Overview

The Audio-Technica ATH-M50x has been widely recognized as a representative studio monitor headphone since its release in 2012. Featuring a large 45mm driver and boasting sales of over 2.5 million units worldwide, it’s a popular product. It has gained recognition for its reliability in professional audio applications and affordable price range, being used in many home studios and broadcasting stations. The design emphasizes practicality with features like detachable cable design and folding mechanism.

Scientific Validity

\[\Large \text{0.4}\]

According to RTINGS measurement data, the frequency response consistency is sub-par, with notable left-right channel differences appearing in the bass region. Group delay performance is rated as terrible, showing negative phase shifts in the bass and lower midrange, with clear resonances visible in the frequency response graph. This results in loose bass and ambiguous transient response definition. DIY Audio Heaven measurements show that distortion below 80Hz reaches 1% primarily in third harmonics, approaching 3% at 97dB SPL, occurring at less than 1mW input. This performance is far from achieving transparency levels.

Technology Level

\[\Large \text{0.6}\]

The design employing a 45mm large-diameter driver with neodymium magnets and CCAW (Copper-Clad Aluminum Wire) voice coil represents reasonable technical standards for its price range. Specifications including 15Hz-28kHz frequency range, 115.1 dB SPL/V sensitivity, and 36.6Ω impedance meet modern standards. The detachable cable system and folding mechanism for practicality are also commendable. However, being based on 2012 design, there’s room for improvement compared to the latest driver technology and acoustic design methodologies.

Cost-Performance

\[\Large \text{0.6}\]

Against the current Japanese market price of 20,300 yen, the Audio-Technica ATH-M40x with equivalent or superior performance is available for 11,500 yen. The M40x offers more accurate and flatter frequency characteristics and is considered a superior choice for studio monitoring applications. Calculation: 11,500 yen ÷ 20,300 yen = 0.567, which rounds to 0.6. The M40x costs approximately 8,800 yen less while providing more accurate monitoring performance according to measurement data, making the M50x’s cost-performance clearly inferior.

Reliability & Support

\[\Large \text{0.6}\]

As an Audio-Technica product, it provides standard warranty coverage and support. The detachable cable design helps reduce repair costs during failures, and replacement parts are relatively accessible. While some users have noted concerns about the long-term durability of the folding mechanism, it maintains industry-average reliability. Firmware updates are not applicable due to the wired product nature.

Rationality of Design Philosophy

\[\Large \text{0.5}\]

Despite positioning as a studio monitor, the frequency response inconsistencies and bass resonance issues revealed in measurement data contradict the fundamental purpose of accurate monitoring. The fact that the more affordable M40x demonstrates more accurate characteristics raises questions about the M50x’s acoustic tuning direction. The design philosophy appears to prioritize general consumer sound coloration over scientifically-based improvements for professional audio applications, making it suboptimal for pure monitoring purposes.

Advice

While the ATH-M50x enjoys high recognition and sales performance, it falls short of other products in the same price range in objective measurement performance. For applications requiring accurate monitoring, we strongly recommend choosing the more affordable ATH-M40x (11,500 yen). The M40x costs approximately 8,800 yen less while providing flatter and more accurate frequency characteristics, delivering superior performance for studio monitoring applications. When considering the M50x purchase, it’s important to carefully evaluate actual acoustic performance and application suitability rather than its reputation or visual design. For professional studio work, rational choices should be made based on measurement data.

(2025.7.20)