skyrim-sword wrote

r00t_b33r wrote

cwill2014 wrote I have a question. Between the Beats Studios and the Audio Technica ATH-M50s, which headphone has more powerful bass and overall better sound quality?

M50 is better for both. The Studios may have more mid-bass, but they lack sub-bass (0-30 kHz) entirely, which is just ridiculous. and the bass is of higher quality on the M50. The M50 has better sound quality.

Not to mention the M50 is less than half the price of the Studios, doesn't use batteries, is built better, has more features, I can go on.

Sorry I have to ask, does the average consumer know what 30Hz sounds like? I was AB-ing some headphones I have on a pop/R&B song I have by Usher and it was VERY hard for me to distinguish any 30Hz sounds. If you're wondering about whether or not I can hear 30Hz, yes I can.

[img]http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=1383&graphID[]=1673&graphID[]=3101&graphID[]=1493[/img]

[img]http://dl.thetechgame.com/u/36091706/30Hz%20Look.bmp[/img]

^If the images don't load, just copy the URL.

With my Skullcandy Hesh headphones, it was rather obvious to my ears that they lacked any sort of sub-bass. I could see why the average consumer would like it though since it does have decent bass punch, despite what the graphs show.

However, comparing my Shure SRH940's (some call it bass-light), Sennheiser HD238 (fun headphone), and Sennheiser CX300's (really bassy headphone), it was hard for me to detect any 30Hz sounds in the track. Maybe I was hearing it but I couldn't tell. In other words, maybe I could the 30Hz, but I couldn't distinguish it from the other frequencies.

The point being, even if the Beats Studio headphones can't playback sounds in the 30Hz range, does the average consumer care? Usually when one says the Beats have 'incredible' bass, for me that implies they have either 'deep' bass (upper sub-bass) and/or good bass punch.

My numbers may have been off, and unfortunately I'm going off of what other people are saying. I have so little first-hand experience with headphones that it's almost embarrassing. No stores I've ever been to carry anything higher-end than Beats and none of my friends are willing to spend more than I am. Money is my only biggest inhibitor.

The highest-end audio I have experienced is my Audio Technica M50. I have heard the Studios a number of times and auditioned them for a short time, and I can tell that I prefer the bass on the M50. I can tell it does go "deeper," at least that's how I thought it sounded. I have very few references.

I'll stop complaining now.

r00t_b33r wrote

skyrim-sword wrote

r00t_b33r wrote

cwill2014 wrote I have a question. Between the Beats Studios and the Audio Technica ATH-M50s, which headphone has more powerful bass and overall better sound quality?

M50 is better for both. The Studios may have more mid-bass, but they lack sub-bass (0-30 kHz) entirely, which is just ridiculous. and the bass is of higher quality on the M50. The M50 has better sound quality.

Not to mention the M50 is less than half the price of the Studios, doesn't use batteries, is built better, has more features, I can go on.

Sorry I have to ask, does the average consumer know what 30Hz sounds like? I was AB-ing some headphones I have on a pop/R&B song I have by Usher and it was VERY hard for me to distinguish any 30Hz sounds. If you're wondering about whether or not I can hear 30Hz, yes I can.

[img]http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=1383&graphID[]=1673&graphID[]=3101&graphID[]=1493[/img]

[img]http://dl.thetechgame.com/u/36091706/30Hz%20Look.bmp[/img]

^If the images don't load, just copy the URL.

With my Skullcandy Hesh headphones, it was rather obvious to my ears that they lacked any sort of sub-bass. I could see why the average consumer would like it though since it does have decent bass punch, despite what the graphs show.

However, comparing my Shure SRH940's (some call it bass-light), Sennheiser HD238 (fun headphone), and Sennheiser CX300's (really bassy headphone), it was hard for me to detect any 30Hz sounds in the track. Maybe I was hearing it but I couldn't tell. In other words, maybe I could the 30Hz, but I couldn't distinguish it from the other frequencies.

The point being, even if the Beats Studio headphones can't playback sounds in the 30Hz range, does the average consumer care? Usually when one says the Beats have 'incredible' bass, for me that implies they have either 'deep' bass (upper sub-bass) and/or good bass punch.

My numbers may have been off, and unfortunately I'm going off of what other people are saying. I have so little first-hand experience with headphones that it's almost embarrassing. No stores I've ever been to carry anything higher-end than Beats and none of my friends are willing to spend more than I am. Money is my only biggest inhibitor.

The highest-end audio I have experienced is my Audio Technica M50. I have heard the Studios a number of times and auditioned them for a short time, and I can tell that I prefer the bass on the M50. I can tell it does go "deeper," at least that's how I thought it sounded. I have very few references.

I'll stop complaining now.

