[Vitor Machado]

 
Quote:

But the usual reply is "H**LY S*IT YOU PAID 100$ FOR A HEADPHONE"

 
People have no problems paying $100 for shoes, but pay $100 for headphones and you're crazy. And most of these people DO spend a lot of time with [crappy] headphones on their heads.
 
One of the wonders of the world is going down
It's going down, I know
It's one of the blunders of the world that no-one cares
No-one cares enough
(Porcupine Tree - The Sound of Muzak)

 

[Hente]

I love to show off my 770s to friends at a college club in I'm (Touhou Teatime - it's pretty self-explanatory: we sit around, play Touhou games, and drink tea).

Waitwhat... is the club's official name Touhou Teatime?

And just to contribute to the thread: had a friend try on my MEElec M6s and he enjoyed the sound much more than the cheapo earbuds that he found on the floor of his gym's locker room. The one thing that drove him away from them were the "cone thingies", I was using the tri flange tips.
When I also told some of my friends that I was going to buy the Pro 900s for $400 they looked at me like I was mad and proceeded to tell me that I was going to be forever alone. ;_;

 

[WhiteCrow]

 
Quote:

 
 
People have no problems paying $100 for shoes, but pay $100 for headphones and you're crazy. And most of these people DO spend a lot of time with [crappy] headphones on their heads.
 
One of the wonders of the world is going down
It's going down, I know
It's one of the blunders of the world that no-one cares
No-one cares enough
(Porcupine Tree - The Sound of Muzak)

my sister spent up words of $700 on, 3 shirts, 4 pairs of pants, and new shoes....and lots of alcohol that ruined her cloth's but I'm bat crap insane for owing 3 pairs of headphones.

 

[HeadphoneOutput]

Quote:

 


Maybe he owned a pair? lol.

Nah I'm pretty sure he didn't haha.

 

[Griffinhart]

Quote:

Quote:

I love to show off my 770s to friends at a college club in I'm (Touhou Teatime - it's pretty self-explanatory: we sit around, play Touhou games, and drink tea).

Waitwhat... is the club's official name Touhou Teatime?

Y'know, I'm not even sure any more.
 
At first when we were forming, we were just the Touhou Tea Club. Then we became the Touhou Tea Party (lol @ teabaggers). Then, at one point early on, I suggested "The Scarlet Devil Mansion Tea Party", which we quickly amended to "The Scarlet Devil Mansion Tea Invitational" to make it sound less political.
 
At our last bakesale (last Saturday), we were Touhou Teatime on the whiteboards. THTT, if you will.
 
(Hell yeah, ridiculous fictional band/anime puns!)
 
-- Griffinhart
 
PS. To be on-topic: I am wearing my DT770s and listening to Rasputina's "Mama Was An Opium Smoker" on my J3/XM5 combo while wearing my AT-ES7s around my neck, up in the production area of my campus. :3

 

[ckryan]

 
 
Quote:

I told him "AD700s. So, so, so lovely for directional audio, even if they're bassless.

 
 
You're not lying. I bought a pair. They seemed interesting.  At the same time, I bought the Asus Essence STX.  Worst combo ever.

 

[chinesekiwi]

Quote:

You're not lying. I bought a pair. They seemed interesting.  At the same time, I bought the Asus Essence STX.  Worst combo ever.

???? How was it a bad combo?

 

[Griffinhart]

 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ckryan /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
 
 
 
You're not lying. I bought a pair. They seemed interesting.  At the same time, I bought the Asus Essence STX.  Worst combo ever.

 
Yeah, I did something similar... bought the ASUS Xonar Essence ST. Probably the worst hardware purchase I made, mostly because it has to sit between my two PCI-e slots on my motherboard. This is a Bad Thing™ because I also bought two ATI Radeon HD5850s, which would be flush with one another in the PCI-e slots... if the soundcard weren't in the way.
 
I need to find a good way to offload my PC audio to something else...
 
-- Griffinhart
 
ETA: I just wanted to add something:
 

 
[size=medium] Quote:

Ah, but those are $120, and a decent quality (aka my friends won't yell at me for having a stupid mid) mic is prob. $20 or so... If anyone has both the X11s AND the KSC-75s, I'd like to know which one has better SQ and if I could do a nice quick cheap driver swap...

[/size]


 
If you're referring to the price of the AD700s... They're going for $80 here: http://www.soundprofessionals.com/cgi-bin/gold/category.cgi?item=ATH-AD700&source=froogle
 
(I bought my pair for about that much off of Amazon, but the price has gone up since a year ago, it seems.)
​

 

[chinesekiwi]

Quote:

This statement is 100% incorrect. AAC does not perform any better than LAME mp3.
 

Quote:

f you believe LAME V0 has the same sound quality as CB320kbps, then the LAME is superior by virtue of smaller file size. It really irks me to find music encoded in MP3 at 320kbps. If I wanted to have best sound quality, then I'd use something lossless like TAK. Also though AAC is technically superior to MP3, at this time, LAME MP3 can still rival current AAC codecs in sound quality at same bitrates.
 
