[Nar1117]

Quote:

Originally Posted by qusp /img/forum/go_quote.gif if they are happy, thats great and I agree that no matter the method, someone enjoying their music is great in my book!! that is after all what this is about (at least for me it is) when music becomes a tool to analyze your gear rather than the other way around, that is a little confusing to me too, but thats cool as well.

Yeah I agree completely with this point - if it's the point im thinking of.

As long as people realize that we're here to get everything we can out of our music rather than everything out of our home or portable setup, I have no qualms.

Yeah, sure, rip 320K sources and what not, but don't look past what the music is there for in order to analyze the 6 drivers in each ear, or the brand-new gold-plated attenuator knobs you bought over the weekend. Music comes first.

 

[Uncle Erik]

Quote:

Originally Posted by atothex /img/forum/go_quote.gif People here, or just in general? I knew a guy who swore every headphone he's ever heard sounds exactly the same. So, yeah. I've heard major differences between digital sources, but maybe part of that is test music. I haven't exactly asked around, but it seems like most people who try to compare digital sources hear significant differences. Well, it helps if they're on different tiers of quality, of course.

Look at the specs of various players - they all have different output levels. If you level those outputs, then differences become difficult to hear.

A CD player that gives a higher output will sound "better" than one that doesn't.

There are some differences in players, but it's all on a much lower scale than the difference between headphones.

The whole source fetish is mostly marketing. Quality of the recording is paramount, then the headphones and an amp that drives them fully with good control. That doesn't necessarily have to be an expensive amp, either. After that, the quality of the source player has a marginal role.

I didn't arrive at that blindly, either. I spent a lot of time fooling with the rig - substituting in cheap gear to see what made the biggest differences. Even the best headphones will sound good with cheap sources and amps. Putting five figures of sources and amps into cheap headphones still sounds terrible.

I've found that a $29 DVD player with a Red Book disc into a high-end amp and headphones sounds incredibly good. The SA8001 (Stereophile Class A) is superb, but it was shocking to hear how good a cheapie sounded. I don't think the cheapie would physically hold up longer than six months, but still, it delivered good sound.

If you don't believe it, go get a cheap DVD player at Wal-Mart or a flea market. Plug it in and listen.

Oh, and I also found that cables are a great way for the people selling them to make money. I can't find any other benefit.

 

[1235sam]

in my country - India many people listen FM radio from their "Crap" headphone connected to Nokia mobile.Many own "poor sounding" ipods and "crap" ibuds.But there is one thing in common-they enjoy music.And i think its same everywhere in world - for people most important thing is to enjoy music no matter what headphone/player they use.

I think in general people do not care about balanced audio,dual driver etc,most people like heavy bass hence EP 630,CX 300 are one of most popular headphones in world

 

[bba1973]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1235sam /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think in general people do not care about balanced audio,dual driver etc,most people like heavy bass hence EP 630,CX 300 are one of most popular headphones in world

Good point. When I upgraded from $10 earbuds to ~$40 Sony MDR-EX55's, the bass presence was the biggest change. Everything else was better too, but more bass was my most liked feature at the time.

I really wish companies like Apple would include $30-$40 IEMs with their DAPs. Going from iBuds to that range is a pretty substantial upgrade (one that most people can afford but have no desire to), and I honestly don't think they'd lose much money in doing so. Sure they're no RE0's, but they're still quite listenable, IMO.

 

[derek8555]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1235sam /img/forum/go_quote.gif in my country - India many people listen FM radio from their "Crap" headphone connected to Nokia mobile.Many own "poor sounding" ipods and "crap" ibuds.But there is one thing in common-they enjoy music.And i think its same everywhere in world - for people most important thing is to enjoy music no matter what headphone/player they use. I think in general people do not care about balanced audio,dual driver etc,most people like heavy bass hence EP 630,CX 300 are one of most popular headphones in world

That is true in some cases. Yet from another point of view it might be that they cannot distinguish difference between higher and lower quality audios, i.e. whatever they hear now and then made no difference to them.

Personally I find myself hard to enjoy music when quality of headphones I use or quality of the recordings are piss poor (such as youtube).

 

[Hsiu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bba1973 /img/forum/go_quote.gif They certainly have every right to use whatever cheap earbuds they use, but they're missing out. I used to be in that crowd (128 MP3 and 128 AAC, $10 earbuds), and I never want to go back. Almost all of my friends are still in that crowd, and I share my interests with them in case they might want to join me. Music can certainly convey emotion through iBuds, but it has so much more emotion (IMO) with better gear and the emotion that comes with getting your rig set up just right. It's not just the music, but the journey of finding that perfect (or really good) setup. Certainly, but I don't see head-fi as stuck up, just obsessive. Outsiders may see it differently though. Great post, btw.

same here, I wish I had my old collection in wav instead of 192kbps. now I tend to skid those that are encoded in low bit rate unless they are chinese pop music that differences is hard to notice due to lack of elements. classical music must be listen in high bit rate.

to my lousy ear 320 sound the same as lossless and 192 sound worse only when I listen to slightly more complex music. the difference is the lifeness in 192kbps

although I cannot distinguish bitrate so well like some of you but I have tell the different sound signature of my UM3X, PFE, JVC air cushion as well as my friends' HF5 and SCL3.

there are people who are less sensitive to notice the subtle differences that make expansive equipment expansive to make and to buy. a friend of mine has SCL3 and when he audit my UM3X he said there isn't much difference which is rather obvious to me.

