The SHP5400 are strange beasts. The construction is extremely simple and yet unique in its own way. The single-piece plastic headband threads through the cups, which slide up and down quite freely. As a result of the loose attachment of the cups, the whole structure is a bit wobbly. The pads and headband are made of foam and covered with a smooth material not unlike that used on the Ultrasone Zinos. The single-sided cable is threaded through the headband internally and has a length of six feet – quite excessive for portable use. The cable is soft and flexible, however, so I had no problem tying up a loop and using the headphones on the go, a task made much more difficult by thick cables such as those found on Grados and the ATH-M30.

Brief: DJ-oriented portable headphone from Rock-It Sounds

Frequency Response: 20-20,000 Hz | Impedance: 64 Ω | Sensitivity: 114 dB SPL/1mW

Form factor: over-the-ear | Space-Saving Mechanism: N/A

Cord: detachable, ~4-6 ft, coiled, I-plug, detachable

Build Quality (8/10): No complaints here – the R-DJ is plasticky on the outside but its construction is no worse than those of many higher-end DJ headphones. The plastics are rubberized and pleasant to the touch. The headband has a wide metal band running through it and metal plates decorate the earcups. The construction is a little tough to fold up but in terms of durability should last the course. The coiled cable is detachable, terminated with an locking connector at the headphone end and an I-plug on the other side. It’s a bit heavy but still very much usable both at home and while on the move.

Comfort (8.5/10): The R-DJ clamps pretty tightly but has thick pads and spacious cups to it’s comfortable to wear for long periods of time. The pleather pads feature handsome white stitching (a-la Skullcandy Mix Master) and the headband pad is amply soft. Those who are sensitive to clamping pressure might be better off with Rock-It Sounds’ similarly-priced R-Studio model but on the whole the R-DJ is very comfortable.

Isolation (8/10): The well-sealing pads and good clamping force put the R-DJ on par with other DJ headphones, such as the Ultrasone PRO450 and Numark PHX, in this regard.

Sound (7.25/10): The sound of the Rock-It Sounds R-DJ is not atypical of a DJ headphone – the headphone has strong bass, slightly less prominent mids, and good treble energy. It’s a slightly v-shaped signature, but an enjoyable one for sure. I preferred the R-DJ to Rock-It Sounds’ similarly-priced R-Studio model for its tighter bass – the R-Studio may be a little less v-shaped in signature but its bass is boomier compared to the R-DJ.

The midrange of the R-DJ is slightly laid back but not overly recessed. The bass is tight enough that bleed is not an issue and while it wasn’t as clear as the rather more thin-sounding Sennheiser HD428, on the whole I did not find the R-DJ to be lacking in clarity for the price.

The treble of the R-DJ has good energy. It’s a little prone to sibilance, but only when sibilance is present on the track. The pricier Creative Aurvana Live! 2 is admittedly a little smoother and more refined, especially at high volumes, but it’s not hugely better than the R-DJ. The Monoprice 8323, on the other hand, is a little too dark in comparison to the Rock-It Sounds set.

The presentation of the R-DJ is pretty wide – almost on par with the HD428 but with better depth, making the Sennheiser unit sound overly distant in comparison. It makes the Monoprice 8323 sound overly closed-in and congested. The R-DJ is not the most precise headphone, but for a sub-$100 enhanced-bass DJ set its imaging is not bad at all.

Value (8.5/10). (MSRP: $75.99; Street Price: $76) The Rock-It Sounds R-DJ is my favorite out of the company’s latest releases, offering up a slightly v-shaped sound signature with ample bass. The sound is a little rough around the edges, but it has no major flaws and is easy to enjoy. The design, likewise, uses a lot of plastic but the R-DJ easily competes with pricier DJ cans in comfort, durability, and isolation. I even like the compact, easy-to-recycle packaging. Overall, an easy recommendation for a versatile DJ-style headphone.







Brief: First on-ear headphones from China-based smartphone manufacturer Xiaomi, who have already brought us the excellent Piston 2 in-ear earphones



Frequency Response: 20-20,000 Hz | Impedance: 32 Ω | Sensitivity: 100 dB SPL/1mW

Form factor: on-ear / over-the-ear | Space-Saving Mechanism: Collapsible

Cord: detachable dual entry (2.5mm connectors), 4.5ft (1.4m) length, 1-button remote and mic

Accessories: hard carrying case, soft pouch, airplane adapter, ¼ (6.3mm) adapter, and two sets of earpads



Build Quality (9.5/10): The Xiaomi Mi Headphones are quite unique in that they can be converted from supraaural (on-ear) to circumaural (over-ear) by simply swapping between the two sets of factory-supplied earpads, which twist to lock in place. The earcups are machined aluminum with metal mesh grilles, and have a decidedly Grado-like aesthetic – except that metal Grados cost upwards of $250. The earpads are of excellent quality and there is ample padding on the headband as well. Hinges below the headband allow the Mi Headphones to collapse for storage and transport.

The cord is detachable, but dual-sided, with a recessed 2.5mm connector on each earcup. It is well-made – TPE above the y-split and nylon-sheathed below. The y-split is also where the microphone and single-button remote control are located. One minor issue I found is that during active use, the cloth-covered bottom portion of the cable carries microphonics (cable noise) into the microphone, which can affect voice transmission quality for the other party.

On the whole, the Mi Headphones are well-made all around - many of the parts are metal, and those that aren't are made of heavy plastics, giving the headphones a very solid feel. What impressed me even more, though, is the superb attention to detail – for instance, the cable connectors have raised L/R markings, but there's also color-coding on both the connectors and their jackets, as well as the corresponding jacks on the headphones. The inclusion of both a hard zippered case and soft pouch is welcome, too.



Comfort (8.5/10): The soft padding on the earcups and headband, together with moderate clamping force and pivoting earcups, make the Mi Headphones comfortable for hours in on-ear mode – more so than, for instance, the The soft padding on the earcups and headband, together with moderate clamping force and pivoting earcups, make the Mi Headphones comfortable for hours in on-ear mode – more so than, for instance, the V-Moda M-80 or Sennheiser HD25 . The over-ear pads are large enough to be fully circumaural, but may be a touch shallow for large ears. Still, for a portable headphone, they are among the best I’ve tried.



Isolation (7/10): The Mi Headphones are designed to look like open headphones, but the grilles are largely decorative. Inside, the earcups are heavily damped and more akin to semi-open - or maybe even closed - headphones. Combined with the soft, well-sealing on-ear pads, this leads to very decent noise isolation and low leakage. They may not be the perfect set to use at the library, but for everyday applications they are equivalent to small closed-back headphones.



Sound (7.5/10): The two different pad options of the Mi Headphones change more than just the fit and look of the headphones – swapping the pads also changes the sound pretty drastically. The on-ear pads have a bassier sound with a more pronounced “v-shape”, meaning the bass and treble sound elevated compared to the midrange. This tuning is punchy and fun, and easily competes with consumer-class on-ears like the original Beats by Dre Solo and the Monster DNA On-Ear.

The over-ear pads provide a less bassy sound, reducing both impact and depth compared to the on-ear configuration. Bass bloat is also diminished slightly. Perhaps the over-ear option was tuned for less bass on purpose, in order to compete with more balanced, higher-end full-size headphones. In any case, the lower bass emphasis draws more attention to the forward upper mids and prominent lower treble of the Mi Headphones, so the over-ear tuning ends up sounding like a more neutral Monster DNA PRO – not that the $280 Monster flagship is poor company for Xiaomi’s freshman headphone effort.

The v-shaped sound signature of the Mi Headphones means they have more bass punch and power compared to flat/reference sets. For instance, there is more of both depth and impact compared to the Sennheiser HD428 and HD429 (much more with the Mi Headphones in on-ear mode). It’s definitely not a basshead level of slam and rumble, but casual listeners won't be left wanting for bass.

The punchy bass of the Mi Headphones gives them a warmer tone and more full-bodied sound compared to sets like the Sennhesier HD428, but also a little less clarity. The mids of the HD428 – and other flatter headphones – seem more forward in comparison, thanks to lack of bass and treble emphasis. Clarity is similar to the V-Moda M-80, though the M-80 is even warmer, smoother, and more forgiving (significantly more expensive, too). In over-ear mode, the Mi Headphones lose some of that warmth as the upper midrange/lower treble emphasis becomes more audible.

At the top, the Mi Headphones can be a tiny bit harsh, especially compared to notably smooth-sounding sets such as the M-80. Even the similarly-priced HD429 can sound more refined, albeit less lively and dynamic. However, the treble energy does help the Mi Headphones maintain a solid all-around presentation for an on-ear portable headphone – neither too forward nor too laid-back, and no more congested than the M-80.

Select Comparisons

Xiaomi Piston 2 (on-ear setting)

Note: normally I try to avoid IEM vs headphone comparisons, but as the Piston 2 is one of my recommended IEMs, this one was unavoidable.

There's no denying that the Piston 2 is a bass-heavy earphone. Even in their bassier on-ear configuration, the Mi Headphones are more balanced, with bass that is less intrusive and more controlled. The Piston 2 does have slightly better bass depth as a result of its more powerful low end, but the Mi Headphones are not at all lacking in punch. A slightly greater amount of upper midrange lift on the Piston 2 helps maintain its clarity despite its more bloated bass. Overall, the two Xiaomi models aren’t vastly different – both pursue v-shaped sound signatures with punchy bass and prominent treble – but the shallower bass and cooler overall tone of the Mi on-ear do result in substantially different voicing for the on-ear model.

Sennheiser PX100-II (on-ear setting)

I wanted to compare the new Xiaomi to one of the few portable, supraaural, open-back headphones still on the market, and the $70 PX100-II was the closest in price I could get my hands on. While the Mi Headphones turned out to not be nearly as open-backed as they look, the Sennheiser unit still made for an interesting comparison. The PX100-II offers up less bass than the Xiaomi (in the on-ear configuration) and lacks a little in the way of dynamics. The Mi is more v-shaped, with a more powerful - but also slightly more boomy - low end. It is also brighter and clearer, with more energetic and crisp treble, resulting in a more exciting and lively sound. The PX100-II tends to be more forward in the midrange, and yet surprisingly is not any clearer or more intelligible. It is smoother, however. The presentation of the Sennheiser unit is a little more laid-back, but, thanks in part to the darker tone, not any more airy or spacious.

Sennheiser HD25-1 II (on-ear setting)

This pricier, closed-back on-ear model from Sennheiser made for a much better sound signature match for the Xiaomi than the PX100-II. The HD25 and Mi Headphones (in on-ear mode) both follow v-shaped signatures with punchy but relatively well-controlled (slightly more so on the HD25) bass and relatively bright upper mids and treble. The Mi does have more bass and a warmer overall tone, trading off some clarity, while the HD25 is less muffled despite its recessed midrange. The Sennheiser unit also boasts a similar-sized but slightly more convincing soundstage and sounds more crisp and refined than the Xiaomi – but not to the extent one may expect for a two-fold price increase.

