[Vertigo-1]

I agree with grinch and markl. With the <$1k headphones, you tend to end up with a sound that generally leans too much in certain frequencies, leading to the feeling over time that something's not right. The more you listen, the more you get irked, and thus the search/lull/itch begins for a new headphone.

I agree with the sentiment that a headphone, or any audio component, should ideally be able to play absolutely any type of music. Unfortunately as I have found it, this just doesn't happen below $1k. Or sure, it could happen if you were that stubborn about any certain headphone.

For me, a person that once swapped headphones on a nightly basis back when I had multiple dynamics, the Stax Omega I/Omega IIs were a godsend. They were the first and only headphones to date that completely got rid of that constant irking that something's wrong with the 'phones themselves. Now if Stax released an Omega III, I'd still get it, just because. But that's a bit different then getting a headphone because something's wrong with my current one.

 

[Mike Scarpitti]

Quote:

Originally posted by Vertigo-1 I agree with grinch and markl.

What about Mikey?

 

[LobsterSan]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mike Scarpitti That you must PREFER the more expensive one was not an assertion I made there, now is it?

Well, actually, it is an assertion you are making because you are equating more expensive with better. It's like saying people who choose less expensive models over more expensive models are stupid because they like the lesser headphone (having heard both of them).

I do understand where you are coming from, though -- and that within the same manufacturing line, the higher-end models tend to improve on the characteristics already present in the lower-end models (i.e., most are going to prefer the hd600 to the hd580). However, the hd600 is considered the top of the line for Senns, but the hd590 (supposedly second in command) has completely different sonic characteristics. And I'm fairly certain there may be people in this world who think the hd590 is actually "better" than the hd600.

 

[Vertigo-1]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mike Scarpitti What about Mikey?

And you.

 

[Mike Scarpitti]

Quote:

Originally posted by LobsterSan Well, actually, it is an assertion you are making because you are equating more expensive with better. It's like saying people who choose less expensive models over more expensive models are stupid because they like the lesser headphone (having heard both of them). I do understand where you are coming from, though -- and that within the same manufacturing line, the higher-end models tend to improve on the characteristics already present in the lower-end models (i.e., most are going to prefer the hd600 to the hd580). However, the hd600 is considered the top of the line for Senns, but the hd590 (supposedly second in command) has completely different sonic characteristics. And I'm fairly certain there may be people in this world who think the hd590 is actually "better" than the hd600.

No, they 'prefer' them, if I may be so bold. Look, in engineering a product, cost constraints are enormous. The best products the mind of man can create often are simply too expensive for anyone but the military or NASA. Given that a certain level of quality is acceptable to large numbers of people, who STRONGLY resist paying three or four times as much as for a slightly better product, it becomes difficult for the engineering to pay for itself when making much higher quality goods. So, often style comes into play. Bruno Magli shoes are all hand made and are absolutely butter-soft, but they cost $250 and up. With lenses and cameras, the same holds true. Why pay $2000 for a 50mm 1.4 Leica-R lens when an Nikkor or Canon lens costs about $400 and is almost as good? There is ENOUGH difference, to be sure, to make it possible for Leica to make and sell the lens. But is this the best that could be made by Leica? Of course not! They could make even better lenses (and probably do under military contracts) but the cost could be in the $20,000 range. Who knows? For that matter, Canon and Nikon could make better lenses, but again the resistance factor comes into play. It would not pay for them to do it. So, for prducts selling in the $300-400 range, the engineers simply don't have anywhere near the freedom required to approach what can be done at $4k or $20k.

 

[JaZZ]

Mike, the important difference to the stuff you listed is that there's no precise requirement specification defined for headphones. This has to do with different anatomics and different perceptions under the exceptional (unnatural) hearing condition headphones represent.

There's no such thing as the universally ideal headphone you claim, and in contrast to speakers you even can't take any frequency response as a benchmark. It definitely comes down to individual perceptions and – yes! – preferences. Believe me! You little wannabe dictator, you...

