Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Am I so bad in identifying sound quality?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Am I so bad in identifying sound quality? - Page 29

post #421 of 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by lee730 View Post


I mean I have spent quite a lot but I won't force my opinion on someone else. I'm willing to offer it if its warranted. I don't mind recommending but I won't $hit on someone if they decide to get something else lol.

 


well that said, i do laugh when people tell me beats by dre is amazing....

 

My friend asked me for advice on headphones, and then she said is te beats solo any good - my reply:
No, don't get it

 

What does she do?
Ignore my advice and gets it anyway

 

I thought to myself...why ask me in the first place!?

 

And she paid something like $200 or something for them?

Its just stupid.

 

 

post #422 of 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by lee730 View Post


I think in that sense I can be a snob lol. Like bose, that's crap "you're paying for a name and not quality" lol. Kinda like with beats from dre. I don't know why people consider that quality. If looks cool kill ;),

 



But the point is, people who uses Beats or Bose always recommends those to people who are asking for recommendations and they always say they are the best. So what we're simply doing is snobbing the snob, which is totally right :)

post #423 of 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totally Dubbed View Post


well that said, i do laugh when people tell me beats by dre is amazing....

 

My friend asked me for advice on headphones, and then she said is te beats solo any good - my reply:
No, don't get it

 

What does she do?
Ignore my advice and gets it anyway

 

I thought to myself...why ask me in the first place!?

 

And she paid something like $200 or something for them?

Its just stupid.

 

 


The thing is that, she's asking you to affirm that the Beats Solo are good. Because many people these days think that money = quality. This however, works with almost every other technology but not sound. Sound remains one of the most mysterious technologies these days. 

 

post #424 of 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremypsp View Post


The thing is that, she's asking you to affirm that the Beats Solo are good. Because many people these days think that money = quality. This however, works with almost every other technology but not sound. Sound remains one of the most mysterious technologies these days. 

 


yeah I guess she just wanted me to comfort her - she knew as soon as she asked me, "you don't like them i presume"

 

*face palm*

 

I did suggest to her the XB500's which are small and 10x better, and cheaper than the solo's but hey she didn't listen!

 

She is good at identifying music too - I remember letting her listen tot he EX500's for several hours, and her coming back to me saying, yes these are much better than my in-ear apples, which cost her around £20 more than my EX500's (RRP £50) FYI: not the apple earbuds, the actual in-ear ones, they aren't bad, but surely not worth the price tag, well worth the £35 as i've seen go on head-fi, but nothing more


Edited by Totally Dubbed - 1/23/12 at 2:29am
post #425 of 571


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremypsp View Post


The thing is that, she's asking you to affirm that the Beats Solo are good. Because many people these days think that money = quality. This however, works with almost every other technology but not sound. Sound remains one of the most mysterious technologies these days. 

 


This is what you call placebo effect at its worst :).


Edited by lee730 - 1/23/12 at 2:34am
post #426 of 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totally Dubbed View Post


yeah I guess she just wanted me to comfort her - she knew as soon as she asked me, "you don't like them i presume"

 

*face palm*

 

I did suggest to her the XB500's which are small and 10x better, and cheaper than the solo's but hey she didn't listen!

 

She is good at identifying music too - I remember letting her listen tot he EX500's for several hours, and her coming back to me saying, yes these are much better than my in-ear apples, which cost her around £20 more than my EX500's (RRP £50) FYI: not the apple earbuds, the actual in-ear ones, they aren't bad, but surely not worth the price tag, well worth the £35 as i've seen go on head-fi, but nothing more


O_O I see, never got to listen to the apple in-ears. Thought they should be worth the price tag since it has dual balanced armatures. 

 

post #427 of 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremypsp View Post


O_O I see, never got to listen to the apple in-ears. Thought they should be worth the price tag since it has dual balanced armatures. 

