as the go to basshead phones. From all the reviews I've read I'm more attracted to the Pro 750 and it's more balanced sound without the really recessed mids of the 900. I don't consider myself a basshead as I was relatively satisfied with the DT880 pro I used to have though I wouldn't mind a bit more impact for certain songs. I Also don't like dark sounding headphones. I am surprised though that the 750 is not more popular than it is. I wonder if it's more neutral-ish character make it a little too ruthlessly revealing compared to the 900 for many people? I might pick up the Pro 750 soon btw.

Joshua
 
Feb 11, 2013 at 5:13 PM Post #2 of 15

bareyb

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Posts
778
Likes
46
Quote:
The 900s are universally more popular but I Also notice that Ultrasone and the 900 are typecast as the go to basshead phones. From all the reviews I've read I'm more attracted to the Pro 750 and it's more balanced sound without the really recessed mids of the 900. I don't consider myself a basshead as I was relatively satisfied with the DT880 pro I used to have though I wouldn't mind a bit more impact for certain songs. I Also don't like dark sounding headphones. I am surprised though that the 750 is not more popular than it is. I wonder if it's more neutral-ish character make it a little too ruthlessly revealing compared to the 900 for many people? I might pick up the Pro 750 soon btw.

Joshua

 
Don't believe everything you read here. Read some professional reviews too. What happens is, people read other people's reviews and then they simply parrot what they've read for fear of being called out for being "wrong". It's a syndrome common to many forums. My advice would be to listen to them yourself after they have a proper break in period. 
 
I bought the Pro 900 because I'd heard it has fantastic Bass, and it does. However, the Pro 900 is not a "basshead" headphone in my opinion. It is an Audiophile headphone. Yes, it has excellent bass but it is clean and well defined Bass. Not boomy and it does not intrude on the midrange as most "basshead" phones do. It also had the most forward Midrange of ANY closed headphone I've ever heard (and I've heard all the biggies).  I haven't heard the 2500 but it is an Open back model so would naturally have a wider soundstage. I have heard the Bass is also very clean and well defined on the 2500 as well. Maybe not quite as much impact as the 900 (being closed) but it's supposedly not far off. I'd try to get my hands on both and give them a listen. I think you'd be happy with either.  
tongue_smile.gif

 
Feb 11, 2013 at 6:25 PM Post #3 of 15

MalVeauX

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Apr 29, 2011
Posts
7,002
Likes
726
Quote:
The 900s are universally more popular but I Also notice that Ultrasone and the 900 are typecast as the go to basshead phones. From all the reviews I've read I'm more attracted to the Pro 750 and it's more balanced sound without the really recessed mids of the 900. I don't consider myself a basshead as I was relatively satisfied with the DT880 pro I used to have though I wouldn't mind a bit more impact for certain songs. I Also don't like dark sounding headphones. I am surprised though that the 750 is not more popular than it is. I wonder if it's more neutral-ish character make it a little too ruthlessly revealing compared to the 900 for many people? I might pick up the Pro 750 soon btw.

Joshua

 
Heya,
 
The PRO750 is more balanced. If the DT880 pleases you with it's low frequency representation, the PRO750 will give you a similar experience, but closed. Ultrasone in general is not the most popular due to their house signature sound. It's a metallic sound. Not the most musical thing people are used to. It's one of those "love or hate" things. I think their balanced headphones are great (HFI780, PRO750, HFI2400, PRO2500, PRO2900). The PRO900 is just a bass cannon, but if you care about anything else, it's not worth it to me.
 
An alternative would be the new Mad Dog with Alpha Pads.
 
Very best,
 
Feb 11, 2013 at 7:59 PM Post #4 of 15

bareyb

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Posts
778
Likes
46
Respectfully disagree. Pro 900 is NOT a Bass Canon. It is akin to a high end stereo at home with a good quality subwoofer. The highs are detailed and smooth. Somewhat bright, but not overly so and with that you also get the amazing details in the music. I'm guessing a lot of these guys that are characterizing Ultrasones as "Basshead Phones" don't have subwoofers at home and wouldn't want one. It's a matter of personal taste. I love good quality clean Bass and the Pro 900s have it in spades.  I'd say if you like a subwoofer with your home speakers, then you'll like the Pro 900's. 
 
