[XxDobermanxX]

Quote:

Hello everyone! I am new here and I'm looking for some insight about my soon to be headphone upgrade.

I currently own a pair of Sennheiser HD555s that I've had for close to 8 years and they still work and I love them!
I recently bought the Audio Technica ATH-M50s for the portability and great sound. However I wear plastic glasses with thick arms and it makes these headphones very uncomfortable. 
 
I'm looking to make my HD555s my portable pair since they're old and beat but effective, and put the HD598s in their place as my home headphones. Gotta sell the M50s, is this a good place to sell? 

And it seems like I shouldn't even ask if the 598s are a good choice huh? I'm pretty much sold.

Yes, the ATH-M50 is a beloved headphone here (i dont know what all the commotion is about), so you will get it sold here easily 

 

[streetdragon]

Quote:

I wish more people around here thought like you do.
Folks get so wrapped up in this amp or that DAC. And dont get me started on cables and balanced vs. Unbalanced.
There is such a huge margin in recording quality that everything else is moot. Find music that moves you and headphones that sing, and you're set. Oh, and EQ is your friend!

in fact actually i find that 128kbps that doesn't come from youtube ripping is actually pretty decent sounding, but still there are some noticable artifacts, anything 192 and above are okay for me. recording quality is much more important.

and yes eq is a really good buddy if used properly

 it's a must have for me, it just helps you bring out the best of your headphone for free! (alongside amps,dacs and sources)

@xXDobermanXx
the M50 is a nice headphone,i like most parts of it but just don't like the soundstage, its just that some people here a little fed up that new headfiers are recommending them strongly when they have only ibuds as a reference point. this causes the M50 to appear as a 'godly' headphone that is miles ahead of any of its competitors. we know that's not the case since there are other great headphones too in this price  range. so that's why there have undergone some 'deflating' (mostly seasoned headfiers complaining about the excessive recommendations from junior headfiers)

 

[derbigpr]

Quote:

I ripped a bunch of my albums at 320 kbps years ago for listening on the road. Two years ago, I transitioned to in-home wireless streaming and archived my entire CD collection to FLAC.
 
There is absolutely no audible difference between 320 kbps and FLAC. I did it for consistency and peace of mind only, not for audio quality.

 
 
I clearly hear a difference between 320 kbps and FLAC on HD650, Q701, DT880 and especially DT770pro. Its not even hard to differentiate them, and yes I did blind tests.

 

[Nirvana Woman]

Quote:

in fact actually i find that 128kbps that doesn't come from youtube ripping is actually pretty decent sounding, but still there are some noticable artifacts, anything 192 and above are okay for me. recording quality is much more important.
 

 
I agree completely on all four points.

 

[Enigma29]

Formats and bit rates are all pointless; you just want the song to sound good to you and thats the only thing you want (and need) in the end.
Its just that bigger file sizes have a tendency of being better.

 

[streetdragon]

Quote:

Formats and bit rates are all pointless; you just want the song to sound good to you and thats the only thing you want (and need) in the end.
Its just that bigger file sizes have a tendency of being better.

agree on this.
the sound information quality is just as important if not more important than the bit rate especially in the higher bitrates.
combination of both these factors will determine the final quality of the information being pumped into your headphones.
 

 

[Dawzy11]

"Its just that bigger file sizes have a tendency of being better."
 
This claim is because there are certain file types that are designed to lose reduce the file size at the loss of quality. If you have ever learnt audio compression down at the bit level, it is a loss of data. 
 
So no file sizes and bit rates are not pointless, if you have a song that is a high quality .flac and you compress it to .mp3 at 192kbps, sure you have a smaller file for storage but you literally have a loss in quality. And to me thats not a sound I want to listen too especially if I have bought headphones to shine high quality formats. 

 

[Enigma29]

Quote:

 
So no file sizes and bit rates are not pointless, if you have a song that is a high quality .flac and you compress it to .mp3 at 192kbps, sure you have a smaller file for storage but you literally have a loss in quality. And to me thats not a sound I want to listen too especially if I have bought headphones to shine high quality formats. 