Yeah it's okay. It's a good question to bring up on Head-Fi. Also, yes I agree with you on the bass of the M50's vs the Studios.

skyrim-sword wrote

r00t_b33r wrote

skyrim-sword wrote

r00t_b33r wrote

cwill2014 wrote I have a question. Between the Beats Studios and the Audio Technica ATH-M50s, which headphone has more powerful bass and overall better sound quality?

M50 is better for both. The Studios may have more mid-bass, but they lack sub-bass (0-30 kHz) entirely, which is just ridiculous. and the bass is of higher quality on the M50. The M50 has better sound quality.

Not to mention the M50 is less than half the price of the Studios, doesn't use batteries, is built better, has more features, I can go on.

Sorry I have to ask, does the average consumer know what 30Hz sounds like? I was AB-ing some headphones I have on a pop/R&B song I have by Usher and it was VERY hard for me to distinguish any 30Hz sounds. If you're wondering about whether or not I can hear 30Hz, yes I can.

[img]http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=1383&graphID[]=1673&graphID[]=3101&graphID[]=1493[/img]

[img]http://dl.thetechgame.com/u/36091706/30Hz%20Look.bmp[/img]

^If the images don't load, just copy the URL.

With my Skullcandy Hesh headphones, it was rather obvious to my ears that they lacked any sort of sub-bass. I could see why the average consumer would like it though since it does have decent bass punch, despite what the graphs show.

However, comparing my Shure SRH940's (some call it bass-light), Sennheiser HD238 (fun headphone), and Sennheiser CX300's (really bassy headphone), it was hard for me to detect any 30Hz sounds in the track. Maybe I was hearing it but I couldn't tell. In other words, maybe I could the 30Hz, but I couldn't distinguish it from the other frequencies.

The point being, even if the Beats Studio headphones can't playback sounds in the 30Hz range, does the average consumer care? Usually when one says the Beats have 'incredible' bass, for me that implies they have either 'deep' bass (upper sub-bass) and/or good bass punch.

My numbers may have been off, and unfortunately I'm going off of what other people are saying. I have so little first-hand experience with headphones that it's almost embarrassing. No stores I've ever been to carry anything higher-end than Beats and none of my friends are willing to spend more than I am. Money is my only biggest inhibitor.

The highest-end audio I have experienced is my Audio Technica M50. I have heard the Studios a number of times and auditioned them for a short time, and I can tell that I prefer the bass on the M50. I can tell it does go "deeper," at least that's how I thought it sounded. I have very few references.

I'll stop complaining now.

Yeah it's okay. It's a good question to bring up on Head-Fi. Also, yes I agree with you on the bass of the M50's vs the Studios. I would still consider the M50's a bassier headphone despite what others say about them being 'neutral'-ish.

I used them for quite awhile with Beyerdynamic velour pads (my friend with Pro700 Mk IIs took a liking to my M50 pads, and gave me the BD pads from some aviation headphones. I wonder why they would use velour for aviation...) and it made them so much brighter! They sounded like my SR80is, but again, my experience is limited. When I finally got some new M50 pads, the bass sounded powerful, but really nice coming from the velours.

I consider them neutral because they're my reference for everything, and people seem to agree that they are more or less neutral. I wish I could get my hands on some higher-end neutral cans. I won't for some time, considering the Pro 900s are my next step. I'm no bass-head, but the closed design, versatility, removable cable, and portability have me pretty much tied down to them.

r00t_b33r wrote

skyrim-sword wrote

r00t_b33r wrote

skyrim-sword wrote

r00t_b33r wrote

cwill2014 wrote I have a question. Between the Beats Studios and the Audio Technica ATH-M50s, which headphone has more powerful bass and overall better sound quality?

M50 is better for both. The Studios may have more mid-bass, but they lack sub-bass (0-30 kHz) entirely, which is just ridiculous. and the bass is of higher quality on the M50. The M50 has better sound quality.

Not to mention the M50 is less than half the price of the Studios, doesn't use batteries, is built better, has more features, I can go on.

Sorry I have to ask, does the average consumer know what 30Hz sounds like? I was AB-ing some headphones I have on a pop/R&B song I have by Usher and it was VERY hard for me to distinguish any 30Hz sounds. If you're wondering about whether or not I can hear 30Hz, yes I can.

[img]http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=1383&graphID[]=1673&graphID[]=3101&graphID[]=1493[/img]

[img]http://dl.thetechgame.com/u/36091706/30Hz%20Look.bmp[/img]

^If the images don't load, just copy the URL.

With my Skullcandy Hesh headphones, it was rather obvious to my ears that they lacked any sort of sub-bass. I could see why the average consumer would like it though since it does have decent bass punch, despite what the graphs show.

