[panik343]

Personally I use the SR-60's mostly because computerpro3 bought me my first pair

. But I like rock music and from the SR-60's I was able to hear other things I didnt hear before, also the soundstage was quite the step up from the sweet i-buds.

 

[Vicomte]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BushGuy /img/forum/go_quote.gif " Why? Why not just go for whatever you enjoy the most?" WHY?.....you ask? That reminds me of another poster who responded simularly that he had heard tons of live music - basically being in a highschool band and he was 17 y.o.. That simply does not cut it at all when you are directing such juvenile responses at people who have spent decades as musicians, with degrees in music, who have been training their ears all that time. The O.P. question was about acquiring a good ear..........only from that point can you begin to move forward.

What is 'forward', exactly? Why is 'live' the standard by which all reproduction shall be judged? I've been to live performances that sounded awful. There are just as many variables in a live performance as there are in reproduction at home: room acoustics, quality of intruments, quality of electronics... I see no reason why a live performance is better and more valid than any other.

Perhaps you could clarify as to what that post means. It's a bit incoherent.

 

[Davesrose]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vicomte /img/forum/go_quote.gif What is 'forward', exactly? Why is 'live' the standard by which all reproduction shall be judged? I've been to live performances that sounded awful. There are just as many variables in a live performance as there are in reproduction at home: room acoustics, quality of intruments, quality of electronics... I see no reason why a live performance is better and more valid than any other. Perhaps you could clarify as to what that post means. It's a bit incoherent.

I have to agree with the majority here. Quality in music and music reproduction is entirely subjective. Music is like any other artform: there's going to be critics who think that their opinions are some gold standard, and there are going to be critics who just follow the latest flavor of the month. But one great thing about art is its diversity. What one person is totally enthralled with is what another person will be totally against. Live performances have just as much diversity as headphone reproduction, so you should just focus on whatever music genres and artists that you like.

To some extent, I try to base my interpretation of music reproduction on intruments that I play and performances I go to....but I realize they will never be the same. And they shouldn't be: they are different mediums, but both can convey artistic representation. The best way to be an enthusiast is to just listen and ask yourself what is making your favorite music sound good to you.

 

[Towert7]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lowfront /img/forum/go_quote.gif I hear many different words on this forum that I still don't understand. The way you guys compare headphones and describe sound is just beyond me. I thought maybe this would help me out. Could you explain to me what difference I should hear between the px 100, koss ksc75, and the grado sr-60, superfi 3, pxc 250 using headfi terms? I own all of these and would love to have someone put words to the difference I hear. To help me better understand the vocab.

The more you listen critically, the more you will learn about your own headphones.

For the frequency spectrum, there are three main categories, the Bass (lows), mids, and highs. When I was first starting out, I didn't really know what each sounded like, but one of the most helpful things was just listening to music and watching a graphic spectrum analyzer. Something like TrueRTA was great in helping me learn these things.

The other main category is what is lumped together as soundstage, where you deal with image focus, depth, width, etc. It's hard to learn about these things because if your equipment can't do a good soundstage, you don't know what to listen for. Don't worry about this too much though, as you scale up your equipment it will become more and more noticeable.

Also, as you use more and more equipment and make comparisons, you start to see the differences.

Bottom line is, it's hard to *use* these audiophile terms until you know what it is you are describing. Likewise, if your equipment exhibits any of these terms, that does not guarantee that you can perceive them. It takes time and experience to build up your ears to get accustomed to these things.

 

[sleepkyng]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Towert7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif The more you listen critically, the more you will learn about your own headphones. For the frequency spectrum, there are three main categories, the Bass (lows), mids, and highs. When I was first starting out, I didn't really know what each sounded like, but one of the most helpful things was just listening to music and watching a graphic spectrum analyzer. Something like TrueRTA was great in helping me learn these things. Bottom line is, it's hard to *use* these audiophile terms until you know what it is you are describing. Likewise, if your equipment exhibits any of these terms, that does not guarantee that you can perceive them. It takes time and experience to build up your ears to get accustomed to these things.

bass mids and highs seem like non-audiophile terms to me. I find graphic analyzers are not the way to go, personally feeling that my ears are best suited for deciding which headphones to buy.

 

[ken36]

Yeah, well-it beats me too.

 

[laxx]

I spend a week or so listening to one headphone exclusively. After you've adjusted to that sound, listen to a different headphone. There will be things that sound different (Soundstage might be smaller, less details, frequency emphasis, treble and bass extension, timbre, etc). I write down the differences and move on. All of this ultimately doesn't matter to me, as long as I enjoy listening to that headphone, it'll remain in my house. I just like learning and developing my ear to listen for the advantages and disadvantages of each headphone.

*I'm not as critical as most of these guys here are, especially due to the music I listen to.

