[Luv My BASS 1]

Quote:

so i still havent returned my white m100s, but im going to soon, but i cant seem to reduce the clamp force anymore, i have a large head and after trying the momentums and ue6000, they were way more comfortable on my head because it has alot less clamp force, so there is a possibility i might not get the m100s again :/ unless i can juist keep trying to reduce the clamp force

XL Pads?

 

[DrSheep]

Quote:

bend them flat around 3-4 times they shouldn't break

Yes, do this.

 

[Transformatron]

Well... I got my M-100s. I have a love-hate relationship with them at this point. They are comfortable but I haven't adjusted my clamp force enough yet. One of my gold shields has a bad engraving job and one silver has some machine gashes on it. The sound is great and just what I expected, bass heavy with overall good sound signature. Another thing to note, these are super loud. I may post pics but I'm a little sad about the shields...

 

[VortexBlast]

I finally got the chance to try these headphones at Mike's Headfonia store in Jakarta. 
 
 

Sorry for poor quality photo.
 
First of all, the build quality on these is absolutely amazing, I would like to think even better than the M-80. Everything feels solid, tough and well made. Build quality, I would give a 10/10
Comfort wise, I found the clamping force just right but the cup size might be a bit too small for my ears. Not as bad as the Sennheiser Momentum though, the cup on the Momentum is too small for my ears. Comfort is a 7/10
Sound wise, I find them to be a mixed bag. It's not horrible but it's a bit uneven to my ears and also very genre specific.
To start off, the star of the show is the bass, and I mean lots of great quality bass. It has lots of impact, lots of body and great quality too. It's quite tight (not as tight as orthos mind you) but it's nicely textured and makes music sound dynamic and fun but sometimes it can be sloppy and overbearing and lacks finesse too, it's more of a brute force attack kind of bass. I would rank the bass on these an 8/10.
On the treble side, I find them to be pleasing. It doesn't show any sign of roll off and it doesn't show any sign of sibilance as well. It has decent detail and is well defined but it lacks air and overall quantity. I would give it a 6/10.
Now on to the bad news, its midrange is sucked out and too withdrawn to my tastes. Vocals are too "weighted" (don't know if it makes sense), they feel like they are being held back massively. The tone is on the warm side, snare drums don't have that right bright tone but a more subdued one that makes it sound quite unnatural. It's not bad mids but it's too withdrawn and that's just disappointing. I would give the midrange a 4/10, I really think it could do better.
Soundstage wise, I didn't really bother but I found them to be small and too closed in. Well maybe because I listened to the Fostex TH600 before listening to the M-100.
 
I really wanted to like the M-100 as much as I liked the M-80 but that sucked out midrange really bothers me. Maybe I'm just a midrange and vocal head but I do not think these are for me. It makes a great portable can though, where an emphasized bass is needed to compensate interference from outside noise.
 
It really is an headphone made for DnB, Dubstep, EDM or any kind of electro music. I was wowed by it when I heard Self vs Self by Pendulum. That track showed everything that is great about the M-100 but when I put Stockholm Syndrome by Muse, I was extremely disappointed by it. I would really avoid it for rock music.

 

[x838nwy]

I finally got the chance to try these headphones at Mike's Headfonia store in Jakarta. 




Sorry for poor quality photo.

First of all, the build quality on these is absolutely amazing, I would like to think even better than the M-80. Everything feels solid, tough and well made. Build quality, I would give a 10/10
Comfort wise, I found the clamping force just right but the cup size might be a bit too small for my ears. Not as bad as the Sennheiser Momentum though, the cup on the Momentum is too small for my ears. Comfort is a 7/10
Sound wise, I find them to be a mixed bag. It's not horrible but it's a bit uneven to my ears and also very genre specific.
To start off, the star of the show is the bass, and I mean lots of great quality bass. It has lots of impact, lots of body and great quality too. It's quite tight (not as tight as orthos mind you) but it's nicely textured and makes music sound dynamic and fun but sometimes it can be sloppy and overbearing and lacks finesse too, it's more of a brute force attack kind of bass. I would rank the bass on these an 8/10.
On the treble side, I find them to be pleasing. It doesn't show any sign of roll off and it doesn't show any sign of sibilance as well. It has decent detail and is well defined but it lacks air and overall quantity. I would give it a 6/10.
Now on to the bad news, its midrange is sucked out and too withdrawn to my tastes. Vocals are too "weighted" (don't know if it makes sense), they feel like they are being held back massively. The tone is on the warm side, snare drums don't have that right bright tone but a more subdued one that makes it sound quite unnatural. It's not bad mids but it's too withdrawn and that's just disappointing. I would give the midrange a 4/10, I really think it could do better.
Soundstage wise, I didn't really bother but I found them to be small and too closed in. Well maybe because I listened to the Fostex TH600 before listening to the M-100.

