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 7

post #91 of 571
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freefallr4545 View Post

It has to be a seal or a fit thing. Some people had a hard time fitting the Sony's. It is impossible for me believe that we are comparing apple buds to Sony ex-600. Even the Cheap Sony's they toss in with their Mp3's annihilate the apple buds. There is no YMMV on this one

 

Edit Spell fix


As I said I don't believe I have seal issue anymore. The comparison is between the earbuds for the blackberry (not apple buds) and the EX. While the EX may sound "technically" right, I just keeps going back to using the earbuds. I tried putting the EX and buds back and forth over and again comparing the same tracks. I am just unable to tell the EX is a better one. This is just my personal experience.

 

post #92 of 571

I've been following this thread and I feel we're down to an issue of semantics. You said it yourself, the EX600 is "technically" better. There's the answer to your thread; you can tell. Sound quality is a technical issue, not an enjoyment issue.

 

You obviously enjoy the signature and presentation of your earbuds much more and would likely benefit from sitting down, looking at a glossary of audio terms, figuring out what you like about their sound characteristics in those terms, and then reading reviews and impressions of more technically capable earphones (which you seem to want to enjoy) that would supply you with your preferred sound.

 

Happy Hunting

post #93 of 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by lostid View Post

 

I mean the earbuds for Blackberry not the apple earbuds. Honestly I don't think I can tell the difference listening the 128kpbs and 320kpbs.

 


Believe me if you get a demanding track and encode one at 128 and 320 you will tell the difference. I discovered this for myself long ago and it pissed me off to find this out (that I was listen to crap for so long...)

 

post #94 of 571
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lee730 View Post


Believe me if you get a demanding track and encode one at 128 and 320 you will tell the difference. I discovered this for myself long ago and it pissed me off to find this out (that I was listen to crap for so long...)

 

I just listened with the EX600 to a track at lossless, 105 kbps and 320kbps. I couldn't tell any difference. I use LAME for conversion.

post #95 of 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by lostid View Post

I just listened with the EX600 to a track at lossless, 105 kbps and 320kbps. I couldn't tell any difference. I use LAME for conversion.


Not sure what to tell you. Did you use a track that is very demanding with lots of dynamics? One that is crowded with lots going on in the track.

 

post #96 of 571

There's bound to be a difference between 128 and 320kbps.

post #97 of 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by RealSlimSeto View Post

There's bound to be a difference between 128 and 320kbps.



There is a big difference...  However, the OP did say he was listening to classical, and not all classical tracks are recorded the best way (especially older ones)...  That could also be why...  The quality of those types of tracks really range.

post #98 of 571
Thread Starter 

Personally I can't really tell the difference. Even if I can tell the slightest difference, I will probably not care as long as it is quality recording. For crappy recording, even listening to the lossless is still lifeless.

post #99 of 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by lostid View Post

I just listened with the EX600 to a track at lossless, 105 kbps and 320kbps. I couldn't tell any difference. I use LAME for conversion.



==", converting isn't going to change anything. You're just increasing the memory for nothing. You can't create something out out of nothing. Once it's compressed, it can't go back. To listen to lossless, you either have to download one that is purely lossless or do a CD rip. 

post #100 of 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by lostid View Post

 

I mean the earbuds for Blackberry not the apple earbuds. Honestly I don't think I can tell the difference listening the 128kpbs and 320kpbs.

 



I know, but you even said the apple earbuds were better than the EX600 and I felt the apple earbuds are better than the blackberry ones.

post #101 of 571
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremypsp View Post



==", converting isn't going to change anything. You're just increasing the memory for nothing. You can't create something out out of nothing. Once it's compressed, it can't go back. To listen to lossless, you either have to download one that is purely lossless or do a CD rip. 


I am not sure if I understand what you mean. The lossless file is a FLAC, and then I compressed it using LAME into 105 kbps and 320 kbps for comparison.

 

post #102 of 571

Well if you say you can tell a good and a bad recording apart, I find it strange that you don't between low and high bitrate files.

post #103 of 571
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremypsp View Post



I know, but you even said the apple earbuds were better than the EX600 and I felt the apple earbuds are better than the blackberry ones.


I actually didn't say the apple earbuds are better than the EX600. So you tried the OEM headset for Blackberry 8310? For me the headset is apparently better than the apple buds. The apples buds sound hollow not the headset for blackberry. The headset buds sound dynamic and genuine.

 

Another thought I have is whether putting the metal (without the plastic covers) directly into my ears have improved the sound. See the photo below.

 

IMG_0053.JPG

 

 

 

 

 

post #104 of 571
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RealSlimSeto View Post

Well if you say you can tell a good and a bad recording apart, I find it strange that you don't between low and high bitrate files.

 

 

For instance, the recordings done 50 yrs ago most likely don't sound comfortable to my ears given the recording technology at that time.

 

No matter how good your earphones are, it can not get rid of the hollow, noisy or lifeless sound if that's part of the recording on CD. This is what I meant.

 

 


Edited by lostid - 1/1/12 at 1:14am
post #105 of 571

If that's the case then you should enjoy those earbuds. I have tried blackberry earbuds, but a different one. 

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?