[RockStar2005]

I'd like to ask the people of Head-Fi if there is any truth to this, or no? Please make sure to elaborate on your answers with details and specifics. 
 
Thank You!

 

[ProtegeManiac]

  I'd like to ask the people of Head-Fi if there is any truth to this, or no? Please make sure to elaborate on your answers with details and specifics. 

 

It really depends on the response, not so much those specs you mentioned. The thing is though when one designs the drivers the impedance can affect sensitivity (just one of many factors though), and among the many factors that can affect response and sensitivity is the design of the driver diaphragm. Lighter can be good, but can make it more prone to damage, so they have to reinforce without adding too much weight, but then that adds to the cost.

 

Think of it this way - it will be like designing a sports car or bike chassis. Going for a full carbon fibre monocoque puts you in Ducati MotoGP or F1 territory, which would be fantastic for handling but harder to sell in larger quantities, so you have to mind how much goes into it also.

 

[RockStar2005]

 

 

It really depends on the response, not so much those specs you mentioned. The thing is though when one designs the drivers the impedance can affect sensitivity (just one of many factors though), and among the many factors that can affect response and sensitivity is the design of the driver diaphragm. Lighter can be good, but can make it more prone to damage, so they have to reinforce without adding too much weight, but then that adds to the cost.

 

Think of it this way - it will be like designing a sports car or bike chassis. Going for a full carbon fibre monocoque puts you in Ducati MotoGP or F1 territory, which would be fantastic for handling but harder to sell in larger quantities, so you have to mind how much goes into it also.

 
Hmm ok. So your final answer is there is no DIRECT correlation then? 

 

[PL4Y3R 0N3]

Hmm ok. So your final answer is there is no DIRECT correlation then? 

As far as I've seen there isn't. Take a look at the shure se846, with an impedance or 9ohms and a sensitivity of 114 dB SPL/mW. Or the meze 99 classics which have an impedance of 32ohms and a sensitivity of 103dB at 1KHz, 1mW. Both of these headphones are very low impedance, have pretty high sensitivity, but get great reviews all around.
Impedance and performance aren't linked, but they are correlated. The reason is that most headphones that are lower quality are marketed towards consumers, and consumers don't have amplifiers laying around at their house. In fact, if they heard a headphone needed an amplifier then they would probably buy a different one, so the headphones that are marketed to them are incredibly easy to drive. This means lower impedance/higher sensitivity. Now, once you start delving into audiophile territory, the manufacturer knows that consumers will either have an amp, or be willing to get one, so instead of worrying about how easy their headphone is to drive, they worry about how they sound. Because that is what they will be picked apart for.
But I'm no expert, this is just my guess. Take all of it with a grain of salt.

 

[Music Alchemist]

It can go both ways. Generally, headphones with lower sensitivity tend to be more expensive and higher quality, but there are plenty of expensive high quality headphones with low impedance and high sensitivity. (Example: Focal Utopia.) Also, the least sensitive headphones can have lower impedance. (Example: HIFIMAN HE6.)

 

[PurpleAngel]

  I'd like to ask the people of Head-Fi if there is any truth to this, or no? Please make sure to elaborate on your answers with details and specifics. 
 
Thank You!

 
I think that other factors that can effect audio quality, make a statement about "high impedance & lower sensitivity" offering the best audio quality a somewhat misleading statement.
My 32-Ohm Soundmagic HP200 headphones are to me equally good sound quality wise to my 600-Ohm DT990.

 

[RockStar2005]

Ok so I guess having higher impedance/lower sensitivity is NOT a guarantee for better sound, but the other factors involved like quality etc are the real reason why high imp/low sens 'phones sound better. 
 
Thanks to all who contributed!! Great info!

 

[Me x3]

  Ok so I guess having higher impedance/lower sensitivity is NOT a guarantee for better sound, but the other factors involved like quality etc are the real reason why high imp/low sens 'phones sound better. 
 
Thanks to all who contributed!! Great info!

