[RPGWiZaRD]

For those that are worried about bass quantity I'd take a look at Fostex TH900 for a sec:
 

 
And audiophiles LOVE this headphone (which costs like $2000 btw), in fact it's among the most loved headphone on this site atm as it's very new. Just cuz a headphone may have say 8~9dB measured boost in bass doesn't automaticly mean the mids and highs will sound bad, it's about the quality which frequency response graphs doesn't tell us. Low THD noise and resonance is what's interesting.

 

[nerfedup]

THE ANTICIPATION D:

 

[olpne]

 Ok, here's what everybody wants: Everything. But, only when the music call for it.
 
So, I don't know....but, does the 8~9 db bass boost of the M-100 (and  Fostex TH900, etc), mean, that amount of bass will be present only when the music calls for it, or that it will be present every time?
Quote:

Just because a headphone has a high price doesn't mean it has that much worth of sound quality. Ultrasone Pro 900 for example. Bassheads love it. I tried it at a Head-Fi meet on proper equipment, I thought it sounded terrible. The retail price is $600, but I wouldn't pay more than $250 for it to be completely honest. The charts at Innerfidelity are also pretty unimpressive for a $600 MSRP headphone...

 Good to know. Well...I'm not sure now if I was talking only about the praised TH900, or just the $2K in general.

 

[miceblue]

Quote:

 
I'm a basshead but I don't like it (well ok the bass is fine but yea mids & highs aren't). 
 
I think there was a saying going around in this forum which I find extremely accurate in my case:
 
The casual listener craves lots of bass
The experienced listener craves highs / clarity (V-shape)
The audiophile craves forward mids
 
xD I've been at the "craving bass" stage and then moved onto V-shape stage and these days the mids are also just as important as bass. I really want as forward / "in-your-face" vocals as possible to go with a boosted bass, the highs should never be emphasized beyond the mids like in PRO900 in my book. I've been at the V-shape stage but I'm past that now and can't enjoy that anymore haha. "Music is in the mids".

Well I prefer mids, but an emphasis on the upper mids and more on the analytical side (the SRH940 does that very well for its price). Forward vocals is probably more what I would want, not necessarily forward mids; singer taking front stage, guitars/piano/clashing cymbals/other mids behind the singer, bass guitar and pedal drum in the back.
 
This might be of interest to some people: http://www.independentrecording.net/irn/resources/freqchart/main_display.htm
 
 
Quote:

 
So, I don't know....but, does the 8~9 db bass boost of the M-100 (and  Fostex TH900, etc), mean, that amount of bass will be present only when the music calls for it, or that it will be present every time?
 

If the music has those frequencies, it will mean it will be played relatively louder than other sounds. The ideal, typical audiophile curve is supposed to be flat from 0 Hz to 1 kHz, then slope downwards at a steady decline from 1 kHz and beyond.
 
 
Though this term is usually thrown around in this community, I consider neutral to be this ideal curve; everything is, theoretically, the same in volume.
 
Example (graph from Innerfidelity):
LCD-3

 
Compare that to the TH900 and the bass is elevated quite a bit more:

 
 
 
 
Though as mentioned before by others, an elevated bass response is acceptable for on-the-go situations where outside noise often destroys any accurate bass response.
 
Which leads to another point, the M-80's did not isolate outside noises very well if I recall correctly. Hopefully the M-100 will be better at that.

 

[DigitalFreak]

Quote:

 Ok, here's what everybody wants: Everything. But, only when the music call for it.
 
So, I don't know....but, does the 8~9 db bass boost of the M-100 (and  Fostex TH900, etc), mean, that amount of bass will be present only when the music calls for it, or that it will be present every time?
 

That's the million dollar question right now as far as the M100's are concerned. As far as the TH900 is concerned I haven't listened to it but I have been keeping close tabs on the appreciation thread. From what I've read from it's owners the TH900 bass although boosted it's tastefully done meaning it's controlled and will boom and slam when the music demands it. From the impressions I've read the TH900 is considered slightly south of neutral meaning it has a hint of warmth to it's sound. It's also not a true neutral and people on the appreciation thread agree there's a touch of coloration in the mids keeping them from sounding dry. It's also been noted as having a very realistic timbre which makes the music sound very natural. The highs are well extended and sparkly but not peaky meaning it's not overly harsh and blends well with the general sound signature. In my book it sounds like a very nice sounding headphone and very few people have said anything negative about it. The exception have been some of the Sony R10 owners who seem up in arms when comparisons are done against the fabled R10. Supposedly it matches up against the R10 very well and holds it's own which is quite impressive.
 
If the M100 can come halfway close to the sound signature described above this headphone could become quite special. Personally I thought the mids weren't bad on the M80. Yes it could use a little more detail but that being said the mids are quite fluid sounding giving it a very pleasurable sound. It's not a monitor it's a headphone designed for grooving. For me personally I wish the M80 highs had a little more edge. Now that I've logged easily 200 hours on the M80 I've come to the conclusion that if it wasn't for the slight bass boost on the M80 the treble would stand out more. I experimented with some eqing a few weeks ago and found a 2 or 3 db reduction in the bass caused the upper mids and highs to sound like they had a little more presence. I'm guessing the the M100 should be a big step forward as far as detail in the mids is concerned. What I'm wondering is how the highs will be voiced. With a 8 db boost those highs better extend up there and there better be some good air in the top frequencies. If the highs roll off to soon they're going to sound buried by the bass.

 

[olpne]

Thanks, guys! This community is awesome!
 
The discussion in here for the last 24h has been epic.
 
I just had to applaud you all.

