[MacDEF]

Here are my initial impressions of the Labtec Elite-840 headphones. As I listen some more this week, I'll add or ammend my initial comments.

I purchased the 840 from computers4sure.com, and including shipping, etc., the total was about $23.

Home test equipment:
Sony 333ES SACD
Headroom Max 2001

Portable test equipment (with amp)
Sony MZ-R50 MD
JMT tin amp

Portable test equipment (no amp)
Sony MZ-E900 MD (I also have a Sharp unit with a much more powerful headphone jack, but I used the E900 because it's got a pretty typical headphone jack (5mW x 2). Unfortunately, my portable CDP is being repaired.

Other headphones used for comparison:
Sennheiser HD600 ($300)
Etys ($270)
Sony MDR-V6/7506 ($80)
Grado SR60 ($70)
Koss KSC-35 ($30)
Koss SportaPro ($20)

The 840s have been "breaking in" using the Max and the 333ES for the past 14 hours straight. Having a changer means you can break them in using Cowboy Junkies, Pixies, Gladiator soundtrack, and Telemann (chamber orchestra) so they've been getting a pretty good workout

I'm going to talk about build quality, comfort, and then sound. When I cover sound, I'm going to compare them with various other headphones using various combinations of equipment, so that they get a fair shake.

I should point out that going into this review, if I had a bias it was that I *wanted* the 840 to be great headphones. Despite my relatively expensive system, I love good, cheap stuff, and I would love to have another pair of sub-$30 headphones I could recommend to people.



BUILD QUALITY

The 840 are pretty well built for a $20-$30 headphone. The headband is solid (but flexible) non-adjustable plastic, but they have a cushioned (*very* hard cushion, but cushion nonetheless) plastic support connected to each earpiece by plastic straps that extend when you put the 840 on your head (there is a spring inside the support piece). This is what sits on the crown of your head and supports the weight of the headphones. This is kind of hard to describe, but I think it's pretty clear what I'm talking about when you look at a picture of them:

Note: that black thing in the middle of the headband is actually a hockey puck I used to hold them up off the desk for a better angle; it's not part of the headphones

Another picture:

The earpads are velour-like, and have the same form factor as the Sony V6 and Beyer velour pads. They are not as deep as the Beyer pads, but they are a bit softer. Here is a picture that shows you a bit more of the earpads:

The earpieces rotate left/right only slightly (maybe 5 degrees in either direction), while they rotate down about 70 degrees (they do not rotate up at all from the stationary position).

The 840 appear to have an open design, despite the earpads (which, again, look like the earpads of closed headphones):

However, it should be noted that when you look through the mesh/grill on the back of each earpiece, it appears that there is a solid black plastic enclosure, so I believe that the 840 are actually closed.

Overall, they are built much better than I would expect for under $30.



COMFORT

Despite the fact that the earpads on the 840 are similar to the Sony/Beyer pads, they are considerably smaller. While the Beyer 250 pads completely surround my ears with room to spare, the 840 just barely fit around my ears, and even then they sit on my earlobes at the very bottom, rather than around them. So I would say that if you have very small ears, they are circumaural; if you have medium to large ears, they will definitely be supraaural.

In terms of their "grip" on the head, the 840 are quite snug. The only drawback to this is that (as I mentioned above) the earpads are actually not very deep, but are very soft, so they don't really provide a lot of cushioning compared to headphones with thicker pads like the V6, Beyer 250, Senn 580/600, etc.

The 840 feel, to me, to be about the same weight as the Sony V6/7506. However, while the Sony have a nice cushioned headband, the "cushion" on the headband support of the 840 is actually pretty hard. After wearing them for an hour or so, the crown of my head was aching for a break.

Overall, the 840 are what I would describe as "comfortable, but not long-term comfortable." They aren't the kind of headphones you put on and say "ouch!" but they could use a couple improvements. I think that with a bit more cushion in the earpads (a bit deeper, or even just a bit firmer), and a bit more cushion (actually, just a softer cushion) in the headband strap/support, they would be quite comfortable.