I really wanted to like the M-100 as much as I liked the M-80 but that sucked out midrange really bothers me. Maybe I'm just a midrange and vocal head but I do not think these are for me. It makes a great portable can though, where an emphasized bass is needed to compensate interference from outside noise.


It really is an headphone made for DnB, Dubstep, EDM or any kind of electro music. I was wowed by it when I heard Self vs Self by Pendulum. That track showed everything that is great about the M-100 but when I put Stockholm Syndrome by Muse, I was extremely disappointed by it. I would really avoid it for rock music.

Regardless of what has been said regarding burning-in, give it 50 hours or so and things open up a bit with the pair i had.

 

[TealRice]

Quote:

bend them flat around 3-4 times they shouldn't break

tried it like 12 times, still hurting my head cuz the clamp force is too strong on my big head

 

[x838nwy]

tried it like 12 times, still hurting my head cuz the clamp force is too strong on my big head

When I un-bend the headband flat, it sprang back to basically its original shape. This means that no permanent strain had been reached on any part (of the headband) it'll clamp just as hard as before. I found that to reduce the clamping force, i needed to slightly go beyond flat like from ( to ) slightly.

Do this at your own risk, btw. Grab the actual headband part, not the cups or the plastic bits on the ends and try not to o over-board with the bending.

 

[joemangi]

Does anyone else have experience with the burn in of these headphones? I am interested in them but am concerened about the mid range and vocals. I love my bass and find the M-80's to be lacking just a little.

 

[x838nwy]

Does anyone else have experience with the burn in of these headphones? I am interested in them but am concerened about the mid range and vocals. I love my bass and find the M-80's to be lacking just a little.

Quite a few have posted that there's no difference between before and after burn-in.

However, i found the bass on mine noticably improved in quality and doesn't overwhelm the rest of the sound as much as when they were new. I'm not sure if i'm just imagining things, however.

 

[legendcheater]

Does the M-100 similar to the Senn IE80? From what i have read the M-100 are kinda like the IE80: emphasized bass, pleasant treble and laid back mid.

 

[egokun]

Does the M-100 similar to the Senn IE80? From what i have read the M-100 are kinda like the IE80: emphasized bass, pleasant treble and laid back mid.

I have the IE8. It's generally described as a bass monster, but its bass is much more balanced than the M-100's, much less boomy and overpowered.
Treble is more subdued than the M-100's, but the midrange is much more present and engaging.

 

[Audioutte]

I think even if these headphones were swapped with HD800 drivers, you guys would look outside that they are the V-moda M-100 and then start judging what the inside will sound like... "overpowering bass"...
 
I think there should be blind test studies on what people think about the sound. One group should be told that they are the Sennheiser HD650, the second group should be told that they are beats by dre studios, the third should be told that they are v-moda crossfade lps, the fourth should be told that they are v-moda m-100 and the last fifth group should not know what headphones they are.
 
All should do a sound test on all genres of music with high-quality files and sources.
 
I bet you these type of studies will reveal how completely deceptively people can review audio gear based on looks and what they seem to be "suited" for along with personal biases.
 
The M-80's by the way are nice headphones especially for the price. I've tested them out extensively. But the M-100 are far more flatter, clear and detail catching but I think they get mistakenly labeled as "bass overpowering or bass heavy" because the bass reproduction capability is far more than the majority of headphones. These headphones give you the bass the track fully intended regardless if the amount of bass from musical aesthetical point of view is not very pleasing.
 
I've found them to expose tracks for what they are. Which means bass bloated tracks get played with the poor audio aesthetics of most mainstream music but music like beethoven, bach and mozart get played with the musical and audio pleasing genius found from the source beautifully and accurately with a wider-sound stage than most headphones including much more high-priced headphones. You actually feel you are there.
 
The M80's though nice headphones have some major flaws which v-moda worked out...
-Their mid range was good but the highs were rolled-off.
-The headphones were lacking some sound-stage. Slightly narrow sound stage but still good.
-They were slightly treble-heavy with some of the bass laid-back.
-Sound isolation was not good at all along with sound leakage being a problem.
 
