[yrstruly]

[Deleted]

 

[angelom]

I wish I had your ears , I honestly can't tell the difference between USB-C and Bluetooth , both sound equally good . I think I have reasonably good hearing for my age , 66 . Just curious is it a really obvious difference you hear that is unmistakable or do you need to concentrate to notice the difference . On another level I am quite happy I don't see a difference as it is more convenient to use Bluetooth . I wonder how many on this Forum are like me , possibly quite few as it probably attracts people who can distinguish between very good and very very good sound quality .

Unfortunately, in audio forums you see A LOT of exaggeration when speaking about sound differences, and this is independent of people's ages. You see tremendous exaggerations about differences in bit rates, codecs, lossy vs lossless, hi-res vs red book files, wired vs bluetooth, expensive vs (very) more cheap equipment, this cable vs that cable, this DAC vs that DAC, this amp vs that amp, etc., etc., etc.

The truth is:

1. Is difficult finding reliable and credible sources/people that will giving you more genuine objective feedback/advice.

2. Many variables are happening when people making some claims, some that you can't even imagine. One VERY important variable is that often A LOT of people believe that one expensive piece of equipment is (VERY) better than a more cheap one -- this is expectation bias. And even when this is true, often the differences are negligible and often not having corroboration by blind tests.

3. Herd mentality is more strong than you imagine, and so many people only repeating what others people are saying without genuine experience or fearing saying the 'wrong' thing.

4. People with hundreds/thousands of posts and using a lot of audio jargon aren't always correct (this is in relation to pinot 1). Is taking sometimes long time for discovering who you can really trusting.

In a perfect world, you're able for testing equipment in an audio shop in quiet environment and then deciding yourself what is good for you personally. BUT the reality is that many, many people can't doing this in many places (even in ALL first world countries) and this is why this forums, audio publications or YouTube are so popular and sometimes useful, but unfortunately you seeing A LOT of mediocre, unprofessional or rubbish posts/articles/videos...and reviews that aren't genuine reviews but only marketing, often using very ambiguous language that often isn't really helping.

AND, one last important aspect is this: our auditory memory is VERY poor, even when only few seconds/minutes passing between comparing one thing to other.

 

[Tenlow]

Unfortunately, in audio forums you see A LOT of exaggeration when speaking about sound differences, and this is independent of people's ages. You see tremendous exaggerations about differences in bit rates, codecs, lossy vs lossless, hi-res vs red book files, wired vs bluetooth, expensive vs (very) more cheap equipment, this cable vs that cable, this DAC vs that DAC, this amp vs that amp, etc., etc., etc.

The truth is:

1. Is difficult finding reliable and credible sources/people that will giving you more genuine objective feedback/advice.

2. Many variables are happening when people making some claims, some that you can't even imagine. One VERY important variable is that often A LOT of people believe that one expensive piece of equipment is (VERY) better than a more cheap one -- this is expectation bias. And even when this is true, often the differences are negligible and often not having corroboration by blind tests.

3. Herd mentality is more strong than you imagine, and so many people only repeating what others people are saying without genuine experience or fearing saying the 'wrong' thing.

4. People with hundreds/thousands of posts and using a lot of audio jargon aren't always correct (this is in relation to pinot 1). Is taking sometimes long time for discovering who you can really trusting.

In a perfect world, you're able for testing equipment in an audio shop in quiet environment and then deciding yourself what is good for you personally. BUT the reality is that many, many people can't doing this in many places (even in ALL first world countries) and this is why this forums, audio publications or YouTube are so popular and sometimes useful, but unfortunately you seeing A LOT of mediocre, unprofessional or rubbish posts/articles/videos...and reviews that aren't genuine reviews but only marketing, often using very ambiguous language that often isn't really helping.

AND, one last important aspect is this: our auditory memory is VERY poor, even when only few seconds/minutes passing between comparing one thing to other.

Right.

Yet, the PX8 sounds audibly different via USB-C vs. Bluetooth, no matter how scientific you like to go about it

Also, they sound different (slightly less bassy) with ANC off vs. on. No auditory memory needed for that as that switch can be made in one or two seconds.

 

[angelom]

Yet, the PX8 sounds audibly different via USB-C vs. Bluetooth, no matter how scientific you like to go about it

Don't take my comments personally. I never implying that you are wrong (I don't know this for fact in your case), only stating facts about soooooo many things that happening in audio forums, online publications and YouTube, but more evident specially in head-fi, the very more popular audio/headphone forum in the world, with thousands of members.

