[moonboy403]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TopPop /img/forum/go_quote.gif That's not a blind test. You can tell as soon as a pair of headphones is put on your head which of two pairs it is... especially with two headphones that have such very different design and fit.

I believe that his dad didn't know about the headphones, as most ones don't.

 

[TopPop]

Quote:

Originally Posted by moonboy403 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I believe that his dad didn't know about the headphones, as most ones don't.

That's fine. All I'm saying is that the definition for a "blind test" is pretty rigid, and this couldn't be considered to be one.

 

[moonboy403]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EYEdROP /img/forum/go_quote.gif I was referring to the Bose Around Ear model, supposedly the best Bose headphone for SQ. And my Dad never even knew I had the Bose because I had bought them for a short period for a review. He dosent give a rats ass about audio and I had him blindfolded, so there was no brand recognition involved.

Yea, the model I was referring to was the On-Ear, which is definitely inferior to the Around-Ear as I auditioned the Around-Ear in stores many times.

 

[member1982]

i like the on-ear better than the around-ear. In Store they are side by side. Put the same tests on the on-ear sound alot better.

 

[moonboy403]

Quote:

Originally Posted by member1982 /img/forum/go_quote.gif i like the on-ear better than the around-ear. In Store they are side by side. Put the same tests on the on-ear sound alot better.

What did you find the On-Ear do better on?

I felt that the Around-Ear has more bass definition, the bass isn't as intruding as the On-Ear, and it's more airy and spacious.

 

[member1982]

oh it was only 30 second demo, and immediately i didnt like the Around-Ear dont like the bass dont like everything even more muffled than the on-ear.

 

[smrtby123]

Neither of them was unpleasant, but there wasn't that much there to be amazed about. They seem like they "airbrush" the music so that any crap pumped through them will sound ok. If you pump **** through a nice system it will sound like **** but the bose probably makes the top 10 from itunes sound half-decent.

I would be interested to see if there is maybe like a cardboard plate or something that you could put on someones ear so they couldn't actually feel the headphones, but that would interfere with the sealing of the cups and whatnot. I agree that blind testing headphones between brands is very difficult. Unless you are going from a pair of $20 no-names to a real set of cans the comparing gets difficult.

 

[Kenix]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kool bubba ice /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you tell a lie long enough people start to believe it. If all you hear is, BOSE are great, you tend to believe it if you have no actually headphone experience to back it on.

If you tell yourself a lie long enough, you'll start to believe it.

Someone try telling themselves Bose is the best. I DARE you.

 

[moonboy403]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kenix /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you tell yourself a lie long enough, you'll start to believe it. Someone try telling themselves Bose is the best. I DARE you.

Bose is the BEST!

 

[Suntory_Times]

Quote:

Originally Posted by moonboy403 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Bose is the BEST!

Sinner, I can not tolerate such a person.

Only kidding........ or am I.

 

[anadin]

YouTube - No highs no lows must be Bose

 

[SoliloCey]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fjrabon /img/forum/go_quote.gif Most people will describe BOSE as sounding "full and powerful" while they'll describe AKG's, Grados or Audio Technicas as "brittle" or "harsh". BOSE sounds like McDonalds food tastes.

Audio-Technica ESW9? ATH-W1000? A900Ti? A900?

all these headphones are warm, the ESW9, W1000, and A900Ti, as well as the A900 are all bass-centric, but have a better midrange. the ESW9 is very fun and warm.

Quote:

Originally Posted by moonboy403 /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's reasonable to be satisfied with Bose when it's your first "audiophile" headphone. As bad as Bose headphones are, they're still light years ahead of apple ibuds and those cheapies that come with the mp3 players.

This is whats sad... I had this talk from two people in my calculus class, and they were saying how the Bose headphones were good and one of them has even heard my A900Ti's and was gobsmacked about the sound, and yet he talks about bose being good.

I tend to forgive them for they do not know what they speaketh, but I dont like to start arguments about it... I just let it fly...

Quote:

Originally Posted by smrtby123 /img/forum/go_quote.gif They weren't bad, definitely good step up from your standard buds or phones, but not unbelievable. I will have to check out the noise-canceling and try them from a better source. I will say the build quality is very good, and they were very comfortable, but I'm sure their margins are very high.

thats the feeling i felt about the sound from bose...

the build quality for the Tri-Ports is horrid, there has been too many claims of the band breaking, pads, and other damages.

 

[intoart]

They actually manage to make the over-ears sound half decent in the store demo, by carefully chosen demo material and amplification. Considering that my 50 Ohm Sennheisers have an issue with amplifier hiss and that the Bose are 34 Ohm, however, I would expect more noise than music. Certainly there are far better phones for the price (though none as comfortable.)

 

[Fido2]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kenix /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you tell yourself a lie long enough, you'll start to believe it. Someone try telling themselves Bose is the best. I DARE you.

You can't "propagandize" yourself by telling yourself a lie you KNOW to be a lie...you silly rabbit. You must tell lies to the ignorant.

 

[leeperry]

Quote:

Originally Posted by member1982 /img/forum/go_quote.gif The College at work told me the Bose On-ear has "way" better bass than my Ultrasone Pro 750 that's just like What??

wait...it's actually worse than the Pro750, What