I posted an interesting response that really got me thinking and stating my view...so I'm curious to get the Head-Fi community's opinion.
I've listened to headphones such as the HD800 and the Grado RS-1 on a DAC, and have to admit they sound great. However, first off, I don't have the cash to dish out, but secondly, I think that there is a bit of dishonesty from companies regarding "upgrading" headphones.
Headphones go up essentially to whatever you want to pay...however, are these extravagantly priced headphones worth it? In my opinion, no. They are packaged with better build quality, nicer boxes, extra design frills, and a unique design. To top it off you spent $800 on them, and to justify your purchase you automatically assume they sound better. Maybe I haven't been able to warm up with a certain phone, but I would be the first one to line up on a blind test with my Grado SR60i and a Grado RS-1 and see if I could tell a gigantic difference. At least with Grado, the placebo effect comes from their pads they offer, but with Sennheiser, I really think that their open-air line is a bit of a sham. The Audiophile line I've listened to all sound EXTREMELY similar, especially with a good amp to drive them properly. You know, it just seems to me that their "marketing" that this is better makes them superior. Grado knows that if they introduce a headphone that is "upgraded" that all of the sudden, everyone will jump on the bandwagon and talk about it and buy it. Simple marketing.
Take a company like Valentine One. They make radar detectors and are ridiculously successful, by selling one product for 20 plus years on one set price. They've only added things to make it better every now and then (which, you can send it in to get a new one if yours is outdated), but fundamentally, they haven't change. I applaud their business model. Or take Bose, for example. Everyone targets their business model for being predatory, but look at their two lines. They market them with the same audio quality, one is noise cancelling, one is not. In both of the lines you have headphones suited to what fits you best. There isn't any real upgrades. Unlike loudspeakers which are easy to differentiate, headphones are smaller, foggier in nature and more misunderstood. Companies think they can take advantage of consumers.
You can ask a fairly educated audio customer about THD and he'll know what it means in relation to a loudspeaker. Now ask them about the impedance or transience of a headphone, and you won't get much of an answer at all.
In a market based on brand names, obsession, and how some view it is a hobby, I feel that brands take advantage of the consumer by over-marketing products via the placebo effect.
Now I'm not saying that every headphone sounds alike (for example, Senns sound radically different than Grados), but what I mean is that upper-line models are unnecessary, extravagant, and based on build quality and not sound quality...brands feel they can do that because consumers trust a certain brand and always want their best and brightest.
Thoughts?
I've listened to headphones such as the HD800 and the Grado RS-1 on a DAC, and have to admit they sound great. However, first off, I don't have the cash to dish out, but secondly, I think that there is a bit of dishonesty from companies regarding "upgrading" headphones.
Headphones go up essentially to whatever you want to pay...however, are these extravagantly priced headphones worth it? In my opinion, no. They are packaged with better build quality, nicer boxes, extra design frills, and a unique design. To top it off you spent $800 on them, and to justify your purchase you automatically assume they sound better. Maybe I haven't been able to warm up with a certain phone, but I would be the first one to line up on a blind test with my Grado SR60i and a Grado RS-1 and see if I could tell a gigantic difference. At least with Grado, the placebo effect comes from their pads they offer, but with Sennheiser, I really think that their open-air line is a bit of a sham. The Audiophile line I've listened to all sound EXTREMELY similar, especially with a good amp to drive them properly. You know, it just seems to me that their "marketing" that this is better makes them superior. Grado knows that if they introduce a headphone that is "upgraded" that all of the sudden, everyone will jump on the bandwagon and talk about it and buy it. Simple marketing.
Take a company like Valentine One. They make radar detectors and are ridiculously successful, by selling one product for 20 plus years on one set price. They've only added things to make it better every now and then (which, you can send it in to get a new one if yours is outdated), but fundamentally, they haven't change. I applaud their business model. Or take Bose, for example. Everyone targets their business model for being predatory, but look at their two lines. They market them with the same audio quality, one is noise cancelling, one is not. In both of the lines you have headphones suited to what fits you best. There isn't any real upgrades. Unlike loudspeakers which are easy to differentiate, headphones are smaller, foggier in nature and more misunderstood. Companies think they can take advantage of consumers.
You can ask a fairly educated audio customer about THD and he'll know what it means in relation to a loudspeaker. Now ask them about the impedance or transience of a headphone, and you won't get much of an answer at all.
In a market based on brand names, obsession, and how some view it is a hobby, I feel that brands take advantage of the consumer by over-marketing products via the placebo effect.
Now I'm not saying that every headphone sounds alike (for example, Senns sound radically different than Grados), but what I mean is that upper-line models are unnecessary, extravagant, and based on build quality and not sound quality...brands feel they can do that because consumers trust a certain brand and always want their best and brightest.
Thoughts?