Feb 11, 2013 at 8:59 PM Post #5 of 15

AzraelDarkangel

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Posts
580
Likes
20
On a side note. Subwoofers really shouldn't be needed with proper speakers. They only came about because people wanted dinky little speakers, this trend being pushed along alot by the horribly overpriced little Bose cube speakers that came out in the 90s. Also I much prefer a good acoustic suspension 12"-15" in a big enclosure than the cheap 8-10" ported, high mass, high excursion and low efficiency woofer in a small enclosure that most people are forced to use.
 
Feb 11, 2013 at 9:12 PM Post #6 of 15

bareyb

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Posts
778
Likes
46
Quote:
On a side note. Subwoofers really shouldn't be needed with proper speakers. They only came about because people wanted dinky little speakers, this trend being pushed along alot by the horribly overpriced little Bose cube speakers that came out in the 90s. Also I much prefer a good acoustic suspension 12"-15" in a big enclosure than the cheap 8-10" ported, high mass, high excursion and low efficiency woofer in a small enclosure that most people are forced to use.

You have 15 inch woofers in your speakers? Yikes. My Dad had some JBL's like that they were HUGE. It  must be at least a three way system and really what you have there is simply a floor standing speaker with its own built-in subwoofer. A 12 or 15 inch speaker will reproduce any of the low frequencies needed so a subwoofer would be redundant. From all I've read, you get a better sound with a 8 or 10 inch woofer and accompany it with a good quality subwoofer dedicated to just the very lowest frequencies. Of course as with all things audio, that's up for debate. 
tongue.gif

 
Feb 11, 2013 at 9:17 PM Post #7 of 15

AzraelDarkangel

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Posts
580
Likes
20
Nope I'm poor but I've been to high end shops selling $20,000+ speakers. I was interested in speakers for 20yrs before I really got into headphones as a cheaper option. The only advantage to subs is that they can be set up in such a way as to deal better with room modes (standing waves).
 
Feb 11, 2013 at 9:21 PM Post #8 of 15

MalVeauX

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Apr 29, 2011
Posts
7,002
Likes
726
Quote:
Respectfully disagree.
Pro 900 is NOT a Bass Canon.
The highs are detailed and smooth. Somewhat bright, but not overly so

 
Ok,
 
Maybe that's your experience. But it seems most of us with all these headphones, well, have the opposite opinion and experience. Funny how that works.
 
And as I have several massive speaker setups, I attest from multiple forms, with 4 subwoofers mind you (all 12's) that it doesn't sound anything at all like a balanced speaker setup.
 
But again, that's just my experience and my ears.
 
Very best,
 
Feb 11, 2013 at 9:29 PM Post #9 of 15

bareyb

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Posts
778
Likes
46
Quote:
 
Ok,
 
Maybe that's your experience. But it seems most of us with all these headphones, well, have the opposite opinion and experience. Funny how that works.
 
And as I have several massive speaker setups, I attest from multiple forms, with 4 subwoofers mind you (all 12's) that it doesn't sound anything at all like a balanced speaker setup.
 
But again, that's just my experience and my ears.
 
Very best,

Oh really? The "opposite"?  That's not what I'm seeing. Most of the reviews I've seen for them here are glowing. Most all of the professional reviews are as well. There are a couple of folks around here who are condescending to others. I won't point any fingers at you, but you've been called out for it before... Just saying. Calling them a "bass cannon that is good for little else" only reveals your lack of knowledge (or hearing).  For what it's worth I worked for years as a sound engineer producing CDs for the Fitness Industry. I spent my entire day with headphones on. I know what I'm talking about.  As for your "ears",  I'll put my ears up against yours any day. 
tongue.gif

 
Feb 11, 2013 at 9:33 PM Post #10 of 15

MalVeauX

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Apr 29, 2011
Posts
7,002
Likes
726
Quote:
Oh really? The "opposite"?  That's not what I'm seeing. Most of the reviews I've seen for them here are glowing. Most all of the professional reviews are as well. There are a couple of folks around here who are condescending to others. I won't point any fingers at you, but you've been called out for it before... Just saying. Calling them a "bass cannon that is good for little else" only reveals your lack of knowledge (or hearing).  For what it's worth I worked for years as a sound engineer producing CDs for the Fitness Industry. I spent my entire day with headphones on. I know what I'm talking about.  As for your "ears",  I'll put my ears up against yours any day. 
tongue.gif

 
Again, pure opinion.
 
