New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

` - Page 3  

post #31 of 254
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lan647 View Post
 
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Warning: Rebuttal (Click to show)

No sir, you are hillarious. I never mentioned sound, but do you honestly thing that Mid-Fi is based on price alone? Of course not!

I only mentioned price because that is all we were talking about at the time. Of course sound is more important, but great sound quality won't make a $1000 headphone come down in price, and it won't justify apple ear-buds being Mid-Fi either. (If they ever DID sound that good)

What I am saying, is that I agree with you. Cost should always be put second when sound is amazing, but for now, many of these headphones still haven't been heard. In the case of the ones that have, they're all Mid-Fi quality.

... Except maybe the DENON AH-D400's... I've been hearing bad things about those.

Also, I said Mid-Fi.


Edited by BRSxIgnition - 9/7/12 at 4:01pm
post #32 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRSxIgnition View Post

No sir, you are hillarious. I never mentioned sound, but do you honestly thing that Mid-Fi is based on price alone? Of course not!
I only mentioned price because that is all we were talking about at the time. Of course sound is more important, but great sound quality won't make a $1000 headphone come down in price, and it won't justify apple ear-buds being Mid-Fi either. (If they ever DID sound that good)
What I am saying, is that I agree with you. Cost should always be put second when sound is amazing, but for now, many of these headphones still haven't been heard. In the case of the ones that have, they're all Mid-Fi quality.
... Except maybe the DENON AH-D400's... I've been hearing bad things about those.
Also, I said Mid-Fi.

 

I know you never mentioned sound. I was relating to the fact that you judge the quality of a headphone based on price, without hearing it yourself. You say D600s are mid-fi quality, and you base that on what? 

Shut this thread down, go think for a bit and return when you have some serious arguments instead. 

 

People like you are ruining the entire hobby.


Edited by Lan647 - 9/7/12 at 9:00am
post #33 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lan647 View Post

 

I know you never mentioned sound. I was relating to the fact that you judge the quality of a headphone based on price, without hearing it yourself. You say D600s are mid-fi quality, and you base that on what? 

Shut this thread down, go think for a bit and return when you have some serious arguments instead. 

 

People like you are ruining the entire hobby.

Looks like someone needs a hug smily_headphones1.gif

post #34 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadley View Post

Looks like someone needs a hug smily_headphones1.gif

 

A serious argument to why the TS just place headphones he haven't heard in quality standards based on the price is what I need.

post #35 of 254

Have been anticipating the M-100 for almost a year now since owning the M-80. I am betting the M-100 will come out on top - basing this off my experience with the M-80, the info about the sound sig, AnakChan's impressions, etc vs. what I know about the other cans. Momentum is a wildcard here however. I do wonder how the isolation will compare between the two. The M-100 has my name all over it though.

post #36 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lan647 View Post

 

A serious argument to why the TS just place headphones he haven't heard in quality standards based on the price is what I need.

Dude, you're ridiculous. You don't understand what it means to differentiate between mid-fi and hi-fi headphones.

 

Basically: the differentiation is actually primarily about price. It is NOT to say that the mid-fi headphones do not have hi-fi sound qualities, however. The understanding is that most of these mid-fi headphones do in fact have hi-fi SQ. In fact, many people prefer the SQ of certain "mid-fi" headphones (which have HIFI SQ) to that of certain "hi-fi" headphones. The classification really is about the price primarily, which you're taking wrong because you think it is an attempt to say that these headphones do not or cannot sound as good as "hi-fi" headphones when it is not. I have KRK KNS 8400s, which easily deliver greater detail and clarity than headphones costing multiple times as much as they do. They are, by SQ, hi-fi headphones. If you asked me how I would classify them, however, I would say they are slightly below mid-fi because they are cheap ($120). 

 

"Then wouldn't Beats be mid-fi since they are in that price range too?" No! Because the assumption to begin with is that we are talking about headphones with hi-fi sound quality only! Which explains why, yes, "mid-fi" vs. "hi-fi" really is a distinction in price with the understanding that both groups are hi-fi SQ headphones, and that sometimes "hi-fi" headphones sound better to most people than "mid-fi" headphones (e.g. "I like my high fidelity D2000s, but they just really can't match the SQ of the HD800s because with their greater price gobs of research and testing and materials and effort was poured into them, which by consensus is one of the best headphones around"), sometimes "hi-fi" headphones and "mid-fi" headphones are very comparable and there is no clear consensus on which one sounds better and it comes down to personal taste, and even sometimes certain "mid-fi" headphones may sound better to most people than "hi-fi" headphones! In any one of those three cases, you can find people on either side of the aisle. Meaning, even in cases where a mid-fi is paired up against a hi-fi and group consensus is that the hi-fi is better, you can still find certain people who would prefer the sound of the mid-fi, because, since we're only talking about headphones with hi-fi SQ to begin with, and since everyone has different tastes and preferences, even though the hi-fi "should" sound better because its greater price afforded more to be put into it that is not necessarily true for everyone.

