I NEED HELP CHOOSING THE RIGHT HEADPHONES
Jul 4, 2012 at 10:53 PM Post #16 of 27
just a quick roundup of what I thought were the good recommendations
 
AKG K701/2 very good highs (analytical) good for female vocals and acoustical
AKG Q701 a little more balanced than the K701 so its not so cold sounding (i prefer the K701 though)
DT990 similar highs to 701, more bass, less mids, good for techno/dance music
Grados, can't say since I've never owned them but seems like a good choice for rock
HD650 warm/laidback a bit pricy but a great investment for future upgrades
 
Definitely requires good amplification
 
Jul 4, 2012 at 10:55 PM Post #17 of 27
I see, well could you explain that to me, what do higher and lower ohms means? Also can you tell me if the amp I listed is good enough for these head phones?
Lol sorry, I am a newbie.
 
 
Jul 5, 2012 at 12:41 AM Post #19 of 27
Well because of that I heard people say that if the headphones have high ohms then an AMP is necessary, because of more resistance the sound will not be as loud and it will be harder to hear more clear/crisp sound, in other words I've been told you'll need an amp to use the headphones to the fullest. I don't  know if that is true or not, but 62 ohms didn't seem like a lot because I saw headphones with 300 ohms. The same people were saying that anything below 100 didn't really need an amp. Can you tell me if that's true or not, and also tell me the significance the ohms have  in the headphones. Is higher better or is lower better? 
 
Sorry for all the newbie questions.
 
 
Jul 5, 2012 at 12:55 AM Post #20 of 27
I believe that while higher impedance headphones might 'need' an amp more often than lower impedance headphones, I feel that lower impedance headphones can also benefit from an amp because while they're lower impedance, they like a bit of current behind them. One personal example of my own is when I had the 250 ohm Pro/4AA. I could easily run them out of my iPod and also my laptop. And when I plugged them into my amp, they really didn't change their sound. However, my 8 ohm Pioneer SE-50 could also be driven with my iPod, but changed much more when plugged into my Asgard. I think, and I could be off because my electrical knowledge is quite basic, that low impedance headphones like to have a bit of current and can benefit from an amp that can supply it with such needs. This however does not mean that they need an amp. It's up to you to decide what works best for you.
 
Whether or not higher or lower is better is personal choice, I think. I think it's been kind of said that higher impedance headphones are 'audiophile headphones' because they can use more windings in their voice coil (my knowledge is basic, someone will chime in with more knowledge) and since they can use more windings, they need more power, and can hence create a more 'accurate' sound which follows the signal better than a low impedance driver, because they can interact with an amp better. Damping and the like. But like I said, most Grados are 32 ohms. I think that's a good example that 'good' headphones don't need to be high impedance.
 
This is just my experiences, someone please correct me if I'm wrong or way off base.
 
Jul 5, 2012 at 12:58 AM Post #21 of 27
having a low impedance can doesn't always mean you don't need an amp with it for it to sound fine. Of course, this is sometimes the case, as with the 32 ohm (?) ATH-m50s. But even the m50s sound very good when paired with a suitable amp.
 
having a high or low impedance doesn't signify how good a pair of headphones are. As you should know, it depends a lot on personal preference. However, it is true that a pair with high impedance does need an amp or it might not be able to go to the volume you want. An amp does more than just supply more power for volume. It sometimes cleans up the lower range and changes the sound slightly, though there are also some very neutral amps.
 
 
TLDR an amp doesn't always depend on the impedance of the headphones, but rather which can it is.
 
Jul 5, 2012 at 1:37 AM Post #22 of 27
I see, so I've been hearing a pair of headphones such as the AKG K702's need a decent amp. Would the FiiO E7 USB DAC and Portable Headphone Amplifier be good enough for the AKG headphones?
 
 
Jul 5, 2012 at 1:44 AM Post #23 of 27
I see, well could you explain that to me, what do higher and lower ohms means? Also can you tell me if the amp I listed is good enough for these head phones?
Lol sorry, I am a newbie.


The "ohm" is the SI unit of electrical resistance, it's named after some dead guy named Ohm. The specs you're reading are nominal impedance (impedance being the complex resistance of an AC system, basically it's resistance that varies with frequency) - so they'll say something like "62 ohms at 1khz" which means those headphones are 62 ohms at 1khz. That doesn't tell the whole story though, and you can't even start talking about "amps" at that point. All you know is that at a given frequency, these cans are 62 ohms. So then you have to go and find sensitivity, which is the ratio of input power (in mW; I hate it when manufacturers goose their numbers and state it relative to RMS volts (because it produces NICE BIG NUMBERS)), to output intensity (in dB SPL). So for the K701 it's something like 90 or 93 dB/mW. So for 1 mW of input power, they will produce 93 dB SPL (which is LOUD). So back to impedance - you have to know that your amplifier can deliver X mW into whatever impedance in order to satisfy your output requirements (these are arbitrary, but generally I suggest you listen between 50 and 70 dB), and that's where impedance becomes "a thing."

Higher end dedicated amplifiers usually mean more output power which makes them better suited for insensitve headphones, or headphones at either extreme of the impedance range (low impedance loads "see" less voltage but more current, high impedance loads "see" more voltage but less current - an easy way to keep this straight is to consider your stereo loudspeakers, that require a lot of current and generally have very low nominal Z, vs electrostatic headphones that require essentially zero current, but thousands of volts - examples of "extreme" headphones are things like the Beyer DT48A.00 (5 ohms) and some of the really old Sennheiser pro models that run around 2000 ohms (both of these happen to be fairly sensitive though, so you don't need to get too nuts with an amp)).

