quadpatch said:
Nice write up Dale! I have most of these and feel very similarly about them. I would ask (for the OP) for a brief explanation of how you compare the Momentum to V-Moda M-100, since you mentioned the Momentum first, but not this time. I should say that I love the Momentum too and personally I prefer it over the M-100 as it doesn't need as much (or any) EQ to be enjoyed as much. Comfort is similar on both, but I love the look and engineering on the M-100 - it's the best looking headphone for me and the folding mechanism is genius!! I was hard on it in my review because of the mis-representation of the presentation (too much bass), but it is a good headphone if you're willing to play with EQ, or straight for some music on the move (Electronic or possibly classical). I would also say that as much as I love the SoundMAGIC HP200 (it is an amazing headphone and even better on price), but I do prefer the Sennheiser HD600/650, the signature, soundstage and the comfort is more impressive to me. Whether it's worth the extra cash and whether it would be worth putting the difference towards an amp is debatable though.
The main reasons I have preferred the M100 over the Momentum are the fact that simple bass EQ on i-devices, played only on the i-device or with an analog amp attached, makes the M100 bass perfect. The lower treble is not ideal in the presence area, but the higher treble is. With the Momentum, the bass is OK without EQ, but the lower mid/upper bass emphasis and the lower treble emphasis combine to push back the mids, which may be OK for instrumental music, but not for vocals. Then with the Momentum, the upper treble rolloff is simply not fixable with i-devices, and worse yet, I haven't found EQ settings that improve the overall Momentum experience on a computer. So I regard the Momentum as portable/non-critical only. The M100 fares even better on desktop than i-device, where I use Foobar EQ of -1 at 311, -2 at 220, -3 at 156, -4 at 110 and 77, and -3 at 55 hz. This modest EQ and the various computer amping options makes the M100 nearly ideal, with only a slight lack of "liveliness" in the presence area. I downloaded a 96k copy of an Otto Olsson organ piece ("Jul") recorded by John Marks of Stereophile and played it on my five headphones, and the M100 gave the most realistic sense of the sound of a large organ in a large space. But with all of the foregoing, I'll turn to the HP200 most often. Why HP200? It's more lively, bass is decent, mids are just right, comfort is superior, .... the only thing that would make me toss all the other headphones is if they could produce the exact sound of the HP200 in a format that's more portable, i.e. wear around neck comfortably when not in use. BTW, there's a *new* review of the Senn 650 at headfonia.
EDIT: I got copies of Lux Urumque from several sources, including an audiophile quality version by Cantus that apparently was recorded by John Atkinson of Stereophile, plus a 2000-person "Virtual choir" version put together by the composer a couple years ago. It's great music, but the Cantus version particularly has the kind of clarity and evenness and vocal range that makes a great test of headphone midranges. This piece only confirms what I already knew about the HP200 - it's the best balanced headphone I have outside of the Senn IE800, which I rarely use.