However, comparing my Shure SRH940's (some call it bass-light), Sennheiser HD238 (fun headphone), and Sennheiser CX300's (really bassy headphone), it was hard for me to detect any 30Hz sounds in the track. Maybe I was hearing it but I couldn't tell. In other words, maybe I could the 30Hz, but I couldn't distinguish it from the other frequencies.

The point being, even if the Beats Studio headphones can't playback sounds in the 30Hz range, does the average consumer care? Usually when one says the Beats have 'incredible' bass, for me that implies they have either 'deep' bass (upper sub-bass) and/or good bass punch.

My numbers may have been off, and unfortunately I'm going off of what other people are saying. I have so little first-hand experience with headphones that it's almost embarrassing. No stores I've ever been to carry anything higher-end than Beats and none of my friends are willing to spend more than I am. Money is my only biggest inhibitor.

The highest-end audio I have experienced is my Audio Technica M50. I have heard the Studios a number of times and auditioned them for a short time, and I can tell that I prefer the bass on the M50. I can tell it does go "deeper," at least that's how I thought it sounded. I have very few references.

I'll stop complaining now.

Yeah it's okay. It's a good question to bring up on Head-Fi. Also, yes I agree with you on the bass of the M50's vs the Studios. I would still consider the M50's a bassier headphone despite what others say about them being 'neutral'-ish.

I used them for quite awhile with Beyerdynamic velour pads (my friend with Pro700 Mk IIs took a liking to my M50 pads, and gave me the BD pads from some aviation headphones. I wonder why they would use velour for aviation...) and it made them so much brighter! They sounded like my SR80is, but again, my experience is limited. When I finally got some new M50 pads, the bass sounded powerful, but really nice coming from the velours.

I consider them neutral because they're my reference for everything, and people seem to agree that they are more or less neutral. I wish I could get my hands on some higher-end neutral cans. I won't for some time, considering the Pro 900s are my next step. I'm no bass-head, but the closed design, versatility, removable cable, and portability have me pretty much tied down to them.

I would recommend the Shure SRH940's but they might be a bit lacking in bass if you're considering the Pro 900's (which a lot of people on Head-Fi seem to like; I hope to try one out some day too).

skyrim-sword wrote

r00t_b33r wrote

skyrim-sword wrote

r00t_b33r wrote

skyrim-sword wrote

r00t_b33r wrote

cwill2014 wrote I have a question. Between the Beats Studios and the Audio Technica ATH-M50s, which headphone has more powerful bass and overall better sound quality?

M50 is better for both. The Studios may have more mid-bass, but they lack sub-bass (0-30 kHz) entirely, which is just ridiculous. and the bass is of higher quality on the M50. The M50 has better sound quality.

Not to mention the M50 is less than half the price of the Studios, doesn't use batteries, is built better, has more features, I can go on.

Sorry I have to ask, does the average consumer know what 30Hz sounds like? I was AB-ing some headphones I have on a pop/R&B song I have by Usher and it was VERY hard for me to distinguish any 30Hz sounds. If you're wondering about whether or not I can hear 30Hz, yes I can.

[img]http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=1383&graphID[]=1673&graphID[]=3101&graphID[]=1493[/img]

[img]http://dl.thetechgame.com/u/36091706/30Hz%20Look.bmp[/img]

^If the images don't load, just copy the URL.

With my Skullcandy Hesh headphones, it was rather obvious to my ears that they lacked any sort of sub-bass. I could see why the average consumer would like it though since it does have decent bass punch, despite what the graphs show.

However, comparing my Shure SRH940's (some call it bass-light), Sennheiser HD238 (fun headphone), and Sennheiser CX300's (really bassy headphone), it was hard for me to detect any 30Hz sounds in the track. Maybe I was hearing it but I couldn't tell. In other words, maybe I could the 30Hz, but I couldn't distinguish it from the other frequencies.

The point being, even if the Beats Studio headphones can't playback sounds in the 30Hz range, does the average consumer care? Usually when one says the Beats have 'incredible' bass, for me that implies they have either 'deep' bass (upper sub-bass) and/or good bass punch.

My numbers may have been off, and unfortunately I'm going off of what other people are saying. I have so little first-hand experience with headphones that it's almost embarrassing. No stores I've ever been to carry anything higher-end than Beats and none of my friends are willing to spend more than I am. Money is my only biggest inhibitor.

The highest-end audio I have experienced is my Audio Technica M50. I have heard the Studios a number of times and auditioned them for a short time, and I can tell that I prefer the bass on the M50. I can tell it does go "deeper," at least that's how I thought it sounded. I have very few references.

I'll stop complaining now.

Yeah it's okay. It's a good question to bring up on Head-Fi. Also, yes I agree with you on the bass of the M50's vs the Studios. I would still consider the M50's a bassier headphone despite what others say about them being 'neutral'-ish.