Condescending or not, your e-cred that you feel the need for quoting doesn't change my opinion in the slightest.
 
Arguing that the PRO900 isn't just a bassy headphone with really recessed mids and very hot treble is pretty much like arguing with a wall. Pointless.
 
Therefore, I respectfully bow out of this thread.
 
Very best,
 
Feb 11, 2013 at 9:36 PM Post #11 of 15

Taowolf51

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Posts
1,877
Likes
201
Quote:
On a side note. Subwoofers really shouldn't be needed with proper speakers. They only came about because people wanted dinky little speakers, this trend being pushed along alot by the horribly overpriced little Bose cube speakers that came out in the 90s. Also I much prefer a good acoustic suspension 12"-15" in a big enclosure than the cheap 8-10" ported, high mass, high excursion and low efficiency woofer in a small enclosure that most people are forced to use.

 
I'd disagree with that. Those who use bookshelf speakers that can't extend as well as a floorstander need a subwoofer to fill in the lower portion of the bass.
 
Feb 11, 2013 at 9:56 PM Post #12 of 15

bareyb

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Posts
778
Likes
46
Quote:
 
Again, pure opinion.
 
Condescending or not, your e-cred that you feel the need for quoting doesn't change my opinion in the slightest.
 
Arguing that the PRO900 isn't just a bassy headphone with really recessed mids and very hot treble is pretty much like arguing with a wall. Pointless.
 
Therefore, I respectfully bow out of this thread.
 
Very best,

Sure they may be a little V shaped, but so are half the headphones in your collection. I'm not saying they are perfect, but they are certainly better than "Bass Cannons".  
beerchug.gif

 
Feb 11, 2013 at 10:02 PM Post #13 of 15

AzraelDarkangel

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Posts
580
Likes
20
Of course. All I meant was that with proper full size floorstanding speakers you shouldn't need subs in most cases. Just that with the evolution of speakers since around the 80s pushed speakers to be smaller and smaller in general which created the main market for subs to reproduce the frequencies that are lost and needed even more for home theatre than most music. I personally dislike this trend, but that's the way it is. The negative effect on sound fidelity is that most cheaper subs that are made go up way too high in frequency and often located too far from the main speakers, or even worse when only one sub is used. Also the use of small, high excursion woofers in small enclosures are not usually able to reproduce the effortless dynamics of larger low excursion but high efficiency woofers in large enclosures.
 
Apr 2, 2013 at 2:34 PM Post #14 of 15

rberger51

New Head-Fier
Joined
Mar 13, 2013
Posts
36
Likes
0
Hey dude,
 
I have the 900s and 750s in my possession right now, and I have to tell you that I agree prefer the 750s over the 900s. The 900s do have more of a bass response, but they are also more responsive the higher frequencies pretty much across the board as compared to the 750s. For me, that was just too much.
 
I find that the 750s give a really realistic sound and wonderful detail.
 
My only criticism of the 750s is the stock ear pads - I found them just a little bit too small. Fortunately, it turns out that the pads for the 900s also fit the 750s (I know this because I've got a set of 900 pads on my 750s right now, even though Ultrasone told me that wouldn't work). 
 
You can build your own graph here: http://www.headphone.com/learning-center/build-a-graph.php to compare frequency response.
 
 
 
Aug 19, 2017 at 8:42 PM Post #15 of 15

Peter Pinna

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Posts
1,002
Likes
76
Quote:


Heya,

The PRO750 is more balanced. If the DT880 pleases you with it's low frequency representation, the PRO750 will give you a similar experience, but closed. Ultrasone in general is not the most popular due to their house signature sound. It's a metallic sound. Not the most musical thing people are used to. It's one of those "love or hate" things. I think their balanced headphones are great (HFI780, PRO750, HFI2400, PRO2500, PRO2900). The PRO900 is just a bass cannon, but if you care about anything else, it's not worth it to me.

An alternative would be the new Mad Dog with Alpha Pads.

Very best,
I know this is an old post but I will reply anyway in the interest of correct information. The Ultrasone Pro 750 does not have a metallic sound. I have owned one for nearly 10 years and I assure you there is no metallic sound. Ultrasones require a burn-in period of at least 100 hours before they start to sound like they are meant to sound. When they reach that point, their sound production is magnificent, IMO. Sometimes I wonder if people who make such ludicrous claims about the Pro 750 might be working for a competitor to Ultrasone.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top