SOUND

I was going to start with a detailed comparison of the 840 vs. the Sennheiser HD600 on my main system, but the truth is, it wasn't even close to being fair. A previous reviewer claimed that the 840 did a lot of what the HD580 did, just not as well. I think that's like saying that a Daewoo hatchback does a lot of what a BMW coupe does, just not as well. The 840 simply aren't even close to being in the same class as the HD600 (and ergo the 580) when driven from a good amp. I'm assuming that my Max and the 333ES are showing me the "as good as it gets" of the 840 -- I would be surprised to see many other systems give the 840 a better opportunity to shine. But the 600s had more of everything. More balance, more bass, more punch, more detail, more air, more soundstage, etc., etc. The 600 had wonderful midrange and clarity that made the 840 sound, well, cheap. There was not a single area in which the 840 even approached the 600. One thing this comparison made clear was that the person who compared the 840 favorably with the 580 had other weaknesses in the chain (source, amp) that were hampering the 580's clear superiority.

BUT -- we're talking $300 headphones vs. $30 headphones, so that's not really a fair fight. Let's move on to more reasonable comparisons. (Given the above, it should be obvious why I didn't spend much time comparing the 840 with Etys. That would have been like asking me to play Michael Jordon one-on-one in basketall. 'Nuff said.)

First, some general impressions. The 840 have decent bass extension, but it's not especially tight. They have a prominent midrange, that, quite frankly, I found to be a bit fatiquing. At times, the midrange on the 840 overpowers the highs and muddles the lows. The treble is the weakest point of the 840, as there were times when I couldn't hear things that I knew were in a recording (for example, on some Teleman chamber orchestra tracks, the harpsichord that is an integral part of the piece is sometimes barely audible). In addition, the midrange often sounds distant/metallic/hollow. I'm not sure how else to describe it; it almost sounds like your head is a metal container and the midrange is being played into it. Finally, the 840s had a noticeable noise floor -- listening to the Cowboy Junkies "Trinity Sessions," which has a lot of dead air because of the nature of the recording, sections that are dead silent with Etys and HD600 are quite noisy on the 840.

I realize this sounds like an highly critical description, but it's not meant to be. The 840 were not horrible by any means, but given what I'm used to listening to, I found it difficult to listen to them for too long without getting fatigued. I guess if I had to describe the overall sound of the 840, it would be distant and midrange-emphasized.

Back to the comparisons. I next compared the 840 to the Sony V6/7506 from the Max/333ES combo. This was much more fair than the inital HD600 comparison, since the V6/7506 and the 840 have similar form factors, and are at least within $40 of each other in price.

The V6 have MUCH better bass (no big surprise there); better bass as in lower extension and tighter presentation. On first listen, the 840 sound like they have a lot of bass, but it's really an emphasized lower midrange/upper bass that isn't very tight. It's not as boomy and mushy as some of the Sony junk I've heard, and the 840 actually had pretty good extension, but it's not "high-end" bass (if that's what you want to call it). The V6/7506 also have a lot more detail and are *much* clearer -- but then again that's what they are known for. The one thing I liked about the 840 compared to the V6/7506 is that, because of their emphasized midrange, on some music they "warmed up" the sound a bit. The V6/7506 have a tendency to sound very cold and analytical on some particular pieces. On those pieces the 840 sounded a bit more relaxing, although at the expense of a lot of detail. In the end, I would pay the extra $40 for the V6 over the 840. Despite their tendency to be analytical, the V6 were more enjoyable over the long term -- the midrange of the 840 was just too fatiquing for me. I found myself putting the 840 down and picking up the V6 and thinking "aah... better" (even when listening to rock/pop).

I then compared the 840 to the Grado SR60. As one would expect, the SR60 had a much more "forward" presentation, which was a *huge* contrast to the much more "distant" sound of the 840. They were also warmer than the 840. I mentioned above that the 840 were at times warmer than the Sony V6/7506. The difference here is that the warmth of the 840 is due to an overwhelming midrange, but that warmth sounds very distant, while the SR60 have a warmth that sounds musical and pleasing. I found myself really getting into the Gladiator soundtrack with my SR60; I can't say the same about the 840. While the Grados let me actually enjoy the music, the midrange of the 840 made me listen to the headphones. In terms of detail, the Grados had quite a bit more (which makes sense, given their peaky response in the upper midrange/lower treble). However, even though the SR60 are know for their less-than-stellar bass response, they had a bit better extension and much more "musical" sound in the bass.

