[supracrazy_tommy]

Ok, so I went to the closest guitar center to try out those dt770s that people were talking about that had good bass. I didn't get the chance to hear them that long, but from what I heard, I didn't hear any bass out of them. How come everyone says they have incredible bass? I wish they had denons there but sadly they don't. They only have the Denon DJ HP1000, but I don't know anything about those. Anyone know if those would be any good for my preference ?

 

[Kayito-san]

Don't get the beats.

I had them, and returned them not 20 days later (I was trying to give them burn-in time, but do beats burn in? No, they don't.) They are VERY biased 'phones, with slow trebble. While the noise cancelling is sometimes nice, the sound signature of the beats is just... unrefined. You may claim you like bass, but sooner or later, you'll want to experience the entire spectrum, more or less, and if you've had the Beats for longer than the return period, you're now out $150 for something that you'll enjoy less and less as time passes. It has ample bass-- Read: overbearing bass. My suggestion would be to find some more ballanced 'phones because, as your tastes mature and change, ultra-bass headphones will be less and less desirable.

 

[chud]

there is a difference between accurate bass and thumping burbleburbleburbleburblerumblerumbleburblebbbbbbbb bbburble.

 

[Kayito-san]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chud /img/forum/go_quote.gif there is a difference between accurate bass and thumping burbleburbleburbleburblerumblerumbleburblebbbbbbbb bbburble.

This, too.

 

[charliex]

x2...sound quality as you mentioned is definitely NOT connected to beats. They sound like s**t and serve to mute out the majority of the spectrum and all you hear is a HEAVILY BLOATED, DISTORTED gawd awful bass presence and nothing else.
But if I were you , I'd get them - who cares about the sound, after all they look so cool, and aren't headphones simply fashion accessories, the ultimate bling...get 'em . You did say you could get them for their worth, about $15.00 right?

 

[JJDyn0mite]

Based on trying the beats vs. Xb700 at best buy, I would pay $150 for the beats, I thought they were fun. Might be different with different setups and music though. My $.02, I think they are better than a lot of people give them credit for, but I'm no audiophile.

JJ

 

[supracrazy_tommy]

hehe lol guys, thanks for the help, I think I got the idea about the beats, but being stubborn before I just went out to try them anyway. I thought they were ok the first day, but the second day I just couldn't wear them, the treble is killing me. Also that they are fatiqueing to listen to after a while. So any suggestions besides the beyerdynamics DT770. I want bass, but it has to be defined. I recently got the IEM denon C710. I was surprised how much bass they can produce from just an IEM. I still want a pair of headphones though, they just feel more natural. Anything with good defined mass ?

 

[jjsoviet]

For about $150 you can get better pairs... the Beats is just thumpy thump thump bass. If you want bass, get an AKG K518DJ or a Senn HD 228/238, pretty good ones in the low-end IMO. Even used HD25's can be purchased at that price.

 

[Graphicism]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJDyn0mite /img/forum/go_quote.gif Based on trying the beats vs. Xb700 at best buy, I would pay $150 for the beats, I thought they were fun.

So you prefer the generic beats frequency range of 20Hz to 20kHz compared to that of the XB700s 3Hz to 28KHz?

 

[applaudio]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graphicism /img/forum/go_quote.gif So you prefer the generic beats frequency range of 20Hz to 20kHz compared to that of the XB700s 3Hz to 28KHz?

To be fair, frequency response specs rarely mean a thing, since companies all measure it differently. Besides, you can't hear anything outside of 20Hz to 20kHz, so...

Don't get me wrong, I have no doubt that the XB700 has better extension than the Beats, but I try not to put too much stock in quoted FR.

 

[JJDyn0mite]

Yeah, I wasn't sure about the freq range when I listened to them, I just thought the Beats was better. I didn't think either one of them was worth the asking price though, I'm just saying that I don't think they are as bad as everyone says and that there is a place for fun headphones that aren't necessarily "neutral" or "like God himself intended music to sound" like people make out other headphones to be. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy higher end sounds, too, and I've been around here awhile, but I think people are quick to throw some phones under the bus because they are mass marketed. Having said that, the Bose headphones they had on display were almost unlistenable. These are just my opinions, though, I don't pretend to be the last word on headphones.

 

[f00fighters]

Quote:

Originally Posted by supracrazy_tommy /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hey guys, I know these are not liked because of the heavy price tag on them. But I have a friend that can hook me up with one for like around $150. I just want to know are they worth it? I know for sure I would not consider them at the $300 price tag, but for $150 is the SQ good enough for that ? Are there better ones that I can get for that price tag and even better SQ ? These headphones appeal to me by looks. I feel like I can wear these around without worried about how goofy I look with headphones on. But SQ is also important to me. I listen to more bass heavy music like hip/hop and r&b. Please help me with some advice.

Listen to me, do not get Beats. Get a pair of Shure SRH840's. You can get them at a good price. You should be able to find them for under $200. They are an amazing phone, and very impressive for the price you pay. A great value IMHO. And they beat the @$&3# out of Beats by Dr. Dre.

 

[Steely Dan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graphicism /img/forum/go_quote.gif So you prefer the generic beats frequency range of 20Hz to 20kHz compared to that of the XB700s 3Hz to 28KHz?

There's a lot more to enjoying how something sounds than the on-paper frequency range, anyone who's ever had Grados can tell you that.

 

[Graphicism]

Quote:

Originally Posted by applaudio /img/forum/go_quote.gif To be fair, frequency response specs rarely mean a thing, since companies all measure it differently. Besides, you can't hear anything outside of 20Hz to 20kHz, so...

Are you sure about that?

Sony SA5000 goes upto 110kHz and is extremely bright and analytical, Sony XB700 goes down to 3Hz and is extremely deep... it has to mean something... whether we can hear it with our ears or not something is picking up on it, be it our bones or water content... it must plays a role somewhere, it isn't purely coincidence when a headphone extends that low it sounds deep or that high it sounds bright...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan /img/forum/go_quote.gif There's a lot more to enjoying how something sounds than the on-paper frequency range, anyone who's ever had Grados can tell you that.

Well I hear people say Grado SR60-225 all sound the same and low and behold they all share the 20-20 frequency range. The SR325 is the notably bassier headphone and is rated 18-24... then we venture into RS1 12-30 and finally the GS1000s 8-35... there is clearly more to hearing than 20-20.

 

[applaudio]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graphicism /img/forum/go_quote.gif Are you sure about that? Sony SA5000 goes upto 110kHz and is extremely bright and analytical, Sony XB700 goes down to 3Hz and is extremely deep... it has to mean something... whether we can hear it with our ears or not something is picking up on it, be it our bones or water content... it must plays a role somewhere, it isn't purely coincidence when a headphone extends that low it sounds deep or that high it sounds bright...

I think that if a headphone extends all the way to 110kHz, then there's a pretty good chance that it doesn't have trouble reproducing the highest audible frequencies (as a general rule, that means up to 20kHz, usually lower, but depending on the person, maybe slightly higher), so one would expect the treble response to be very audible and sharp... hence the bright sound. Similarly, if a headphone extends all the way down to 3Hz, it would be no surprise to find that it does an excellent job of reproducing the very lowest tones you can hear. When they engineer a headphone in such a way that it has incredible extension either high or low, chances are it's going to sound slanted toward the high or low frequencies, respectively. A pair of headphones isn't going to sound bright just because it is physically capable of reproducing frequencies that lie far beyond the range audible to humans, and thus, far beyond the range present in any recording you might feed to the headphones anyway. But it might sound bright if it extends very high, very cleanly, without the treble roll-off that almost always occurs even in ultra high-end headphones.

My two cents.