Monster DNA Pro (over-ear setting)

Monster’s full-size DNA Pro was the only headphone I found that made for a good match for the Mi Headphones in their over-ear configuration. It is a bright headphone, notable for its forward upper midrange. The Mi Headphones have less presence there, but follow a similar tuning scheme and have similar voicing. The Mi over-ear has slightly more boosted bass, which gives it a warmer – and arguably more neutral – tone but also sacrifices a bit of clarity. The bass of the DNA Pro is noticeably less powerful, but also tighter, and the brighter Monster unit sounds more analytical on the whole.

Value (8.5/10): The Xiaomi Mi Headphones – the company’s first non-in-ear headphone release – succeed in offering very solid value for money. The sound is punchy and energetic, and changes (mostly in amount of bass boost) between the on-ear and over-ear pads. What impressed me more than the solid performance, however, is the superb design and construction. Whatever they may lack in absolute sonic bang/buck compared to the company’s sub-$20 Piston 2 in-ears, the Mi Headphones make up for with a combination of features unique to their price point, including the convertible on/over-ear design, headset functionality, extensive accessory pack, detachable cables, and outstanding build quality.

Build Quality (8.5/10)

: Built like a typical DJ headphone, the HP1000 is made mostly out of hard and heavy plastic with the exception of the grilles, which are metal inserts. The outside of the earcups is rubberized. Like most DJ headphones in its price range, the HP1000 is both flat-folding and collapsible and comes with a long and thick coiled cord. The construction feels solid and should be nearly bulletproof in consumer applications but fails to match the ATH-M50 and some of the pricier DJ headphones out there in fit and finish.

Frequency Response: 12-20,000 Hz | Impedance: 32 Ω | Sensitivity: 102 dB SPL/1mW

Form factor: over-the-ear | Space-Saving Mechanism: N/A

Cord: detachable, 4ft (1.2m) straight | 8ft (2.4m) coiled

Build Quality (10/10): The construction of the PRO40 impresses right out of the box – the headphones are built largely out of a durable aluminum alloy and the few parts that aren’t, are made of hard, sturdy plastic. The rubber headband pad and pleather earcups are soft and pleasant to the touch. The 3.5mm jack is located on the left earcup and the headphone comes with two interchangeable cords – a nylon-sheathed portable-length cable with microphone and 3-button remote, and a long coiled cable with ¼” adapter for studio use (note: the coiled cable will not be included in the box with the first batch of the headphones, but will be available to customers at no additional charge via the Munitio website). Both cables are very well-made, utilizing high-grade materials and a design that shows good attention to detail. The headphones also come with a very sturdy hard-shell carrying case.

Comfort (8.5/10): Despite the bulletproof construction, the PRO40 is not a heavy headphone and fits on the head very securely thanks to what Munitio calls CODA AXIS technology – a mechanism that affords the earcup a wide range of motion independent of the rest of the headphone. The same mechanism keeps the headphones comfortable, though the protein leather earpads can get a touch warm with extended wear.

Isolation (8/10): The soft pads and adjustable fit provide a good seal between headphone and ear. Isolation is above average and noise leakage is average for a headphone of this size.

Sound (7.75/10): Not unlike Munitio’s in-ear earphones, the company’s first full-size headphone delivers smooth sound underpinned by powerful bass. The bass response of the titanium-coated drivers used in the PRO40 beats everything I’ve heard since the Denon AH-D1100 in quantity, boasting both great impact and depth. The PRO40 sounds bassier than the vTrue model from subwoofer manufacturer Velodyne, and much bassier than the V-Moda M-80.

Some bloat is to be expected considering the bass quantity, but on the whole the PRO40 holds up rather well. Its bass tends to be more intrusive in comparison to the Velodyne and V-Moda sets but remains tighter and more controlled than that of the Klipsch’s Image One, another bass-heavy portable headphone. The midrange of the PRO40 gives up some clarity and prominence as a result of the bass emphasis but has a rich, warm tone and still maintains better resolution compared to many other enhanced-bass models. The mids are thick enough that they don’t get crowded out, avoiding the type of heavy midrange veiling that plagues many other headphones of this type.

The top end of the PRO40 is relaxed, but not as rolled off as with the Monoprice 8323 or the classic Sony MDR-V6. The sound is smooth and forgiving, with treble presence about on-par with my V-Moda M-80, but much bigger bass. The Monoprice 8323, for example, sounds quite dull and lacking in dynamics next to the Munitio set and the Denon D1100 isn’t as smooth. The presentation of the PRO40, too, is a little more even than with the Denon set. Whereas the D1100 has a well-layered but intimate presentation, the PRO40 is less forward and a little more versatile. Worth noting also is the high sensitivity of the headphone – the PRO40 is very easy to drive and reaches high volumes as easily with my phone as it does with the HiFiMan HM-901 or a desktop amp.

Value (7.5/10): The Munitio PRO40 is quick to impress with superb build quality and a compliant, comfortable fit. The headphones boast a much better construction than similarly-priced sets such as the Skullcandy Mix Master and Audio-Technica ES10, and back it with a 2-year warranty. The sound loses a bit of refinement to the enhanced bass but is fun and capable all around. Overall, the PRO40 is a good bass-heavy headphone with bulletproof construction, and a great full-size adaptation of Munitio’s in-ear earphones.

Frequency Response: 10-30,000 Hz | Impedance: 32 Ω | Sensitivity: 106dB SPL/1mW

Form factor: over-the-ear | Space-Saving Mechanism: flat-folding

Cord: detachable, 4ft (1.2m) straight w/mic, 1-button remote, and analog volume control

Build Quality (8/10): The original Creative Aurvana Live! has been a budget-friendly audiophile favorite for as long as I can remember not only for its sound, but also its light weight and outstanding comfort. It was never considered a particularly tough headphone, though, and the story is much the same with the new version – mostly plastic parts with a metal headband. The cups are a little thicker compared to the first-gen model, largely due to the way they attach to the headband, but overall, I like the aesthetic of the new CAL! better. The construction also feels a little more solid in the hand, with no shakes or rattles despite the fact that it has more moving parts due to its ability to fold flat for transport and storage.

The CAL! 2 boasts a detachable cable with a 2.5mm connector at the earcup end. While I would have preferred the more common 3.5mm, I’m glad it’s not a proprietary connector and quality replacements won’t be difficult to come by. The stock cable is flat in cross-section and has an inline mic and remote, as well as an analog volume control. The remote and microphone are split up into two separate modules, with the mic located a few inches higher up on the cable than the remote for better voice capture. The analog volume control slider means volume control functionality not only with iPods and iPhones but with most Android and Windows Mobile devices as well.

Comfort (9.5/10): The official product shots of the new CAL! 2 make it look bulkier and heavier compared to the original CAL! but I am pleased to say that the new headphone stays very true to its predecessor on the comfort front. The plastic structure keeps the weight very low, the cups are nice and deep, and the memory foam pads have a large internal diameter. All this yet again makes the Aurvana an absolute standout in wearing comfort, easily the most comfortable portable circumaural headphone in my possession. The only negative, and it is a small one, is that the protein leather earpads can get a little warm with extended wear.

Isolation (6/10): Though leakage is rather low, the passive isolation of CAL! 2 is not great for a closed headphone – enough to make it usable outside, certainly, but not great for noisy environments.

Sound (8.25/10): Listening to the CAL! 2 makes it clear that Creative has chosen not to mess with a good thing too much when it comes to sound. The CAL! 2 is a warm-sounding headphone with impactful bass, its sound a little shifted towards the low end compared to the original Aurvana. Denon did the same thing with their AH-D1100 model in comparison to the previous AH-D1001, but the result there was a monster with more bass than I could tolerate. The CAL! 2 keeps its composure better – it’s a bassy headphone, but not overwhelmingly so.

The midrange of the CAL! 2 drops off somewhat in emphasis and is well warmed-up by the prominent bass. Impressively, midrange clarity is similar to the rather thin-sounding Sennheiser HD428, which has very little bass in comparison to the Aurvana Live! 2. The Aurvana is also clearer and more detailed compared to the recently-reviewed Rock-It Sounds R-DJ despite having stronger and deeper bass, but gives up some clarity to the much more expensive – and significantly brighter – Monster DNA Pro.

The CAL! 2 remains smooth and relaxed through the upper midrange and treble. The top end doesn’t come back up to the level set by the bass for that v-shaped sound signature, instead providing a very inoffensive listening experience somewhat lacking in treble energy. The treble is smoother compared to the R-DJ, HD428, and DNA Pro. As a result, the CAL! 2 is very tolerant of sibilance, harshness, and poor mastering – out of the headphones I’ve tried recently only to the Velodyne vTrue can compete in this respect. There is no chance the CAL! 2 will sound fatiguing to anyone, though the smoothness and lack of a prominent midrange may encourage higher listening volumes.

The presentation of the CAL! 2 is good, especially compared to the vast majority of on-ear headphones. It gives up a little bit of soundstage width to the R-DJ and the heavy bass can be a touch detrimental to overall imaging but overall, for a bass-heavy headphone, the CAL! 2 is plenty spacious.

Select Comparisons

Monster DNA ($150)

A warm-sounding headphone with surprisingly strong mids, the DNA is Monster’s answer to the Beats by Dre Solo following the Beats/Monster breakup. Though it is a small on-ear portable, the DNA is a better signature match for the CAL! 2 than the circumaural DNA Pro. It doesn’t quite have the sound quality to compete with the Aurvana, though, sounding muddier despite its forward mids. The CAL! 2 has more emphasis on the low end but its bass is tighter compared to that of the DNA. The bass-centric balance of the Creative set does have an effect on the mids, which sound a little veiled and recessed but still more natural compared to the DNA. At the top neither headphone has great energy or sparkle but the DNA has a much smaller soundstage, sounding consistently congested thanks to its forward, aggressive sound signature.

V-Moda Crossfade LP2 ($200)

The Crossfade LP2 is V-Moda’s enhanced-bass headphone, complimenting the more audiophile-oriented Crossfade M-80 and M-100 models. Compared the Creative Aurvana Live! 2, it is significantly bassier, boasting more mid-bass impact and sub-bass slam. Considering that the Creative set is not bass-light by any measure, this shows just how powerful the bass is on the V-Moda set. The LP2 pays the price, however, with audibly greater bass bloat and mids that appear somewhat muffled compared to the CAL! 2. The Aurvana sounds significantly cleaner in comparison. Both have somewhat subdued treble but the Crossfade LP2 also suffers from a slightly more congested presentation.

