[gz76]

Sein... feld?

 

[nickdawg]

Be glad you can't afford the Bose. They're Skullcandy-range headphones for twice(or more) the price.

LMMFAO at the "sein" thing!!

Sein-feld. Priceless.

 

[| Scorpio |]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gz76 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sein... feld?

Sorry to burst you bubble, but I'm pretty sure Jerry isn't capable of producing an audiophile grade sound. That's just my opinion though

 

[Nagasaki_Kid]

wait, I thought the B&O Earset 3 is based on the A8. the A8 is definately over priced but worst than ipod earbuds?

 

[Uncle Erik]

Save up $70 and get the Grado SR-60. Then go compare them to a Skullcandy in the store. You'll understand.

 

[ClieOS]

I have the A8 and I got mine for only $99 (no overpricing here) . It is one of the best earbud in my collection. It might not able to rival PK1's SQ, but it is still most positively better than iBud.

 

[The Pieman]

What is wrong with Skullcandies?

Lets start with the name...........

cheers
Simon

 

[tds101]

They simply sound like a tin can!!! Actually, tin might be a SQ improvement.

 

[nylan8301]

I've heard the "hesh" and other models at a similar price range and, for forty to sixty dollars, these headphones were incredibly congested, not fully closed, uncomfortable, and felt very cheaply made. It sounded as if I were listening through a thick layer of cloth.

Completely undesirable in every way, shape, and form for me.

Nylan

 

[moogoob]

In the admittedly short time I've been here, I've never seen this much agreement in a Head-fi thread. Good job, folks.

 

[nickdawg]

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Pieman /img/forum/go_quote.gif What is wrong with Skullcandies? Lets start with the name........... cheers Simon

I've browsed past threads about Skullcandy and read similar posts. Criticism of SQ is OK, we all have different ears an no one headphone fits all tastes.

But I do take issue with other criticisms. Like criticizing the name or the marketing or the appearance of the product.

In a previous thread the Skullcandy website and even their product descriptions were being ripped apart. So what one model is called the "Smokin Buds". So what one pair of cans has three bullets on the headband. These aspects in no way affect the sound quality.

I'm willing to bet that many of the Skullcandy bashers there as well as on this one may not have tried any of their products before. This is supposed to be a website dedicated to discussing sound quality of headphones, not criticizing other people's style. Not discussing and criticizing manufacturers websites.

As I've stated, I have used the Skullcandy Ink'd. For a low-end headphone, it is not bad. It's not high-end, but for an under $50, it's decent. Any of the under $50 IEM contenders are an improvement over standard earbuds.

I would like to throw a suggestion out there for future product criticisms: If you've used the product, mention that in your post. Criticisms are more helpful when they come from someone who has used the product.

 

[Marl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nickdawg /img/forum/go_quote.gif But I do take issue with other criticisms. Like criticizing the name or the marketing or the appearance of the product. In a previous thread the Skullcandy website and even their product descriptions were being ripped apart. So what one model is called the "Smokin Buds". So what one pair of cans has three bullets on the headband. These aspects in no way affect the sound quality. I'm willing to bet that many of the Skullcandy bashers there as well as on this one may not have tried any of their products before. This is supposed to be a website dedicated to discussing sound quality of headphones, not criticizing other people's style. Not discussing and criticizing manufacturers websites. As I've stated, I have used the Skullcandy Ink'd. For a low-end headphone, it is not bad. It's not high-end, but for an under $50, it's decent. Any of the under $50 IEM contenders are an improvement over standard earbuds. I would like to throw a suggestion out there for future product criticisms: If you've used the product, mention that in your post. Criticisms are more helpful when they come from someone who has used the product.

Last time I checked, we discussed headphones. Appearance is very much a part of the headphone and is up for discussion. I realize Skull Candy's targeted demographic isn't us, and that's fine. But we can certainly make fun of their headphones when they are so outrageously ridiculous looking.

Don't get all holier than thou about headphones. The beauty isn't all on the inside. There is a certain point when you just can't buy something that ugly.

 

[magnetiq]

this was originally posted by someone here a short while ago:

YouTube - skullcandy Skull Crushers with built in subwoofers. BASS

sums it all up really.

 

[1nf1n1tygame]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cx420ns /img/forum/go_quote.gif i wanted a pair before, but after reading so many "run them over with a car" like comments here i'm scared... is it just cause yer all "headphone snobs" (no offense intended) im definitely not with my 15 dollar sony buds, and no way can i afford bose or the more top shelf sein...whatchacallits (heimer? i just saw it spelled 30 seconds ago...) i was looking at the lowriders... ...i just don't want a plain black hunk o plastic on my head when i can have ~flava~ thanks for any comments

haha bose!

 

[Enthusia]

Quote:

Originally Posted by magnetiq /img/forum/go_quote.gif this was originally posted by someone here a short while ago: YouTube - skullcandy Skull Crushers with built in subwoofers. BASS sums it all up really.

Hahaha, my head would explode from that.