Many "audiophiles" mistake treble-heavy sound as quality sound and even many times as accurate. Bass-heavy sound always gets far more trashed than treble-heavy. In fact, I've never seen treble-heavy sound ever get trashed. But trust me, both are just as bad in quality and both deserve the same bashing.
 
Before comparing the M-100's to the M-80's, make sure both are connected to a decent dac/amp with a decent source and high-quality audio files.  Why? Because the M-100's I've found to actually need a dedicated dac/amp even though the are only 32 ohms and the improvement they get is not minimal but rather by two times as much better sound quality. They still sound very good without a dedicated dac/amp and still beat the M-80's by a long shot but their full potential comes with a decent dedicated dac/amp.
 
The M-80's also improve very slightly when connected with a decent dedicated dac/amp. M-80's are FAR less capable headphones than the M-100's. They are still nice though but not up to the level of the M-100's and I would also like to point out that they are not a "proper apples to apples" comparison.
 
Comparing the M-80's to the M-100's is almost like taking a ferrari 458 and comparing it to a Ferrari F12 Berlinetta.  Both cars have completely different engines and these headphones also have completely different drivers as well ( 40MM vs 50MM).  Both cars have completely different aerodynamics and these headphones are different in this perspective too. (On-ear vs Over-ear.) Both cars are also priced very differently and so are the headphones. ($150 on amazon vs $300 on amazon).
 
Anybody who is reading reviews to make a buying decision on the M-100's or the M-80's needs to be aware of the completely absurd comparisons which go between these two headphones along with misinformation, biases and self-proclaimed "audiophiles" or "experts" who are giving flat-out incorrect bias snap judgements.
 
Often times they will listen to the gear and not the music coming from the gear. This by design is guaranteed to bias judgments and not objectiveness. 

 

[dbdynsty25]

I don't know if I'd go as far as to say they destroy the M80 but they are a bit better overall. But like you said...completely different headphones and are really in two separate categories all together.

 

[egokun]

I don't get your point.

I've never heard the M-80, but how would that change my opinion of the M-100? Headphone manifacturers don't make new, more expensive models to "improve" upon the "lesser" models. They make new models to offer a different sound, to offer a product that suits different uses and purposes. And each one of us has different tastes, and of course, a different perception of sound and music.

If the M-100 really "give you the bass the track fully intended", then why so many other headphones don't even attempt to give that amount of bass? Why are so many other headphones "muddy" and "bass heavy", but the M-100 sound should be considered accurate and true to the source? Why can't I get even a fraction of the M-100's bass quantity with my ATH-AD2000, not even with bass boost on my iPod (BTW, the AD2000 are excellent with classical)? Why don't the "92% accurate" Ety ER-4s offer that amount of bass?

Treble-heavy sound gets trashed a lot. Those who trash treble-heavy sound are the people who call treble-light headphones "mellow" and "non-fatiguing". You see a lot of them.

I've tried the M-100 amped. The sound didn't change that much. The amp boosted frequencies other than bass, but didn't make the M-100 more interesting or exciting. Rather, it made the M-100 flatter. Less thumping, but less... unique. It took away some of its "personality". The opposite happens with other cans I own, like the AD2000, the HD558, the K518DJ.

I think that saying that people mostly judge sound based on looks and what the headphones are supposed to be suited for, is quite rash and offensive. Many people here have listened to a lot of music through so many different headphones and sources. And not all of them have settled for the best-looking, best-reviewed, most expensive gear available. They have settled for what they liked the best. And many of them still haven't stopped trying out new gear.

I know what music I like, and I know how I like it to sound. The M-100 don't make the majority of the music I listen to, sound the way I like it. I don't judge the M-100 based on what it's supposed to be suited too; I listened to it, and I know that it isn't suited to MY PERSONAL TASTE. And heaven knows just anyone would want it to sound wonderful based on looks, because it's a beautifully designed product.

So, again, I don't get your point. I don't think someone suggested that the M-80 is OBJECTIVELY better than the M-100. Rather, someone simply prefers the sound of the M-80, and I don't see anything wrong with that. As for my previus post, I responded to someone asking if the M-100 sounds similar to the IE80, and based on my experience with the IE8, I said that it really doesn't. Very different timbre, very different signature.

 

[plakat]

Quote:

But the M-100 are far more flatter, clear and detail catching but I think they get mistakenly labeled as "bass overpowering or bass heavy" because the bass reproduction capability is far more than the majority of headphones. These headphones give you the bass the track fully intended regardless if the amount of bass from musical aesthetical point of view is not very pleasing.

 
M-100 Flatter? Interesting take...
"the track fully intended" -- Wrong.