V-Moda M-80 ($200)

Though the M-80 is a compact on-ear headphone, it is the only warm-sounding set in my collection that could compete with the CAL! 2 in sound quality, making for a worthwhile comparison. The M-80 is a rather balanced headphone but still has stronger bass and mids relative to its top end, giving it a warm overall tone. The CAL! 2 places more emphasis on its bass and less emphasis on its midrange, sounding a little recessed there compared to the pricier M-80. Clarity is mostly similar between the two headphones – on bass-light tracks I thought he CAL! had an advantage but as soon as its big low end came into play the more prominent mids of the M-80 suddenly won out. The mids comprise most of the difference between these two headphones; stepping away from the midrange, bass control is better on the M-80 while the CAL! 2 is a little more spacious in presentation.

Velodyne vTrue ($279)

Velodyne’s flagship is an enhanced-bass headphone that seems to be tuned similarly to the new Aurvana – smooth, warm, and certainly not light on the low end. Like the Aurvana, it is a large, closed over-ear headphone that is intended for use both at home and on the go. Compared to the CAL! 2, the vTrue has fatter, more boomy bass and sounds warmer overall. Its midrange is more forward but unlike that of the M-80, it is also thicker compared to the CAL! 2 and sounds less clear as a result. The Aurvana Live! 2 is clearer and also has a little more treble energy than the vTrue, as a result sounding more balanced and refined overall compared to the Velodyne. Both have good soundstage width with spacious presentations, a necessity with all that bass in order to avoid congestion a-la V-Moda Crossfade LP2.

Value (8.5/10): Six years after the release of the original Aurvana Live!, Creative has given the headphone a redesign with the Aurvana Live! 2. The CAL! 2 delivers a warm and lush sound with plenty of bass and good clarity. It may not be the best headphone for accuracy, but it has the perfect consumer sound – warm, impactful, and smooth even at high volumes. It’s also one of my favorites for wearing comfort, thanks to the spacious ear cups and the extremely light weight and, as before, the price is right, with similarly-performing headphones from other big-name brands easily running into the $200 range and higher. The original CAL! is still a great choice, especially as it’s often discounted, but as a bassier option competing with the many enhanced-bass headphones on the market, the new CAL! 2 has a lot going for it.

(A25) Monster DNA Pro Over-Ear

Brief: The newly-released big brother of the Monster Cable DNA on-ears

Frequency Response: N/A | Impedance: N/A | Sensitivity: N/A

Form factor: over-the-ear | Space-Saving Mechanism: Collapsible

Cord: detachable, est. 6ft (1.8m) coiled + 4ft (1.2m) straight w/mic & 3-button remote

Build Quality (9/10): The DNA Pro is made mostly of thick plastic with metal reinforcement of the headband below the hinge. It shares the triangular design of the other sets in the DNA line, though the aesthetic is more striking on the larger DNA Pro. The earcup pads are of excellent quality; the rubber pad on the headband less so, but still adequate. The DNA Pro boasts a detachable cable with a slightly recessed 3.5mm plug. It has ambidextrous cable connectors, so the cord can be plugged in on either side of the headphone. The remaining jack can be used to “daisy chain” a second headphone to the DNA Pro in order to share a signal. The stock cable of the DNA Pro is coiled, but still lightweight enough to be used portably. A straight headset cable with mic and 3-button remote is also included.

Comfort (7.5/10): The cups of the DNA Pro are deep, easily encompassing the entire ear. The triangular shape of the pads works well and the imitation leather is soft and smooth. However, the earcups don’t have quite as much freedom of movement as I would like and, for me at least, seal better at the bottom than at the top. In addition, the headphones are a bit on the heavy side and create a pressure point at the very top of my head – not a big deal, but noticeable compared, for example, to the more lightweight Creative Aurvana Live! 2.

Isolation (8/10): The passive noise isolation is quite good as long as the cups are sealed around the ear – on-par with most DJ-style headphones.

Sound (8.25/10): One may expect Monster’s flagship over-ear headphone to follow in the footsteps of Beats by Dre or offer a logical progression to the warm and bassy sound of the less expensive DNA on-ear. However, the DNA Pro is a different beast altogether. Its tuning focuses on clarity and resolution, and the resulting sound signature is brighter than I had anticipated.

The DNA Pro is not a bass-heavy headphone. The bass is present and not lacking in punch, especially at higher volumes, but the slightly v-shaped overall response of the headphone is tilted up, in favor of the treble, instead of down towards the low end. Bass extension is good – deeper, for example, than with the Sennheiser HD428. Bass control is even better- the bass is much tighter compared to that of the Creative Aurvana Live! 2, Velodyne vTrue, and most other mainstream headphones in the price range.

The excellent bass control and bright tonal tilt afford the DNA Pro no veiling whatsoever in the midrange. The Sennheiser HD428 is noticeably veiled in comparison, the CAL! 2 even more so. The overall response is a little v-shaped, but the mids aren’t particularly recessed, just lacking some fullness at the bottom. The upper midrange and treble of the DNA Pro have plenty of energy.

In comparison to the brighter DNA Pro, the Sennheiser HD428 and CAL! 2 sound smoother through the upper midrange and top end and both – but especially the Creative unit – appear to be almost too laid-back at the top. Due to its treble energy, the DNA Pro sounds best to me at low to moderate volumes. Its sound is detailed and technically very proficient, just a little off tonally compared to what I consider neutral. The presentation, likewise, is very capable, with good width and no congestion, but a more balanced response would provide a slight improvement in imaging and overall dynamics.

Select Comparisons

Monster DNA On-Ear ($150)

The new DNA Pro provides a listening experience very different from that of the On-Ear DNA model – a clearer, tighter sound that is probably less well-suited for the average consumer (which at least partly justifies the “Pro” label). The on-ear DNA has a bassier, warmer sound but isn’t recessed in the midrange. Nonetheless, its boomy bass has a strong tendency to muffle the mids. The DNA Pro is much clearer and has tighter bass. It also sounds more v-shaped in comparison to the DNA. Its treble is significantly brighter, but also cleaner and more crisp next to the smoother, more forgiving on-ear DNA. Tonally, it’s hard to say whether the brighter, colder DNA Pro is more natural than the warm and smooth DNA, but the Pro model certainly has more of the things we normally associate with higher-end headphones – clarity, sonic space, and detail resolution.

V-Moda Crossfade LP2 ($200)

V-Moda’s DJ-oriented Crossfade LP2 headphone is warm and very bassy – an extreme contrast to the Monster DNA Pro. The LP2 is much bassier, with a low end extends deeper and produces sub-bass notes with greater authority. However, the bass is also much more intrusive. This makes the overall sound – especially vocals – extremely muddy in comparison to the DNA Pro. The Monster set, on the other hand, has much tighter – albeit lower in quantity – bass and significantly clearer, more resolving sound. Tonally, the LP2 is much darker than the DNA Pro, lacking all of the sparkle and most of the treble energy of the latter. The presentation of the DNA Pro is more impressive mostly due to the lack of congestion-causing bass boom. In terms of actual sonic space, the pricier Monster headphones aren’t far ahead.

Sennheiser HD25-1 II ($200)

Sennheier’s DJ-oriented HD-25-1 II is more similar in form factor the on-ear DNA, but the DNA Pro is closer in performance. In comparison to the DNA Pro, the HD25-1 has more emphasized, slightly boomier bass. Its mids are more recessed and end up sounding a little muffled. The DNA Pro has its tighter bass and clearer midrange, but the upper midrange and treble emphasis causes vocals to sound more nasal on it and the brighter tonality often appears less natural overall. The HD25-1 is tonally darker, but its top end is still splashier compared to the DNA Pro, so in the end neither set wins in treble quality. The DNA Pro has a wider presentation – the HD25 is more similar to the on-ear DNA in that regard.

Value (8/10): The Monster DNA Pro is a clear-sounding headphone with very controlled bass and a somewhat bright tonal tilt. This makes it not only unique in its class, but also the best-sounding headphone I’ve heard from Monster. Sound aside, the DNA Pro loses a bit of ground to some over-ear headphones in the comfort department but is well-made and has good noise isolation with a proper seal. All in all, those looking for an over-the-ear set with good clarity and controlled, accurate bass will be well-served by the DNA Pro.

(A26)





ADL H118: First headphone product from Alpha Design Labs, sub-brand ofJapanese Hi-Fi component manufacturer Furutech



Current Price: $269 from Needle Doctor and other distributors MSRP: $269.00 ( manufacturer’s page Current Price:from Needle Doctor and other distributors

Frequency Response: 20-20,000 Hz | Impedance: 68 Ω | Sensitivity: 98 dB SPL/1mW

Form factor: over-the-ear | Space-Saving Mechanism: Collapsible

Cord: detachable (mini-XLR), 9.8ft (3m), straight, 3.5mm termination w/6.3mm adapter

Build Quality (9.5/10): The ADL H118 is a circumaural, closed, collapsible headphone. The unit is made of heavy plastics with a textured finish in places and feels very solid. The unique elongated earcups are a little on the large side, but the headband is tucked in, which makes the headphones look more compact on the head. The cable is single-sided and detachable, with a locking mini-XLR connector. At 3m in length, the stock cord is not designed for portable use, but can be coiled and pocketed if necessary. The beefy Furutech 3.5mm plug is stepped at the front, which makes it usable with even the thickest smartphone cases; many portable headphones could take a lesson here. A nice hard-shell carrying case is also included.

Comfort (8/10): One of the most striking features of the H118 is the odd triangular earpad shape – it is somewhat similar to the Monster DNA Pro, but narrower and more elongated. After several months with the headphones, I have to say it works pretty well. The cups are deep and have good freedom of motion. Combined with clamping force on the high side of average, this allows the thick padding to seal well all the way around the ear. Like most large, closed headphones with thick padding, the H118 tends to become a little sweaty with prolonged use.

Isolation (8.5/10): The passive noise isolation of the ADL H118 is good thanks to the thick, well-sealing pads and closed-back earcups. Sound leakage out of the headphones is nil.

Sound (8.75/10): The first headphone effort from Furutech, the ADL H118 offers a sound signature that falls somewhere between “traditional audiophile” and “studio headphone” – a lush and warm sound with very good bass and darker overall tonality.

The bass is enhanced, with good extension and strong punch. Impact is about on-par with the famed Sennheiser HD25. There is some mid-bass emphasis but bloat is kept to a minimum, which is always a relief. Bass quality is actually a little better than with the V-Moda M-80 – tighter and cleaner, albeit with a bit less emphasis on sub-bass.

