Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Why are some headphones more expensive than others?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why are some headphones more expensive than others? - Page 2

post #16 of 107
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by manbear View Post
 

Ok, but what type of mp3 did you buy from iTunes?

If you pick songs that sound well recorded, do you hear more of a difference?

I don't know what type of mp3 I bought, they were simply albums and songs from iTunes on my phone.

 

I hear an astronomical difference from well recorded songs through my SRH840's! My earpods reproduce poorly recorded music better then the Shures, and I guess I'm afraid that the earpods surpass the SRH840's in sound quality in poorly recorded songs.

post #17 of 107
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by FancyDan View Post
 

You might want to get electronic music from a site like Beatport since they can get you MP3-320s which will sound much better than the lower bit rate sound files you can get off itunes. That may help you going forward, and may highlight the differences between more headphones. 

That's the problem. I already purchased the songs on iTunes, and don't want to spend an additional $1.49 for the same songs.

post #18 of 107

Well uhh, there is a little thing called uTorrent... Just saying. Bandcamp also allows you do download in any format without adding anything to the price. I just generally try to avoid buying music on iTunes as the price/sound quality ratio just isn't there

post #19 of 107
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by FancyDan View Post
 

Well uhh, there is a little thing called uTorrent... Just saying. Bandcamp also allows you do download in any format without adding anything to the price. I just generally try to avoid buying music on iTunes as the price/sound quality ratio just isn't 

Is uTorrent and Bandcamp free to use to convert the file format?

 

How do you use Bandcamp? :confused_face:


Edited by JR4599638 - 1/5/14 at 2:41pm
post #20 of 107

Bandcamp is just a music downloading website that allows anyone to put up a page and music. The pricing is whatever the artist wants, so that's that, but you can choose what file type you want to download when you buy. As for uTorrent, that's just software for pirating basically xD

You can torrent/pirate files as a way higher level of quality than what you'll find on iTunes if you find good torrents, but I don't condone it unless the artist is like filthy rich or something. 

post #21 of 107
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by FancyDan View Post
 

Bandcamp is just a music downloading website that allows anyone to put up a page and music. The pricing is whatever the artist wants, so that's that, but you can choose what file type you want to download when you buy. As for uTorrent, that's just software for pirating basically xD

You can torrent/pirate files as a way higher level of quality than what you'll find on iTunes if you find good torrents, but I don't condone it unless the artist is like filthy rich or something. 

What would you suggest for converting iTunes files then? .wav converters?

post #22 of 107

Well .wavs are going to be insanely inefficient to be honest. FLAC or MP3 320 would be what I recommend for listening. Trust me, I've been a producer of electronic music for many years now and I have hard drives full of .wav samples I'm never going to use. You can't tell the different between a FLAC and a .wav with anything less than like some Beyer T1s or Senn HD800 or something insane

post #23 of 107
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by FancyDan View Post
 

Well .wavs are going to be insanely inefficient to be honest. FLAC or MP3 320 would be what I recommend for listening. Trust me, I've been a producer of electronic music for many years now and I have hard drives full of .wav samples I'm never going to use. You can't tell the different between a FLAC and a .wav with anything less than like some Beyer T1s or Senn HD800 or something insane

If I can't tell the difference between a FLAC and .wav, then why not convert to .wav?

post #24 of 107

because they're f***ing HUGE and you won't even be able to play them without a different media player than iTunes (i highly recommend fubar2000 btw) and you can't put them on a phone. 

post #25 of 107
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by FancyDan View Post
 

because they're f***ing HUGE and you won't even be able to play them without a different media player than iTunes (i highly recommend fubar2000 btw) and you can't put them on a phone. 

Okay, so would you use an online converter for previously bought iTunes music?

post #26 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR4599638 View Post

What would you suggest for converting iTunes files then? .wav converters?


Converting the files you already have from iTunes into .wav will do absolutely nothing and will be a huge waste of time. You'll just have a poor quality mp3 in a .wav container. It will sound exactly the same -- the .wav converter can't add the missing sonic information back in. The only way to fix this problem is to download higher quality files. Check out the free FLAC thread here. There are a lot of artists on Bandcamp that let you download their music for free. It's called "pick your price" and you can just pick a price of 0 and download. You don't really need FLAC or WAV though -- 320 kbps mp3 is just as good for most people. I can't hear a difference and you probably won't either. 128 kbps mp3 is crap though. 

Torrenting is obviously an option, but it's not supposed to be talked about around here as it is illegal. Use google to find out more about that. 


