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 7

post #91 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by obobskivich View Post
Does it sound good enough to you?

 

And that's the best way to draw the line.

 

I must be lucky in that I found my "good enough" for home listening only two headphones in, and for the measly sum of $250 (not including the receiver I had lying around to drive it). While I still have that curiosity of what other electrostatic setups sound like (unfortunately for my wallet, because this stuff is expensive due to amp requirements), I can keep enjoying music just fine if the SR-Lambda was my final headphone.

 

As for all that cable talk that's going on in here now, all I'll say is that the only time I hear differences between cables is when the cable in question is obviously defective; noise, channels cutting out, etc.

post #92 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Great Sound View Post

By far overpriced cables.
http://www.noiseaddicts.com/2008/11/most-expensive-speaker-cable-world-audioquest-audiophile/
^ like that one

Nowhere near the most expensive in the world. redface.gif

I also don't consider AudioQuest in there with real audiophile manufacturers, mostly because they're kind of a "sellout" brand that Best Buy and RadioShack picked up a few years ago just to hawk with new TVs. Look up Shunyata, Furutech, MIT, Virtual Dynamics, etc - I'm not a big cable proponent, but I think if I were going to spend some major coin there, I'd look beyond AudioQuest or Monster. redface.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by NamelessPFG View Post

And that's the best way to draw the line.

I agree with this. Like mother always said in the shoe store: if you don't love it in the store, you won't wear it on the street, and it should be comfortable like slippers. I kind of apply that to things other than shoe shopping.
post #93 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by MHOE View Post

OT: Do you have T50RP modded? How do they compare with HD650?

No, I don't have modded T50RP. The only 'mod' I did was just to change the pad to Shure 840c as the stock pad is unbearably useless, lose and no seal.
Do you still want comparison with stock T50RP?
post #94 of 201

Yes, the "more expensive == better" thing bothers me, but that's true in a lot of places.  Every person I've ever discussed Bose headphones with falls for their "It's expensive, so it must be good!" pitch.  They're not bad headphones - they're just overpriced.

 

The excesses of excitement of the FOTM bugs me too.  Once you've got good headphones, what's with the constant changes?  The vendors won't get rich off me; I have a setup I love and I'm staying with it.  It all turns out to be vintage, too, even the K1000s.

post #95 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lou Erickson View Post

Yes, the "more expensive == better" thing bothers me, but that's true in a lot of places.  Every person I've ever discussed Bose headphones with falls for their "It's expensive, so it must be good!" pitch.  They're not bad headphones - they're just overpriced.

 

The excesses of excitement of the FOTM bugs me too.  Once you've got good headphones, what's with the constant changes?  The vendors won't get rich off me; I have a setup I love and I'm staying with it.  It all turns out to be vintage, too, even the K1000s.

 

 

The whole vintage thing is proof enough that the FOTM is exactly that. People get all excited about the new gear....then it gets old cause everyone has them....then it turns into a large portion of the people moving on to something newer, while what was formerly new starts getting boring...then sometime much later, that gear that was once the FOTM and new and exciting has become "vintage"....people try out said vintage gear and realize, "wow, this stuff is great!" lol   Just goes to prove that, like Obob said, this isn't computer software that becomes obsolete ever six months. Audio technology doesn't change overnight, and often times you'll find older gear that sounds as good or better than newer gear. 

post #96 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Focker View Post

The whole vintage thing is proof enough that the FOTM is exactly that. People get all excited about the new gear....then it gets old cause everyone has them....then it turns into a large portion of the people moving on to something newer, while what was formerly new starts getting boring...then sometime much later, that gear that was once the FOTM and new and exciting has become "vintage"....people try out said vintage gear and realize, "wow, this stuff is great!" lol   Just goes to prove that, like Obob said, this isn't computer software that becomes obsolete ever six months. Audio technology doesn't change overnight, and often times you'll find older gear that sounds as good or better than newer gear. 

 

This also ties into what MalVeauX said in his early post in this thread. Suggestability is a big factor here. And I would also add addiction as a way to understand this. Audiophiles are typically addicts looking for the new "high" in listening to music (yes we are, and if someone disagrees, you are in denial wink.gif ).

 

So even when there are actual sonic differences between two things, we often perceive them as greater in magnitude than others would because we are responding to finding another high. FOTM is yet another instance of this where the excitement of the new thing and being part of a group that is excited plays into that addiction need to find that high. 

post #97 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedBull View Post


No, I don't have modded T50RP. The only 'mod' I did was just to change the pad to Shure 840c as the stock pad is unbearably useless, lose and no seal.
Do you still want comparison with stock T50RP?

 

No but thank you very much! :-)

post #98 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Focker View Post

The whole vintage thing is proof enough that the FOTM is exactly that. People get all excited about the new gear....then it gets old cause everyone has them....then it turns into a large portion of the people moving on to something newer, while what was formerly new starts getting boring...then sometime much later, that gear that was once the FOTM and new and exciting has become "vintage"....people try out said vintage gear and realize, "wow, this stuff is great!" lol   Just goes to prove that, like Obob said, this isn't computer software that becomes obsolete ever six months. Audio technology doesn't change overnight, and often times you'll find older gear that sounds as good or better than newer gear. 