 

[Curly21029]

Quote:

That's the million dollar question right now as far as the M100's are concerned. As far as the TH900 is concerned I haven't listened to it but I have been keeping close tabs on the appreciation thread. From what I've read from it's owners the TH900 bass although boosted it's tastefully done meaning it's controlled and will boom and slam when the music demands it... In my book it sounds like a very nice sounding headphone and very few people have said anything negative about it.

 
It's funny how the Edition 8 was bashed (in part) for having accentuated bass while the TH900 is praised for it by some of the same members when their described low-end performance seems to be similar. (subjectively... forget about comparing graphs)  Of course, the former is an oft-blindly bashed Ultrasone while the latter is from DIY darling Fostex, so there you go. 

 
Point being, there are numerous examples of a headphone having heaps of bass without being a muddy, slow, bloated mess.  To my ears, the Ed8 did bass as well as any headphone I've ever heard because it was among the best at only being present when called upon and always distinctly placed within the soundstage..  If the music was bass-heavy it was conveyed satisfyingly.  If it was bass-light, it wouldn't "inject" additional low-end a la some of the more popular Beyers.
 
Going back a few posts, from what I've read the consensus seems to be that the M-80's bass performance has been well received.  I doubt that this will be a setback for the M-100, but what I've seen mentioned in numerous reviews is that the M-80 is "slightly muffled" due to a lack of treble presence.  Val has already stated that he intends to address this with the M-100 without the addition of any nasty spikes, so this is the most interesting sonic characteristic in my mind and merits further discussion.  Honestly, the recent posts are the first I've read about the M-80's mids being recessed, so it'll also be interesting to read these same members' impressions of the M-100 when it releases.
 
...it would be lovely if somebody made a headphone with Ed8 bass, ESW-9 mids, and HD600 treble.

 

[RPGWiZaRD]

I wouldn't concider M80 to have recessed mids, it has a slight emphasis there in the graph but I think some user's think it's recessed due to the warm/smoother mids due to being rolled-off starting in the upper-mids to highs. I've seen numerous times when people describe = lack of mids clarity = recessed mids when that's not true, it's not about clarity but about volume, if mids comes out muddy or clear isn't what defines recessed or forward, it's just the sheer volume of what you hear, whether it's clear or not (often V-shape can have clearer sounding midrange but it's just more silent & distant sounding which isn't my cup of tea). I agree with above that extended highs which Val has spoken several times about in M100 probably will probably have the biggest improvement soundwise, "the lack of airiness" in the highs is probably what's M80's biggest disadvantage which affects overall sound, especially midrange. Now how well this improved highs extensions can be percieved with the slight bass bump as well remains to be seen.

 

[raytraceme]

owning the m80's i can say that the mids and highs felt lacking.when compared to the miles.davis tributes. the 2 sound similar but the m80's just felt dry compared to the mdt. the bass oth was just amazing and soundstsge was really.good for a pair of semi open on ears.

 

[ARTPOP]

Good morning folks! 
 
It's terrible... I have the money to order some M80s right now and it's so dang tempting !! But I have officially decided to hold out and wait for these M100s.
 
The reason for me deciding that is because highs are a big selling point for me.. and I've read a lot about how the M80s are somewhat disappointing in that aspect. Do we have any official confirmation or a chart that would suggest a change with the M100s?

 

[amipat01]

Hey how long will the cord length of the m100 be? I absolutely love over-ear headphones, and want to purchase one but I find that most over--ear headphones have excessive cord lengths. Although Dr. Dre beats studio aren't the best for its price, they at least have the perfect cord length (1.3m) for over-ear. I'm hoping the vmoda m100 offers something similiar in cord length!

 

[BRSxIgnition]

Loving the discussions we're all been having lately - it seems there's more and more new users hoping to get the PPU's - this might be a challenge. Hahaha.
 
Either way - to answer the poster above me, it's going to be just around 4ft - so not the "absurd" length you get with other headphones.

 

[Malevolent]

Quote:

Loving the discussions we're all been having lately - it seems there's more and more new users hoping to get the PPU's - this might be a challenge. Hahaha.
 
Either way - to answer the poster above me, it's going to be just around 4ft - so not the "absurd" length you get with other headphones.

 
It would be nice to get a shorter cable than what I got with my LP2s. That cable was ridiculously long. I love coiled cables, and I don't mind the extra bulk; I just hate really long wires. :/

 

[roma101]

I haven't perceived the mids of the M-80s to be recessed to my ears. They're smooth and liquid, definitely not forward but not recessed especially in comparison to headphones like the D1100. Now those have some recessed mids. I've found the M-80s to be one of the most balanced headphones out there despite the treble being polite. The tone is very warm in comparison to something like the KNS 8400 so to me, because of the different tonalities and sound signatures in general, they're different flavors and it depends on what your preferences are. I love both the M-80s and the KRKs for different reasons - M-80s for their smooth detailed, and lounge-y sig and the KRKs for their analytical yet musical sig. The KRKs are detail monsters in their own right but when I put on the M-80s I don't find them muffled at all - I find them to be a nice complement and a smooth relief. YMMV but in the end it all depends on what you prefer. Different horses for different courses.

That said, I am highly anticipating the M-100s and what they'll be bringing to the table. The fact that they've been compared to the Ultrasone Sig Pro which is about 3X the price is very indicative of their potential IMO.

 

[ncorrigan2014]

compared to the original lp's, is the isolation going to be better on these? Also, are the pads going to be any bigger because my ears barely fit into the lp's and in result i lacked a lot of isolation. One last thing, I have the ATH M50's right now and love the sound, but I also love the look of the V modas a lot more than the m50s, and the durability is much better on these also.