Also, they sound different (slightly less bassy) with ANC off vs. on. No auditory memory needed for that as that switch can be made in one or two seconds.

Yes, this is my experience too with the PX8, and is typical of majority of ANC headphones (and easily testing quickly obviously), some more than others (ML 5909 isn't very good here, for example, because when ANC is on you hearing a big boost in bass, for example)

 

[TK33]

It's been discussed many times here. A bloated bass (even after the firmware update). A dip in the upper mids and lower highs. The biggest sin to me is the bloated mid-bass. It gets in the way of so much of the mids and high frequencies of these cans. Some tracks, to be fair, sound brilliant on these cans. But most tracks just do not. I have really given them a fair shake over the holidays and took them over to Europe on a plane and back....and they function perfectly, the noise canceling was plenty good, etc. No matter how much time I've given them and me to adjust to their sound characteristics, I decided this week to send them back (extended holiday return period from Amazon). It was a slow and painful decision given how much I like everything about them except for their sound. Too dark. Too bloated in the mid-bass. Too much of a dip in the upper mids and low highs.....on about 75% of the tracks I have heard. The 25% sound great....but that's just not enough of a positive ratio.

Although the noise canceling is not as good, I prefer the sound of the Master & Dynamic MW65 I own....it's flatter, more neutral and a bit more sparkly on the top end, which I happen to enjoy, while generally being a flatter curve across the frequency spectrum than I perceive of the B&Ws. I know, many others here will disagree with me on this. The M&Ds sound better than my Sony XM4 and XM5 over ears, but do not block as much sound out. The Sonys are brilliant for that.

Sigh....just wishing I could have enjoyed the B&Ws more. Wanted to post here realizing that I'm in the extreme minority and have read each and every page of this forum over the past couple of months. Intrigued by your admiration for the sound of these when I have 40 years of enjoying high end audio in my background and know what good sound is and should be, and just don't quite hear it out of these cans.

The best over ear bluetooth headphones I've heard are the Shure Aonic 50 (given that the noise cancellation sucks on them), and the M&D MW65 (decent but not great noise cancellation). The Philips L3 sounds good, not great, odd, good noise cancellation but a funny sound signature overall. I know the Focals are supposed to be great, as are the Mark Levinsons....and perhaps the newer M&D MW75. That said, I'm not desperate and will keep auditioning. I am one who buys things in the cheap. The B&Ws were a splurge for me at that price, even though it was a good discount off of retail. All others I tend to buy used, open box, etc. to get extreme discounts off of new. And thus, the B&Ws are going to have to go back after a long demo.

I know that I like a slightly brighter, livelier (and I'll go so far as to call it more neutral) sound signature overall than is offered by the PX8. The MW65 offer that in bluetooth, as do the Shures. I also enjoy warmer sounding headphones that don't have as much deviation from neutral as I find the PX8 to have. Just something about these that do not sound right to me. Many months ago there was a review on YouTube where the reviewer said that this headphone just sounded bad and wrong out of the box (he was comparing these to two other models, I can't recall which). I am sad to say that I feel he was dead on correct.

That all said, I want to thank everyone on here for their comments, knowledge, research, observations, recommendations and input into this forum. It was highly enjoyable to be a spectator and hear everyone's opinions and assessments. Mine differ from the great majority....but I trust my ears as I know you all do.

Enjoy the PX8,all....and thank you for allowing me the space here to write and share my thoughts.

Regards,
Jazzophile

Your impressions are consistent with mine. Someone recently asked me about my Px7 S2s and if they were Px7s or Px8s (I have both) and my knee-jerk reaction was something along the lines of Px8s definitely sound better but they are bassy and need EQ. What I find interesting is that, more often than not, I actually find myself reaching for the Aonic 50s over my Px8s. There are others who love the sound of the Px8 and find the Shure Aonic 50 "anemic" (that's ok too) so it really comes down to personal preference. As a complete package, I think the Px8s are great. As I thought about it, I think what also keeps me from recommending the Px8s to friends are the issues I have personally had with QC (I have had to send PI7s and Px8s back for warranty replacement) and some of the headband issues I have seen posted.

