[Prog Rock Man]

Having spend around £100-£150 on headphones a few times and doing some research to buy my first new headphones in a decade, if anything deciding what to do is harder now than before.

Ten years ago there were not many reviews. Now there are loads, from YouTube, to forums to the reviews left by customers. There is almost information overload. What is noticeable, is the number of reviews that discuss differences in sound, as opposed to improvements in sound. I watched a couple of YouTube reviews were cheap Grados and Beyerdynamic headphones were compared to far more expensive headphones from the same company, and it was clear that more money does not guarantee a better sound, just a different sound, in that case.

More money does pretty much guarantee headphones made out of more expensive materials, a nice box, may be a choice of cable, but it does not appear to guarantee better sound. "Better" is subjective. "Different" is more objective. "Better" tends to mean all the instruments are clear and you can really hear the music. I remember letting a friend listen to some Grado SR80s and she realised she had misheard some lyrics on a track she had been listening to for years. The "better" SR80s meant she could hear the vocals clearly. "Better" would also be the bass sounds more bass like and not thin. "Better" would tend to mean no tizzy sound on cymbals and generally no distortion. "Different" could also mean more bass, where the bass on both headphones sounds fine, it is a matter of preference as to how much bass the listener would like to hear.

How much money is needed to guarantee a "better" sound than £100ish headphones, such as the AKG K271 Mkii, K702 Grado SR80 or Beyerdynamic DT990? Or does more money just mean a different sound that is not necessarily better?

 

[Redcarmoose]

Much of the time a different replay does get misinterpreted as better! That’s for sure. The key is finding your tone which you have already done.

I’m here to tell you to a point it’s a moving target! Where what sounds exciting and fresh for a while can start to some how sound not so fresh. That can take place once in a while. We both joined Head-Fi around the same time. Though the main goal should be to find even and correct frequency response with in your desired sound signature, resulting in a complete and natural sound that you don’t ever question. You click “on” and find yourself intimately involved, no matter what the genre is.

1st off I will say there is no easy answer to your question. I wish that there was. That there could be these simple upgrade packages that people could all buy and be happy with. The reason that doesn’t exist is due to the wild difference in what someone wants to spend and the multitude of sound profiles there are.

The one thing for sure is everyone thinks they are right. They think they have the best solution for the money. That’s how myopic this hobby is. More money does not always guarantee better sound but often it does.

You have to realize that there is some (some) common sense in the purchase plans and trajectories in this community. Many do it different and many make mistakes, but the end goal should be musical involvement. Not everyone is blindly wasting their money following trends which lead nowhere. Not everything is hype.

Now that Corona is letting up you should go to a new meet. Find a place where you can listen to some gear. Most of this equipment is still not readily found. So it is useful to build your experience at the expense of others especially if they want to demo you their stuff for free. That’s the community and that’s the sharing of knowledge that moves it all forward. You may take a headphone from one system and plug it into another and find your path? At least you can try now complete systems that you didn’t get a chance to before. One of the issues is trying to find progress and learning to hear the whole picture. Meaning much of the time what one person hears you will not. So it comes down to time. Time to let your ears adjust to a potentially correct and complete sound signature. Or you will become distracted by a single part of the listening experience and forget about other aspects, which are equally important.

I have moved to IEMs and that is always a path for some. Truth being there are some values in IEMs that do not exist in full-size headphones at this moment in time. Basically there are some real issues with much of the sub $300 headphones that are out there now, yet $300 IEMs which are far superior, if your into the IEM sound. It’s just a fact that IEMs are easier to make work. They are simpler to build and built with a whole different set of values. Less material and easier to R&D.

The next thing I would at least think about would be whole systems. Meaning the perfect headphone for you could get missed if you were not driving it right? So typically we tend to look at whole system synergy at hand. The good news is things have changed. It is much easier to get way, way, way better sound for less than it ever has in history. Stuff really does sound better. It’s more mature at times and offers an even and correct frequency response.

 

[geek707]

Another difference between expensive and less expensive is quality control. Meaning that if you hit the edges a pair of the same phones might not sound much alike.
That said figure out how much you can spend and buy several examples in that price range to compare and send back what you don't like.

 

[silent-circuit]

In my experience you have to go to around $300, 350 to see a significant jump in sound quality vs $100-150 headphones. The next jump is around $5-600, then around $1000. That's the most expensive stuff I've heard so far. I've definitely noticed improvements in line with cost. I've also bought everything used, so haven't paid anywhere near those prices.

 

[geek707]

In my experience you have to go to around $300, 350 to see a significant jump in sound quality vs $100-150 headphones. The next jump is around $5-600, then around $1000.

While this might be true, the OP's stated price range is about £100, or about half. It might be that by going to £200 the phones are better, then you really need to start looking at source. And yet another rabbit hole to go down.

 

[bigshot]

The fact is, everyone hears a little differently because of their unique physiognomy. A response curve that sounds fantastic to one person might be just "eh" to another. You need to determine what sort of a response curve works for you... and that takes critical listening. Transducers aren't like electronics where everything is calibrated to transparent. The end of the chain is where the rubber meets the road, and you have to figure out what's best for your particular ears.