Not necessarily. you'll find plenty of low impedance headphones that sound just as good or better than high impedance ones.
Going high impedance is a design choice for manufacturers, nothing more. They can do it right or wrong no matter the choosen impedance.
Most of the times high impedance headphones need very little current so they are easier loads for the amplifier vs a low impedance headphone with the same sensitivity (dB/V).
In that sense, the amp will work better with high impedance headphones. You can drive 4 DT880 (250 Ohm) with the power needed for 1 AKG K702 (67 Ohm).

 

[ProtegeManiac]

   
Hmm ok. So your final answer is there is no DIRECT correlation then? 

 
Yes.

 

[RockStar2005]

Yes.

Ok thanks Protege!

 

[obobskivich]

I would agree with the consensus here, but note that historically this probably had some indirect correlation and thus basis in reality (e.g. it isn't just arbitrary marketing claims). The "why" is not that high impedance/low sensitivity was for any reason "better" due to its own virtues (as has been explained here by others), but that most of the higher end cans of yesteryear were usually high impedance/low sensitivity models (go look at older Sennheiser, AKG, Beyerdynamic, Koss, etc products as examples). More recently it seems like most manufacturers are trying to do lower impedance and/or higher sensitivity cans that play nicer with mobile/portable devices as opposed to assuming that users are predominately hooking headphones into some desktop-based unit (like a receiver or integrated amplifier). That doesn't mean there aren't lots of exceptions - as far as I know Grado has never produced a "high impedance" model, and many high-end Sony and Audio-Technica cans (even going back years) are low impedance as well. Also keep in mind that outside of Beyerdynamic (who offer multiple impedance versions of a few cans, like the DT880), there will be a lot of other, bigger, differences between a hypothetical low impedance/high sensitivity can and a high impedance/low sensitivity can - for example a "classic" comparison between the Grado RS-1 and Sennheiser HD 600; there's a lot going on there beyond just impedance/sensitivity that makes those sound very different.

 

[RockStar2005]

I would agree with the consensus here, but note that historically this probably had some indirect correlation and thus basis in reality (e.g. it isn't just arbitrary marketing claims). The "why" is not that high impedance/low sensitivity was for any reason "better" due to its own virtues (as has been explained here by others), but that most of the higher end cans of yesteryear were usually high impedance/low sensitivity models (go look at older Sennheiser, AKG, Beyerdynamic, Koss, etc products as examples). More recently it seems like most manufacturers are trying to do lower impedance and/or higher sensitivity cans that play nicer with mobile/portable devices as opposed to assuming that users are predominately hooking headphones into some desktop-based unit (like a receiver or integrated amplifier). That doesn't mean there aren't lots of exceptions - as far as I know Grado has never produced a "high impedance" model, and many high-end Sony and Audio-Technica cans (even going back years) are low impedance as well. Also keep in mind that outside of Beyerdynamic (who offer multiple impedance versions of a few cans, like the DT880), there will be a lot of other, bigger, differences between a hypothetical low impedance/high sensitivity can and a high impedance/low sensitivity can - for example a "classic" comparison between the Grado RS-1 and Sennheiser HD 600; there's a lot going on there beyond just impedance/sensitivity that makes those sound very different.

 
Yes, ALL true! Smartphones didn't exist before about 10 years ago, so they had no real motivation to make lower impedance/higher sensitivity headphones. 
 
It's the Hi-Fi Audio world...........OF COURSE there always exceptions! ROFL 
 
So in the end, I still feel the correlation between high imp/lower sensit headphones and top-quality sound is weak at best. Too many other factors to consider. 
 
Excellent discussion!! Thank you all for your contributions. 

 

[obobskivich]

I think "weak at best" is probably a very good way of putting it. It *is* probably reasonable to assume that a hi-fi headphone that's high impedance + low sensitivity is probably a higher end model (e.g. Sennheiser HD 650) - I can't actually think of any "cheap junk" that fits that quale off-handed, but by itself those qualities aren't what *make* it a high end model.