I'm a fan of the PX8 as a complete package, but I understand your concern with the sound signature - I've used my PX8s as travel headphones (commuting or on flights) and one Zoom/Team calls in the workplace.

Yes, I was surprised at the quality of the 5909s ANC. However, the headphones provide a good passive seal, which probably is a large factor in this. I had no complaints about the PX8 ANC.

BTW, I also own the Shure Aonic 50s. Great BT headphones but really poor ANC. The ML 5909 is closer to the Shures in sound signature than the PX8s, but is obviously an improvement on both

The T&A Solitaire headphone is, on paper, the one I'd have gone for, despite the high price, but I just know that the earcup size would end up being a problem for me - I've tried a pair on to confirm that the earcups are a little too small for my ears, but, as with the Dali IO-12s, have deliberately not listened to them.

Agree with your comments on the Px8 being great as an overall package. If the Px7 S2 and Px8 didn't have EQ like previous models, I don't think I would have bought them but I did keep both. Px7 S2 are my commuting headphones and the Px8 is what I use primarily when I am sleeping. Aonic 50s are a bit too large to use while lying down for me personally and I found their bulk a bit annoying when commuting as they were constantly bumping against the windows on the train (not to mention their almost non-existent ANC). I had originally purchased the Aonic 50s before a last-minute cross country flight back in 2020 and ended up using my B&W PI7s instead because the ANC on the PI7s were much more effective than the Aonic 50s. At home, I do find myself reaching for Aonic 50s (I don't use EQ for the Shure Aonic 50) more than my Px8s (I do EQ the bass down a bit on these but, again, this is personal preference).

I too love the Shure Aonic 50. That is a fantastic sounding headphone, and the ANC is sub-par at best. I've not seen anyone else remark about this in any forum or any review, but I wonder if you noticed that the Aonic 50 sounds better using the APTX-HD codec rather than the LDAC codec. The LDAC codec sounds oddly congested and constrained in the bass compared to APTX-HD. I've tested that repeatedly and it's obvious. I'd be very happy with just the Aonic 50 if the ANC was good. It just isn't.

I have used Aonic 50s with LDAC and aptX HD (I have a Pixel 7 Pro and Samsung Galaxy Fold 5 as well as some Bluesound Node 2is/NAD M10 v2/NAD D 3045 streamers and amps, which have aptX HD). Don't think I noticed much of a difference. I definitely did not feel like I was missing anything and I try not to fuss over codecs much anymore. For the Px7 S2 and Px8, I mostly use my Pixel 7 Pro since it does have aptX HD (and the added benefit of not draining the battery on my Fold 5, which is my main phone). When I want to travel light, I just use my Px7 S2 with my Fold 5 and am perfectly happy listening to my music. For TWS, I just use my MTW3 with my Fold 5 even if it is only aptX and it sounds fine to me (also use Jabra Elite 10s, which only do AAC and SBC). I do have the LG V60 (capable of aptX adaptive with the B&W Px8, Px7 S2 and Senn MTW3) that I rarely use anymore and have traded in two OnePlus 8t phones which could also do aptX adaptive, because they are just not as convenient for me. For me, bluetooth ANC headphones and TWS are about convenience and there will always be compromises. In that sense, I think the Px8 are fantastic as an overall package.

 

[Jazzophile]

Your impressions are consistent with mine. Someone recently asked me about my Px7 S2s and if they were Px7s or Px8s (I have both) and my knee-jerk reaction was something along the lines of Px8s definitely sound better but they are bassy and need EQ. What I find interesting is that, more often than not, I actually find myself reaching for the Aonic 50s over my Px8s. There are others who love the sound of the Px8 and find the Shure Aonic 50 "anemic" (that's ok too) so it really comes down to personal preference. As a complete package, I think the Px8s are great. As I thought about it, I think what also keeps me from recommending the Px8s to friends are the issues I have personally had with QC (I have had to send PI7s and Px8s back for warranty replacement) and some of the headband issues I have seen posted.