 

If you still don't get it after I explained all that, then you just need to understand that you have no idea what people mean by mid-fi vs. hi-fi, even though I would imagine most other people on here who read discussions like this know perfectly well what the distinction is.

post #37 of 254

I think the bottom line is that the definition of "mid-fi" and "hi-fi" isn't clear.

 

To me, it seems natural to interpret these terms as referring to the price category. "How much are you willing to pay / How high can you go?".

 

I'm not willing to call some nice sounding 20$ headphones hi-fi, neither will I call a beats studio "low-fi".

 

 

As for something more related to the thread itself...is it just me or the MDR-1 series of headphones are damn good looking cans.

post #38 of 254

Weirdossssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss

post #39 of 254

You guys are lost. 

 

Hi-fi = High fidelity. Originally it meant high fidelity sound. Ever heard a headphone have "high-fidelity pricing"? 

 

Didn't think so. 

post #40 of 254

Everyone is lost. So about that M-100 ya ya? Can't wait to try em out!

 

On a more serious note, stop your bickering HFiers... I've had to notify a few Mods in the past, don't make me do it again. This page alone is enough to get a few PMs exchanged between a HFier and a Mod...

post #41 of 254

Is that word synonymous to "neutral sounding"?

 

I have the troll beats marketing line "music the way the artist intended" on repeat in my head atm.

post #42 of 254
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevenlongs View Post

As for something more related to the thread itself...is it just me or the MDR-1 series of headphones are damn good looking cans.

 

I also think they look damn fine. Maybe it's the way the cable is integrated not into the cub, but the Y-bar? I thought they were metal at first though, so I was disappointed when I found out they were only plastic.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lan647 View Post
Warning: Rage~! (Click to show)

I know you never mentioned sound. I was relating to the fact that you judge the quality of a headphone based on price, without hearing it yourself. You say D600s are mid-fi quality, and you base that on what? 

Shut this thread down, go think for a bit and return when you have some serious arguments instead. 

 

People like you are ruining the entire hobby.

 

Warning: Response to Lan647 (Click to show)

 

I have 4 things to say to you:

 

  1. Stop putting words in my mouth. I never said I judged the quality of ANY headphone, let alone the ones on this list, only by price. I put them into a temporary category based on their price. And even after that, I backed up my argument by saying that the category is dependant on both sound and price. That is why the poll is based on VALUE.
  2. I put the DENON AH-D600 headphones in the Mid-Fi classification because they are under $600, and have the positives and sound quality to validate their cost based on reviews. Therefore, they are a "Middle Class" headphone. Unless you expect them to be apple ear-bud quality, or HD-800 quality, they can fit into no other class.
  3. I agree with you. I agree with your words that price is not the only deciding factor, and I will clear that up in the next point. But for you to attack me, personally, because of the way I had described something? Really sir?
  4. To further clarify the "Fi's", I will clearly spell it out for you:

 

 

Low Fi:

Low Cost (<$200)
Passable/Okay Sound Quality
High return on Investment (Each dollar extra spent within the "Low-Fi" class usually gives much better sound.)
 

Mid-Fi:

Medium Cost ($200 - $600 Usually)
Midrange/Great Sound Quality
Lower return on Investment (Each extra dollar spent within the "Mid-Fi" class gives a slight improvement. aka Law of Diminishing Returns.)
 

Hi-Fi:

High Cost ($600+)
Best Quality Sound
Lowest return on Investment (Each dollar spent within the "Hi-Fi" class gives a much smaller improvement. Again, aka Law of Diminishing Returns.)
Usually requires Amps & Additional Equipment
 
I truly, honestly hope this helps, and I have to point out that this is what I thought up while I was at work. I don't think it should be taken as fact or even as a guide, but it's what I go by, and what sounds right to me. Also, Lan647, if you have anything else you would like to say to me, or clarify, I would be glad to help you in PM. 

 

Everyone else, have a great day, and keep contributing, thanks!

Edited by BRSxIgnition - 9/7/12 at 3:43pm
post #43 of 254

lol I need to leave HF. Taking my M-100s and running!

 

EDIT: I will add that anyone's definition of anything in this hobby, is very subjective. Very subjective. If you don't agree with someone else, all you can do is move along. Either that or settle the differences via PM.


Edited by roma101 - 9/7/12 at 3:06pm
post #44 of 254
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by roma101 View Post

lol I need to leave HF. Taking my M-100s and running!

 

EDIT: I will add that anyone's definition of anything in this hobby, is very subjective. Very subjective. If you don't agree with someone else, all you can do is move along. Either that or settle the differences via PM.

Agreed on both counts - I'm right behind you. As soon as I get my next cans, I'm out for a while.

 

However, I still ask everyone to stay and give reviews of the headphones they HAVE heard. Those could be the PSB M4U 2's, the Sennheiser Amperiors, the DENON AH-D400's or AH-D600's, the Beyerdynamic Custom One Pro's, or any of the others as soon as they show up.

 

Thanks again!


Edited by BRSxIgnition - 9/7/12 at 3:15pm
post #45 of 254

Honestly I'm pretty sure I will keep coming back here because of my addiction. But I could do without unnecessary, mindless arguments ensuing here and there. It's just childish and a little sad.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
This thread is locked