6 ms·
The sad part about the headphone market - especially over the ear models - is that the sound they produce is so far from natural, that no one knows what thinks
by rplst8 11y ago
The sad part about the headphone market - especially over the ear models - is that the sound they produce is so far from natural, that no one knows what thinks actually sound like anymore. Beats headphones are a perfect example and are probably the worst offender of them all. This ends up affecting everyone - even those of us who choose a pair of headphones that are "flat" or better at being acoustically transparent. Just as recording and mastering engineers learned to change the sound of their albums to sound better on small little "boom boxes" in the 80's and early 90's, today they alter the sound so they work on these grossly inaccurate headphones.
- degenerate 11y agoEarlier this year I was looking for the flattest (least "colored") pair of headphones I could get for under $100 and after lots of reading finally went with the ATH-M40x. You all might have seen this model headphone go on sale now and again with mic bundles on Amazon/B&H, and wondered if these headphones are any good. This video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udLoAV7YmjA&feature=youtu.be&t=83 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udLoAV7YmjA&feature=youtu.be...] (linked to 83s) really puts into perspective how muddled - aka "colored" - the popular pairs of headphones can sound. I was skeptical of how this works - how do you record what the headphones sound like? This must surely be fake. However here is the making-of video and it really put into perspective for me how detailed sound engineering can get: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnK1Gq7txYA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnK1Gq7txYA
- coldtea 11y ago>Beats headphones are a perfect example and are probably the worst offender of them all. Still Beats are much better than 99% of the headphones people use there, especially cheapo in ear models, and most everything the mass market used with their "walkmans" in the 80s and 90s.
- Nav_Panel 11y agoI dunno. I've always been a big headphone evangelist, have owned a few pairs of not-bad cans like the ATH-M50s and HD280Pros, but I've been using a $10 pair of IEMs lately (I think the first pair was Phillips and then I bought a Sony pair). To my ears (and I'm fairly sensitive to this) they sound about 80% as good as my ATH-M50s and they actually isolate a little better. I'd assumed most earbuds would be awful tinny pieces of plastic like the Apple earbuds but I was blown away. I suggest giving it a shot if you have $10 to experiment with potentially large convenience gains for only a mild loss in fidelity.
- coldtea 11y agoI have a $180 pair of in-ears, an ATH-M50s and a AKG pair and I don't think the in-ears go anywhere near these (which while monitor-grade, they're not really high end monitor headphones). As for cheap in-ears, I never had much luck with any model.
- dharma1 11y agosoundmagic e10 are pretty good as far as cheapie IEM's go. I use mainly Sennheiser HD650 for audio work but for listening the soundmagic's are pretty nice. I use them with Comply foams to block out some noise and get a tighter fit/better bass
- danbolt 11y agoI like the eagerness to experiment for such little cost. Such an idea strikes me as a way to get a little extra colour out of a common activity like listening to music.
- tP5n 11y agoI agree, but I think you're forgetting something that gets lost in the age of digital music: for some 'what things actually sound like' isn't hard to describe. If I want to know how a piano sounds, I'm going to listen to an actual piano. If my recorded and played backed piano sounds any different than that, it's not 'how a piano sounds like'. Apart from that and having owned HD600s, ATH-M40x, E-10s and a pair of AKGs, I'm in agreement with the parent and most of the following posts. Don't buy beats, any of the mentioned headphones here will blow you away for a lot less money.