[maverickronin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ishcabible /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
The Beyerdynamic DT770, DT880, and DT990 use the same driver too I think.
 

 
In a thread which I can't remember the name of, I believe Skylab said the the Beyers use the same basic drivers, but in different assemblies.  The enclosures are also completely different as well, which makes a huge difference as well.
 
For loudspeakers anyway, the enclosure is often more important than the actual drivers.  It's hard to find a driver that won't sound quite good if you put it in a properly matched and constructed enclosure.  You won't get deep bass or sparkling highs from a $2 wholesale driver whatever kind of box you put it in, but the upper bass through low treble will be much better than you might otherwise guess.  I don't know how much any of this applies to headphones though.

 

[Ishcabible]

Quote:

 
In a thread which I can't remember the name of, I believe Skylab said the the Beyers use the same basic drivers, but in different assemblies.  The enclosures are also completely different as well, which makes a huge difference as well.
 
For loudspeakers anyway, the enclosure is often more important than the actual drivers.  It's hard to find a driver that won't sound quite good if you put it in a properly matched and constructed enclosure.  You won't get deep bass or sparkling highs from a $2 wholesale driver whatever kind of box you put it in, but the upper bass through low treble will be much better than you might otherwise guess.  I don't know how much any of this applies to headphones though.

Well I knew that, yeah the three completely different enclosures and pads change the sound.
 
Enclosure and dampening completely applies to headphones! Backwaves and such. I won't pretend to know all that much about them. Save it for the Ortho ninjas. The pads also affect sound greatly, like the room affects the sound of the speakers.

 

[junkanoo]

Quote:

Haha, gullibility?  Everybody thinks people don't know.  I guess it is different for audio freaks.  I used to only be into car audio but things changed.  I always knew there was better stuff out there than Bose but I didn't wanna empty my wallet so I didn't even get Bose.  But I wasn't gullible or uneducated.  But like I said I guess people who are into audio know more than those that are only casual listeners...

 
It's become increasingly hard to have a personal opinion on headphone comparisons.  Very few retailers still have a headphone rack where you can try multiple brands/models out to the same source music.  The 'high-end' shops by me (the ones that haven't gone under) don't even have a single headphone for demo, merely purchase.  Usually they carry only one or two models (at best) because they are so concerned about inventory in this economy.  So where does that leave the music lover?  How many have the time or opportunity to attend a trade show or exposition?  How many have access to a high-end shop with a superior selection of headphones to demo?  
 
That's the beauty of this forum - to discuss things with people you would just love to bump into. 

 

[Mochan]

Discussion here though is no substitute for real listening time with the headphones in question. Relying solely on opinions from here for purchases is bound eventually to:
 
1. get you disappointed because a can didn't sound the way you "thought" it would sound
2. cloud your impressions into thinking something sounds the way you read it would, especially when trying to defend a purchase
 
It won't happen all the time, but if you stick around and buy enough headphones it's bound to happen. I guess I'm just saying be careful, and take everything you read here with a grain of salt.

 

[Bilavideo]

 

I was talking about most people in general. Anyway, Bose doesn't claim it's the best, and never uses the word "audiophile" in their marketing.  People confuse hating a company with hating the product.

 
Bose doesn't say it has the "best" headphones.  It says, "Better Sound Through Research," a claim that's intentionally vague.  On the other hand, people selling Bose - or recommending it through reviews that look like sales ads - have no problem dropping a few "best" bombs to make their case.  
 
Here's one from a site that calls itself boseearphonesguide.blogspot.com.  Under the heading, "Best Earphones - Bose Earphones," we read: "Bose earphones are the best earphones and that is why they are rather expensive. " http://boseearphonesguide.blogspot.com/
 
Here's another serving of hype from http://www.bestbrandtobuy.com/bose-headphones/:
 
"Bose Corporation is the manufacturer of their world famous noise canceling headphones. Bose was the first to come up with noise cancellation technology and introduced it to the public in 1989. Their headphones are far superior to all the other brand names and they provide superb noise reduction with extraordinary sound quality." (emphasis added)
 
If that wasn't enough, BestBrandToBuy says it again:
 
