Author Topic: headphones (Read 7499 times)

wordfool · « **on:** Sun, 22 November 2009, 20:31:25 »

Been hanging out with the good folks at head-fi to try and figure out a good pair of headphones and wondered what everyone here uses.

I'm about to buy a pair of Alessandro MS-1i cans... anyone else use these or the Grado equivalents?

AndrewZorn · « **Reply #1 on:** Sun, 22 November 2009, 20:35:01 »

audio-technica ath-m50s

yes, they are closed... i needed it that way

lmnop · « **Reply #2 on:** Sun, 22 November 2009, 20:39:23 »

Cyber Snipa Sonar 5.1 and Sennheiser HD515.

wordfool · « **Reply #3 on:** Sun, 22 November 2009, 20:56:01 »

Quote from: AndrewZorn;135439

audio-technica ath-m50s

I was considering those but figured if I am able to use open 'phones then I should. I am worried the MS-1's might have less bass oomph than I'd like.

AndrewZorn · « **Reply #4 on:** Sun, 22 November 2009, 21:07:07 »

grado generally does

the m50 is a bit much bass, but yes, i like it even though i know its wrong. kind of like overcontrasted TVs...

if you can get open, get open. i got closed to try to stop some of the incessant noise from nearby hooligans.

GenEric35 · « **Reply #5 on:** Sun, 22 November 2009, 21:26:27 »

I am currently using a Razer headset, not exactly Grado since they are fairly hard to come by in Canada, but for having tried many Sennheiser headphones under 300$ I'd have to say they were comfortable but the sound wasn't amazing, I played acoustic and electric blues for 10-15 years, by ear, so my hearing must be still good, and I didn't keep any of the Sennheiser.

Now i'm more into computing and less into muisc, use a headset mostly for gaming and listen to shoutcasts in 128kbps. What i'm using now is the Razer (~60-70$) with a x-fi platinum soundcard.

chongyixiong · « **Reply #6 on:** Mon, 23 November 2009, 09:29:09 »

I really prefered the Alessandro's MS1 to Grado's SR60/80.
Much more musical.

However, not sure about your taste of music but if I listen to a wide range composed of mainly 50% vocals and indie stuff 20% soundtrack and 10% metal 10% rock and etc.

The Beyerdynamic DT990 fits the bill for me as they sound like an all-round winner when paired with the correct amp.

And getting an amp is worth it, either through cheap proven designs on headwize/diy-audio or just getting a commercial one would do. Depends on your level of enthusiasm I guess to DIY stuff

wordfool · « **Reply #7 on:** Mon, 23 November 2009, 10:58:42 »

the amp thing is my next upgrade... perhaps next year. Ideally I'd like to get a DAC/amp combo to bypass my laptop's headphone plug, but that might be outta my price range.

Shawn Stanford · « **Reply #8 on:** Mon, 23 November 2009, 11:26:22 »

Bose TriPort over-the-ear. Love'em...

J888www · « **Reply #9 on:** Mon, 23 November 2009, 12:03:08 »

Klipsch Image S4 Headphones. Not much used now, with bad eyesight, it seems dangerous for me to travel with these ear-plugs. Also since a few youngsters were laughing at this old Monkey (I just look plain silly).

Langley · « **Reply #10 on:** Mon, 23 November 2009, 12:25:55 »

I see Audio Technica ATH-AD700 for about $90-$99 recently. They're pretty good, but I tend to alternate between my DT-990 and Grado 325is just because they fit my head better. Even the DT-990 feels a little small next to the ATH-AD700.

didjamatic · « **Reply #11 on:** Mon, 23 November 2009, 12:30:12 »

Senheiser HD-202's are a great value headphone i keep at work. I think you could spend a good deal more than this and get much worse headphones.
http://www.amazon.com/Sennheiser-HD-202-Headphones/dp/B000065BP9/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1259000770&sr=8-1

Earbuds I have Shure e2c I think they're amazing mids and highs but I wish had a little more oomph on the bottom end. They're about half the price they were a year ago.
http://www.amazon.com/Shure-E2c-Sound-Isolating-Earphones/dp/B0000CE1UO/ref=sr_1_11?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1259000878&sr=1-11

