More bass does not mean better bass!
Apr 2, 2013 at 12:38 PM Post #16 of 38

MonoMood

New Head-Fier
Joined
Mar 26, 2013
Posts
27
Likes
11
Have you ever thought that some people prefer "more bass" than someone else?

Music preferences are as varied as the phones one uses to listen to them, and bashing a preference is just a really..

Well, stupid.
 
Apr 7, 2013 at 9:40 AM Post #17 of 38

Sound Quest

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Posts
291
Likes
30
Quote:
Have you ever thought that some people prefer "more bass" than someone else?

Music preferences are as varied as the phones one uses to listen to them, and bashing a preference is just a really..

Well, stupid.

I'm not bashing a preference. People are entitled to like bassier headphones. I don't mind bassy headphones myself.
 
It's when people make the automatic assumption that "more" bass will equal to a better sounding bass. I'm not saying that bassy headphones aren't capable of sounding good, the point i'm trying to make is that just because 1 headphone has "more" bass than another headphone, doesn't necessarily mean its going to sound better, or more fun.
 
It's just that i've seen threads on here asking for comparisons between the amount of bass alone and nothing else.
 
Apr 7, 2013 at 9:54 AM Post #18 of 38

HamilcarBarca

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jul 20, 2012
Posts
1,027
Likes
41
Quote:
It's when people make the automatic assumption that "more" bass will equal to a better sounding bass. I'm not saying that bassy headphones aren't capable of sounding good, the point i'm trying to make is that just because 1 headphone has "more" bass than another headphone, doesn't necessarily mean its going to sound better, or more fun.

 
That's a preference. Its sounds better, or is more fun, if the listener thinks it is.
 
Your point is that you don't agree with the preferences of some others.
 
Apr 7, 2013 at 12:25 PM Post #19 of 38

SmOgER

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Posts
557
Likes
36
Quote:
 
That's a preference. Its sounds better, or is more fun, if the listener thinks it is.
 
Your point is that you don't agree with the preferences of some others.

What he wanted to say is that, regardless of your preference, you'll always find HP with good bass quantity&quality, texture, soundstage and detail to sound way better than HP with slightly more but bloated bass and overall in your face muddy signature, that's obvious. 
 
Apr 7, 2013 at 1:09 PM Post #20 of 38

HamilcarBarca

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jul 20, 2012
Posts
1,027
Likes
41
Quote:
What he wanted to say is that, regardless of your preference, you'll always find HP with good bass quantity&quality, texture, soundstage and detail to sound way better than HP with slightly more but bloated bass and overall in your face muddy signature, that's obvious. 

 
What you have said is "good bass" and "sound better" but good bass and better sound are nothing more than personal preference. While "bloated bass" doesn't "sound better" or even good to me -- or I think to you and the OP -- once again that's nothing more than our preference. Obviously.
 
Apr 7, 2013 at 2:24 PM Post #22 of 38

streetdragon

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Dec 29, 2011
Posts
2,911
Likes
157
Everyone's world is different and everyone's vision of perfect sound is different, so i guess wierd as it seems wishing for bloated muddy bass is just as valid as wishing for neutral textured bass.
.
.
.
It's just that the former opinion isn't popular nor valued here, so it makes it taboo/incorrect.
 
Apr 7, 2013 at 2:40 PM Post #23 of 38

SmOgER

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Posts
557
Likes
36
Quote:
 
What you have said is "good bass" and "sound better" but good bass and better sound are nothing more than personal preference. While "bloated bass" doesn't "sound better" or even good to me -- or I think to you and the OP -- once again that's nothing more than our preference. Obviously.

You're too funny 
biggrin.gif
 
 
better soundstage is not a preference, if it's better it means it's better for everyone and a better SQ for any kind of ears. Same goes for bass texture/quality. You just can't argue about that... It's like stating that choosing between 320kbps and 96kbps tracks depends on preference... If someone finds it true, he needs to check his ears, cheers. 
cool.gif

 
Apr 7, 2013 at 4:24 PM Post #24 of 38

KimChee

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Posts
2,964
Likes
414
Location
US
I like a lot of bass quantity as long as it's tight and detailed.  Take the JH16 for example, it has the best bass quantity, texture, headroom, and detail I've heard in a headphone.  It does not bleed into the other frequencies.  A bad example to me would be the XB500, it is bloaty, and dominates the other frequencies..
 
Apr 7, 2013 at 4:33 PM Post #26 of 38

SmOgER

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Posts
557
Likes
36
Quote:
 A bad example to me would be the XB500, it is bloaty, and dominates the other frequencies..

True, but you wouldn't believe what proper EQing can actually do. More and more often I see people enjoy using even blind built-in EQ presets from sound card drivers / amps / mp3s... Now imagine the effect of a EQ preset specifically made for your HP and your taste. The true is, that on flat EQ you will never hear the full potential of any HP, especially the cheaper one, as freq response is usually far from the one you admire the most. 
 
PS. This is obviously not related to OP statement. 
biggrin.gif

 
Apr 7, 2013 at 4:44 PM Post #27 of 38

streetdragon

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Dec 29, 2011
Posts
2,911
Likes
157
"better" here in head-fi generally means the ability of the headphone to produce a more accurate and wider soundstage, but "better" to some may be having all the sound coming from inside your head.
It's easy to dismiss something as 'understood'/'of course' to be better because almost all of us agree it is 'better'. 
But if we talk about the headphone's ability to 'better' reproduce the sound more accurately instead then it is a different story than being 'better' to someone's vision of perfect sound.
Some preferences appear to be 'bad' because their reference points are skewed. Their vision is bassy boomy over the top bass as being high quality. Ours are more of based on what headphones we have heard before and other places. This is also the reason it is not really advicable to jump from ibuds to HD800 and LCD3 in one go, because we haven't built our reference point and trained out ears to fully appreciate the details and soundstage the high end gear has to offer.

And any bad headphone can be vastly improved with a simple eq. An example would be my HD202, before eq it was just kind of bassy and muddy, but after that it has tight bass, a soundstage that is actually outside your head, and clearer treble with more realistic overall timbre.
Better headphones improve less with eq though since they already do a lot of things correctly.
 
 
Apr 7, 2013 at 5:18 PM Post #28 of 38

TiestoFan

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 26, 2009
Posts
128
Likes
47
I'm one of those people that always asks for more bass. However its unfair to lump me or other who come to this forum into the "beats by dre" category. Some of us are here asking for the "best" bass knowing we are talking to audiophiles.That being said I'm still looking for a headphone under 200 that gives me that smooth deep clear tight almost rolling bass with crystal clear SQ in all other frequencies. No one seems able to direct me in the right direction or they'll say Dt770 forgetting that I asked for bass not "an audiophile headphone that has a tiny tiny tincture more bass than every other audiophile headphone"
 
Apr 7, 2013 at 5:24 PM Post #29 of 38

streetdragon

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Dec 29, 2011
Posts
2,911
Likes
157
Not many (if any) headphones can/will do that. Afterall a simple eq can give you all the bass you want as long as the headphone is not anaemic to begin with. Normally suggested is the ultrasome hfi 570, though not heard that myself or any headphone that delivers lots and lots of bass with crystal clear rest of the sound cause.... They are kind of opposites
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top