Agree with your comments on the Px8 being great as an overall package. If the Px7 S2 and Px8 didn't have EQ like previous models, I don't think I would have bought them but I did keep both. Px7 S2 are my commuting headphones and the Px8 is what I use primarily when I am sleeping. Aonic 50s are a bit too large to use while lying down for me personally and I found their bulk a bit annoying when commuting as they were constantly bumping against the windows on the train (not to mention their almost non-existent ANC). I had originally purchased the Aonic 50s before a last-minute cross country flight back in 2020 and ended up using my B&W PI7s instead because the ANC on the PI7s were much more effective than the Aonic 50s. At home, I do find myself reaching for Aonic 50s (I don't use EQ for the Shure Aonic 50) more than my Px8s (I do EQ the bass down a bit on these but, again, this is personal preference).


I have used Aonic 50s with LDAC and aptX HD (I have a Pixel 7 Pro and Samsung Galaxy Fold 5 as well as some Bluesound Node 2is/NAD M10 v2/NAD D 3045 streamers and amps, which have aptX HD). Don't think I noticed much of a difference. I definitely did not feel like I was missing anything and I try not to fuss over codecs much anymore. For the Px7 S2 and Px8, I mostly use my Pixel 7 Pro since it does have aptX HD (and the added benefit of not draining the battery on my Fold 5, which is my main phone). When I want to travel light, I just use my Px7 S2 with my Fold 5 and am perfectly happy listening to my music. For TWS, I just use my MTW3 with my Fold 5 even if it is only aptX and it sounds fine to me (also use Jabra Elite 10s, which only do AAC and SBC). I do have the LG V60 (capable of aptX adaptive with the B&W Px8, Px7 S2 and Senn MTW3) that I rarely use anymore and have traded in two OnePlus 8t phones which could also do aptX adaptive, because they are just not as convenient for me. For me, bluetooth ANC headphones and TWS are about convenience and there will always be compromises. In that sense, I think the Px8 are fantastic as an overall package.

TK33,

Very well said and I agree with you on almost everything here. I also own the Bluesound Node 2i and some other NAD equipment (two hometheater receivers, 787 and 747) and that technology is great. That said I haven't used it for Bluetooth as I stream over wifi and at hi res. For bluetooth I use my Pixel 8 almost entirely as it's convenient and offers APTX HD and LDAC depending on which cans I'm using.

It's interesting to hear from a number of you telling me that my ears were telling me what yours are telling you about the PX8. I guess the PX8 sound bothered me a bit more than some of you. I just couldn't resolve myself to that sound signature long term.

The Aonic 50....yes, they are bulky and the arms do bump into everything, don't they? But that neutral, accurate, dynamic sound is something to behold on a Bluetooth headphone. Just for fun, go back and compare LDAC and APT HD on a hi res audio track and tell me if you hear the congestion I hear when using LDAC. That is the only device or headphone I've used where I've run into that...which tells me it's unique to Shure's implementation on the Aonic 50.

I don't feel I'm missing much when using APTX vs. APTX Adaptive either. Mobile use with the Momentum 3 TWS or the B&O EQ TWS and APTX is fine. They both sound great that way. I wish I had Adaptive....but can live without it. I actually prefer the higher bitrate (on a consistent basis) of APTX HD rather than APT X Adaptive....but whether I could actually hear the difference or not is questionable. I just wish headphone makers would include rather than exclude APTX HD and allow that down selection for phones that do not include APTX Adaptive.

 

[thevibes]

This thread has been super entertaining, so here I am to join in on the fun. I’ve been rocking my Px8 for about a year now. These weren’t my first or even second choice but when I tried them out for the first time, I was blown away. Huge upgrade from the XM4s. My wallet is a bit lighter after rediscovering this passion of mine I tend to use these with the BT-W5 or connected to an iPad via USB-C.

Here are a few of my favorite tracks to listen to with the Px8s
Peso Pluma-Por Las Noches
Maxwell-Whenever Wherever Whatever(MTV Unplugged)
Raisa-Cinta Sederhana

 

[evhvis]

TK33,

Very well said and I agree with you on almost everything here. I also own the Bluesound Node 2i and some other NAD equipment (two hometheater receivers, 787 and 747) and that technology is great. That said I haven't used it for Bluetooth as I stream over wifi and at hi res. For bluetooth I use my Pixel 8 almost entirely as it's convenient and offers APTX HD and LDAC depending on which cans I'm using.

It's interesting to hear from a number of you telling me that my ears were telling me what yours are telling you about the PX8. I guess the PX8 sound bothered me a bit more than some of you. I just couldn't resolve myself to that sound signature long term.