The low-end emphasis and overall tonal tilt of the H118 give the headphone a very full-bodied midrange with a warm tonal character. Unsurprisingly, it lacks the perception of increased clarity that comes with brighter headphones – the HD25, for example, is a little clearer, whereas the V-Moda M-80 has similar clarity but slightly more midrange presence. Overall, considering the warm and smooth character of its sound, the clarity of the H118 is quite good.

The treble of the H118 appears recessed at first listen, and even after extended listening the headphone still has a somewhat dark overall tone. The transition from the midrange is extremely smooth, and the relative lack of treble energy makes the headphones very forgiving. In comparison, the Sennheiser HD25 is brighter and more v-shaped overall, with treble that sounds a little tizzy and metallic next to the more relaxed H118.

The ADL H118 also boasts a very decent soundstage for a set of closed cans, easily beating the smaller V-Moda M-80 and especially the forward and aggressive HD25. With the H118, there is more air between instruments, and the lack of congestion really helps it sound more refined than most other closed sets with similarly plentiful bass. The H118 is also quite easy to drive – not as efficient as the M-80, but still very consistent and plenty loud across different sources.

Select Comparisons

Munitio PRO40 ($200)

Both the ADL H118 and Munitio’s flagship PRO40 model provide warm and bassy sound, but go about it in different ways. The PRO40 has more bass quantity, but lacks refinement in both the bass and the midrange. Its bass is boomy, and its mids sound muddy and muffled in comparison to the H118. Even the treble sounds a little smeared compared to the ADL set.

The H118 has a tighter low end with less bloat and better overall clarity. It is not far behind the PRO40 in bass quantity and puts up a better performance in every other way on the sound front. I do prefer the mostly metal construction of the PRO40, and the carrying case that comes with it is among the best I’ve seen, but that doesn’t even begin to make up for the sonic deficiencies in comparison to the ADL H118.

Creative Aurvana Live! 2 ($130)

The Creative Aurvana Live! 2 – the warmer, bassier follow-up to the original Aurvana Live! – is likewise not too far from the H118 in sound signature. Its sound is warm and bass-heavy, but a little less full-bodied. The CAL!2 has slightly more bass, while the ADL H118 is a little tighter. The mids of the H118 are less affected by the bass and it sounds marginally clearer overall.

The CAL!2 has a slightly thinner note presentation – not a bad thing in itself, but its treble is a touch “tizzy” and makes the H118 sound smoother and more natural in comparison. The Aurvana does provide a slightly more spacious, less closed-in soundstage presentation. It also boasts nearly faultless listening comfort, but lacks the noise isolation and solid construction of the H118.

Monster DNA Pro Over-Ear ($250)

Unlike the two sets above, the Monster DNA Pro provides a major contrast to the H118 with its bright sound and bell-like clarity. The two headphones have such different sound signatures that each has a tendency to make the other sound flawed in comparison. The bass of the DNA Pro is less powerful but tighter, while the H118 sounds bassier and more muffled in the midrange.

The H118 has a full-bodied sound with more filled-out lower mids, while the DNA Pro is somewhat thin-sounding, but clearer as well. In comparison to the H118, it has too much upper midrange presence while the H118 lacks a large amount of treble energy, sounding warmer and darker. The DNA Pro is also more efficient than the H118. Overall, I found the ADL unit to not be far behind the DNA Pro in clarity and bass control, and preferable on most other counts.

Value (8.5/10): The ADL H118 is a semi-portable headphone with a closed, circumaural form factor and warm, somewhat treble-shy sound with plentiful bass. The sound is quite refined, especially the lush and smooth midrange, and the headphones feel well put-together and isolate surprisingly well. The earcups are not very compact, but the elongated shape doesn’t sacrifice comfort. Overall, an easy recommendation for fans of warmer, darker-sounding headphones.

