[Parall3l]

I wonder how other people determine the quality of headphones. Personally, I judge a pair of headphones' quality in the following order:   
 
(sound signature > sound stage > build quality > details > looks > price/performance ratio)
 
Just curious how a seasoned audiophile determine the quality of a pair of headphones 

 

[Costia]

comfort
sound
build quality
 

 

[Uncle Erik]

Mostly sound quality. I must have a very average head, since I don't run into fit/comfort issues very often.

Build quality is usually fine with headphones, too. People make a stink over plastic, but it holds up fine. Some were upset about the HD-800, but I haven't heard of one breaking in the two years it has been on the market.

Value for the dollar is important, too. Some headphones are obscenely overpriced. I don't care how much aluminum or leather it has, an overpriced pair is bad. Especially when they cost more than speakers that can thoroughly thrash them in sound quality.

 

[khaos974]

Sound Quality > Build Quality > Looks

But I feel that what you mostly want to know is what in important in sound quality, in order, here's my ranking
- details, ie how the the headphones handles attacks and decays, the timbre of the instruments, unbloated bass, non confusing treble, how easy it is to distinguish instruments and musicians.
- sound signature, as long as it's not to extreme, I can like treble heavy, bass heavy (but non bloated), V shaped, but I have a preference for neutral. It is by far the easiest thing to correct with a parametric EQ, sound sig does also affect timbre though.
- soundstage, to me the best 'headstage' sounds artificial compared to speakers, even unmounting the bowls on my headphones and holding them in from of me seem more realistic. So I just make do, I'm kind of resigned, I mostly judge by how accurately I can place the musicians in my headstage.

 

[Gatepc]

Sound Quality > Build Quality > Value > Looks

I feel that the sound quality is far and above the most important part. I can handle a little discomfort if I must for a good pair of headphones, lucky for me I have not yet had to do this haha.

As for the actual sound I think one of the most important things for me is the sound stage and the mids. For me it absolutely has to get both right otherwise I likely won't like it very much. The mids have to be balanced(not balanced as in you need balanced amps etc, balanced as in natural sounding) or if unbalanced I prefer an upper mids exaggeration to a lower mids exaggeration. They have to be detailed but not analytical also a touch of warmth is always good. For the soundstage I want it to be wide and controlled sounding. The bass and highs matter somewhat less to me. The bass as long as its not over powering or slow and smudgy then I really don't care about its balance. The highs as long as they are not over powering, shrilly or grainy then I don't care much about their balance either.

As for the build, when I look at the build I think to myself "how long do I think these will last" that's my judging method haha. If they look solid and like they will last more then a few years then good. If they look like they are going to fall apart after a few uses not good.

Value is also very important, I think its only fair to compare headphones or amps etc in their price range. No sense comparing a $900 pair of headphones to some $30 ones. If they can't compete in their price range then their not good headphones even if they sound good compared to a lot of other things, at least IMO.

The looks I could care very little about, sure its nice to have something that looks striking but its never going to be a deal breaker for me.

 

[koolkat]

First of all, sound quality.
Second is build quality. (I consider headphones to be like a future investment)
Third is comfort.
Fourth is value of product.
Fifth is customer support.
Sixth is aesthetics. 
 

 

[DJGeorgeT]

1. Sound quality
2. Initial cost and maintenance costs
3. Build and components used
4. Reputation of the brand
5. Warranty and customer support

 

[TheGomdoRi]

price/performance ratio > comfort > sound signature > build > warranty > looks

 

[Apalachian77]

Obviously quality is equal to the street cred you get for wearing them.

 

[Parall3l]

Quote:

Obviously quality is equal to the street cred you get for wearing them.

 
If that were true then the AKG K1000 would be the worst headphones ever, I'm sure many people would disagree with that.

 

[bcasey25raptor]

Sound to performance ratio > Build quality > Warranty/Customer support > Comfort (Hardly an issue ever) > Looks
 
 
I generally try to get what is already known to be bang for the buck headphones. (Shure SRH840 ($200), Alessandro/Grado MS1($100), Pioneer SE M390($60), etc)

 

[Suntory_Times]

Quote:

I wonder how other people determine the quality of headphones. Personally, I judge a pair of headphones' quality in the following order:   
 
(sound signature > sound stage > build quality > details > looks > price/performance ratio)
 
Just curious how a seasoned audiophile determine the quality of a pair of headphones 

 
I hate the idea of callin myself an audiophile or videophile etc, though most will assure me that I am indeed one.  Basically what it comes down to is what will allow me to enjoy music, movies and lastly games the most.
 
 

 

[kn19h7]

my priority is generally like
comfort > build >= look >= sound
 
comfort for long hours usage is critical to me, currently all orthos fail here because of their weights ==

 

[fabio-fi]

1- sound quality
2- comfort
3- build quality
4- looks. 

 

[pdupiano]

I'd just rank by sound quality and there are actually subcategories for audio quality including dynamics, signature, imaging etc... The other stuff (build, comfort) are by in large stuff you have to put up with. I figure a good pair of headphones with outstanding audio qualities will be heard regardless of their physical constraints, unless of course the headphones break every time you put them on your head.