 

[bellsprout]

listening to more than one type of headphone helps, since after extended listening session, u'd be able to tell the difference even without the audiophile vocab.

also, choose types of music that's suited to attentive listening - eg, classical, prog, etc, and...listen attentively.

things u can notice quickly are:
frequency response - if it sounds dark and heavy, it has enhanced bass. if there's a lot of highs, it sounds bright. vocals are mids - if vocals sounds like it's cast to the back it has recessed mids.

detail - self explanatory. faster drivers give notes a sharper edge, and indivudual notes sounds more articulate. it is said to "resolve" more details in the recording. overly detailed is "analytical", and some consider this undesirable, because it resovles bad recordings.

soundstage: how "big" the sound is. small sound stage sound like the music is right between ur ears. bigger soundstage sounds around your head. binaural recordings can give u a "full" room sized soundstage.

 

[Mrvile]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bellsprout /img/forum/go_quote.gif listening to more than one type of headphone helps, since after extended listening session, u'd be able to tell the difference even without the audiophile vocab.

This is very important. As soon as you listen to at least two different headphones, you start experiencing exactly the kinds of differences we talk about here at Head-Fi. For a lot of people, when they get their first headphone, they like what they hear (compared to whatever iBuds they were using before) and that's that. They generally have no clue what to expect in other phones, and it makes it very difficult to both analyze and describe what they're hearing. But as soon as they start listening to more headphones, differences become clear, audiophile vocab becomes apparent and tangible, and they can finally start truly analyzing what they hear.

Experience is key!

 

[Ace o' Spades]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lowfront /img/forum/go_quote.gif I hear many different words on this forum that I still don't understand. The way you guys compare headphones and describe sound is just beyond me. I thought maybe this would help me out. Could you explain to me what difference I should hear between the px 100, koss ksc75, and the grado sr-60, superfi 3, pxc 250 using headfi terms? I own all of these and would love to have someone put words to the difference I hear. To help me better understand the vocab.

My biggest advice is to be true to your own ears. Really, no one can "teach" you how to hear, you pretty much have to gain the experience on your own. It doesn't take much to get the point across, so try not to get too confused with all of the "audiphile vocabulary" that we tend to get caught up in. But anyways, the stereophile vocab list is an excellent resource for learning the terms. Listen to the different qualities of your SR-60, for instance, and relate what you hear to what is on screen.

I definetly agree with Mrvile too, demo different cans and the strong and weak points of the ones you own will become apparent pretty quickly

 

[Dept_of_Alchemy]

PX100 is warmer than KSC-75.

SR60 is shrill.

Grado is evil.

Senn is good.

 

[MaloS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dept_of_Alchemy /img/forum/go_quote.gif PX100 is warmer than KSC-75. SR60 is shrill. Grado is evil. Senn is good.

I've a general preference to chicken, is that permissible?

 

[keiith]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaloS /img/forum/go_quote.gif I've a general preference to chicken, is that permissible?

Chicken is evil

 

[fordgtlover]

I am going to take a different position to most people who have responded. I believe, and have experienced, that just hearing music teaches you no more than watching a guitarist teaches you about playing it.

When I was first learning to critically listen to music and evaluate equipment, the advice I was given was to pick a piece of music that your reasonably familiar with. Then listen to one of the instuments, say the bass guitar or the snare drum, and try to follow all the way through the song.

Tip: Make it a relatively easy song to start with. Not a lot of complicated changes and multi-tracked instruments fading in and out. Pink Floyd is quite good to start with, and the snare drum is probably the single easiest instrument to follow in most songs (not just Pink Floyd)

What's it playing? How do the notes sound? What is the sound of the bass like in various parts of the song? Punchy, boomy? Can your hear the sound of the bass strings rattle against the bass body as the bassist plays the strings? Work through the song a few times listening to the same instrument. Trying each time to hear something new about the instrument in that song. Next try with another instrument, etc.

You can only do this for 10 or so minutes when you start because your ears and brain will tire quite quickly. It actually takes quite a bit of concentration. Leave it for a while or the day and come back and try again later.

You should try this exercise a few times with the same song and the same equipment - maybe 3 times. Now listen to the song again as a whole. You will find yourself focussing on different instruments at different parts of the song. But you will now better hear the whole and the parts.

Then swap one of the components - perhaps a different set of headphones - and try the same exercise. What is it about any one of the instrument that has changed? More punch in the bass? More crunch in the lead guitar? Are the cymbals brighter? Do they have more sustain? Over time you will find it easier to pick differences in equipment.

Many people spend their lives pursuing their critical listening skills. I'm not sure there is a destination, just enjoy the journey

WARNING: Critical listening can reduce your enjoyment of music. Please remember to frequently listen for enjoyment to remind yourself what its all about.


And, as already mentioned in this thread, check out my audio glossary linked in my signature.

 

[sleepkyng]

how is that disagreeing? that seems to agree with most posts.