Besides adding some style points to the plasticky KSCs, the common KSC75 mods do improve the already-great clip-ons, but at a price.List of parts used: Mogami-recabled KSC75 ($30 from head-fi FS forums). 68 Ohm impedance adapter ($18, ebay). Sennheiser PX200 leatherette earpads ($6.99+shipping, Sennheiser USA). Kramer-modded grilles (10 minutes with a drill).Naturally, build quality depends largely on how good the recabling job is. The recable on my set was quite good so the only build issue is the same as with the stock KSC75s – the **** clips still come off on occasion.Not much difference in comfort between these and the stock KSCs. If your ears are prone to sweating, the leatherette earpads may cause some discomfort and the earhooks may need to be reshaped to accommodate the thicker pads. I personally find the PX200 pads a bit more pleasant than the original foam ones. Like the stock KSCs, these can be worn comfortably for several hours, even while exercising. It should be noted, though, that my new cable is prone to microphonics. This is easily taken care of with a shirt clip to fix the cord in place.Though the leatherette pads may help sound leakage around the ear these are still open headphones so the difference is minute. They do seem to isolate just a tad better because the earcups seal around the ear but wearing them on the subway is still not recommended.The sound changes quite noticeably with modding. Most of the difference comes from the Kramer mod alone. The sound varies widely with the way the holes are drilled. The more grille is missing from closer to the center, the more treble you get. Similarly, the outer edges of the grille are responsible for masking bass, so removing them adds bass quantity. Compared side-by-side to the stock 75’s, my modded ones have better mids and highs. They are even more forward and aggressive than the stock phones. The bass becomes less muddy (but also a bit less impactful) with the addition of the 68 ohm adapter. Another big addition is to the incredible airiness of the Koss phones with the Kramer mod and the PX200 pads. The stock KSC75s sound anything but boxed in but the modded set sounds like a small concert hall. The sound signature may not be perfect, but it’s extremely enjoyable, especially for those who already like stock KSC75s.Even though I prefer the sound of these to my stock KSC75s, I cannot say that for the average listener the price tag and time investment would be worth it. I estimate that an enterprising head-fier not adverse to DIY could end up with a pair like mine for ~$55. Mine ended up costing a bit more ($62 to be exact). Still, they are definitely a fun project for anyone with a desire to get into DIY or play around with different sounds and configurations.The K81DJs were my first step into higher-priced portables and remain a personal favorite through many upgrades and inventory changes.The construction of the K81DJ feels very robust and utilizes AKG’s patented 3D-Axis folding mechanism to make a truly versatile portable. The plastic headband houses a thick metal strip and is actually quite pliable. The joints of the 3D-Axis system are smooth and precise and the range of motion of these phones is very impressive. There is at least a half dozen different ways to fold them into the provided pleather bag. The cups are made of a hard plastic and the pads - of thick pleather. The cabling is thick and slightly rubberized. The plug is very meaty and the molded strain relief is massive. It is also threaded and a screw-on ¼” adapter is included. The biggest gripe I have with these is the length of the cord, which is quite excessive for a portable headphone at 8.2ft (2.5m).With a bit of adjustment when donned the K81s can be comfortable for several hours. The headband can be stretched overnight over a stack of books for a looser fit, which reduces the pressure exerted by the cups. The clamping force of a stock set can indeed be excessive for long listening sessions but there is an upside – the fit is very, very secure. I find them comfortable for a while but the pressure does get tiring after some time. Also, the headband isn’t as long as I expected – it requires to be extended completely to fit around my noggin while all of my other portable require around 50% extension – and doesn’t have any padding. Those with large heads may want to skip this set as there may just not be enough length in the headband.The wide range of motion of the cups, combined with the thickness of the pads, makes these one of the best-isolating portables I’ve ever tried. Leakage is nonexistent and the isolation they provide is actually on par with some of the lesser-isolating IEMs, which is saying a lot.The sound signature of the K81dj is definitely on the warm/dark side of things. The treble is rolled off slightly but it sounds very natural, especially with stringed instruments. The mids are rich and full, a tiny bit recessed compared to the bass, just like the treble, but still very natural-sounding. The low end is very powerful and lacking in control somewhat. There’s a certain softness to the bass impact that gives these a ‘weighty’ low end. Not ideal for tracks with dense, fast, rapidly changing basslines but very enjoyable in tracks with discrete beats. The bass can be eq’d down to balance out the sound but even as is the big bass can be lots of fun. The foam pads over the grilles can be removed to balance out the amount of treble, mids, and bass slightly, adding to the former two and subtracting from the latter. I still wouldn’t pick these for any critical listening but they are very enjoyable headphones all in all.(MSRP: $99.99, Street Price:) At the current street price the AKG K81Dj provide an incredible combination of portability, durability, and isolation. They perform respectably in the sq area as well, providing a rich midrange, very strong bass, and accurate treble. I never found them tiring even with the foam inserts removed and I can’t think of any set that I’d enjoy as much out-and-about without worrying about bothering those around me or everyday wear-and-tear. They can be comfortable for quite some time, though probably not for everyone. A plethora of well-documented mods exist to raise both the sq and comfort of the K81, giving them growth potential rivaled only by the KSC75s. A great set of phones that works extremely well at its price point (and makes me want to try the higher-end K181DJ).Frequency Response:16-24,000 HzImpedance:32 ΩSensitivity:115 dB SPL/1mWCord:8.2ft (2.5m); Straight PlugSpace-Saving Mechanism:Flat-folding, collapsibleA true circumaural headphone, the portability of the CAL! may be questionable but the sound produced by the OEM Foster drivers shared with the renowned Denon AH-D1001k is not.The Creative Aurvana Live! is a well-built headphone but doesn’t exude the same air of solidity as the K81dj and HA-M750. The plastics feel sturdy and well-made. The glossy black cups and chrome trim are fingerprint magnets but the grime isn’t too visible on them (unlike, for example, the ATH-ES7). The stainless steel headband is padded and the cabling is nice and thick, rubberized to prevent tangling and short enough for portable use. An extension cable is included. On the downside, the CAL! are neither collapsible nor flat-folding, so calling them portables is contingent entirely on their having a shorter cable and being easily driven.The cups of the Creative Aurvana Live! were designed to be circumaural, and they are - for all but those with the largest ears. The cups are deep, extremely comfortable, and have a wide range of motion. The phones themselves are very light, largely due to the plastic construction, and there is almost no clamping force exerted by the headband. The pleather on the cups and headband feels quite soft but can get warm after a while, though I can stay cool longer in these than the JVC HA-M750.Though leakage is expectedly low, the isolation of CAL! is also quite low for a closed can. While better than almost all of the on-ear ultraportables, it just doesn’t compare some of the larger closed cans. I found myself cranking the volume up almost immediately when going outside.As mentioned before, the CAL! shares OEM drivers (as well as pads and parts of the inner structure) with the renowned Denon AH-D1001k. My expectations were pretty high for these, so I was fairly surprised when I found the general sound signature to be similar to that of the significantly-cheaper JVC HA-M750. Over time, however, they grew on me and I learned to differentiate them from the JVCs in subtle but important ways. Like the JVCs, the CAL!s are bass-heavy headphones with a very rich-sounding midrange and a warm tonality. However, the Creatives boast better clarity in the (far less forward) midrange and a more dimensional sound - the soundstage has some depth in addition to the width. They are more laid back and balanced and at the same time a little faster when the music calls for it. The bass is textured, fairly well-controlled, and surprisingly deep (capable of dropping below 30Hz). The low-end response can be excessive at times - these are most definitely not monitoring headphones – but it’s hard to beat them for an enjoyable and relaxed listening experience with plenty of subwoofer bass.(MSRP: $99.99, Street Price:). I like these, I really do. They are extremely comfortable, reasonably portable, and they sound oh-so-good. Granted, the sound isn’t quite as neutral as some may prefer and the isolation could be better. But they are just so very fun to listen to. In a series of A:B comparisons they make my JVC HA-M750 sound muddy, aggressive, and flat and my K81Dj – hollow and resonant. The CAL! is definitely one headphone I could use both on the go and at home, but only if isolation was inconsequential and absolute portability was not a concern.Frequency Response:10-30,000 HzImpedance:32 ΩSensitivity:103 dB SPL/1mWCord:3.94ft (1.2m) + 5ft (1.5m) extension; Straight PlugSpace-Saving Mechanism:N/AUltrasone’s mid-range ultraportable easily racks up the style points but falls short of excellence in other areasThe priciest of the “ultraportable” headphone crop, the Ultrasone Zinos fold to make a compact package not much larger than the Sennheiser PX100s. The construction is simple and elegant, made out of quality plastic and with only one hinge per side. Cabling is rubberized and relatively thick and the silky-smooth synthetic fabric-covered pads are very pleasing to the touch. Bonus points for the handy hard carrying case Ultrasone includes. What worries me is the hard strain relief on the 3.5mm plug as well as the generally delicate structure for the $130 MSRP.The Zinos are very light and barely clamp at all and as a result are extremely comfortable. However, their strong suit becomes their downfall when any physical activity is performed. Combined with the low clamping force there just isn’t enough grip from the smooth fabric-covered pads or plastic headband for them to stay on my head. This may not be an issue for those with larger heads, but for me having to think about my portable headphones falling off when hopping onto a curb or bending down to pick something up is an annoyance.The Zinos are advertised as “semi-closed”, but the large downward-facing vents and flat foam pads really don’t obstruct leakage much. Their relatively large size on the ear is all they have to offer in terms of isolation.I was really hoping that the Zinos would save themselves from mediocrity and justify the price tag with sound quality. I think that the loose fit may affect my impressions of them a bit as the bass really isn’t all that deep unless I clamp the cups to my ears, hard. The sound signature is biased towards the high and low end but not so much as to make them sound unbalanced. The bass is capable of dropping below 30Hz when the drivers are prodded and the bass emphasis works well outside where bass notes tend to get drowned out by noise. Clarity is quite good all-around and high-end extension is impressive. The treble even has a bit of sparkle but may be too bright for some. The soundstage is wide and instruments are well-positioned, likely due in part to the S-Logic system, but can make the slightly thin midrange sound downright diffuse at times. The biggest problem I have with the Zinos, though, is the metallic sound of the mids and treble, especially with hard rock and metal. Indeed, I have noticed that one’s enjoyment of the Zinos is very dependent on music choice. They work far better with pop, trance, and electronica than with more instrumental genres such as metal and classical. On the upside, the Zinos are very iPod-friendly – they are quite forgiving of poor-quality sources and recordings.(MSRP: $129.99, Street Price:) While the Ultrasone Zinos are certainly attractive to behold, they fall slightly short of expectations set by the $100 price tag all-around. I do like the wide, airy sound produced by the Zinos but the metallic overtones exhaust me after extended exposure. The Zino is definitely a very competent portable, offering a small, lightweight form factor and competitive sound quality. But in the world of portable headphones, ‘competent’ is no longer good enough when the bar is set by products that are, at least in some ways, downright superb.Frequency Response:15-25,000 HzImpedance:35 ΩSensitivity:101 dB SPL/1mWCord:3.94ft (1.2m); Straight PlugSpace-Saving Mechanism:CollapsibleThe second incarnation of Sennheiser’s closed ultraportable, the PX200-II excels where its predecessor failedIt should come as no surprise that the build of the PX200 II is quite similar to that of my old PX100s. The plastics are thicker all around and the metal headband has been widened by about 1/16” but the overall design and feel of the structure are very reminiscent of the previous PX headphones. The pleather pads seem identical to the old PX200 pads and are approximately the same size as the pads on my other small portables. The 4-foot single-sided cable features a volume control with a belt clip about halfway down. Strain reliefs seem excessively hard and worry me a bit, especially considering that the volume control/belt clip on the cord may lead to an increased chance of snags. A soft carrying pouch is included with the PX200 II in place of the hard plastic case included with the PX100.As with the PX100, the swiveling earcups provide a compliant fit. The padding on the headband looks miniscule but gets the job done without making your head sweat. However, the pleather earpads heat up more than the foam pads use by the PX100 and the whole assembly is heavier and clamps quite a bit harder making the PX200-II substantially less comfortable for prolonged use.The swiveling earcups provide a good fit and the pleather pads can create a seal despite the diminutive cup size. As a result, the isolation they provide when positioned properly over the ear is surprisingly good, beating all of the similarly-sized supraaurals and even the circumaural CAL!.Despite being a closed headphone, the PX200-II does not sound closed-in but instead rather spacious, not unlike the Panasonic Slimz. Though the soundstage isn’t any wider than that of the PX100s, the overall presentation is less intimate and better spaced. The sound is cooler and brighter than the PX100 – far closer to being tonally neutral. At the low end of the frequency spectrum the PX200-II provides a tight punch that makes the PX100 sound very muddy in comparison. The mids and treble not as strikingly smooth as the PX100 due to the PX200-II being far less warm, but clarity is greatly improved. The high end is fairly extended but doesn’t boast much sparkle (may be a good thing for some). Instrumental separation is good, helped significantly by the clarity and the more evenly distributed soundstaging. The resolution and fine detailing are not quite on par with some of the pricier phones here but for such a small and convenient portable it’s all really quite impressive. On a final note, I found that the PX200-II benefits less from dedicated amplification than did the old PX100, likely because there’s not as much room for improvement at the low end.