I have always wanted a set of Grados, their look to me is awesome. And of course the high end AT's and Senn's mentioned above are others I've really wanted. I've never had a set of real high end cans.

lmnop · « **Reply #12 on:** Mon, 23 November 2009, 13:19:03 »

Sennheiser HD202 bass is too muddy if you have ever owned a Logitech speaker set not named the Logitech Z-5500 or Z-680 you will know what I mean. Sennheiser HD201 are much better.

ricercar · « **Reply #13 on:** Mon, 23 November 2009, 14:17:57 »

Koss Pro4AA. Flattest response for over 30 years.

wordfool · « **Reply #14 on:** Mon, 23 November 2009, 15:49:04 »

gah, the peril of spending too much time on forums... now my shortlist is getting longer.

microsoft windows · « **Reply #15 on:** Mon, 23 November 2009, 16:13:49 »

I've already suffered from Forum-itis. You get used to it after a while.

keyb_gr · « **Reply #16 on:** Tue, 24 November 2009, 03:11:57 »

A whole bunch of varying vintage here.
HD580 on the comp...
SE420s for mobile use with the Clip...
HD590 for bedside-fi...
HD540 (600 ohm) on the CDP...
HD420SL as radio and general purpose cans.
(Plus a few more that don't see much use, including a HD650 I've wanted to sell for ages.)

A little Sennheiser-centric as you can see, save for the Shure IEMs.

lmnop · « **Reply #17 on:** Tue, 24 November 2009, 03:24:47 »

I would say so. I am not big on Sennheiser build quality.

PikachuDX · « **Reply #18 on:** Fri, 27 November 2009, 09:46:27 »

d1IIqq0Z%jbFiY0'PLX8znY4TiF]Cw7(;-!Y9$nz}g2,hl2Oq]

PRISONER 24601 · « **Reply #19 on:** Sat, 28 November 2009, 03:23:44 »

good headphones are important but I've never had the money for them. Too many other hobbies. I had a pair of Grados once, but they broke. Right now I use a cheapass pair of Sennheiser HD201.

microsoft windows · « **Reply #20 on:** Sat, 28 November 2009, 15:58:56 »

I have an old pair of headphones from the 1960's. You guys would laugh at them.

chongyixiong · « **Reply #21 on:** Sun, 29 November 2009, 10:16:48 »

Quote from: microsoft windows;137005

I have an old pair of headphones from the 1960's. You guys would laugh at them.

You know the drill here. Vintage stuff are not to be laughed at.

The orthodynamics type headphones are considered to be a rarity among head-fiers and some say that their midrange cannot be compared against!

Well, just post some pics will ya

microsoft windows · « **Reply #22 on:** Sun, 29 November 2009, 13:13:50 »

I can't. The LCD on my phone's broke. That means no more pictures of the bomb shelter for a while too!

Computer-Lab in Basement · « **Reply #23 on:** Sun, 29 November 2009, 15:40:54 »

I'll give you my brothers old phone, it has a good camera and it has a QWERTY keyboard. The battery doesn't last long though, but the replacement is only $13.

We must see more pictures!

And in response to the thread, I just use my crappy iPod headphones, they get the job done.

watduzhkstand4 · « **Reply #24 on:** Sun, 29 November 2009, 15:44:25 »

I favor in-ear more than headphones =P I have a pair of Shure E2C but I want to save up for a better set.

ch_123 · « **Reply #25 on:** Sun, 29 November 2009, 15:45:41 »

I find in-ear ones a bit harsh. I have a set for when Im traveling or commuting, but when I'm at home or staying somewhere, I have my Beyers

watduzhkstand4 · « **Reply #26 on:** Sun, 29 November 2009, 15:49:06 »

Quote from: ch_123;137249

I find in-ear ones a bit harsh. I have a set for when Im traveling or commuting, but when I'm at home or staying somewhere, I have my Beyers

Another reason why I don't like to wear headphones is because it messes up my hair lol

Computer-Lab in Basement · « **Reply #27 on:** Sun, 29 November 2009, 15:49:37 »

The iPod headphones make your ears sore if you wear them for an extended period of time.

ch_123 · « **Reply #28 on:** Sun, 29 November 2009, 15:53:49 »

Quote from: watduzhkstand4;137251

Another reason why I don't like to wear headphones is because it messes up my hair lol

Ah, such are the advantages of having short hair, even though my female friends keep telling me to grow it long...