The Aonic 50....yes, they are bulky and the arms do bump into everything, don't they? But that neutral, accurate, dynamic sound is something to behold on a Bluetooth headphone. Just for fun, go back and compare LDAC and APT HD on a hi res audio track and tell me if you hear the congestion I hear when using LDAC. That is the only device or headphone I've used where I've run into that...which tells me it's unique to Shure's implementation on the Aonic 50.

I don't feel I'm missing much when using APTX vs. APTX Adaptive either. Mobile use with the Momentum 3 TWS or the B&O EQ TWS and APTX is fine. They both sound great that way. I wish I had Adaptive....but can live without it. I actually prefer the higher bitrate (on a consistent basis) of APTX HD rather than APT X Adaptive....but whether I could actually hear the difference or not is questionable. I just wish headphone makers would include rather than exclude APTX HD and allow that down selection for phones that do not include APTX Adaptive.

People have different perspectives and what is enjoyable for some might not be enjoyable for others. Some value trying to extract as much detail as possible, while others value timing, rhythmical drive, timbre etc. Personally I find the PX8 to be very enjoyable for listening to music, with good timing and pretty decent timbre at the same time I find the ANC to be adequate for most uses. Do keep in mind that peoples hearing is different and your ears will also affect the frequency response of a headphone, especially a closed back (they are part of the acoustical chamber and impact reflections, total air volume in the ear-cup etc.).

Personally I have a wide tolerance for different sound signatures as I've had a lot of different stereo equipment in different rooms with different level of treatment. Most of my stereo equipment has been in the upper mid range to lower high-end. I've yet to hear a headphone that comes close to a good stereo speakers setup though. I write good as in both good quality speakers + electronics and proper job of integrating the system into the room (placement, acoustical treatment etc.) I also have a 15+ collection of headphones and in-ears mostly mid-range and up. The difference in sound signatures between headphones is very large, much larger than between floor standing speakers, so when you swap between them you will get used to adapting quickly between different signatures.

Through my listening Apt-x HD seems to have a mid-range that is closer to wired while Apt-x Adaptive seems to have treble that is closer to wired, but neither are perfect. Plain Apt-x seems to have less treble detail and generally sound darker than HD and Adaptive with a bit less resolution in the mid-range. Adaptive is easily the brightest of the 3 codecs.

 

[yrstruly]

People have different perspectives and what is enjoyable for some might not be enjoyable for others. Some value trying to extract as much detail as possible, while others value timing, rhythmical drive, timbre etc. Personally I find the PX8 to be very enjoyable for listening to music, with good timing and pretty decent timbre at the same time I find the ANC to be adequate for most uses. Do keep in mind that peoples hearing is different and your ears will also affect the frequency response of a headphone, especially a closed back (they are part of the acoustical chamber and impact reflections, total air volume in the ear-cup etc.).

Yep. I guess the thing to bear in mind with the PX8 is it prioritises tone and timbre over technicalities or neutral/reference tuning. That's always going to be a tricky sound profile for the "traditional" audiophile set.

I've just re-acquired the H95 and currently weighing up which one to keep...

 

[AcademicBarzo]

Yep. I guess the thing to bear in mind with the PX8 is it prioritises tone and timbre over technicalities or neutral/reference tuning. That's always going to be a tricky sound profile for the "traditional" audiophile set.

I've just re-acquired the H95 and currently weighing up which one to keep...

Indeed re the PX8. Choice is a great thing. The ML 5909s and the PX8s sound very different - very clearly tuned that way, as has been said about the Shure Aonic 50s and the others. As my listening journey with the ML 5909s continues, they are clearly much closer to the 50s than the PX8 (and, as a side note, I wonder how different the 50 s2 are in tuning and ANC from the originals). However, and happily, the ML 5909s are closer to the PX8 in terms of the impact of their passive isolation and ANC performance than the Shure Aonic 50s (their biggest achilles heel, alongside a lack of true portability).

The joy of this hobby is that there is so much choice, but it is also the curse as there is always something new to try. Ultimately, what matters is what one enjoys and the headphone that provides the most of that enjoyment. That is very different than the measured technical performance, of course, the opinions of others. The added complexity, with BT ANC headphones, is that there are many more variables beyond simple sound quality and a lot can depend on usage scenarios. For those reasons, I still think as a complete package, the PX8 are a great headphone.