For the most part, 1 mW is more than enough power to take your head right off with most headphones. There's a few exotics that defy this. The K701 are not one of them. And most portables can dish out more than 1mW.

As far as high Z cans on portables - here's where a lot of the myths come from. Something like a DT880/600 (which has a 600 ohm nominal impedance, and a spike that takes them to closer to 1k) will have problems with some portables, not because there's not enough power, but because the portable can't swing enough voltage to drive them (which is a limitation of it's battery). But there are portables that are able to deal with some of those higher Z cans (and I'm aware of no "murder scenario" super high Z and super insensitive cans; the Beyers are some of the "worst" in current production, and they're all pretty sensitive).

The sound quality benefits of proper drive for headphones can come from a variety of sources, like removing clipping, having suitable dynamic headroom, or having an appropriate Zout (output impedance). The last one is probably responsible for most differences people hear between amplifiers, and can do quite a bit to confuse the issue altogether. Basically I don't advise people to worry about Zout, as long as it's lower than Znom, and the amp is otherwise stable into the load. With reactive loads (where impedance is not constant), a higher Zout will result in non-linear attenuation of the system's FR which means you change the sound (and in some cases, quite a lot!) - an example is the Etymotic E4S and E4P (which are two separate models, separated only by a resistor). If the impedance is relatively stable (like a Grado), you'll just attenuate the entire thing, and you're wasting (some) power after a point (for example if you're driving a Grado off of the headphone jack on your big'ol stereo receiver - it's driving an amp section that probably has a Zout of less than 1ohm through ~500 ohms of resistors and then into the cans, you're dissipating power across the resistors (it's fairly minimal overall, but it's potentially equal or greater to the power going into the cans themselves)).

There is no simple, linear, relationship here - it's not a Consumer Reports rating metric.

Since you've mentioned mobile use, if you're going to consider a Beyerdynamic, I would get the 32-ohm variant of whichever model you pick (they're designed for mobile use). Grado headphones are also fairly easy to drive, but you need to consider that like the DT990 and the K701 and the PRO2900, these are all open-back headphones that will leak sound out and in, and provide you with no isolation. I don't know if this will be a problem with your usage, but it's worth noting.

I don't know if you missed my question on the first page: what was your issue with the Bose QC15?

Also, as a general request to a few posters in this thread - please do not suggest or recommend hardware with which you have zero experience. It doesn't help anyone.
 
Jul 5, 2012 at 12:21 PM Post #24 of 27
confused.gif
 . . . looks like I need to learn math and science again. My explanation was caveman like/primitive/very basic . . . hahaha your explanation LOOKED like it was good (even though I didn't understand it). I'm gonna keep rereading that and see if I will understand it better if I keep doing that!
 
EDIT: Oh yeah, there is no need to apologize for being a newbie APKOHA . . . I'd venture to say that almost everyone here was a newbie when they first joined. I still very much am 
wink.gif
. I haven't just been here since last month though like it says up in the right hand corner of all my posts . . . before I joined I was lurking since January.
 
Jul 5, 2012 at 9:48 PM Post #25 of 27
Thank you for that explanation Obob. I did look up the headphones you mentioned and they seem like a good pair of headphones, but something about the AKG attracted me more. The sound difference I am not sure of because I don't know any places around where I live where I can sample both of the headphones. I've seen reviews about the AKGs and a lot of people say they are very analytical and flat. I do prefer to listen to the music as the artist/band intended or the way it was recorded, but still it would be great if I could find a way to sample both of them, because buying off the internet for something that I think you need to experience is quite difficult. 
 
 
Jul 5, 2012 at 10:45 PM Post #26 of 27
Quote:
Thank you for that explanation Obob. I did look up the headphones you mentioned and they seem like a good pair of headphones, but something about the AKG attracted me more. The sound difference I am not sure of because I don't know any places around where I live where I can sample both of the headphones. I've seen reviews about the AKGs and a lot of people say they are very analytical and flat. I do prefer to listen to the music as the artist/band intended or the way it was recorded, but still it would be great if I could find a way to sample both of them, because buying off the internet for something that I think you need to experience is quite difficult. 
 

 
 
it will be great if you can sample it but for me personally, i dont do a good job when i sample headphones in a store. maybe too many people walking away and i cant focus?
 
Jul 6, 2012 at 7:47 PM Post #27 of 27
Thank you for that explanation Obob. I did look up the headphones you mentioned and they seem like a good pair of headphones, but something about the AKG attracted me more. The sound difference I am not sure of because I don't know any places around where I live where I can sample both of the headphones. I've seen reviews about the AKGs and a lot of people say they are very analytical and flat. I do prefer to listen to the music as the artist/band intended or the way it was recorded, but still it would be great if I could find a way to sample both of them, because buying off the internet for something that I think you need to experience is quite difficult. 

 


I agree on the experience thing. With the Bose, you can probably find them in-store and if not, Bose does their 30-day trial thing (you buy them, but have a month to decide if you want to keep them). I'm not sure with AKG; it depends on your dealer's policies. Between the two, that's a tough call (I had just gotten rid of the AKGs when I tried the Bose) - both are fairly smooth/clean sounding through the midrange and into the treble. Neither are aggressive/harsh. The Bose have more bass and the AKGs have more minute details (which may or may not matter depending on what you listen to/for). Both are relatively enjoyable. Between the two, I'd probably try the AKG at $50-ish cheaper and no batteries needed, especially if they look cooler to you. They're also bigger, so they should fit "better" (I see some people with HUGE ears having problems with the Bose). And did I mention they don't use batteries? :cool:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top