(MSRP: $99.95, Street Price:) Unlike the original PX200, which had little going for it besides being small and closed, the Mk II is a surprisingly competent all-rounder. Well-built, reasonably comfortable, and offering a good amount of isolation, the PX200-II is the headphone that the old PX200 should have been and finally offers serious competition for the likes of the AKG K81DJ. Die-hard bassheads will probably be happier with the old PX100 but for the rest of us the far more balanced and neutral PX200-II offers more faithful sound reproduction. The sacrifice in comfort for better passive noise reduction is rather unfortunate but potentially of more value to those actually using the headphones on the move. The PX200-II therefore has all the hallmarks of a critical and commercial success – usability, excellent sonic characteristics, and a respected name to back it all up - and will likely become more popular than the famed PX100 in the near future.Frequency Response:10-21,000 HzImpedance:32 ΩSensitivity:115 dB SPL/1mWCord:3.94ft (1.2m), single-sided; Straight PlugSpace-Saving Mechanism:Flat-folding, collapsibleWearing the ATH-ES7 in public will undoubtedly turn heads, but even without the style the ES7s have enough merit to draw attentionThe most obvious feature of the ES7’s exterior is the mirror-finish cups, which look absolutely stunning when they are clean. This latter nuance may not seem like a big deal but the polish attracts scratches and fingerprints like an industrial-strength magnet. A microfiber cloth and soft carrying pouch are included to help keep the headphones clean. The structure itself is quite robust, with a rubber-covered metal-wire headband and smoothly-rotating cups. Cabling is fairly average, similar in feel to what is found on the smaller and cheaper Sennheiser portables.The rubber-covered headband doesn’t provide much padding and the odd shape causes the cups to exert quite a lot of pressure on the wearer’s ears. Though the ES7 stay in place very well as a result, discomfort is noticeable after just minutes on a stock set. The clamping force of the ES7 can be decreased by stretching the headband or bending it outward at the ‘shoulders’. Though I do like the rough leather-like pads, Sennheiser HD25 velour pads fit on the ES7 for a comfort boost. Even with the possible modifications comfort is mediocre at best – great for (very) short walks outside; not so good for a 3-hour listening session.For a closed supraaural of its size the isolation of the ES7 is below average - I often felt compelled to crank up the volume when wearing them outside. The pronounced bass does help make this more tolerable, as bass is usually the first characteristic lost due to lack of isolation. Leakage is expectedly minimal.The ATH-ES7 provide a distinctly ‘fun’ sound signature that betrays Audio-Technica’s poising them for mainstream success. They’re heavy hitters in the bass department with a smooth and full-bodied low end. Extension is adequate and these can produce a good amount of bass rumble when prodded. The speed isn’t quite up to par with the HA-M750 and Q40s but the softer impact may even be preferable for some. They are certainly less tiring to my bass-sensitive ears. The midrange is slightly recessed but clarity is quite good and vocals sound more or less natural. There seems to be a small hump in the lower midrange response, which gives the sound some coloration. The treble is on the bright side but not fatiguing enough to be a problem. It’s quite upfront and very crisp and clear. They do a good job relating a track’s dimensionality but don’t quite manage an open and spacious sound -soundstaging is very close and intimate. Despite this I still find them perfectly enjoyable headphones when listening on the go.(MSRP: $169.95, Street Price:) Among all of the reasonably priced portable headphones the ATH-ES7 is a unique offering in that it manages to combine style and substance without compromising much of either. The mirror-finish cups are stunning to behold and the sound is very fun and involving – bright-n’-shiny treble, deep, impactful bass, and a clear and articulate midrange. Comfort and isolation are unfortunately not quite on par with much of the competition and those in search of a more neutral sound may want to stay away. If, however, looks are given any weight at all in a purchasing decision and absolute fidelity is not the goal the ATH-ES7 are worth a second look.Frequency Response:5-30,000 HzImpedance:32 ΩSensitivity:100 dB SPL/1mWCord:3.94ft (1.2m); Straight PlugSpace-Saving Mechanism:Flat-foldingNearly universally praised in the head-fi community, the SR60i is Grado Labs’ entry-level supraaural headphone and is quite often referred to as the ‘gateway drug’ to the world of audiophilia.Perhaps in line with their retro looks, the strength of Grados lies in their simplicity. There are really only three parts to the construction – the cups with the adjustment bars sticking out of the top, the headband, and the two plastic blocks that unify the structure. The headband a simple piece of steel sheathed in unpadded leather. The plastic cups are sturdy but do show some molding artifacts, just like the lower-end iGrados. The cable, however, is completely antithetical to the wimpy plastic string used on the baby Grados – thick, tough, and with a meaty 3.5mm plug, this cord is built to last. Overall the construction is not high-rent in any sense but carries with it an air of time-tested quality and brute strength. Not to mention that many physical problems with Grados can be mended with a hammer and some glue.Wearing Grados does take some getting used to – the cans rest on one’s ears and the slight pressure exerted by the pads can be bothersome after some time. Luckily, I’ve had plenty of practice. For me the bowl pads found on the higher-end models are far less comfortable than the amply-named ‘comfies’ that come stock on the SR60i and SR80i. The plastic SR60i is also much lighter than my last two Grados, the SR325i and MS2i, so after a few weeks of break-in they become as comfortable as large supraaurals can be. If the pads feel ‘itchy’ at first, I recommend giving them a bath in a low-concentration shampoo solution, followed by a good rinse. Of note again is the thick, 7.5ft cord, which is less than ideal for portable use (but at least the SR60i is terminated with an ipod-friendly 3.5mm jack, unlike higher-end Grado models).Like all Grado headphones, the SR60i is a fully open design, which means they can be heard from the next room at reasonable volumes. Not recommended for busses, libraries, shops, or anywhere others may be bothered by music.From the very first listen it is obvious that the SR60i, like all Grados, is a purpose-built listening device. Build quality, isolation, comfort, and all other considerations simply fade away when the music starts playing. There is just nothing out there for the money that can compare to a Grado for that front-and-center-at-the-Rock-show feeling. The overall sound is forward and edgy, with strong mids and pronounced treble. They are certainly on the bright side of neutral, though nowhere near as bright as the higher-end SR325i model. The bass is very tight but does not extend particularly deep and lacks the visceral impact of some of the closed cans in this lineup. In fact, the SR60i makes extremely clear the distinction between bass that is ‘punchy’ and bass that is ‘boomy’, having almost no ‘boom’ at all. The clarity is top-notch across the range and while the soundstage is below average in size, the instruments are well-separated and nicely positioned and detail is easy to pick out. The fast, fun, and forward sound of the SR60i works especially well with more energetic genres such as Rock and Pop but all music lovers will be impressed with the clarity and coherence of the sound.(MSRP: $79; Street Price:) Though I’ve never personally considered Grados to be portable cans, the sound produced by the SR60i for a mere $80 is hard to argue against. They are completely open, not very compact, and the cord is far too long and thick to be convenient on the go. But they are also reasonably rugged, quite comfortable, and not quite as shocking to behold outside as, say, an AKG K701 or ATH-A700. The best thing about the Grados is that they don’t try to be a jack of all trades. They are absolutely stunning for what they are – clear, detailed, bright, and aggressive Rock cans. As far as I am concerned the SR60i really is one of the best all-around values in personal audio. Whether it is truly a portable headphone is a function of personal preference.Frequency Response:20-20,000 HzImpedance:32 ΩSensitivity:98 dB SPL/1mWCord:7.5ft (2.3m); Straight PlugSpace-Saving Mechanism:Flat-foldingThe ATH-M30 are rarely mentioned on head-fi, at least in comparison to the big-brother ATH-M50, but the low price and comfortable form-factor make them quite competitive as budget portables.Despite the low selling price, the M30 are built like proper studio monitors with a steel headband, sturdy plastic forks, and generous padding. The cable is also fit for a set of studio monitors - the thick 11ft-long single-sided cord terminates in a threaded 3.5mm plug with a steel strain relief. However, the cups are quite flat and the headphones look unassuming, attracting no more attention when worn outside than the JVC M750 or other true portables. Though neither collapsible nor flat-folding, the ATH-M30 are sturdy enough to toss in a bag and forget about.While the M30 is a circumaural headphone, the cups are shallow, causing them to bottom out on my ears. Luckily, the padding is very soft all-around and clamping force is low, causing them to be very comfortable for prolonged listening sessions.The ATH-M30 are closed-back circumaurals. They don’t seal particularly well since the cups bottom out on my ears and clamping force is very low but isolation is still more than adequate for outside use.The sound of the ATH-M30 is balanced and unaggressive, a very different signature from the Panasonic RP-HTX7 I’ve been using recently. The M30 has a bit of upper-bass emphasis but the bass is not overpowered in the conventional sense. Though the M30s are capable of delivering plenty of impact when prodded, the bass is usually heard more than it is felt. The punch of the bass is soft and controlled, often without a definite moment of impact. The mids are laid back, slightly warm, and very smooth, especially towards the top. Detail is good but the M30 won’t keep up with the Philips SHP5400 or Yuin G2A, mostly because the laid-back signature makes it harder to pick out fine nuances. The treble rolls of at the very top and holds no nasty surprises. In fact, the whole signature is quite neutral and balanced, as good as any closed headphone I’ve heard in the price range. The soundstage is quite wide but lacks depth, resulting in a somewhat distant sound most of the time. Not a bad thing as it makes them sound less closed than, for example, the RP-HTX7 or HA-S700. Compared to the majority of headphones in this thread the M30s are also quite inefficient, taking about 4/5 of maximum volume from my Sansa Fuze, but at least they do a great job of stifling hiss, even with my home amp.(MSRP: $119; Street Price:) I was very surprised by how much I enjoyed using the M30 outside. Though not designed to be portable, they are no less suited than the Denon AH-D1001k or JVC HA-M750 as long as the extra cord length is tied up. The build quality and comfort make them a great all-rounder and I have no problems using them at home, either. At the current ~$50 price the M30s come highly recommended as a balanced and neutral all-rounder for those who don’t require an in-your-face presentation to enjoy music.Frequency Response:20-20,000 HzImpedance:65 ΩSensitivity:100 dB SPL/1mWCord:11ft (3.3m), single-sided; Straight PlugSpace-Saving Mechanism:N/AI've owned the SHP5400 for quite a long time and they've been a great companion for use while moving about. Though Philips has ceased selling the SHP5400 in the US, I felt that they deserved a review still, if only to show what the manufacturer is capable of.[size=12.0pt][/size]The pads and headband of the SHP5400 are quite soft and don't heat up nearly as much as pleather padding does. Clamping force is rather high, however, resulting in comfort that doesn't last as long as with some looser-fitting headphones. Since the headband narrows towards the bottom, I imagine that the clamping force would be greater for those with larger heads.The SHP5400 are semi-open headphones and feature large vents on the rear of the cups. They are also most definitely supraaural, resulting in mild leakage and not much isolation from external noise.The SHP5400 are quite different from most other headphones I've heard in the $50 range. Their areas of expertise, so to speak, are speed and clarity. The bass is very well-controlled and extremely tight. Extension is mediocre but the speed is tremendous. The bottom end is very transparent and lacks slightly in texture, giving them a ghost-like sound that can be very interesting with the right tracks. Expectedly there is no midrange bleed. The mids are articulated and clear, though a bit of extra volume is recommended to really bring out the detail. The soundstage is wide and the mids can sound a bit distant as a result but separation and positioning are solid. Unlike the Panasonic RP-HTX7 I've been using recently, the upper midrange and lower treble of the SHP5400 are accented without any harshness or sibilance. The upper end is extended and very crisp. The signature leans towards brightness and they can sound a little cold. I wouldn't, however, call them neutral or analytical. The sound is shiny and shimmering with energy and excitement despite them not being as forward and aggressive as, say, the Grado SR60i. The SHP5400 are also surprisingly inefficient. At my maximimum listening volume with most portable headphones (around 50% on the Sansa Fuze), the SHP5400 are just becoming audible. Combine that with the fact that the midrange is really brought into perspective only at higher volumes and a powerful player or portable amp is recommended to bring out the full potential of these cans.