"Bose headphones are the best on the market today and continuously deliver outstanding sound cancellation technology while affording high sound quality listening for music lovers. Bose headphones are quite expensive compared to other brands of headphones. Bose headphones will only work while connected to a power supply, unlike other brands that work without batteries. While the high price may be a stumbling block for some, others do not flinch when they know of the superb nose cancellation ability these headphones offer. To these people, Bose headphones are worth the cost so that they can get the superb sound quality and the needed noise cancellation technology. (emphasis added)

 

[tyty5150]

Quote:

Discussion here though is no substitute for real listening time with the headphones in question. Relying solely on opinions from here for purchases is bound eventually to:
 
1. get you disappointed because a can didn't sound the way you "thought" it would sound
2. cloud your impressions into thinking something sounds the way you read it would, especially when trying to defend a purchase
 
It won't happen all the time, but if you stick around and buy enough headphones it's bound to happen. I guess I'm just saying be careful, and take everything you read here with a grain of salt.

I totally agree with this!  Like I read it and thought wow that is what I have experienced to some extent!

 

[tyty5150]

Revival of this thread!
 
I'm going back to a school of thought developed during the Enlightenment here.  Utilitarianism.  As seen by Bentham and Mills.  I love to bring new stuff to the table.
 
Utilitarianism is a language of ethics, deciding what is right and wrong.  It boils down to two different things, consequentialism and hedonism defined in a broad sense.  Consequentialism is looking at the consequences of different actions being taken in a particular ethical situation and deciding based on a prediction which action will yield better results.  Hedonism, in a broad sense, is pleasure or pain (good or evil/happy or bad).  Any follower of utilitarian thought will try to maximize pleasure and minimize pain by looking at the consequences and picking the choice that is better after predicting the results of the taken action.  As such, based on these principles, a moral decision is chosen by what makes the person happy. It is unique in a sense that there is in no way a correlation to a collective in this matter.  Utilitarian morals are defined by the individual only.  Finally there is no way to measure pleasure or pain.  One man's trash is another man's treasure, so each person can have a different outlook on what their pleasure is.  This is Bentham's philosophy.
 
Mills brought an interesting complication into Benthan's theories.  He argued there is a way to distinguish certain pleasures better than others.  But...  Education matters.  For example, an ethical controversy could come up and the uneducated person would pick choice A out of A and B; however, an educated person might pick choice B because of the information that person knows.  This argument can be applied to utility (as happiness).  Take for another example, tic tac toe and Hamlet (Shakespeare).  An uneducated person would enjoy tic tac toe more so than Hamlet because he isn't trained or informed in Shakespearian language.  The educated would most likely enjoy (Mills assumes the educated would pick higher brow choices over simple ones) the Shakespeare over tic tac toe because they understand it (however it is not always true some lovers of Shakespeare might love tic tac toe more).
 
Regardless, it is clear that many head-fi users believe most of the public is uneducated in true audio products and that they choose the Bose (or tic tac toe) over (to them) unknown products that are praised here at head-fi (Shakespeare).  Just something to throw out there...

 

[MrFisherman]

 
Quote:

 
I suspect that Bose would not be invited to the party, even if it made a decent headphone, for the same reasons Jan Brady hated Marcia and Joseph got sold into Egypt by his brothers.  There is a jealousy that comes from being the "favorite," particularly the favorite of those who laugh at headfi as a geek's passion to begin with.

 
Whoa!  Whoa! Whoa!  Whoa!  Jan hated Marcia?  WTH?
 

 

[joelpearce]

Quote:

Revival of this thread!
 
I'm going back to a school of thought developed during the Enlightenment here.  Utilitarianism.  As seen by Bentham and Mills.  I love to bring new stuff to the table.
 
