Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Your most hated audiophile-related misconceptions?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Your most hated audiophile-related misconceptions? - Page 2

post #16 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redcarmoose View Post

1}

 

Folks who believe that all amps sound exactly the same. I don't hate the misconception, I hate the audiophile. At times I really think these folks are trolls.

 

True enough! I always hate to exaggerate things but the difference between neutral amp (like O2) and bass-coloured amp (E11 or even E9) can be quite drastic... I believe that many people who don't like phones like HD650 don't like them just because they amplify them in an inappropriate way using their ultra-ultra-tube (and/or insufficient portable/cheap) amps.

post #17 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by MalVeauX View Post

 

Hearing 24khz and knowing it's sound from 19khz is dubious. But someone will look at a spec sheet and think the one capable of higher frequencies is better, without ever having listened to it, or knowing that they likely can't even hear that frequency. Simply an example. And when people simply read a review, which is questionable depending on its source and highly dependent on that person's experience and technical knowledge, then start talking about a headphone like they own it and have listened to it for the past 10 years, it becomes problematic as you get this mass of inconsistent information cropping up. It's like someone reading a graph and saying "Get this headphone, it's bassy" when it's not bassy as described by those who actually have listened to it. Again, simply an example.

 

 

Yeah, that would be mis-interpreting the specs in the first place, and two, sure the specs can say *one* headphone would be more bassy than *other*, however its always comparative.

But I get your idea. 

post #18 of 201

Definitely agree with the psychological thing. People tend to dismiss it entirely, when the truth is a better mood will have a greater increase in how good something sounds in comparison to a lot of really expensive junk. I don't know about you guys but generally when I get a new toy I'm in a good mood. A warm feeling, to say the least. I don't think the fact that people so often describe their upgrades as warmer sounding is coincidental.

 

 

And the cost = better sound thing can get really annoying here. When trying to understand the science behind a pricier setup, a lot of users just say that it's obvious that a $500 setup won't sound as good as a $1500 one because it costs more. 

post #19 of 201

1. That cables make a huge difference to the sound. I think they make a difference, but people around here tend to exaggerate it greatly.

2. That high quality cans require great amplification to sound good, otherwise they are terrible, unlistenable, etc. I find that the effect of amplification on the sound is greatly exaggerated and that apart from the really hard to drive cans like HE-6 or K1000, most high end headphones can still sound very acceptable out of most modern portable players from reputable brands like Sony, Cowon, SanDisk etc, unless the listener wants high volume levels which are not healthy for the ears anyway.

3. Gazillion hours of burn in. Come on people, no headphone needs hundreds of hours, and IMO nowhere near a 100 to fully settle down. It's all in your head IMO. I believe this has been measured already and I have never seen any graphs that show a significant difference between a new headphone and a burned-in pair. I do believe in some mild burn-in, but again - the difference it makes is often grossly exaggerated on this forum.

 

Maybe I can think of more things later...

post #20 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pianist View Post

1. That cables make a huge difference to the sound. I think they make a difference, but people around here tend to exaggerate it greatly.

2. That high quality cans require great amplification to sound good, otherwise they are terrible, unlistenable, etc. I find that the effect of amplification on the sound is greatly exaggerated and that apart from the really hard to drive cans like HE-6 or K1000, most high end headphones can still sound very acceptable out of most modern portable players from reputable brands like Sony, Cowon, SanDisk etc, unless the listener wants high volume levels which are not healthy for the ears anyway.

3. Gazillion hours of burn in. Come on people, no headphone needs hundreds of hours, and IMO nowhere near a 100 to fully settle down. It's all in your head IMO. I believe this has been measured already and I have never seen any graphs that show a significant difference between a new headphone and a burned-in pair. I do believe in some mild burn-in, but again - the difference it makes is often grossly exaggerated on this forum.

 

Maybe I can think of more things later...

 

I agree with everything... Absolutely!

post #21 of 201

How do you tell what is a safe volume to listen at and also which are safer out of IEM and over ear headphones for your hearing?

 

When I was younger I used to always listen to my IEM loud and now I get ear pain if I mess with loud volume too much so I am a little worried about hearing loss when I am older possibly.


Edited by nicholars - 10/9/12 at 10:42am
post #22 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicholars View Post

How do you tell what is a safe volume to listen at and also which are safer out of IEM and over ear headphones for your hearing?

 

When I was younger I used to always listen to my IEM loud and now I get ear pain if I mess with loud volume too much so I am a little worried about hearing loss when I am older possibly.

and how dangerous ARE iems anyway? say if i use dtx 101s on the bus at moderate - slightly high volumes? im not talking about stupid high, i just mean louder than not...

post #23 of 201

My most hated audiophile misconceptions are not so much mis-conceptions but companies trying to rip off consumers with pseudo scientific BS such as expensive HDMI cables with 99.99999999% triple shielded moonstone intergallactic blackhole magnectic feild inductors. Or statements such as "puts back the quality lost from Mp3" which was a recent gem from Monster.

post #24 of 201
1) People thinking that there is a *best* headphone.
2) People saying that I spend too much on a pair of headphones (JVC HA-S500) while they're wearing beats pros that are inferior, and cost 5 time more. blink.gif
post #25 of 201

IEM's aren't dangerous at all. I've asked my doctor about it. Only bad thing about them compared to full size is that they cause more wax build up.