On a more related note, someone was unable to perceive the difference between AD700 and HD202.

 
Uh, yes it does:

Spectrogram analysis via Spectro:

I used Kevin Rudolf's 'Let It Rock' because it is heavily Loudness War'ed thus contains a lot of digital info within the file.
 
Lossless FLAC file
 

 
Quicktime 7.6.9b TrueVBR AAC at ~192 kbps (AAC is natively VBR [Variable bit rate]). Converted to WAV to work with Spectro otherwise it is 100% representative of that file.
 


LAME 3.98.4 mp3 at VBR -V0 (~245 kbps)



As you can see, the AAC is better more accurate representation of the FLAC file via less artifacting Not only that, thee AAC file is a smaller file, requiring less bitrate which in turn means less processing power which in practical terms, means more songs on your DAP / 'mp3 player' and longer battery life as the CPU calculates less and decodes less. Will submit the 320kbps CBR vs VBR -v0 later.

 

[Tablo]

Quote:

today i took my M50 to school, my friends were all like "WOOOW" after listen to them. Luck most of them don't know the beats and bose (although some have skullcandies).
But the usual reply is "H**LY S*IT YOU PAID 100$ FOR A HEADPHONE"

However they probably would buy $100 Skullcandy headphones and $300+ Beats.

 

[maverickronin]

Quote:

As you can see, the AAC is better more accurate representation of the FLAC file via less artifacting Not only that, thee AAC file is a smaller file, requiring less bitrate which in turn means less processing power which in practical terms, means more songs on your DAP / 'mp3 player' and longer battery life as the CPU calculates less and decodes less. Will submit the 320kbps CBR vs VBR -v0 later.

What really matter is if you can ABX them.  I'm not gonna say which I think is better because I haven't done extensive tests myself but what really matters is if you can hear the difference, not what the spectrogram says.
 
Also more 'advanced' codecs usually require more processing power to fit the same data in a smaller space on both the encoding and decoding end.  You might save a bit of power from reading less data but if it takes more calculations to decode it then you really haven't saved anything.

 

[keanex]

Quote:

lol? Both are exactly the same on a spectrogram. really. If you want inferior, mp3 as a whole is inferior to AAC except for decoding time, but it's overridden by the extra bitrate required for the same quality for mp3 (e.g. AAC @ ~192kbps is better qualtiy than VBR -V0 / 320kbps CBR mp3). mp3 is only useful these days for compatibility reasons. That's it. It's vastly inferior to AAC.

 
Exactly they are exactly the same, while 320kbps takes up much more space, this making 320CBR inferior in every way to LAME V0. It's arguable that AAC is better, though even if it is the noticeable difference wouldn't matter since LAME V2 is transparent to most. If you really want to get nerdy and technical though, OGG is better than both.
 
 
[size=medium]

Quote:

Quote:
Which is incredibly inferior to FLAC.

If you have ears that can hear frequencies above 20k then sure.
​

[/size]

 

[maverickronin]

Quote:

If you have ears that can hear frequencies above 20k then sure.  

 
Well, slightly less than 20KHz, to be fair...

 

[keanex]

Quote:

Quote:
 
Uh, yes it does:

Spectrogram analysis via Spectro:

I used Kevin Rudolf's 'Let It Rock' because it is heavily Loudness War'ed thus contains a lot of digital info within the file.
 
Lossless FLAC file
 

 
Quicktime 7.6.9b TrueVBR AAC at ~192 kbps (AAC is natively VBR [Variable bit rate]). Converted to WAV to work with Spectro otherwise it is 100% representative of that file.
 


LAME 3.98.4 mp3 at VBR -V0 (~245 kbps)



As you can see, the AAC is better more accurate representation of the FLAC file via less artifacting Not only that, thee AAC file is a smaller file, requiring less bitrate which in turn means less processing power which in practical terms, means more songs on your DAP / 'mp3 player' and longer battery life as the CPU calculates less and decodes less. Will submit the 320kbps CBR vs VBR -v0 later.

There's so much misinformation in this post that I'm going to clear up. First off the FLAC you linked is a lossy mastered, or terribly mastered since FLAC should peak at 22k. Secondly higher/more filled spectracles does not indicate smarter VBR algorithms. Though I'm not 100% sure if this is the case, though it would appear so, that the AAC isn't as smart at compression and etc so it's possibly leaving extra data that doesn't need to be there. That may not be true and AAC may be slightly better than LAME, either way though AAC isn't as close to being as accepted as MP3. Ogg actually is better than both if you want to get technical.
 
Lastly the file size doesn't necessarily mean that it uses less processing power. Some codecs require more processing power than others. Also when you do your 320 CBR, don't use FHG, which is what iTunes uses to decode, since FHG is bad.

 

[keanex]

Quote:

 
Well, slightly less than 20KHz, to be fair...

FLAC can reach up to 22k.