The background noise in my house, e.g. air conditioning, etc. doesn't really bother me when I'm listening to music, and in fact I can barely hear it most of the time when I've got music playing, except during quiet passages. But these sounds are no worse than the background noise that would be present when the performers gave you a private concert. Normal ambiance doesn't detract from the music for me, and I consider myself a very critical listener. Actual distortion is much more obtrusive. If the headphones actually muffle small details, if they soften or muddy the bass, if they smear the treble and add sibilance, or if they skew the frequency response, pianos won't sound quite like pianos, etc. and the music will sound conspicuously off. This is much worse than a little ambient noise.
The only open headphones I've owned are mid-priced ones, such as the SA5000, K701 and HD650. My three most expensive headphones were the Edition 9, W5000 and DX1000. Of the headphones I've owned, the Edition 9 was my favorite, followed by the W5000, and then the SA5000 the K701 and then the HD650 and DX1000, which were my two least favorite. It's really not a fair comparison between my two favorites and the open ones I've owned, given the price difference, but prevailing opinion on head-fi seems to say that open headphones compete well with closed ones in their price range. I wouldn't say I have the listening experience to say which is better, but I know that the principle behind open headphones in the first place is to eliminate the resonance present in closed headphones at the expense of isolation.
As for carbon fiber, it's used in instruments because its ability to be built with different properties allowed the designers to control the resonance in their instruments. It's also possible to restrict resonance with carbon fiber if it's used correctly. An example of a high end speaker company that uses carbon fiber in its cabinets is Wilson Benesch. But I wouldn't want to encourage Ultrasone to use carbon fiber cups as a gimmick. I just want them to do what will sound best, and they know what that is. I just thought it'd be cool, and it's been used effectively before.
The only open headphones I've owned are mid-priced ones, such as the SA5000, K701 and HD650. My three most expensive headphones were the Edition 9, W5000 and DX1000. Of the headphones I've owned, the Edition 9 was my favorite, followed by the W5000, and then the SA5000 the K701 and then the HD650 and DX1000, which were my two least favorite. It's really not a fair comparison between my two favorites and the open ones I've owned, given the price difference, but prevailing opinion on head-fi seems to say that open headphones compete well with closed ones in their price range. I wouldn't say I have the listening experience to say which is better, but I know that the principle behind open headphones in the first place is to eliminate the resonance present in closed headphones at the expense of isolation.
As for carbon fiber, it's used in instruments because its ability to be built with different properties allowed the designers to control the resonance in their instruments. It's also possible to restrict resonance with carbon fiber if it's used correctly. An example of a high end speaker company that uses carbon fiber in its cabinets is Wilson Benesch. But I wouldn't want to encourage Ultrasone to use carbon fiber cups as a gimmick. I just want them to do what will sound best, and they know what that is. I just thought it'd be cool, and it's been used effectively before.
