or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › LOL at all the Beats bashers........
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

LOL at all the Beats bashers........ - Page 19  

post #271 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by jake120 View Post

 

I don't think so,

 

all the data at the required spectrums is there or not... if its not there then its the instrument wasnt used or it was mastered out but the music is still lossless it still has the content originally intended even if the master didnt do the job as was intended.

 

lossless from a technical point of view is moot, if it already meets its designed spec no one cares about all the extra bits we will never hear.

 

 

that already means nothing is lost in the first place

post #272 of 353

well speakers, headphones, iems have their limits too, even if you go as high as 192khz on your music, your speakers/headphones/iem may not even be able to reproduce it and 192khz may cause intermodulation distortion... just saying

 

This makes no sense to me. Care to elaborate?

post #273 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sound Quest View Post

Here is a frequency response graph comparing the beat solos with a couple of the headphones that you mention in your post above.

 

 

Of course you could artifically add more bass with the headphones you mention with the use of an equalizer, but that isn't the point. You can do that with any headphone.

 

The point of a balanced headphone is that you won't have to mess around with the equalizer in order to find the right sound.

 


So...a straight line is best?? By the way...I was talking about the 325is which has significantly more bass than a 325i, in my opinion.

post #274 of 353

Beats headphones are about to lose their 1miillion dollar headphone mascot.

post #275 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by reddragon View Post

 

 

that already means nothing is lost in the first place

 

Yes I agree my bad, i should have used lossy in place.

post #276 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tus-Chan View Post

 

This makes no sense to me. Care to elaborate?

 

 

which part do you not understand? 

post #277 of 353

Quote:
Originally Posted by EF88 View Post

So...a straight line is best?? By the way...I was talking about the 325is which has significantly more bass than a 325i, in my opinion.

That is the 325is. HeadRoom doesn't offer the SR325i, just the SR325is so I would assume the graph is of that. 

 

Also, a straight line is balanced. That isn't good or bad, it just is. If you like neutral, its good, if you prefer r/v/n/u/whatever shaped sound signatures, then it is bad. Since we are talking about Beats and headphones that are better than them, we should be looking for frequency response graphs that show a ton near the left, i.e. headphones for bassheads. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TMRaven View Post

Beats headphones are about to lose their 1miillion dollar headphone mascot.

 

Monster is losing Dr. Dre, but Beats Audio is its own thing. Monster already has other celebrities lined up as well. It seems like the Diamond Tears and other new stuff is a lot better than Beats (though still overpriced), but I haven't tried any of them so I'll reserve judgement until then. 


Edited by ThinkAwesome - 3/15/13 at 6:09pm
post #278 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThinkAwesome View Post

That is the 325is. HeadRoom doesn't offer the SR325i, just the SR325is so I would assume the graph is of that. 

 

Also, a straight line is balanced. That isn't good or bad, it just is. If you like neutral, its good, if you prefer r/v/n/u/whatever shaped sound signatures, then it is bad. 

 

 

Monster is losing Dr. Dre, but Beats Audio is its own thing. Monster already has other celebrities lined up as well. It seems like the Diamond Tears and other new stuff is a lot better than Beats (though still overpriced), but I haven't tried any of them so I'll reserve judgement until then. 

 

 

for some reason the diamond tears looks more like toys to me than headphones, not trying to bash, just stating my honest opinion. i have however never listened to it neither so wont say anything about the sound

post #279 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThinkAwesome View Post

 

Monster is losing Dr. Dre, but Beats Audio is its own thing. Monster already has other celebrities lined up as well. It seems like the Diamond Tears and other new stuff is a lot better than Beats (though still overpriced), but I haven't tried any of them so I'll reserve judgement until then. 

 

 

I was referring to Lil Wayne.

post #280 of 353

I would actually put the Diamond Tears appearance a step above all of the Beats (maybe except for the Executives, those were pretty classy looking). Yes, they look blingy, but they don't look cheap and I really wouldn't be that embarrassed to go around wearing them. 

post #281 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by chewy4 View Post

What you're saying goes against the theorem that digital audio is based upon. Care to back it up?

 

Here's a really good video on digital audio that you should watch: https://www.xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml 

It contains demonstrations proving what you're saying wrong.


That links a popping a 404 error, do you have another?

 

Love the whole digital vs analog arguments. Particularly when the rather erroneous assumption that analog recordings are not samples is used:)

post #282 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThinkAwesome View Post

I would actually put the Diamond Tears appearance a step above all of the Beats (maybe except for the Executives, those were pretty classy looking). Yes, they look blingy, but they don't look cheap and I really wouldn't be that embarrassed to go around wearing them. 

Bar cheapie earbuds I would say the diamond tears are the cheapest, plasticky looking headphone on the market. The look like they were designed by the kind of people who bejewel their staplers. 

post #283 of 353

which part do you not understand? 

 

How exactly does a higher sample rate, when converted to an analog electrical signal, cause distortion or overwhelm a headphone? That doesn't make any sense. Applying that logic to a pure analog recording, which would theoretically have a sample rate of infinity (because there is no sampling) would mean that all analog recordings are equipment killers.


Edited by Tus-Chan - 3/15/13 at 7:36pm
post #284 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hutnicks View Post


That links a popping a 404 error, do you have another?

 

Love the whole digital vs analog arguments. Particularly when the rather erroneous assumption that analog recordings are not samples is used:)

Ah crap, looks like a space after the link was causing that. Edited it and it should work now, and so should this: https://www.xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml

post #285 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tus-Chan View Post

 

How exactly does a higher sample rate, when converted to an analog electrical signal, cause distortion or overwhelm a headphone? That doesn't make any sense. Applying that logic to a pure analog recording, which would theoretically have a sample rate of infinity (because there is no sampling) would mean that all analog recordings are equipment killers.

Analog recordings are still bandlimited, moreso than your standard digital file. Way more than a 192kHz digital file. They have quite a bit of treble rolloff. 

 

The distortion would arise when a headphone is trying to reproduce a frequency that it is not really engineered to reproduce, which a 192kHz file is capable of producing. Really a worse case scenario though I think.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › LOL at all the Beats bashers........