 

 

One of the most radical examples of that is the LCD-2. It came out to extravagant praise--'one of the finest headphones ever' etc. Then the Rev2 came along and suddenly the original was passe--and worse, riddled with faults like dark, muffled, narrow soundstage, you name it. The Rev2 was the one to have. Then the LCD-3 came out and the Rev2 was passe. Funny thing though, I have the Rev1 and it still sounds great. Given its myriad faults, well documented in these pages, and all the "better" products that have come out since, it should sound like crap, but somehow it doesn't--it still sounds like it did when I got it--like music. I can't explain it, but it's true. rolleyes.gif

post #99 of 201

Wow! this thread is really active,so many posts in so little time.

 

My most hated audiophile misconception is the idea that paying more will always get you better sound.

 

I believe that when you get to a certain price point we should replace the word 'better',by the word 'different',one can very well prefer the sound signature of a $500 paire of headphone to a $800 paire.

 

Something else,regarding components specs,i was reading recently about an interconnect cable that suposedly had 99.999999% pure copper,wich is obviously purer than a cable that ''only'' has 99.999998% pure copper.the same is true about distortion figures 0.001 vs 0.002.THD.

 

The question is,do we have the hearing acuity to be able to tell the difference between such small variations,i seriously dout it.

 

Finally,some peoples see using an amp as a ''necessity'' to get good sound from their headphones,altough i respect their opinion,i don't share it,i have a Musical Fidelity X-Can V2 that i'd bought way back when i was using my Senns HD-600,i still use it today with my Grados,and even if some would see this as a big no no,i have no problem driving my Grado PS/HP1000 straight from the headphone output of my vintage Yamaha CA610II or my Marantz 2220B.

post #100 of 201

I'm not sure if its a 'misconception', another gripe I have is with the marketing of headphones and IEMs.

 

Their model naming/numbering sucks.

 

Sennheiser being one of the worst offenders. Their headphones all increase in number, and price. HD2XX -> HD8XX. This gives the illusion that bigger numbers are somehow

'better'.

 

How about sound? *Groups* of headphones have different signatures, and therefore you cannot say HD650 is a "lower" model than the HD800, can you? Its not even similar in design.

And their description doesn't help either. Both are "Reference Class". Is the HD800 a *better* reference??

 

Utterly confusing for new customers.


Edited by proton007 - 10/10/12 at 8:29pm
post #101 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by proton007 View Post

I'm not sure if its a 'misconception', another gripe I have is with the marketing of headphones and IEMs.

 

Their model naming/numbering sucks.

 

Sennheiser being one of the worst offenders. Their headphones all increase in number, and price. HD2XX -> HD8XX. This gives the illusion that bigger numbers are somehow

'better'.

 

How about sound? *Groups* of headphones have different signatures, and therefore you cannot say HD650 is a "lower" model than the HD800, can you? Its not even similar in design.

And their description doesn't help either. Both are "Reference Class". Is the HD800 a *better* reference??

 

Utterly confusing for new customers.

 

I pretty much disagree with everything you have just typed, but I dont even know where to start so I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. 

post #102 of 201

Why not ask them to arrange a logical method of naming/numbering, a la Radeon GPUs? First number is generation, second denotes class (entry/home theater, then low intensity gaming, high intensity gaming, then best-of-generation), third number is relative quality within that class, and the last number is always a zero because everything looks better with 0's at the end.

 

Not that I have any idea how that would translate into headphones, but it'd be funny as hell to watch the attempt. very_evil_smiley.gif

post #103 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBEG View Post

Why not ask them to arrange a logical method of naming/numbering, a la Radeon GPUs? First number is generation, second denotes class (entry/home theater, then low intensity gaming, high intensity gaming, then best-of-generation), third number is relative quality within that class, and the last number is always a zero because everything looks better with 0's at the end.

 

Not that I have any idea how that would translate into headphones, but it'd be funny as hell to watch the attempt. very_evil_smiley.gif

 

Thats what I was thinking. Something like Westone 1-4 very logical, tells you the number of drivers.

For headphones, just have a single number, or maybe an abbreviation of the musical quality.

 

And putting 'turbo' or 'ultra' behind everything works. HD800-Turbo sounds nice, doesn't it? tongue.gif

post #104 of 201

Or start naming them like Android phones. biggrin.gif

post #105 of 201

Speaking of model numbers, you know what bugs me? When they have very different products using the same model name/number, just with an often-overlooked revision number/letter after it. (Not just headphones or audio equipment, but technology in general.)

 

If hearsay is anything to go by, AKG and HiFiMan are especially notorious for this. All the talk about "bass light" and "bass heavy" K340s and K1000s, HE-400s that have differently-colored drivers and sound signatures, and so forth. It just makes things confusing for the people trying to do their research on those products.

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?