 

If you're listening to a level just below where it starts to hurt, you are damaging your ears. At levels below that, it really depends on how long you are listening to music for. Listening to moderate levels all day with headphones isn't a good idea for example.

post #26 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamlr View Post

and how dangerous ARE iems anyway? say if i use dtx 101s on the bus at moderate - slightly high volumes? im not talking about stupid high, i just mean louder than not...

 

This is entirely a guess but I would assume that IEM are actually less dangerous than over ear headphones.... Because they use tiny little drivers which move small amounts of air compared to over ears which can move some serious air with larger drivers.... I am not sure if this is correct but it seems logical.... Similar to standing next to a 20" subwoofer at a concert would probably do more damage than an iem at an equivalant sound level?

 

I don't get much ear pain at all from my Shure IEM but the D2000 I had used to give me tinnitus and ear pain very easily... I dont get much problems with my HD650 but they are so boring sounding anyway I am not suprised lol.

 

If anyone with some knowledge of this could tell me I would be very interested to know.... for example which is safer at equal equivalant volume levels :

 

Standing next to a massive speaker

Over ear headphones (I guess open design are safer than closed)

IEM's

 

Assuming they all had the same frequency response...

 

Also what volume level is safe to listen to for long periods with no hearing damage?


Edited by nicholars - 10/9/12 at 10:59am
post #27 of 201

1. That specific headphones are only more detailed due to extra treble

2. Headphones are more neutral if they have less treble and are warmer. Extra treble is bad, but being very very warm is perfectly OK!

3. That a neutral and completely flat headphone actually exists..I haven't heard one yet. Every one has some coloration. Instead I will look for what sounds balanced to my ears.

4. That equipment that measures flat all sounds the same. Or that amps are always dead neutral. I sure wish that was true!

5. That FLAC nearly always sounds better than a 190kbps mp3. I'd rather take a good recording in 192kbps any day over a poor recording in FLAC. Well, duh.

6. That a headphone lacks bass, but it's actually just the headphone being accurate to the recording and not screwing it up.

7. That just because you can't hear a difference between cables doesn't mean someone else possibly could.

8. That there is such a thing as a "best" headphone for EVERYONE under $300, $500, $1000 etc. What's best for me is not best for you.

9. That every expensive headphone scales up magically with specific gear. I think people randomly come up with this crap. I'm sure it's true for some headphones.

10. A headphone is automatically easy to drive if it's under 55 ohm.

11. Headphone graphs are very reliable and accurate

12. Bass heavy headphones have little bass bleed.

13. A headphone that costs more is nearly always better.

14. A headphone without a mid-bass hump lacks bass.

15. That if a recording sounds bad, it must be the headphone's fault.

16. That all the popular gear on head-fi is actually the best. Sometimes..

17. Every headphone will sound the same for everyone

18. That the HD-600 is actually very neutral biggrin.gif Pretty close I guess.

19. The bigger the amp the more powerful it is

20. That a computer DAC is like 10x better than a high quality full sized CD player.

21. If you don't have a computer DAC you're not really hearing your fancy headphone.

22. That a 10ohm output jack automatically ruins every headphone with a lower impedance. Yet the person never has tried it.

23. That a receiver is not good for headphones AT ALL. Sometimes they are and sometimes not.

24. That a headphone can't possibly sound much different with other gear. At one point I hated the HD-650 and K702 with the wrong setup (probably colored amp/dac)

25. No such thing as amp/dac synergy

26. That an amp that measures ruler flat is automatically good with every headphone (as long as it can drive it properly).

27. A headphone manufacturer can't change a headphones sound signature without telling us.

28. That the Q701 sounds 100% identical to the K702 normal_smile%20.gif.. or wait the HD-598 sounds the same as the HD-595.

29. That the E9 is a horrible match for anything that costs more than the amp itself!!


Edited by tdockweiler - 10/9/12 at 11:01am
post #28 of 201

tdockweiler it sounds like you are pretty miffed about headphones LOL.

post #29 of 201
1. The whole "specs don't matter " thing....come on people..
2. Cables --- ESPECIALLY headphone cables that cost more than the headphones they are on....
3. That EVERY headphone needs amped to sound good....despite specs saying otherwise.
4. That EVERY headphone is fine unamped...despite specs saying otherwise.
5. That price is always proportional to quality.
6. That just because someone personally likes something, it must be better than EVERYTHING else for EVERYONE else.
7. That anything with opamps sounds bad.
8. Blindly 'rolling' random opamps into gear.

and yeahh... those are the main ones for me anyway...
Edited by Snag1e - 10/9/12 at 11:40am
post #30 of 201

That an audiophile forum is actually needed so misconceptions can be widely and wildly heaped upon the uninformed masses...but why mess with a good thing?

A very good thread.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Your most hated audiophile-related misconceptions?