Price doesn't necessarily relate to sound quality. Once you determine the response curve that sounds best to you, THEN all those reviews with response graphs will become useful to you. Say you find a $1000 set of cans that sounds wonderful to you... Just get a copy of a measurement of the response of those cans and go searching for a cheaper set with the same kind of response. You'll find that price and response are not correlated at all.

Expensive headphones are expensive for two reasons...

1) Bass extension: The only aspect of sound that does correlate with price is bass. A set of headphones with good bass tends to be more expensive than ones with weak bass. If you are a bass person, you're going to pay a bit more. I think this has to do with designing and manufacturing a diaphragm that handles wider excursion better, but that is just a guess.

2) The machining involved: A metal pivot to allow cans to lay flat is very expensive to manufacture. Plastic and resin pivots are much cheaper to make. When you see an all metal set of cans with lots of molded and interfacing parts, it's going to cost you, especially if they are light weight. A plastic set of cans will always be cheaper and are unlikely to be too heavy.

3) Manufacturing tolerances: The difference between a $200 and $800 set of headphones might have nothing to do with the actual parts that make the sound. An expensive set is held to stricter tolerances. It may have an acceptable deviation of +/-1 or 2dB across the core range of frequencies, while a cheap set might vary as much as 5 or 6dB. This means one copy of the same make and model might sound quite different than another. The way manufacturers maintain consistency is to test every set of headphones that come off the line and reject the ones that don't meet spec. When you buy a set, you are paying for all the rejects.

Buying speakers and headphones involves the most work on the part of the consumer than any other audio component. The more effort you invest into finding the right one, the more likely you'll be happy with your purchase in the long term. My advice would be to either go to a store where you can sample various models and bring well recorded music you are familiar with. Jot down on a yellow pad your reactions, decide what you like and then go home without buying anything and google to find measurements that come close to your target. Order 2 or 3 potential candidates from a retailer that allows returns and try them all and keep the ones you like and return the others.

I'm pretty lucky myself. My personal preference for response is pretty close to the Harman curve. I've figured out the formula for what I like... Harman -2dB between 2 and 4kHz and a slight 2dB boost in the bass (splitting the difference between the two Harman curves). I can look at a response chart and compare it to Harman and know if I am going to like it or not.

Another consideration is features. How are you going to use them? A set of headphones for the gym is going to be different than ones for serious home listening. Is wireless important? Do you mind using an external amp? If you'd prefer not to, look for cans with low impedance/high sensitivity. These are things you need to define to make the best choice. It doesn't work to try to make a square peg fit in a round hole.

The last aspect to consider is comfort. That again is totally personal. You just have to try them and see if they work well on your noggin.

No need to worry about distortion, micro dynamics or soundstage. I've found that this stuff is either just fancy names for placebo and bias, or so small of a difference, it's negligible. Focus on response first, then usability.

 

[bigshot]

Whatever you do, don't fall into the trap of thinking you need five sets of cans that all sound different. You hear with one set of ears every day of your life and sound sounds good. You don't need every response curve in the rainbow. It will just confuse you and muddle what actually does sound good to you. I also would recommend against taking advice from fellow audiophiles. They are listening with different ears than yours. Subjective opinions aren't useful to any other person in the world than the person expressing them. And people in internet forums and meets clump together into teams around a brand name like soccer fans. Their preference is based on marketing, not on sound. Listen and decide for yourself.

 

[Prog Rock Man]

My opinion on this is issue is that objectively, so long you can hear everything in the recording, then the headphone is doing its job. A point was made by Redcarmoose that "...the perfect headphone for you could get missed if you were not driving it right?", and I agree, sufficient amping is needed for detail retrieval. But, once everything is there to hear, from being able to make out the words of the lyrics to the soft touch of a cymbal to a plucked bass guitar in a noisy track, then after that the sound is subjective. Whether there is an emphasis on bass or treble or midrange, makes headphones different, not better, as the sound is down to preference and the music we listen to.

 

[Prog Rock Man]

Once you determine the response curve that sounds best to you, THEN all those reviews with response graphs will become useful to you. Say you find a $1000 set of cans that sounds wonderful to you... Just get a copy of a measurement of the response of those cans and go searching for a cheaper set with the same kind of response. You'll find that price and response are not correlated at all.

That is pretty much what I have been doing in deciding on new headphones. I got recommendations of £350-400 headphones, then checked them against existing headphones I have heard and then got the cheaper set with the graph I consider ideal. I have settled on DT990 Pro, which have not arrived yet, so it will be interesting to see if the plan has worked.

It was more fun to trawl hifi shops (plus John Lewis and PC World) and listen to headphones, but we still sadly appear to be months away from being able to do that.

 

[castleofargh]

The definition of better will involve the user. I always roll my eyes when I read ”just listen” in a discussion, because of how often it's used to justify ignorance or to try and legitimize being dead wrong. But at the same time, a main variable for listeners’ preference(what they will think of as better) is frequency response.
Between preferred music genres, preferred listening level, personal HRTF, and just typical lateralization of unprocessed stereo, it will be necessary to try and ... just listen.^-^
Like @bigshot, I have come to know my preferred response, but it did start with a lot of listening and trying to correlate FR graphs(from one source!) with my impressions.