the problems are 1. Not knowing what is better, 2. not knowing that better thing is out there 3. can't notice the differences

I am glad I find this place and my ear are not too deteriorated but sorry for my wallet and my parent's hard earn money

 

[atothex]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif Look at the specs of various players - they all have different output levels. If you level those outputs, then differences become difficult to hear. A CD player that gives a higher output will sound "better" than one that doesn't. There are some differences in players, but it's all on a much lower scale than the difference between headphones. The whole source fetish is mostly marketing. Quality of the recording is paramount, then the headphones and an amp that drives them fully with good control. That doesn't necessarily have to be an expensive amp, either. After that, the quality of the source player has a marginal role. I didn't arrive at that blindly, either. I spent a lot of time fooling with the rig - substituting in cheap gear to see what made the biggest differences. Even the best headphones will sound good with cheap sources and amps. Putting five figures of sources and amps into cheap headphones still sounds terrible. I've found that a $29 DVD player with a Red Book disc into a high-end amp and headphones sounds incredibly good. The SA8001 (Stereophile Class A) is superb, but it was shocking to hear how good a cheapie sounded. I don't think the cheapie would physically hold up longer than six months, but still, it delivered good sound. If you don't believe it, go get a cheap DVD player at Wal-Mart or a flea market. Plug it in and listen. Oh, and I also found that cables are a great way for the people selling them to make money. I can't find any other benefit.

I thought something like 2V out is fairly standard among digital sources. I know they vary, but I'm not really certain how much. Making the jump from iPod as source to the Pico DAC was a huge improvement to me, though.

Anyways, you're right that the source and amp don't necessarily have to be super pricey, but they're still usually much more expensive than the phones themselves. I certainly wouldn't be happy with an iPod sourcing my AD2000s, although an old cheap CD player has a decent chance of being better. We probably have different standards for perceived "high end" sound.

As for cables, well I definitely haven't gotten around to messing with those yet. My Monoprice RCAs don't clamp very well, so I'll probably eventually upgrade to BJC or Emotiva sometime.

 

[bakhtiar]

I also use cheap Dvd player for my low cost home theater system. But I connected them with SPDIF optical (toslink) and the sound is marvelous . Digital does make thing better and simpler.

I also tried the DVD SPDIF to my iBasso D10, and it still sound AMAZING!. Perfect digital audio from a cheap DVD player.

 

[Drubbing]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif The whole source fetish is mostly marketing. Quality of the recording is paramount, then the headphones and an amp that drives them fully with good control. That doesn't necessarily have to be an expensive amp, either. After that, the quality of the source player has a marginal role.

This hasn't been my experience. I started off using onboard (with DT250/MS1) and was listening to some very well recorded music. I didn't know this at the time, as my onboard just couldn't do it any justice. Then it got a cheap DAc and this really only cleaned up the extraneous onboard noise on some of my rock music.

Then I got a DACmagic and the good music really opened up and came alive, space between instruments, better dynamic range to pick up all the subtle stuff in the production, as well as being very clear.

IME source was the most important thing I addressed to help me enjoy my music on a different level.

 

[Cleid]

I used to be like that. I honestly just never gave it a second thought with my stock iPhone buds. I thought they sounded fine but I never considered that I could get something better. Yes, I'm pitiful, but I hope to upgrade soon.

 

[fhuang]

it's been more and more here, head-fier talking about people using cheap ***** earphone, if we're using car for comparing, we're cursing in all these benz and bmx and now laughing at those who's driving in a kia? nice.

 

[shigzeo]

again, this thread pops up all the time... yawn, boring... good bye.

 

[watchluvr4ever]

Although the GS-1000 might not be the best headphone Grado has made, that statement is just delusional!


Quote:

Originally Posted by Joelby /img/forum/go_quote.gif I can understand teenagers not knowing better. Here's a truely alarming review of the SK Pro straight from skullcandys website: I own a pair of Grado Statement Series 1000 headphones. Those retail at $1000. Those are apparently the best headphones one can own. When switching betwen the SK Pro's and the Grado's I do NOT...I repeat..o NOT distinguish an $850 difference in sound quality. The SK Pro's are the best deejay headphones one can procure. Not to mention, if you want to look good performing and Sennheiser and AKG have a similar sounding adversary...please...Skullcandy makes a deejay look slick ... with that close to Grado sound...no question here. I've been deejaying since the early nineties...just buy these. It'[s a no brainer. Thanks....Lucas A. Ortega aka Dr. Rendezvous Sorry Grado fans!

 

[MD1032]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMarchingMule /img/forum/go_quote.gif I had a music major come into my room today and she didn't even recognize any of the nice audio gear I had lying around.

Drubbing kinda hit on this but I'll contribute. You need to make the difference between Music Performance, Education, and Technology majors. The Technology majors usually know all about hi-fi stuff while the Performance and Education people are clueless because it's not necessary for them to know, nor have they ever actively sought out high-end audio equipment.

 

[sphb]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MD1032 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Drubbing kinda hit on this but I'll contribute. You need to make the difference between Music Performance, Education, and Technology majors. The Technology majors usually know all about hi-fi stuff while the Performance and Education people are clueless because it's not necessary for them to know, nor have they ever actively sought out high-end audio equipment.

Yeah they have it live just under their palms... do they?