[AmanGeorge]

Thanks for taking the time to do this and sanity-check everyone, joker! I was really weirded out when I read that top 10 the other day

 

[manaox2]

This review was a good read and definitely the refreshingly honest review I was hoping for. Thanks!

 

[RedSky0]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dfkt /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thanks for the extremely honest and unbiased review - it's a good read.

Basically what I was going to say.

To be fair though, most people looking for a earphones that price range probably do want huge bass or that seems to be the impression anyway. Not that that should be an excuse for a headphone store to sycophantically cater to this preconception, but then I wouldn't be surprised if Headroom previously experienced a fair few returns in their lower range of products for "not having having any bass".

 

[omega52]

Nice review! Thanks.
With an iPod Nano 5g the Titans bass is not so bloated. I have mentioned it before, but the Titan seems to be a good match to the Nano output. With a Clip+, Tosh T400 or Zune 80, I think the Titan's bass is more intrusive & the highs start to get a bit harsh. The 5g Nano is my first iPod, so I can only surmise that it is a bit rolled off at both ends of the spectrum & as a result the Titans don't suck

.
Cheers,
kev

 

[Jupiterknight]

To be fair to Skullcandy and Headroom, this review is based on the 2008 Titan version (some refer to it as the ebay version).
Headroom are selling the new 2009 upgraded version that has a different (better) cable and a volume control. So maybe this can explain their ranking?

I have a pair of these (2009 version) that I bought for $25-27 through Amazone and after 100 hours of burn-in they are much in the same league as my Monster Turbines, but having slightly less detail depending on source and type of music, fun factor is about the same. So they are not that bad (new version) especially when the Turbines are being sold for $100-150.

 

[ljokerl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jupiterknight /img/forum/go_quote.gif To be fair to Skullcandy and Headroom, this review is based on the 2008 Titan version (some refer to it as the ebay version). Headroom are selling the new 2009 upgraded version that has a different (better) cable and a volume control. So maybe this can explain their ranking? I have a pair of these (2009 version) that I bought for $25-27 through Amazone and after 100 hours of burn-in they are much in the same league as my Monster Turbines, but having slightly less detail depending on source and type of music, fun factor is about the same. So they are not that bad (new version) especially when the Turbines are being sold for $100-150.

Drivers are unchanged. I don't see why a volume control makes them better headphones and I didn't think the cable was so bad - microphonics are nearly non-existent when worn over the ear.

They are not in the same league as the Turbines though. I just listened to both back-to-back and it's not even a contest. Compared to the Titans, the Turbines are significantly more detailed and better balanced. They are not nearly as aggressive with the bass and the attack is much quicker, making them suitable for fast rock. The bass never overpowers. They also have a coherent presentation and decent soundstage, which the Titans lack. Might be just me though. I guess you're with HeadRoom on this one.

 

[tstarn06]

Odd, but I had the exact same reactions when I compared the Titans (the silver ones with the volume control for $26) to the Im590s. While neither was bad, I favored the Titans at half the price, very honestly. I used Complys with the Titans but didnt have any T200s for the IM590s. Goes to show you, it's just a subjective hobby. To me, the Titans, the model I have, sounded crisper and less veiled than the 590s, no matter how many times I moved from one to the other. Not saying the 590s are bad, just that they were not superior to the Titans. I was quite surprised in fact. But as with your comparison to the Turbines, it wasn't even that close.

 

[Jupiterknight]

I'm not on anybody's side, never will be. I didn't say the vol. control made them any better, just pointed out a difference between the two models, if anyone cared.. Maybe I have a bad pair of turbines, who knows. What I said was; that the Turbines I own, doesn't justify their price compared against the Titans IMO.


Quote:

Originally Posted by ljokerl /img/forum/go_quote.gif Drivers are unchanged. I don't see why a volume control makes them better headphones and I didn't think the cable was so bad - microphonics are nearly non-existent when worn over the ear. They are not in the same leagues as the Turbines though. I just listened to both back-to-back and it's not even a contest. Compared to the Titans, the Turbines are significantly more detailed and better balanced. They are not nearly as aggressive with the bass and the attack is much quicker, making them suitable for fast rock. The bass never overpowers. They also have a coherent presentation and decent soundstage, which the Titans lack. Might be just me though. I guess you're with HeadRoom on this one.

 

[baka1969]

My prediction was correct. Headroom's new ad in Stereophile has the Skullcandy Titan in it. They sold out.

 

[ljokerl]

Ad in question (thanks, baka):

 

[priest]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jupiterknight /img/forum/go_quote.gif To be fair to Skullcandy and Headroom, this review is based on the 2008 Titan version (some refer to it as the ebay version). Headroom are selling the new 2009 upgraded version that has a different (better) cable and a volume control. So maybe this can explain their ranking?

Thanks for pointing this out. I wonder if anything else is different between the two versions.

 

[Kloug]

I was considering the Titan but after reading your review, I bought one of your comparison model, the JVC HA-FXC50 Micro HD. I was not expecting very much but I am pretty surprised with them. The midrange is recessed but the bass and highs are impressive. Best of all, I got mine at a Future Shop liquidation sale for the ridiculous price of $4.97

 

[ljokerl]

Quote:

I was considering the Titan but after reading your review, I bought one of your comparison model, the JVC HA-FXC50 Micro HD. I was not expecting very much but I am pretty surprised with them. The midrange is recessed but the bass and highs are impressive. Best of all, I got mine at a Future Shop liquidation sale for the ridiculous price of $4.97

I think you got the best deal in all of portable audio. $5 for the FXC50 is seriously impressive. Make sure to keep the receipt for warranty purposes though

.

 

[YGuyG]

I am impressed you shelled out the money to review this. It was a good review but me personally would never shell out the dough for that. But I'm only 16 and buying anything to listen to besides my IE8's would be a crime to me . For a cheapy though I like the JVC Marshmallows, my mom bought them so that's why I listened.

 

[BRCMRGN]

I have to agree with th OP. After reading the post, I dug out my Titans from the desk drawer where they have been hibernating for a few years. I was amazed how my perception of them has changed from when they were my only IEM until now where I have IEMs ranging from the MEELEC M6 and M11+ all the way up to MTPC and TF10. The Titans had overpowering bass that just wouldn't decay. The mids and highs were like reading sheet music, the notes were there, but there was no texture, detail or overtones from being played on a real musical instrument. Closed miked recordings of guitar or cello where you can revel in the sounds of fingers or a bow interacting with the strings, sound like listening through a heavy blanket on the Titans. I was quite surprised to hear how my own taste and awareness of the depth and detail of recordings has grown since leaving the Titans behind for greener pastures. My youngest son just left for Medical School and as a going away present, I gave him my SuperFi 3s to replace his Skullcandy FMJs and the look on his face (jaw dropping and eyes getting big) said it all. He had never heard the detail, clarity and texture in recorded music until that moment.