 

[terrymx]

sorry i only read the frist post and anser too lazy to read 3 pages, but these are my input: for me it's more about comfortability and efficiency. i believe when a heaphone is greatly built with high sound quality it should be able to make any style of music sound good (as in for the music listener who like that genre of music). i think the other issues are up for your cd player equalizer to control. i can't believe people complains too much bass.
i would only need 3 headphones. one earbud, one portable, and one studio. all of them are serve for different purposes, there you go. i agree with the point made by jazz above

 

[RVD]

lkmich, you read my mind, I was thinking of posting this exact question. I totally agree with your first post and those are my thoughts exactly.

I can see having multiple headphones for different uses such as for home use and portable use, but for different music I don't see it.

Also I have $200 headphones and I think they do all genres of music that I listen to equally well and even best $400-700 headphones that I have owned before. So I do not think you have to spend a $1000 plus on a headphone to achieve a headphone that does all music equally well. Maybe I am too stubborn or inexperienced and that is why I think a $200 headphone does all music equally well, I don't know.

 

[markl]

RVD,
What $200 phone are you referring to? Is that what HD600s are going for these days?

BTW: I'm not saying that a $400 headphone is automatically going to sound better than a $200 one. It's possible that buying one company's $200 headphone gets you much more than buying another company's $400 model just due to varying cost of producing each manufacturer's line. Within that range, each company can have different cost structures, produce at different volumes in different countries with different labor rates. Also, a poorly designed $700 headphone is no guarantee of good sound either (*cough* RS1 *cough*).

But when we are talking about something like the R10, Stax Omega, Senn Orpheus, spending more does get you more, the proof is in the pudding. If there were any $700-$2000 headphones, I'd wager they'd be better than the $200-$400 class of headphone, though. With that much extra to plow into build, I bet you would get a much better phone than you can when you are limited to selling for a street price of only $300.

Mark

 

[Matthew-Spaltro]

Quote:

Originally posted by markl But when we are talking about something like the R10, Stax Omega, Senn Orpheus, spending more does get you more, the proof is in the pudding. If there were any $700-$2000 headphones, I'd wager they'd be better than the $200-$400 class of headphone, though. With that much extra to plow into build, I bet you would get a much better phone than you can when you are limited to selling for a street price of only $300. Mark

I don't understand. There are headphones in that range

 

[markl]

A couple of lower-end Stax systems yes. OK, let's talk dynamic phones.

There are no *dynamic phones* in the $700-$2000 range. If there are please eductate me.

Mark

 

[markl]

Doh! Before you reply, I'm talking CURRENTLY AVAILABLE. W2002 does not count, nor do HP series Grado. Strett price on K1000 is $550 these days, isn't it?

In either case, though, most seem to feel they are at least *slightly* better than the $200-$400 group, so they only bear out my point.

Mark

 

[RVD]

Quote:

RVD, What $200 phone are you referring to? Is that what HD600s are going for these days?

Yes, I was referring to the HD600's. I paid $250, because I bought them locally, but I believe they are close to $200 if bought from Meier.

Quote:

BTW: I'm not saying that a $400 headphone is automatically going to sound better than a $200 one.

I understand what you are saying and I do agree that with the Big 3 (Orpheus, R10, Omega II) that spending more does get you more as it should as all three headphones are the top of the line of it’s respective company. I was just saying that I think it is possible to get a headphone that does all music well under a $1K. Granted not as good as the Big 3, but still very good.

 

[Mike Scarpitti]

Quote:

Originally posted by RVD I was just saying that I think it is possible to get a headphone that does all music well under a $1K. Granted not as good as the Big 3, but still very good.

Yes, and if you read my post carefully you'll see that's what I said, too. The differences among brands tend to diminish as you approach perfection. The same is true with speakers or any other product.

 

[kartik]

There is a point at which the pain at parting the moolah exceeds the pleasure in listening to your headphones. Just before this point is the perfect headphone with the perfect amp. Its the greenbacks that decide!