I used them for quite awhile with Beyerdynamic velour pads (my friend with Pro700 Mk IIs took a liking to my M50 pads, and gave me the BD pads from some aviation headphones. I wonder why they would use velour for aviation...) and it made them so much brighter! They sounded like my SR80is, but again, my experience is limited. When I finally got some new M50 pads, the bass sounded powerful, but really nice coming from the velours.

I consider them neutral because they're my reference for everything, and people seem to agree that they are more or less neutral. I wish I could get my hands on some higher-end neutral cans. I won't for some time, considering the Pro 900s are my next step. I'm no bass-head, but the closed design, versatility, removable cable, and portability have me pretty much tied down to them.

I would recommend the Shure SRH940's but they might be a bit lacking in bass if you're considering the Pro 900's (which a lot of people on Head-Fi seem to like; I hope to try one out some day too).

Yeah, I've been eyeing the 940s, but I think the Pro 900s are better for me. I love electronic music and I like the look of the Pro 900 more. I think Ultrasones are some of the best looking cans out there. If only I could have both, though...

skyrim-sword wrote
Sorry I have to ask, does the average consumer know what 30Hz or below sounds like? I was AB-ing some headphones I have on a pop/R&B song by Usher and it was VERY hard for me to distinguish any sounds in the 30Hz or below frequency range. If you're wondering about whether or not I can hear 30Hz, yes I can (I have a 10 second 30Hz WAV file as part of my headphone burn-in playlist).

[img]http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=1383&graphID[]=1673&graphID[]=3101&graphID[]=1493[/img]

[img]http://dl.thetechgame.com/u/36091706/30Hz%20Look.bmp[/img]

^If the images don't load, just copy the URL.

With my Skullcandy Hesh headphones, it was rather obvious to my ears that they lacked any sort of sub-bass. I could see why the average consumer would like it though since it does have decent bass punch, despite what the graphs show.

However, comparing my Shure SRH940's (some call it bass-light), Sennheiser HD238 (fun headphone), and Sennheiser CX300's (really bassy earphone), it was hard for me to detect any sounds in the 30Hz or below range from the track. Maybe I was hearing it but I couldn't tell. In other words, maybe I could hear the 30Hz, but I couldn't distinguish it from the other sub-bass frequencies.

The point being, even if the Beats Studio headphones can't playback sounds in the 30Hz range, does the average consumer care? Usually when one says the Beats have 'incredible' bass, for me that implies they have either 'deep' bass (upper sub-bass) and/or good bass punch. The song I chose for testing purposes was chosen because I felt that it represents the kind of music an average consumer would listen to.

Sorry if this is off-topic, and I don't mean to start a whole side-conversation. I was just curious since you mentioned that and I found it hard to justify for my case.

The Shures are pretty infamous for not having much extension either, but you have a point. Not very many pop songs have bass that gets down low, but for the people that really appreciate bass, not going down to 20hz probably won't cut it. It is, however, good enough for most consumers, but paying $300 for "good enough" is kind of ridiculous.



Just wondering if the Beats--anyone care to test?--can get down that ^^^ low (Around 0:45). Just tested it with my $15 XePort 5010 and every drop was quite audible.

Out of curiosity, what song did you use?

My Portapros hit that very nicely.

[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]

[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]

Two more. Return II Space has it going through almost the entire song. If you can't hear it, then the music is ruined. King Kong has the kind of bass that's meant to be really felt. Again, Portapros handle these like a champ!

This guy is definately right, Beats are WAYYY overrated. My $50 skullcandy hesh sound the same as beats. Your paying for the b on the side, thats it.

Willybobo wrote This guy is definately right, Beats are WAYYY overrated. My $50 skullcandy hesh sound the same as beats. Your paying for the b on the side, thats it.

Your Skullcandies are just as hyped and overpriced as Beats. You can get WAYYY better sound quality and build quality for less. People tend to think of SC as a budget brand, but there are always better alternatives.

r00t_b33r wrote

Willybobo wrote This guy is definately right, Beats are WAYYY overrated. My $50 skullcandy hesh sound the same as beats. Your paying for the b on the side, thats it.

Your Skullcandies are just as hyped and overpriced as Beats. You can get WAYYY better sound quality and build quality for less. People tend to think of SC as a budget brand, but there are always better alternatives.

$50 is pretty low though. I can only think of the Sennheiser HD428, Koss Portapro, maybe the Sony V6, and Creative Aurvana Live! as definitive upgrades for the same price. And their warranty is pretty cool too. I've been tempted to ask around for a pair of broken Ink'd IEM's that everyone seems to break to get that 50% off coupon (part of their lifetime warranty deal) to try out the Mix Masters. Heck, $75 for the Aviators is a banging deal as well if you consider that it's a portable headphone. Then again, Koss' lifetime warranty is awesome too. I've been meaning to drive up to Milwaukee to Koss HQ to get my replacement pair of KSC75's.