The amout of qualty (kbps) that a person needs to enjoy a song is subjective - this is what i meant.
 
The fact that some format and some bit rate isnt enough for you is personal prefference and having this discussion is like having one about why you like a specific color; people can throw a billion reasons at you as to why you shouldnt like it, but you still like it and its your opinion/prefference and no one in the world can do anything with that.
 
Everyone knows .mp3 is a lossy format, no one is denying that.

 

[Dawzy11]

Yeah I understand, it is subjective. But some people don't know how good it can sound until they are shown....
 
Hense non-audiophile reaction thread

 

[Lord Voldemort]

Personally, if you can overcome the psychological bias that lossless is much better than 192/256/320 kbps, which again is not true, you'll be able to enjoy the music much more at lossy format. The difference between lossless and lossy is very small, so small that:
1) It should not serve as a sole factor in liking or disliking of a particular song 
2) The difference can only be noticeably heard when one realizes beforehand that two files of the same song is different.
 
So for instance, let's say the song you listen to is always lossless. However, your sister plays a nasty trick on you by secretly changing all the lossless music in your Itunes library into lossy 128 kbps files. I highly doubt anyone would notice a change in sound quality This is partly because you'd believe the files to still be lossless. The human mind only becomes more perceptive (or suspicious) when we expect things to being different. Usually, the brain is in a more carefree and relaxed state.  It's like when someone asks you a question and just before you answer, s/he said it is a "trick" question, which makes you doubt your answer. 
 
I'm rambling on but another aspect to consider is that people who are good at distinguishing between lossy files and lossless files have been trained to do so. These are usually the people who have done numerous tests regarding how file sizes affect qualities. My point? The difference between lossy and lossless is small. 

 

[adam sofa]

What's up guys. I've been a long time lurker and I finally joined because my denon 1100 cracked so I replaced them with the 598s and I should have them in my hands this week!

I know this has been asked many times but what's a good option for me to upgrade and shorten my cable? I thought about bundling it but I'm in a wheelchair so any bulk I can minimize would be awesome.

I did find this but I'm not to sure on their quality. What do you guys think?

http://www.showmecables.com/custom-cable.aspx?link=Homepage

 

[streetdragon]

Quote:

What's up guys. I've been a long time lurker and I finally joined because my denon 1100 cracked so I replaced them with the 598s and I should have them in my hands this week!
I know this has been asked many times but what's a good option for me to upgrade and shorten my cable? I thought about bundling it but I'm in a wheelchair so any bulk I can minimize would be awesome.
I did find this but I'm not to sure on their quality. What do you guys think?
http://www.showmecables.com/custom-cable.aspx?link=Homepage

i think it should be decent, not sure if it will improve the quality of the sound but i'm pretty sure it won't be degraded. even if so it would be hardly noticable.
the reserve options are to braid the cable or use a cable winder, or a twisty tie

 

[PurpleAngel]

I have the HD558 headphone and I'm looking for a replacement cable with a 3.5mm (mini-jack), instead of the 1/4" (6.35mm) jack.

 

[doginabag]

I got a pair for Christmas, absolutely loving them.
 
Just ordered myself a replacement cable and a 3.5mm Neutrik jack plug so I can make myself a more suitable cable.
 
Think I may also build myself a portable amp as I feel the ipod is very much the limiting factor at the moment.  That and i need to start rebuilding my collection of well recorded music!  

 

[Mitch02]

I have read that an amp is needed to fully power the HD 598s. My price range is around $100, and I will be using my PC laptop, Kindle Fire HD tablet, and iPhone 5 for music. Which amp will power these headphones, but work with the lightning port on the iPhone 5? Please let me know of any cables I need to buy, as well. I would prefer a portable amp, but if a stationary one fits better then so be it. I will use primarily for music and movies.

Thanks,

- Mitch

Also, how bad is an amp really needed with these headphones - will it warrant the extra money?