I then moved on to the KSC-35 (at this point still driving everything through the Max/333ES). After the previous comparisons, this was turning out to be the most significant comparison -- two headphones that cost about the same (the KSC-35 have a list price of $29.95, but can be found for as little as $24, or even $20 on sale). In addition, the KSC-35 is my "sub-$50 reference" -- I consider them to be true giant-killers that even give the V6 a run for their money in terms of being truly enjoyable to listen to. If the 840 could hold their own against the KSC-35, they would be a bargain in my book even if they "lost" in comparison with the other cans above.

Unfortunately, it didn't work out that way. While the differences are harder to verbalize at this price point, two things struck me: 1) the midrange problems of the 840 are still quite evident when compared with the KSC-35; and 2) the KSC-35 are just *fun* to listen to. They have good bass, good detail, and overall they just have good balance. No one area stands out. On the other hand, every time I put the 840 on, all I can think of is "woah, midrange." If the KSC-35 have a fault at this price point, it's a slight roll-off in the treble. Even so, the harpsichord I mentioned above, the one that I could barely make out at times on the 840, is pretty clear on the KSC-35. Not as clear as on Etys or HD600, but at least I'm not left wondering who killed the harpsichord player. In terms of bass response, I feel that the KSC-35 have a bit more bass extension with a bit more impact.

Considering how late it was getting, I stopped there; I didn't bother with the SportaPros, since they are basically the KSC-35 with boomier bass.

I also compared the 840 to the V6, SR60 and KSC-35 using my portable sources. It turns out that the results were pretty much identical to what I found using the Max/333ES. One significant point -- someone had commented that the 840 looked like they would need an amp based on their impedance (32 Ohms). However, the truth is that there really wasn't a lot of difference between their performance using the Max and using one of my portable sources (even the 5mW Sony MZ-E900). So I think that if you're happy with their sound, they will work fine for you out of a portable.



CONCLUSION

Overall, ignoring cost, the 840 were fair-sounding headphones. They didn't have very good bass extension, and the bass they had was not very tight. They also didn't have a lot of detail. In fact, as is clear from the comparisons above, the one thing that ended up being obvious was that the 840 are *very* midrange-heavy. The midrange at times overpowers everything else.

On the other hand, if you take into account that these headphones cost around $20, they are a decent buy. They don't beat out the KSC-35 as "best headphone under $50," but if you don't like the way the KSC-35 fit, or if you want a "closed" headphone for cheap, they'd be a pretty good way to go.

I wish I had a pair of Koss UR20 or UR30 to compare them to -- maybe these could contend for the "best closed headphone under $50" crown?

 

[jude]

MacDEF,

Great review! Long story short, I don't think I'll put an order in for these any time soon.

 

[Joe Bloggs]

Thanks for the long, detailed review!

Hey, is there a way you can really check if these are closed headphones? Like, turn up the music and ask someone else whether they can hear it like they're open phones?

 

[tktran]

MacDEF

I am impressed by your detailed and thoughtful review.

I've read it once, and my 'take-home message' is that although they're not giant killers, they are fair headphones.

At this stage would you describe them as hifi phones?

I have a pair of KSC35 which cost AU$80 (US$40). This may be "cheap" to headwizers/fiers but it's by no means "cheap" to the ordinary person who's used to <US$10 phones...

Yet I would definitely recommend them as the minimum entry level into the world of "real music with headphones"

Can you say that about the Labtec Elite 840's?

Am interested to hear how your perceptions of the phones changed with time... I remember the first time I got the KSC35 I impressed, but nowadays I love them.

 

[Temjin]

Great review man! Now I have heard from a real professional in headphone technologies, I think I will have a less tougher choice to find the best sub $50 headphones.

But I wish you had a comparsion between the 840 and the UR 20, since I been itching to know which one I should buy.
I been wondering what type of headphone improves overall gaming experiences, open or closed? All I need is one word answer and I know which headphone to get.

Again, a job well done on the review.

*Btw, what if Michael Jordon give you a handicap?*

 

[KR...]

Good job!

with the 333ES SACD and the MAX 2001, you sure gave the 840 every chance to shine, but they just couldn't.

I guess that the 35's and MX-500's are still the kings of dirt cheap headphone fun!

