RS-1 vs. PX100: the $650 question

Aug 18, 2004 at 3:29 AM Thread Starter Post #1 of 81

robert

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 22, 2001
Posts
633
Likes
10
not that i'm in the mood for buying more phones, but i cruised over to HeadRoom, and ran the FR compare utility.

there's only a smidge of difference end to end. who'd a thunk it. and not a whole lot of difference PX100 to SR-325. hmm.
 
Aug 18, 2004 at 4:18 AM Post #4 of 81
Quote:

Originally Posted by blessingx
I think they're pretty similar, except that the RS1 sounds good.


rs1smile.gif


I think with a digital EQ I could even EQ my Sony earbuds to have a similiar FR like the RS1. Then I'd save even more money.
 
Aug 18, 2004 at 4:43 AM Post #6 of 81
I got to say, this means jack to me. I'd get the RS1 for the sound quality. Don't care what some graph says.
icon10.gif
 
Aug 18, 2004 at 8:04 AM Post #7 of 81
If the headroom graphs show the PX100 to be near identical to the RS1, then - i'd suggest headrooms measuring equipment is busted...

They sound nothing alike.
 
Aug 18, 2004 at 1:14 PM Post #9 of 81
One of the best kept secrets about headphones is that price has very little to do with sound quality. Yes there are very expensive headphones (Stax, high end Sennheisers and Grados) that are actually worth what they cost. BUT there are MANY inexpensive headphones (including 50 dollar models like the PX100) which are FAR better than other models which cost hundreds (I have some in mind, but won't put them here to avoid getting "flamed". Ok...I'll mention a long discontinued model...the Audio Technica ATH-7...my first electrostatic (electret, actually) headphones from the early 80s. I saved for these, and lusted after them. And when I finally got them home, they were HORRIBLE! My 40 dollar Sennheiser HD-40s were IMMENSELY better!)

Take the Koss line for instance. The KSC-35, Porta Pro, Sporta Pro line sounds fantastic. The much more expensive closed models mostly sound awful...far worse than their far less expensive brethren.

For many years, Sennheiser made a 40 dollar model called the HD-40 (mentioned above) which I am convinced was removed from the line because it was far better than their 200+ dollar models. Can't have that, if we want to actually sell our high-end models!

In the 70s Koss sold a model called the HV1a whose sound was shockingly similar to many of the better electrostatics of the time. Electrostatics then cost 200-1000 bucks. The HV-1a was about 39.95.

IMHO the PX100 is another "giant killer". It's not as piercingly bright as Grados (a good thing to me!) But everything's there, in proper porportion, they're comfortable (a MUST...it makes no difference what 'phones sound like if you can't wear them without PAIN!), and cheap! Buy them, enjoy, and forget the elitist bullsh@t. Transducers (headphones, phono cartridges, microphones) are one area where less (expensive) is often MORE (sound quality). Take the Shure SM-57 microphone...about 79 dollars at most pro audio stores, and used on virtually every recording on the radio! If you've heard electric guitar or a drum-kit on a recording made in the last 30 years, there's about a 99 percent chance that one or more SM-57s were used! Take the Grado line of phono cartridges. They used to have models for 20-30 dollars which DESTROYED so called "high-end" models, including moving coils.

SOME inexpensive equipment is as good as ANYTHING at ANY price. Example: NAD electronics, particularly those from the 80s. Accept, and enjoy your (our) good luck at knowing this!
 
Aug 18, 2004 at 1:22 PM Post #10 of 81
Great post Mike, but views like that are not very popular around here, as I have tended to find out. I think too many people naturally think that a cheap audio item can not sound as good as an expensive one under any circumstances, and people who have expensive gear, will understandably deny this ferociously (as would I, if I had such expensive gear).

Nevertheless, I have found my "nirvana" using a collection of cheap, entry level components, and find myself completely satisfied, even after hearing more expensive hardware, but as some members will take great pleasure in telling me, I must be deluded, or deaf, or both.
biggrin.gif
 
Aug 18, 2004 at 2:01 PM Post #11 of 81
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Walker
there are MANY inexpensive headphones (including 50 dollar models like the PX100) which are FAR better than other models which cost hundreds



I agree totally with Mike. I had a pair of Grado SR-225s and sold them after I compared them to the PX 100s. I never found the Grados comfortable and they didn't sound much better (if any better) than the PX 100s.

I own the HD 650s and they sound significantly better than the PX 100s but the PX 100s cost $40.

I think part of the problem is that it is so hard to audition headphones and do side by side comparisons.
 
Aug 18, 2004 at 4:53 PM Post #13 of 81
Go Team Coby.


But seriously, I just listened to "Ready to Go" by Republica and the KSC-35s sounded like poor man 225s - awesome. Baby Rockalizers.
 
Aug 18, 2004 at 5:02 PM Post #14 of 81
This is just my opinion, but things do get better with price. Of course there are expensive phones that suck (Ie the upper sony line, excluding the 3k, r-10, etc)
You got to remember that phones heavily depend on a good source and amp (and recording). Many people buy HD650s and RS1 for instance, and use them with either bad or low-end equipment (ie mediocre portable source). This is just a waste, trust me, I've done the same thing. ($$ phone, cheap source/amp -> acceptable sound) You'll never know what they can really do.
I really don't think a low-end phone can beat a respectable "giant", when it all the components are good. Low-end phones are of course more forgiving, but that doesn't necessarily make them better over all.

But if you're happy with the basics, go with it. There is no reason to spend more if you're happy. Some people either hear small differences with better stuff, some hear big ones. Many people downgrade from the good stuff, because they want to. If you can't appreciate the benefits of a better rig, revert. I myself am f**kin' crazy (seriously), so I like listening to better and better phones. I have an entry-level setup and enjoy it greatly, but I will always desire for more. For a crazy headphone audiophile, only the best (we can afford) will do. But I doubt giant killers will become the staple of head-fi.

Besides, if an (for example) ipod, supermini, and low-end phones were truly the end-all of hi-fi, why do people have expensive rigs? Because we care about great sound (as opposed to acceptable). Not to mention most of us are probably nuts.
icon10.gif


(please don't flame me for this)
 
Aug 18, 2004 at 5:03 PM Post #15 of 81
Among many other things, one thing a freq. response graph doesn't show is how quickly the driver starts moving after the signal arrives, and conversely, how quickly it stops after the signal dissapears.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top