Edited by manbear - 1/5/14 at 2:59pm
post #27 of 107

Sorry - I had to jump on this - so much misinformation here .....

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by FancyDan View Post
 

You might want to get electronic music from a site like Beatport since they can get you MP3-320s which will sound much better than the lower bit rate sound files you can get off itunes. That may help you going forward, and may highlight the differences between more headphones. 

 

Ummm - no.  Itunes default now is aac256, so unless the OP has intentionally downloaded as aac128 - then the file quality should be OK  Also aac is generally regarded as being a better container for lossy files - with aac256 accepted as being at least equal to mp3 320 if not better.  Personally I find them indistinguishable.  Any other difference would be in the actual mastering.  If you want to try (the software is all free) - have a look at this thread (http://www.head-fi.org/t/655879/setting-up-an-abx-test-simple-guide-to-ripping-tagging-transcoding).

Take any CD - rip to lossless - then transcode the lossless to two copies - one aac256 and the other mp3 320.  Highly doubtful you can successfully and consistently abx (ie blind) the aac256 from the mp3 320 - let alone from the actual lossless file.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by FancyDan View Post
 

I just generally try to avoid buying music on iTunes as the price/sound quality ratio just isn't there

 

Agree on the price - you can buy CDs cheaper - then just rip them yourself.  As far as SQ goes - nope.  Mastering may be different, and that's what you have to watch.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by FancyDan View Post
 

You can torrent/pirate files as a way higher level of quality than what you'll find on iTunes if you find good torrents, but I don't condone it unless the artist is like filthy rich or something. 

 

Nope again.  At least with iTunes you know what you're buying.  Torrenting is illegal and there would be no guarantee that the file quality would be any better.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by FancyDan View Post
 

Well .wavs are going to be insanely inefficient to be honest. FLAC or MP3 320 would be what I recommend for listening. Trust me, I've been a producer of electronic music for many years now and I have hard drives full of .wav samples I'm never going to use. You can't tell the different between a FLAC and a .wav with anything less than like some Beyer T1s or Senn HD800 or something insane

 

There is no difference between WAV and FLAC - apart from file size (FLAC is compressed - but still lossless).  Both will send the same PCM signal.   It doesn't matter how good your system is - as long as their are no errors in decoding, and both are from the same master digital file, both volume matched and tested under a proper blind abx - no-one will be able to tell them apart.

post #28 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR4599638 View Post
 

I don't know what type of mp3 I bought, they were simply albums and songs from iTunes on my phone.

 

I hear an astronomical difference from well recorded songs through my SRH840's! My earpods reproduce poorly recorded music better then the Shures, and I guess I'm afraid that the earpods surpass the SRH840's in sound quality in poorly recorded songs.

 

Don't worry about it - they were probably aac256 so you'll be fine.  Where you'll hear the difference (in headphones) will likely be well recorded/mastered music.  Dire Straits "Sultans Of Swing" or practically anything by Steely Dan will be reasonably easily noticeable - especially on cymbals and high hats.

 

But if you prefer your Earpods - then don't listen to any of us ;) - just enjoy the music !

 

BTW - if you haven't already - try the Earpods with foam covers (cheap generic ones are fine).  Creates a little more seal and comfort.  Works wonders.  Also you might want to look at something called Earskinz as well.  I currently use mine with Earskinz fitted, then the foam covers stretched over the top.

post #29 of 107

Whoa, my ass just got jumped lol. Well you're right about a few things, first of them being that there's no difference between FLAC and wav as far as PCM signal goes. I have friends who tell me you can hear the compression with a pair of T1s, but I don't know myself. Regardless, my point stays the same: .wav is pointless for listening. 

 

As for iTunes, last time i bought a song off iTunes (which granted was a while ago) it downloaded an MP3 256kbps, not aac and MP3 320 is objectively better than MP3 256, so... yeah, I think that speaks for itself. 

 

I'm trying to avoid the issue of torrenting, but if you're any good at it you can find high quality stuff. Again, I don't condone it or recommend it, but it IS possible to get really good quality stuff through that method if you want to take that route. 

 

Hope that clarifies things. Certainly not trying to spread misinformation. 

post #30 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by FancyDan View Post


I have friends who tell me you can hear the compression with a pair of T1s, but I don't know myself. 


LOL. Your friends clearly don't understand the difference between lossy and lossless compression. This lack of understanding is causing them to fool themselves. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Why are some headphones more expensive than others?