 

[dkswong]

I can understand the initial impression of "midrange heavy", and that's how I felt in the first instant of the headphones, no treble and no bass. And the midrange was pretty "big and fat" I first moment listened to them. Juts give them some more time. I don't see any prominent problem with the treble and bass now. They have stretched considerably after my using them for more than a few weeks.
As for the details in music, I STILL think they are very good at these areas, but not on initial listen. I know what "details" mean, and I have a pair of HD-250 Linear II, which are very good at showing details. Comparing to the HD-250 Linear II, of coz the Elite 840s sound inferior, but most of the details which are shown in the HD-250s are retained in the Elite 840s. But of course, they don't show on the first few days of run-in.
I don't mean to start a fight here, but I think my system while not perfect, should not have any major flaw or weakness in the chain. I am using Marantz CD player connected the the X-DAC, and the X-DAC connected the the X-cans. Though they are not really Hi-end, I consider them in good balance. And my Elite 840s don't sound "cheap" on them. Of course, as I always insisted, the HD-580s are BETTER headphones.
The MacDEF's review is very fairly written however, and I can also easily identify the mentioned flaws with the Elite 840s, though they should not be as prominent as said in the review. As I mentioned before, they are weak at both treble and bass extension. But I don't feel they are VERY midrange heavy. And they sound quite forward to me, I don't have the slightest clue as to why MacDEF found the heaphones sound "distant" and "hollow". And also, I find my Grado 225s even more "midrange heavy".
Anyway, thanks a lot, MacDEF. Your review is very detailed and it's a pleasure to read. Do come back and comment on them more after a couple of weeks of run-in.

 

[tvhead]

Macdef,

Do you have any idea why all the people in the Hong Kong forums love these headphones? Did you ever catch yourself thinking, "Though these phones suck, I can see why they would like it."

I just feel a little unsatisfied that something that made such a commotion in Asia, is being flat out rejected here. Basically, that all these people in Asia have no idea what they're talking about since they don't have golden ears like us on this website.

Is it taste? Do we hear things differently?

 

[dkswong]

Oh TVhead, I can assure you most of Hong Kong users who own and love the Elite 840s are seasoned audiophiles. And not only Hong Kong people, the Taiwanese love them too. Maybe we do have different ears.

 

[tvhead]

dkswong,

This is why I am so uncomfortable with this whole this thing. How can all these audiophiles in the east be wrong? Why do people love them so much there? Does anyone not like them?

 

[dkswong]

And one more thing, they are OPEN-AIR headphones. Yes, there is something like "a black plastic enclosure" under the grille, but it doesn't by any means block the sound out, I would regard it as something to do with the aesthetics. I once opened the the headphones, and it's actually a very thin piece of plastic-like paper, which can easily let sound through.

 

[huy_ha]

It may have to do with the availability of better headphones. If I hadn't been able to get my headphones easily, I'd still think my Koss TD-65's as a great sounding can. Also, price points are different, too.

Or maybe they just have a more enthusiastic posting community. Imagine what would happen if the Sony Streetstyle folks frequented this site.

 

[tvhead]

Huy_ha,

Dkswong says these guys are seasoned audiophiles. They're comparing it to 580s not headphones like streetstyles.

It just seems so odd.

 

[massappeal85]

The amount of people who own sony street styles here has gotta be double the amount of people buying these things wherever else. I'm quite sure alot of these people are familiar with the term audiophile, and are raping the hell out of it. Are they audiophiles? No. Do we regard them as being anywhere near the term? No.

You can not possibly say that every single person who bought those headphones were all seasoned audiophiles. That'd be like us saying everyone who buys a sony street style is an audiophile. And yet at the same time, there are people who buy sony v600s who call themselves audiophiles, and say those are grade A audiophile phones.

A large amount of people CAN be wrong. People who buy street styles, 840 elites, nazis, racists, the whole 9.

 

[dkswong]

TVhead,
Maybe it's always subjective when it comes to Hi-Fi. I am serious about headphones, and I like them. Some of you at this point may think that my ears are "bad" and "untrained", and my recommendation of the Labtec is a joke. I just can't agree with that. At least I could still see a guy or two from this forum do own and like the headphones, and I remember someone saying that he found them very good and once emailed the Headwize reporting the surprising quality of the Elite 840. As some guys here have mentioned, so many people loving these headphones can't be all wrong. And all the Taiwanese and Hongkongers who highly praised the heaphones can't be all wrong either. I know some of you would still come up with the "many trendy&crappy earphones are popular too yet they still suck" theory, and I don't feel like defending anymore. It's meaningless unless they listen to them themselves.
Anyway, I am still grateful to MacDEF as it took him time to listen to the Labtec. Thanks a lot for taking the time, MacDEF.