Not to say that other variables aren't relevant, I put weight/comfort and price(keeping it low) above FR for example( because I can usualy EQ anyway). And there are clearly some truths mentioned above about pricing and materials, matching drivers to each other, matching them to a given target, etc.

Should price be set based on certain distortion levels? Are they? I do not know. My guess is that while it is of concern for the engineers, the results from test panels will focus more on look, price, and mostly FR interpreted as so many subjective notions like soundstage and how ”fast” the driver feels, etc.

Even if it doesn't look like it, I’m trying to answer the money-to-better-sound question here. Because if money doesn’t correlate well with FR(I saw 2 papers saying it doesn't) and FR is an important variable when determining our definition of better, then money is simply not a reliable enough variable.
People can come up with prices that make a difference to them, and they'll have the anecdotal experience of that headphone they like so much to ”validate” their opinions. But at the same time, I can think of a few expensive headphones that I wouldn't want to use if they were given to me for free. So where does that leave us? Pros and cons Anecdotes, with little relevant statistics. Can we really use pricing as a scale for better sound? My personal opinion is, NO! There is probably a minimum cost to get ok driver with fairly consistent response. But one could also use fairly ok drivers with not so consistent response and just create a database and let statistics work their magic until some drivers end up matched closely by pair. The drawback being that if you like one pair, maybe you won't like the next one as much.

 

[bigshot]

I have great headphones that retailed for a grand. They sound fantastic and they don’t need an amp. The impedance and sensitivity works perfect plugged straight into my iPhone. The amp should be factored into the cost of the cans. $200 headphones that require a $100 amp actually cost you $300.

 

[Redcarmoose]

Truly it could be $2000 worth of “color” that is doing the job? We all know that at times color seems to add a euphoric element. Still with-in a balanced, even and correct frequency response color seems to be at work?

The question of reproduction of correct music is lost anyway. When the recording was made it fell into the passing time never to be reconstructed again. All that matters is how involved we are and how entertaining it is. IMO No recording studios have standardized process. The end result is an artistic statement. Some headphones make it even more of an artistic statement. How we accept it as natural and correct........I’ll never know? Much of the time it’s a multitrack which is a composite of 20 or 30 or 70 different recordings all put together into a new and maybe better end result.

Your goal should be to hear whatever playback and accept the delusion of it being real.....or at least enjoyable? Can $4000 or $6000 dollar headphone do that better? It’s maybe subjective. Still there are technicalities which come into place. Some of my favorite transducers don’t actually do everything right. Still they create an imaginary world where it is believed to be true. With in that world is imaging and transient response which adds to the feeling of it being a real place and time. Boosted bass or boosted treble can give a feeling of excitement. But it never is exactly what was recorded.

And that’s the riddle of headphones at times. We think (even for years) that we are hearing a reproduction of the music as accurately as possible. Then years later we find something even better; it’s better because it shows the faults in the previous headphone. Now the curtains have been pulled back on a new reality. Honestly this is one of the single most confusing things. After we hear a more natural and true reproduction we can go back and determine the faults of the past headphone. It’s never known before.

And that is the single most dangerous thing that can happen. The different system will show you the faults in the previous system. Guess what?

That’s right!

Those faults will now be permanent. You will now hear them every time you hear that system. This is due to the brain not knowing what it does not know.

The great thing about being new and inexperienced is you truly don’t know what you don’t know. Some come from experiencing real instruments in real life and they are harder to fool. But it is very difficult to go backwards in this game.

 

[bigshot]

Color is just a nice way of saying response error. If you don't care about accuracy, get a mid range set of cans and an equalizer. Save a lot of money.

 

[Redcarmoose]

Color can result from the intrinsic resonance factors of materials or distortions and is many ways infinite. The reverberations of wood cups, or the sound of openbacks. I’m not so sure an equalizer can replicate all headphones distortions? I’ve never tried. I know that the wood of guitars can cause overtones....different harmonics to show-up......if they can be created with EQ......... I would have to see that. That is really what we are getting at; If a transducer can be pliable to the point of getting new and different responses from just EQ, or if things need to actually be different in their quality.

Is it possible to make a HD600 really have that low bass by just adding EQ? We really are coming to terms with the EQ question at the same time. Obviously we are talking about a distortion so.......can it be fully created other than with material or tuning?

I think with each headphone being different you have an ability to a point of changing it? But there is still a quality that makes the HD800 a HD800 and a HD600 an HD600. You can’t take and make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear?

 

[bigshot]

Color is distortion of the signal. The more color, the lower the fidelity. You may like the distortion, but it's a purely subjective thing. You can't recommend your favorite color to other people. They may prefer balanced, or a totally opposite color. Coloration is best added using DSPs because you can adjust it to exactly what you want. You aren't limited to one coloration that is hard wired into the design of the component.