 



dunno what they packed inside that said, all i know is that the bass wasn't as good, however mids and highs were nice - again, as I said EX500's beat them in all aspects

 

I also find BA's lacking in impact

 

post #428 of 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totally Dubbed View Post



dunno what they packed inside that said, all i know is that the bass wasn't as good, however mids and highs were nice - again, as I said EX500's beat them in all aspects

 

I also find BA's lacking in impact

 



Well, I don't really like too much bass though. I find my Klipsch S4 and Turbines to have too much bass, though the Turbines are more bearable. Hmm, there are some BAs that have nice impact though, like the D-jays, Q-jays, Shure SE535, 530, Westone 3 etc. 

post #429 of 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremypsp View Post



Well, I don't really like too much bass though. I find my Klipsch S4 and Turbines to have too much bass, though the Turbines are more bearable. Hmm, there are some BAs that have nice impact though, like the D-jays, Q-jays, Shure SE535, 530, Westone 3 etc. 



Turbines had rolled off bass - bit boomy though

 

post #430 of 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totally Dubbed View Post



Turbines had rolled off bass - bit boomy though

 



I see, I find the bass to go quite deep. I do like their highs and mids though. But I'm not a big fan of bass so I'm selling these to my friend and upgrading soon.

post #431 of 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremypsp View Post



I see, I find the bass to go quite deep. I do like their highs and mids though. But I'm not a big fan of bass so I'm selling these to my friend and upgrading soon.


i made a review with them comparing the TFTA's and the PFE's:

http://www.head-fi.org/t/590714/3x-100-earphones-detailed-comparison-between-tfta-1xb-vs-phonak-aud-o-pfe-112-vs-monster-turbine

 

Long story:
Mids, hidden

high, good

Low present, but rolled off if listening analytically 

 

MTPG's address all these issues, but then if i really listen to the bass of the MTPG's it doesn't sound as refined as my TFTA's -> then take price into consideration and MTPG is out the door, and so are the MT's

 

 

post #432 of 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by lee730 View Post


I think in that sense I can be a snob lol. Like bose, that's crap "you're paying for a name and not quality" lol. Kinda like with beats from dre. I don't know why people consider that quality. If looks cool kill ;),

 


No you are not being a snob. That's being a smart consumer. If I recognize that there's something that's not a particular brand name but is still just as good or even better, than of course I would buy it over the branded one.

 

Laptops especially. People keep saying "Asus is the best," but I haven't really seen anything to warrant that.

 

post #433 of 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totally Dubbed View Post


i made a review with them comparing the TFTA's and the PFE's:

http://www.head-fi.org/t/590714/3x-100-earphones-detailed-comparison-between-tfta-1xb-vs-phonak-aud-o-pfe-112-vs-monster-turbine

 

Long story:
Mids, hidden

high, good

Low present, but rolled off if listening analytically 

 

MTPG's address all these issues, but then if i really listen to the bass of the MTPG's it doesn't sound as refined as my TFTA's -> then take price into consideration and MTPG is out the door, and so are the MT's

 

 


Hmm, the mids on the Turbines are quite laid-back but I find them rather detailed. Yes, the MTPG seemed to have addressed the issues but I don't if it's just me or the highs are not as well extended as the normal Turbines. But I never really liked the fit on the Turbines though. I'm using Sony EX hybrids and it's a lot better but still pretty uncomfortable. 

 

post #434 of 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremypsp View Post


Hmm, the mids on the Turbines are quite laid-back but I find them rather detailed. Yes, the MTPG seemed to have addressed the issues but I don't if it's just me or the highs are not as well extended as the normal Turbines. But I never really liked the fit on the Turbines though. I'm using Sony EX hybrids and it's a lot better but still pretty uncomfortable. 

 


well either or, i would NEVER pay £110 for the turbines

Sony EX500's were £45, i see the turbines at £40 or so

 

post #435 of 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totally Dubbed View Post


well either or, i would NEVER pay £110 for the turbines

Sony EX500's were £45, i see the turbines at £40 or so

 



I see, I can tell you're a very big fan of bass. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Am I so bad in identifying sound quality?