(MSRP: $99.99, Street Price:) Despite being discontinued in the US, I've seen NOS sets of these cans pop up on eBay and various internet outlets on occasion. For the price, they are definitely worth picking up for anyone who enjoys bright, clear, and fast sound. Like the majority of mid-range Philips cans I've owned, the bang/buck ratio is quite high on the SHP5400 and I really hope Philips has a replacement in store for the US market at some point in the future.Frequency Response:7 - 22,000 HzImpedance:40 ΩSensitivity:99 dB SPL/1mWCord:6.6ft (2m); Straight PlugSpace-Saving Mechanism:N/ABeyerdynamic’s follow-up to the highly successful DT231 has gotten very little attention on head-fi. The somber looks of the headphone may partially be to blame but after spending a few weeks comparing the DT235 to some far more popular options I think these lightweight wonders deserve far more praise than they get.The DT235 is not a pretty headphone, that much is certain. The single-piece headband and cups are made of a rough-feeling plastic, with a thin piece of rubber acting as an elastic second headband for comfort. A white Beyerdynamic logo on the headband and model markings on the cups complete the function-over-form appearance. There are no moving parts to the structure and the 8-foot single-sided cable is thick and flexible, with functional strain reliefs on either end. There really are no weak points to the construction – the DT235 may not be particularly high-rent but there is very little to go wrong with them.The egg-shaped cups of the DT235 are a bit too small to be circumaural. Still, the soft velour pads and low clamping force yield a very comfortable fit. The self-adjusting elastic headband allows them stay on securely despite the low clamp. The elastic headband and simple overall structure also make the DT235 very easy to wear around the neck, which I tend to do quite a bit for convenience. The only long-term issue with the comfort is the pads heating up over time. I suspect that like Beyer’s renowned DT770/880 pads, the DT235 are actually pleather-backed, which causes them to get hotter than ‘true’ velour pads such as those on my HD25-1.The semi-supraaural nature of the DT235 and low clamping force lead to fairly average isolation for a closed headphone of this size. Like the ATH-M30, the DT235 is adequate for use outside but probably not too useful on a plane.While the styling of the DT235 is easily forgettable, the sound leaves a different impression. On the whole, the DT235s emphasize balance and detail. Compared to the far pricier HD25-1, the bass of the Beyers is neither as hard-hitting nor as extended. The low end is, however, quick, controlled, and still quite impactful. There is a very pleasant fullness to the bass of the DT235s, not unlike that present in the DT770/250. Generally, the low end stays back and the midrange is placed a step forward. On bass-heavy tracks, however, the DT235s really step up and display gobs of low-end muscle - it’s an addictive sort of bass that gets layered under the music but manages to remain integral to the listening experience. There isn’t any significant midrange bleed and mids are smooth and natural. Compared to the lush low end, the midrange can sound just a bit thin, but this is hardly noticeable. Though not quite up there with the best in the category, the DT235 is clear and detailed. Partly as a result of a larger soundstage, the midrange of the DT235 is not nearly as in-your-face as that of the Senns but it’s still very enjoyable and the softer bass presentation helps keep the detail discernible. The Beyers maintain smoothness up into the treble - no harshness or sibilance is present. The treble is a bit bright but is generally very clean and unfatiguing. Top-end extension is very good for a $50 can – the Beyers do roll off earlier than the HD25, but not by much. The overall signature leans slightly towards coolness but stops far short of being called cold as such. The presentation is rather airy for a closed headphone, with a medium-sized stage and solid positioning. As a final note, I will say that the DT235 is not a very efficient headphone, requiring quite a few volume notches from my Sansa Fuze. Most portable players will drive them just fine but the low sensitivity is something to be aware of.(MSRP: $79, Street Price:) The DT235 is easily one of the better sub-$100 headphones I have heard. The combination of simple and durable construction, long-term comfort, and truly impressive sound quality make it an excellent choice for those who care little for looks and a whole lot for substance. In the land of similarly-priced portables, the balanced and neutral nature of the DT235 is a welcome relief from the bass-heavy offerings put out by Ultrasone, AKG, JVC, and other manufacturers. In the end I can only wonder why the $55 Beyer is recommended so rarely while the previous model was commonly compared – and often quite favorably - to the still-popular Grado SR60.Frequency Response: 18 - 22,000 HzImpedance: 32 ΩSensitivity: 95 dB SPL/1mWCord: 8ft (2.4m); Straight PlugSpace-Saving Mechanism: N/ATop-of-the-range headphone from Sennheiser’s ultraportable line, the HD238 promises top-quality sound in a compact but open form factor.The HD238 is made mostly of plastic but features metal hinges and fittings. The metal trim gives them a distinctive but neat look and they are wonderfully unobtrusive to wear. The pads, while foam on the inside, and lined with cloth and pleather. Unfortunately there are about as many squeaks and rattles in the structure of my HD238 after several months of use as with my 3-year-old PX100s. The single-sided cord is rubberized and doesn’t tend to tangle but is quite thin for a headphone. The 3.5mm plug is oddly shaped, quite large, and lacks any proper strain relief. If you’re the kind of person who tends to knock the plug about when it’s connected to something, the HD238 may end up being a danger to other electronics and to itself.Comfort is definitely a strength of the wonderfully small and light Sennheisers. The headphones themselves are much smaller than I envisioned – just barely large enough to cover my ears – and the pads are very soft and stay cool even after very long listening sessions. The padding on the headband is adequate and the flat-folding cups have enough rotational freedom for a compliant fit. Those with smaller noggins may have trouble keeping the HD238 on during any sudden head motion, though the problem isn’t nearly as severe as with the smooth-and-slippery Ultrasone Zinos.The HD238s are open-air headphones but have significantly larger and better-sealing pads than Sennheser’s own PX100 or the Koss PortaPros. As a result isolation is just a tad better and leakage is a smidge lower, but I still wouldn’t use the HD238 anywhere others may be annoyed by music.First of all, the sound score I gave to the HD238 is based on running them through a mini3 portable amp – without it they would have scored lower as I personally prefer even the lower-end HD228 to an unamped HD238. I am not usually one to advocate for portable amplifiers but the HD238 is one headphone that is dreadfully mediocre when powered by a weaker portable player such as my Sansa Fuze or Clip.The sound signature of the HD238 is unsurprisingly Sennheiser-esque in nature, with plenty of bass, slightly recessed mids, and extended but sparkle-free treble. The low end is reasonably extended and has a moderate mid-bass emphasis. It tends to sound slightly muffled and boomy when running unamped and distorts faintly at high volumes. Even with a proper amp, bass tightness doesn’t even begin to approach that of the impossibly controlled PX200-II. Control aside, the bass is rather pleasant in character – deep and full-bodied but with soft impact and lacking slightly in definition. Next to the woolly MDR-XB500, the HD238 is rather punchy and resolving. Next to the Alessandro MS1, the Sennheisers sound distant and muffled. Does the HD238 hit the sweet spot between the Grado and Sony sound signatures? Maybe for some, but my personal preferences lean towards the clarity of the Grado end of the spectrum.The midrange of the HD238 is warmed up by the mid-bass and very slightly recessed in comparison to the low end, though amplification helps bring it forward a touch. Clarity is good but the warm and smooth HD238s are bested by the PX200-II, the Beyer DT235s, and any of the Grado headphones. Detailing is quite impressive and the HD238s are ultimately more textured than my initial listening indicated, which makes them less relaxing to listen to than the rather less agile-sounding PX100s. The smoothness of the midrange carries over into the treble which, while quite crisp, is never sibilant. The crispness and detail are actually quite impressive in the context of the rest of the sound sig and the treble is less recessed than the midrange. There’s not much sparkle in the treble but it is well-extended and the microdetail improves further with added power.The HD238 also does a good job of presenting audio, boasting good soundstage width (better with an amp) and decent depth. Positioning is solid but the like Sennheiser’s own PX100s and IE8 IEMs, the presentation of the HD238 is distancing in nature – portraying intimacy is definitely not one of their strong suits. The HD238 is also not very resolving in nature, even with an amp, making it less-than-ideal for busy pieces of audio – jazz, acoustic, instrumental, and vocal tracks all work very well but the presentation breaks down somewhat when confronted with a large orchestral piece. The Sennheisers also lean towards the dark side tonally, which detracts from the realism of their sound in some instances. Overall, I found their presentation rather spacious for a portable headphone but not quite as well-separated as I would have liked.(MSRP: $139.95, Street Price:) As someone who still finds the sound signature of Sennheiser’s aging PX100 enjoyable in a relaxing sort of way after years of ownership, I had high hopes for Senn’s new ‘audiophile’-class portables. What I got was a more refined dose of the typical Sennheiser sound in what is admittedly a very handsome and convenient portable. Though the comfort of the HD238 is superb, their lack of isolation once again reminds me of why higher-end open-back portables are so rare – there are simply very few occasions in which I found myself needing a truly portable open headphone. And of course there’s the amping requirement – without a half-decent portable amp, the HD238, while still superior to the PX100, fails to justify the street price (never mind the MSRP) as far as I am concerned. The HD238 seemingly caters to those who have a portable amp handy and need a laid-back but surprisingly detailed open portable. For the majority of listeners, however, other options abound.Frequency Response: 16 - 23,000 HzImpedance: 32 ΩSensitivity: 114 dB SPL/1mWCord: 4.5ft (1.5m), single-sided; Straight PlugSpace-Saving Mechanism: Flat-foldingSmall closed headphone slotting in just below the HD238 in Sennheiser’s portable lineWhile the higher-end HD238 uses sturdy-feeling matte plastics and metal hinges and fittings, the HD228 is almost entirely made of a far less impressive glossy plastic. While it still attracts very little attention when worn, the glossy HD228 looks and feels cheaper than the higher-end model. The pads are also simpler than the HD238 pads – no cloth lining is present on the HD228. Instead, the pleather is stretched right over the foam backing. The single-sided cord is identical between the two headphones - quite thin for a headphone and terminated with a nickel-plated 3.5mm plug that lacks proper relief and is several sizes too large.Due to the less substantial construction and materials, the HD228 is even lighter than the higher-end model. Though the two headphones are equally small, the pads are thinner, but not any less soft, on the HD228. The padding on the headband is adequate and the flat-folding cups have enough rotational freedom for a compliant fit. As with the higher-end model, the HD228 is not ideal for those with small heads or for active use – the clamping force just isn’t adequate to comply with any sudden head motion.Though advertised as closed and noise-isolating portables, the HD228s are not really tight enough in fit or large enough in size to isolate significantly. For all intents and purposes, the HD228 can be called semi-closed – the closed-back design reduces leakage substantially but does little to genuinely isolate from outside noise. For casual use the attenuation may be plentiful but those looking for heavy-duty commuter phones may do well to look elsewhere.Unlike the shockingly inefficient HD238, the benefits of amping the lower-end HD228 are close to negligible for those with moderately powerful portable players. Though the HD228 are not particularly easy to drive, hooking them up to an amp for the most part simply raises the volume headroom. What is surprising, however, is how much more sensitive to positioning on one’s ears the HD228s are – I found the ideal position in terms of sound to be a bit farther back than what comes naturally. The HD238s, which coincidentally also have bigger meshes in the pads, are far less sensitive to how they are worn. Side-by-side with the higher-end model, the HD228 lacks most notably in dynamic range and detail. The low end is not quite as extended or full as that of the HD238 but it is rather well-controlled in comparison to the latter running unamped. The bass of the HD228 tends towards being boomy rather than muddy and distorted, which is not necessarily a bad thing.The mids are warm and quite clean. As with the higher-end model, the midrange of the HD228 is just a tad recessed in comparison to the low end. Both the midrange and treble of the HD228 are not nearly as textured and detailed as the HD238, which makes them less involving but actually easier to listen to, especially for long stretches. As expected, the treble of the HD228 is very smooth but lacks extreme extension. The overall tone is on the dark side but surprisingly not quite as dark as that of the HD238. Positioning is similar as well – the HD228 is not very good at conveying intimacy but also not as good at portraying distance as the open HD238 and, while the separation is quite decent, the presentation of the HD228 still does break down on busy passages.