Utilitarianism is a language of ethics, deciding what is right and wrong.  It boils down to two different things, consequentialism and hedonism defined in a broad sense.  Consequentialism is looking at the consequences of different actions being taken in a particular ethical situation and deciding based on a prediction which action will yield better results.  Hedonism, in a broad sense, is pleasure or pain (good or evil/happy or bad).  Any follower of utilitarian thought will try to maximize pleasure and minimize pain by looking at the consequences and picking the choice that is better after predicting the results of the taken action.  As such, based on these principles, a moral decision is chosen by what makes the person happy. It is unique in a sense that there is in no way a correlation to a collective in this matter.  Utilitarian morals are defined by the individual only.  Finally there is no way to measure pleasure or pain.  One man's trash is another man's treasure, so each person can have a different outlook on what their pleasure is.  This is Bentham's philosophy.
 
Regardless, it is clear that many head-fi users believe most of the public is uneducated in true audio products and that they choose the Bose (or tic tac toe) over (to them) unknown products that are praised here at head-fi (Shakespeare).  Just something to throw out there...

Although it seems to be a slightly simplified understanding of Bentham's hedonistic calculus.
 
As well, I need to point out that part of the pain that one needs to weigh when deciding what headphones to buy is the level of research required to reach the better brands.  Since they don't advertise heavily, there's a steep uphill climb early in that research.  We've chosen that it's worth putting off the pleasure of finding a greater headphone as we do that research, but for most the difference isn't worth it.

 

[Uncle Erik]

I do think Bose would be invited to the party if they made a decent product. Sony was a long-time favorite of electronics geeks, however, Sony has made some excellent headphones.

The problem with Bose is that, despite the price, they cater to the lowest common denominator. Bose chooses to be the "premium" brand of consumer junk.

It's like the old Big Mac argument - gigantic sales figures and broad public appeal don't necessarily mean there is quality. However, if Bose produced something good, they would get attention from audiophiles. AKG and Sennheiser make a lot of low-end junk, too, but their better models are worth it. Bose could do the same if they wanted to.

 

[JoetheArachnid]

Well if in this case we take money as pain and audio pleasure as... pleasure, then by choosing Bose you are not doing your best to maximise your own pleasure or diminish your pain, with high costs for less return than other products. Obviously there's a logical fallousy there, as there is definitely pain in the research needed to find your perfect can, and there is the potential for much more pain (money spent) by going down the hi-fi path. One could say that by restricting their spending and choice to a brand like Bose, one is actually reducing their total pain.
Moreover, a person listening to Bose headphones might feel pleasure from them, and we have no right to choose what they percieve as pleasure, since Utilitarianism takes a subjective rather than objectivist principle.
 
If we apply Bentham's hedonic calculus, the duration, extent and depth of the pleasure brought on by high-end audio is probably greater than the pleasure found by the average Bose listener, but the Bose listener can be content in their own way.
John Stewart Mill, however, would completely disagree with this: he said (and this is probably the most applicable quote to this situation) 'It is better to be a human dissatisfied than a pig satisfied.' So basically, it is better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all. It is 'better' to be someone who knows the truth (that Bose is overpriced and that there are better sounding things out there for less) and pursues their ultimate audio bliss with all the accompanying pain than an ignorant person who knows nothing other than that their Bose QCs sound quite nice.
 
I could write some more, but it's late here. I got an A in my Ethics AS exam paper, somehow...
 
I saw in a Bose leaflet (in an Amazon delivery package) that there was a pair of noise-cancelling headphones for £400. I could be most of the way towards my current perfect rig for that much, and that includes amps and DACs. I wouldn't mind spending £400 if I was going to get £400 worth of sound, but I doubt it.

 

[jtwtsan]

The bose techsupport/store salesman are beyond ignorant

 

[maverickronin]

Quote:

Revival of this thread!
 
snip...

Bose is popular because people don't know any better.
 
/executive summary

 

[PointyFox]

Bose triports actually have very nice sound for their price and being closed headphones.  If they made them a bit more durable, they'd be awesome travel headphones.
 
Oh whoops, this is a Bose bashing thread.
 
I mean:
Buy Other Sound Equipment.
B(l)ose.
No highs, no lows, must be a Bose.
I'd rather shove awls into my ears than have to listen to Bose.
People who buy Bose are ignorant fools with no sense of hearing.

 

[DiamondHead]

Expensive but not worth the price.
They would be fine if they were $100 cheaper.
You should pay quality and not the brand.