 

[KopaneDePooj]

A dip in the upper mids and lower highs. The biggest sin to me is the bloated mid-bass.

It's so funny how different our hearing or preference is (generally speaking)... - and I totally agree with your description of the PX8 sound compared to a more neutral tuning - but this to me are the frequencies that I always tweaked this way to get the sound I preferred with many headphones that I tried and owned. I very often found myself wanting to lower the upper mids and low highs because my ear perceived this "presence" region as harsh. And usually when a headphone needed this, I also felt it needed a bit of lift in the mid-bass and low mids to get more body in the vocals.
PX8 took care of all these aspects for me in its stock tunning. That's why for me it's the headphone I will never be without, unless the next model or other brand will be tunned exactly the same.
Headband falling apart or not, I don't care, I'll fix it or get a replacement but I'll have the PX8, because they tunned it FOR ME, and that was very hard to find.

 

[mainguy]

Yep. I guess the thing to bear in mind with the PX8 is it prioritises tone and timbre over technicalities or neutral/reference tuning. That's always going to be a tricky sound profile for the "traditional" audiophile set.

I've just re-acquired the H95 and currently weighing up which one to keep...

It's a winner for a BT set imo.

Most of us here have desktop headphones and loudspeakers. Fact is the technical abilities of all of these BT headphones falls miles short of those, even the universally acclaimed Bathys is nowhere near similarly priced desktop headphones from Focal.

So really when I put my bluetooth headphones on I want a nice timbre, that doesn't offend, feels fun, involving, and emotive. That's just my 2cents, and PX8 is just so damn enjoyable.

 

[Jazzophile]

It's so funny how different our hearing or preference is (generally speaking)... - and I totally agree with your description of the PX8 sound compared to a more neutral tuning - but this to me are the frequencies that I always tweaked this way to get the sound I preferred with many headphones that I tried and owned. I very often found myself wanting to lower the upper mids and low highs because my ear perceived this "presence" region as harsh. And usually when a headphone needed this, I also felt it needed a bit of lift in the mid-bass and low mids to get more body in the vocals.
PX8 took care of all these aspects for me in its stock tunning. That's why for me it's the headphone I will never be without, unless the next model or other brand will be tunned exactly the same.
Headband falling apart or not, I don't care, I'll fix it or get a replacement but I'll have the PX8, because they tunned it FOR ME, and that was very hard to find.

You are correct. Appreciate your acknowledgment of my characterization of their sound. The beauty of the hobby is as you described. Works for you, and you enjoy them! And for many many others here. I respect and appreciate that point of view.

The stock tuning bothered me on many acoustic jazz tracks where the acoustic bass was so bloated and loud compared to the rest of the frequency spectrum that I knew I couldn't enjoy them long term. I also found the high highs to be present, but lower frequency highs to be suppressed. Couple that with bloated lows and I struggle to see how you all enjoy these cans.

Being a purist, the idea of EQ is something I can't wrap my brain around as many here have and do. If it doesn't sound right out of the box to me, I don't want to EQ it. Yes, rigid, I know.

 

[KopaneDePooj]

Being a purist, the idea of EQ is something I can't wrap my brain around as many here have and do. If it doesn't sound right out of the box to me, I don't want to EQ it. Yes, rigid, I know.

Yeah, I also try to avoid EQ as much as I can because I feel it cannot achieve the same thing as a stock tuning that is as you want it. Hence why I love the PX8

On the other hand I have headphones that I EQ-ed on desktop in the past, but now a few years later, I'm ok with their stock sound. (HD598, HD6XX).

 

[evhvis]

Yep. I guess the thing to bear in mind with the PX8 is it prioritises tone and timbre over technicalities or neutral/reference tuning. That's always going to be a tricky sound profile for the "traditional" audiophile set.

I've just re-acquired the H95 and currently weighing up which one to keep...

What is a "traditional" audiophile though? I have quite a few friends who are into stereo and their needs and opinions differ quite a bit. Average list price is probably 35k euros on the systems with the lower end being around 15k euros and the upper end being around 200k euros. For some the main priority is absolute detail and neutrality, others it is about warm sound with dynamics and grand scale. None of their systems sound the same and the sum of the parts range from upper midrange to high-end. Even the best systems have minor tradeoffs in that there are some stuff they where they are only good, not excellent. I would consider the majority of them audiophiles, but with different priorities.