(MSRP: $99.95, Street Price:) Like the higher-end HD238, the HD228 is a very comfortable portable headphone that's unobtrusive and easy on the eyes. Though the attention to detail and build quality of the HD228 isn’t quite on the same level, it isolates slightly more than the higher-end model due to the closed design. The lesser technical proficiency of the HD228 in comparison to the higher-end set actually makes the faults that the headphones do share less glaring. Also, while the HD238 may be the better headphone technically, the HD228 is easier to bear for extended periods due in no small part to the poorer detailing and texturing. The cheaper price and lesser necessity for amping help make the easy-going HD228 a decent value in the portable world, though new users should be mindful of the headphone's picky attitude towards how it is worn.Frequency Response: 18 - 22,000 HzImpedance: 24 ΩSensitivity: 110 dB SPL/1mWCord: 4.5ft (1.5m), single-sided; Straight PlugSpace-Saving Mechanism: Flat-foldingThe huge, pillow-like pads of the XB500, the middle headphone in Sony’s ‘Extra Bass’ line, seem like fitting vessels for the smooth and bassy sound signature imparted on the listener by these gentle giants.The design of the XB500 is clearly dominated by the humongous pads but the headphones themselves look quite tame and stylish. The headband and silver cups are plastic but the forks are made of anodized aluminum and feel very solid. There are no creaks or rattles in the structure after months of use. The pads are extremely soft and covered in very pleasant pleather that has a bit of a hand-sewn look to it. The XB500 is also notable for the ribbon-like flat cables, which feel rather sturdy and don’t tangle. Indeed, flat cables make much sense to me on a headphone than on an in-ear monitor. The strain reliefs on housing entry seem poorly integrated but are far from weak and the 3.5mm L-plug is compact and well-relieved.By virtue of the huge and impossibly soft pads, the XB500 is one of the most comfortable circumaurals around. Though the inner diameter of the pads is smaller than with larger phones like the Creative Aurvana Live, the pads encapsulate average-sized ears fully. The underside of the plastic headband is also well-padded with a cloth-like mesh cushion. Clamping force is moderate and makes the XB500 very secure in fit but is distributed exceptionally well by the gigantic pads and causes no discomfort. The only downside of the fit of the XB500 is that the pads do get squished down and swathe quite a large area of skin in sweat-invoking pleather.The XB500 isn’t particularly well-isolating for a headphone of its size but fares better than average due to the huge and well-sealing pads. Leakage is minimal at reasonable volumes but blasting these in a library is not a great idea – despite being marketed as closed headphones, there are vents on the back that leak consistently at high volumes.As if the fact that they come from Sony’s “Extra Bass” audio line is not enough of an indicator, the ridiculous 4 Hz figure at the lower end of the XB500’s Frequency Response spec betrays the bass-focused nature of these headphones. The sound of the XB500 is indeed bass-driven, with a low end that (realistically) extends below 30 Hz and carries plenty of power. The bass is incredibly smooth and very forward. It can be distracting on some tracks but never sounds downright muddy or washed-out. Impact is soft and slightly dull but there’s plenty of it – bass lovers will be impressed. Unlike heavily-textured bass-heavy phones with sharper impact (e.g. the M-Audio Q40), the XB500s don’t give me bass headaches. They do, however, suffer from minimal bass bleed and have a moderately recessed midrange. The mids are slightly warm but sound quite full and rich when not overshadowed by the low end. Clarity is about on par with the Sennheiser PX100 and Koss PortaPros but not quite as good as the Beyer DT235 or Sony’s own MDR-Q68 clip-ons. The treble transition is rather smooth but the high end seems even more recessed than the midrange in comparison to the low end and rolls off earlier than expected. The treble does have some bite but lacks any real sparkle. On the upside, harshness and sibilance are completely absent. In terms of presentation, the Sonys sound fairly spacious and three-dimensional but lack real air and width. Their soundstage has fairly clear outer limits, at least when compared to something like the Senn HD238, which can throw positional cues at great distances. Overall I found the Sonys quite enjoyable in a warm and mushy sort of way. They are a fun listen but I never managed to forget that I was wearing moderately-priced headphones. It should be noted that the 40 Ω impedance of the XB500 helps them cut down on hiss very well with noisy portable players and even full-size headphone amps. On a related note, the headphones do sound extremely dull at the lowest volumes due to the forward bass. To get any sort of fine detail and texture out of them, higher volume levels are definitely recommended.(MSRP: $79.99, Street Price:) The Sony MDR-XB500 is a solid, albeit not truly hi-fi, performer in the $50 range. The bass is strong and smooth and generally remains quite competent despite being slightly dull in nature. The recessed midrange and treble can occasionally be overwhelmed but an equalizer can be used to compensate for the lack of balance. At the very least the Sonys are never harsh or grating. The headphones are also well built and extremely comfortable aside from the fact that they heat up quicker than many earmuffs. Those in search of reasonably competent closed basshead cans that can be worn for hours on end (ideally in cold climates) and don’t cost a fortune are likely to find their dream set in the XB500.Frequency Response: 4 - 24,000 HzImpedance: 40 ΩSensitivity: 104 dB SPL/1mWCord: 3.9ft (1.2m); Angled PlugSpace-Saving Mechanism: N/AEntry-level model from Grado Labs’ globally-active partnerAs with all Grado and Alessandro headphones, the structure of the MS1 is extremely simple and consists of very few parts outside of the driver assembly. The construction is remarkably similar to Grado headphones of the previous generation (SR60, SR80, SR125, etc), with shallower cups compared to the newer –i models (SR60i, SR80i, etc). The only cosmetic difference between the MS1 and my SR80 aside from branding is the button-less cups – a trademark feature of all Alessandro headphones. As with the previously-reviewed SR60i, the headband of the MS1 is a simple piece of steel sheathed in unpadded leather and the 7ft-long cable is thick, tough, and terminated with a meaty 3.5mm plug. The overall build speaks not of refinement and luxury but rather quality and longevity.Like all of the Grado headphones, the on-ear fit of the MS1 can take some getting used to. Luckily, the headphone is light and the clamping force isn’t great. The headband can also be bent to shape and the foam pads become less itchy over time. Though the MS1 ships with Grado flat pads, I do think that the MS1 sounds slightly better with bowls, which attempt to be partially circumaural and have a hole in the center, but those must be purchased separately and make the headphones less comfortable.The MS1 provides no isolation of any sort and the only way they could leak more is if the drivers faced outward, and even that’s debatable.Though Alessandro does pursue a certain house sound with their retuning of Grado headphones, the MS1 is still very Grado-like in the great scheme of things. I’ve owned quite a few Grado sets – at least one iteration of every model from the iGrado to the SR325i with the exception of the SR225 - and the MS1 is just as forward and edgy as the rest of them when compared to the products of nearly any other manufacturer. But they all do differ in subtle ways and the extremes can sometimes stray a bit too far from the Grado sound to be enjoyable – case in point: the SR125, which was far too bright for me despite having detail and resolution superior to both the SR60i and SR80. But I digress.The low end of the Alessandro MS1 is very tight, competing with the Sennheiser PX200-II in control but offering a bit more punch. Extension is decent and there is a bit of mid-bass emphasis. The bass detail keeps up with the competition, attack speed is excellent, and texturing is simply superb, making instruments come to life like no other headphone can. The midrange is forward and aggressive. It is in excellent balance with the bass and treble and manages to be both relatively neutral and extremely engaging. Detail and clarity are top notch – the Alessandros really have a knack for sounding like there is neither space nor matter between the band and the listener. When listening to the MS1 back-to-back with the HD238, using the Alessandros was akin to being on-stage with the band while donning the Sennheisers made me think of standing among the trusses underneath. The treble of the MS1 is exceptionally crisp and energetic. While they are certainly bright headphones, they are never harsh or sibilant and appear to be slightly less bright than the Grado SR60i and SR80 and significantly darker than the SR125 and SR325i. As with other lower-end Grados, the MS1s have no soundstage to speak of but do a great job with separating out instruments. Positioning is quite decent and it’s very easy to pick out individual instruments. The overall coherence of the MS1’s sound signature is truly mind-blowing and a testament to the timelessness of the Grado signature. Those who don’t mind the speed and energy of the sound and don’t require impeccable (or any) soundstaging are sure to be pleased.(MSRP: $99, Street Price:) As a complete experience, listening to music with the MS1 is, for the lack of a better word,, and fewer sacrifices in terms of coloration are made in comparison to the cheaper Grado SR60i, the similarly-priced SR80, or even the pricier SR125. Though the MS1 suffer from the same isolation, comfort, and portability issues as the competing Grados, they offer quite a lot of sonic bang for the buck. It should be noted that due to the global nature of Alessandro’s pricing, the MS1 may be an even better deal outside of the US, where the better-known Grado cans are often sold with huge markups. For those who wouldn’t mind a bit more excitement in their (audio) life, the MS1 is one of the best audio experiences $100 will buy.Frequency Response: 20 - 22,000 HzImpedance: 32 ΩSensitivity: 100 dB SPL/1mWCord: 7ft (2.1m); Straight PlugSpace-Saving Mechanism: Flat-foldingAging DJ headphone from Numark notable for the amazing versatility of its accessory pack and its modest price pointThe build of the Numarks is representative of the majority of similarly-priced DJ headphones. The construction is mostly plastic with a bit of rubber on the headband. The headphones are flat-folding and collapsible and the joints feel smooth and precise. Though the similarly-priced ATH-M50, Denon DN-HP700, and Ultrasone HFI-450 all use slightly sturdier materials, the Numarks boast detachable cabling and screw-on pads, which add to their versatility. On the point of cabling, the Numarks ship with a trio of cords – 10-footers in both straight and coiled flavors as well as a 4-foot straight cord for portable use. All three cords terminate in a meaty L-plug a-la Sennheiser HD25-1. In addition, two pairs of pads are included – pleather and velour – as well as a pleather carrying pouch.The PHX Pro is a hair smaller than the average DJ headphone and the edges of the pads are a bit thicker than usual. As a result, the headphone is not entirely circumaural for me. Clamping force is medium in strength but the earpads and headband are soft and the headphones remain reasonably comfortable for some number of hours.: The semi-circumaural nature of the PHX Pro slightly reduces the isolation the headphones are capable of providing but they still keep up fairly well with the other DJ cans.Released back in 2004, the Numark PHX Pro was designed as a multi-purpose monitoring headphone that would match Numark’s mixers and yet be efficient enough for portable use. Indeed, the PHX Pro benefits from a dedicated amp far less than the similarly-priced Denon and Audio-Technica DJ headphones currently in my possession. More interesting, however, is the sound signature of the aging DJ headphone. The PHX Pro boasts a robust and full-bodied low end that acts as a solid platform for the rest of its sound signature. The headphones are rather fast and fairly aggressive, especially when it comes to mid-bass reproduction, but the bass can be toned down slightly by switching to the velour pads. Extension, both top and bottom, is quite good, though sub-bass is not nearly as strong as with the similarly-priced M-Audio Q40.More remarkable, though, is the midrange of the PHX Pro - it is quite forward and rather lush in nature. Vocals come across very strongly which, despite the overall smoothness of the sound signature, results in a slight amount of vocal sibilance being detectable on certain tracks. Still, the midrange is fairly neutral tonally and surprisingly transparent. The treble, on the other hand, is bright and sparkly. The velour pads seem to accentuate the brightness slightly so using the pleather pair may be a partial solution for those who find the treble of the PHX too aggressive. Despite the bright treble, the mid-forward signature of the headphones, combined with the medium-sized soundstage, results in a slight lack of air in the upper registers. Overall instrument separation and detail are very good but the presentation is rather intimate on the whole and, like most mid-forward headphones, the PHX Pro can be slightly tiring for those used to more V-shaped balancing. Still, the headphone boasts a much more ambient and three-dimensional sound than most Grados or the narrow-sounding HD25. In addition, it offers an impressive dynamic range and does a good job of conveying subtlety when necessary. Personally, I found the PHX Pro very enjoyable for the type of sound signature it offers. Are there more technical headphones out there for the money? Sure. More enjoyable ones? Perhaps not.. (MSRP: $199.00, Street Price:) Though most retailers want around $100 for the Numark PHX Pro, looking around ebay and amazon can 