Quote

The iPod headphones make your ears sore if you wear them for an extended period of time.

iPod headphones are ****, and god bless the poor souls who go out and cough up €30 (at least around here) to buy a new Apple set when the old ones die.

I remember around the time iPods became popular, there were people who'd buy the Apple earphones to use with their CD/Radio player to look fashionable. Also around that time, police forces in several countries were warning the public that the white earphones would mark them out for theft or mugging. I am sure that somewhere at some point, some hapless fashion victim with his banged-up walkman was probably accosted by a drug addict because of earphones that were worth more than the player that they were connected to...

watduzhkstand4 · « **Reply #29 on:** Sun, 29 November 2009, 15:57:11 »

Quote from: ch_123;137254

iPod headphones are ****, and god bless the poor souls who go out and cough up €30 (at least around here) to buy a new Apple set when the old ones die.

I totally agree with that. Even here in the states I still see people wearing iPod headphones for some crappy MP3. I personally don't find it so fashionable.

Computer-Lab in Basement · « **Reply #30 on:** Sun, 29 November 2009, 16:00:22 »

I am going to get some on-ear headphones.

microsoft windows · « **Reply #31 on:** Sun, 29 November 2009, 17:25:26 »

I wear my ancient old clunky headphones with my cassette Walkman.

Computer-Lab in Basement · « **Reply #32 on:** Sun, 29 November 2009, 20:38:30 »

I bet they look as bad as your computer lab.

chongyixiong · « **Reply #33 on:** Sun, 29 November 2009, 23:28:26 »

Quote from: watduzhkstand4;137248

I favor in-ear more than headphones =P I have a pair of Shure E2C but I want to save up for a better set.

I'm using one of these! Might as well save up and go full customs!
Just for the record, these are 'headphones' too, albeit miniaturized ones

From this:

To this:

On the plus side, they sound extremely detailed and cost me 2 HHKB Pro2s

watduzhkstand4 · « **Reply #34 on:** Sun, 29 November 2009, 23:42:04 »

are those the ultimate ears? =D

itlnstln · « **Reply #35 on:** Mon, 30 November 2009, 08:16:14 »

Quote from: AndrewZorn;135439

audio-technica ath-m50s

yes, they are closed... i needed it that way

I have the same ones. They are great to keep at work and take travelling.

ernestrome · « **Reply #36 on:** Mon, 30 November 2009, 09:19:17 »

Sound magic pl-50. I had pl-30s before, the bass adjust knobs broke, but the pl-50s are very good. A cheap balanced armature iem.

chongyixiong · « **Reply #37 on:** Mon, 30 November 2009, 09:49:05 »

Quote from: watduzhkstand4;137362

are those the ultimate ears? =D

Unique Melody Mage.
Nicest build quality so far on all customs in the world.

Quote from: ernestrome;137427

Sound magic pl-50. I had pl-30s before, the bass adjust knobs broke, but the pl-50s are very good. A cheap balanced armature iem.

I used these as my pair of daily drivers before I upgraded to full customs. Loved it for its clarity, relatively decent mids/highs and sufficient bass.

cwilson · « **Reply #38 on:** Mon, 30 November 2009, 16:15:34 »

Wow those customs look awesome. I've always wanted to try in-ear. Right now I'm using Beyerdynamics DT990s with an Audio-gd Compass DAC/amp. Lovin it. I also have some Goldring DR150s that I've been meaning to sell but am having trouble parting with. They're great cans for the money. I remember comparing them to some mid-range Senns a friend had (can't remember which number, but they were more expensive than the Goldring) and the DR blew them away (or the "Docs" as head-fiers call them).

ricercar · « **Reply #39 on:** Mon, 30 November 2009, 16:20:15 »

My kids' occupational therapist recommended a Sennheiser model headphone as the flattest response under $200 USD. She works with audio therapy on kids on the autism spectrum. The therapy is noticeably effective. I need to find out the exact Sennheiser model.

itlnstln · « **Reply #40 on:** Mon, 30 November 2009, 16:32:41 »

Most people don't like flat response curves. It certainly exposes bad engineering (all other things being equal). The way I think about it is I am hearing the music the way the engineer (and artist, hopefully) intended, for better or worse. You certainly don't know what equipment the engineer was using to master the recordings with, but oh well.

itlnstln · « **Reply #41 on:** Mon, 30 November 2009, 16:53:20 »

Quote from: ripster;137563

What drives me nuts is mixes that build in noise AND clipping. That usually drove me to recheck my equipment. Now I listen often with my PC and Creative Sound cards drive you nuts with their OWN built in pops and crackles.

Because of this, I only keep Hip Hop and some electronica in MP3 format since it doesn't really make a difference at that point.

AndrewZorn · « **Reply #42 on:** Mon, 30 November 2009, 18:02:28 »

using stuff like WASAPI seems to help

SCTony · « **Reply #43 on:** Mon, 30 November 2009, 18:43:58 »

Has anyone tried the Atrio M5 by Futuresonics? Any opinions?

http://futuresonics.ypguides.net/store/item/1mu7p/Universal_Fit_Earphones/Atrio_model_m5_Black_Professional_Earphones.html

ricercar · « **Reply #44 on:** Mon, 30 November 2009, 22:37:40 »

Quote from: ripster;137563

My studio engineer roommate would engineer on flat monitors then take the CD out to his car and play it on those and a cheap pair of Radio Shack speakers. So yeah, his goal was not flat reproduction but to sound good on lots of consumer equipment.

Smart man. When I was an audio engineer for some SF area bands, I'd sit by the studio engineer and listen, but as I told the musicians, the only meaningful test is to listen in a car with the engine on. That's the most common listening room in the world.

One of the things I hate is compression. One of the CDs I helped master has awesome dynamic range in the musical content, sounds fantastic on its own, but in a 5-cd changer it sounds like ass because its median volume level is about 9 db lower than the standard factory CD from Columbia/Sony/Warner Brothers.

wordfool · « **Reply #45 on:** Tue, 01 December 2009, 01:10:49 »

well, I ended up getting a pair of Shure SRH840 'phones. Am burning them in now (if you believe the burn-in malarky) and so far they sound great so any burn-in improvement is a bonus. Got them for a steal, too ($125). Now I'm wondering if I need an external DAC/amp to bypass my laptop's sound card... the slope just gets more and more slippery and my wallet more and more emptery.

ricercar · « **Reply #46 on:** Tue, 01 December 2009, 02:02:37 »

The DAC in your computer is probably as good as anything you'd get casually; go for a fiber optic digital out into a good pre-amp if you're looking to spend money. RCA digital out has measurable jitter compared to optical fiber. I've seen the o-scope, I don't do RCA digital.

keyb_gr · « **Reply #47 on:** Tue, 01 December 2009, 11:24:41 »

Quote from: ricercar;137688

RCA digital out has measurable jitter compared to optical fiber. I've seen the o-scope, I don't do RCA digital.

Funny, other people say optical is inherently worse in terms of jitter. Implementation is king, it seems. BTW, if you want to see bad, try USB isochronous.

Notebooks' internal sound solutions tend to be quite bad, often plagued by interference of various kinds and rarely equipped with oversized output coupling capacitors (and the Shures with a nominal 44 ohms are rather in the low impedance camp). If the output seems clean at least, I'd recommend a little headphone amp.

itlnstln · « **Reply #48 on:** Tue, 01 December 2009, 11:28:15 »

Digital is digital. The signal is there (and able to be decoded) or it isn't. I just use whatever is available. I have used both optical and coax with no problems. These days, I usually use optical, because it's more available (I don't have an HDMI-equipped receiver yet), but I actually prefer coax as the cable and interface are more robust, and coax is easier to make into custom lengths.

AndrewZorn · « **Reply #49 on:** Tue, 01 December 2009, 13:18:52 »

what you are saying is generally true, i generally present it in the same way, but you have to think about "able to be decoded right now"

an example of this is digital TV
yes it is digital, and it is super clear, but when a bird passes over or there is a storm or something you get a whole block of the screen section missing, some missed frames, etc... as in, a really bad situation can cause what seems to be like a quality issue, even though it is a complete non-transmission of information.

i have heard about long, twisted opticals giving problems... i cant imagine why it would be true though

News:

Author Topic: headphones (Read 7499 times)