Which Headphone for Listening at Home?

[wolfen68]

I currently use my Sr60's and E3's out of my Archos portable for most of my listening. The E3's seem to satisfy whenever I'm "on the road". I use the Sr60's mostly around the house.

What headphone would be a BIG step up from SR60's for around the house use? I listen to mostly rock/punk/folk type stuff (mp3's), and I really enjoy being able to hear detail in the music.

I would like to spend less than $200. I don't have an amp, but maybe someday. I don't care if they're open or closed.

I've been intrigued by everybody's discussion of the ATH-A900 and the SR-225. Are these the best I can do in this range?

Also, I would like my "at home" cans to sound better than my E3's....otherwise I would just end up using those all of the time.

Any suggestions/advice would be appreciated. If I can find a sweetie for home use, I would probably sell my SR60's to finance my upgrade.

 

[blessingx]

I went from the SR80 to SR225 and thought it was a pretty big step up (while still sharing the same signature, just more refined), but would avoid recommending spending that money without an amp or other strong device (older receiver, etc.). Also don't know how they compare to the E3, but I sold my Grados when I got the ER4P/S.

Your problem with any significant upgrade is kinda limited by your source.

 

[sbulack]

I went from the SR60's (unamped) to the SR225's (unamped) and it was a SUBSTANTIAL step up. If detail is what your ears are hungry for, the SR60 -> SR225 move (without an amp) will give it to you. What is really nice is HOW the SR225's give you the detail. They let you enter INTO the detail. The sonic events sound as if they are happening more AROUND you, with different amounts of localization / delocalization based on the frequency (wavelength) of the sonic event. In other words, you don't have to analytically strain to listen for the detail, the detail presents itself to your ears in intuitive ways that you naturally hear and appreciate. So you BOTH hear LOTS more detail AND hear the music more as an organic whole. Again, this is all without an amp. Spectral response and tonal quality goes up substantially across the acoustic spectrum as well with the 225's. Listening with the 225's is just, overall, a FAR more involving experience, even with modest, portable sources. If an amp is in your future, the SR225's improve greatly with an amp, making the investment in the amp worth every penny you pay for it. If it sounds like I am enthusiastic about the SR225's, it's only because I know how much pleasure I got from them each day without an amp (and now, with an amp). I found that the SR225's sounded good new from the box, sounded really good after two days of continuous use, and sounded their best after two weeks of continuous use. These are my observations (To My Ears, On My Equipment, Your Mileage May Vary ...).

 

[wolfen68]

You make a strong case for the SR225's. Obviously your opinions vary on amp requirements. I don't mind a headphone that shines with an amp (as i'll probably get one eventually)....as long as it is also good without one.

I am not set on SR-225's...but to be honest, they have been high on my list for awhile, though I've never heard them

. From my understanding, the build quality on the 225 is the same as the 60's. That's OK for a $70 headphone....but at $195 I would prefer a better headband and cups.

I would like to get a headphone that cures upgraditis *for awhile* if possible.

Is this my smart choice? If so, where's a good deal on these? The cheapest I've seen is $195 -10% at TTVJ.

 

[SpoonMan]

Personally my A900's have cured my upgratis...sorta....I'm now trying to find a portable phone which satisfies me as much as my A900's do...in short, I'm happy with 'em, but they made me unhappy with my portable phones

 

[pspivak]

I use a pair of Stax Lambda Pros connected to the output of Dish Network satellite receiver. I listen to blues and acoustic. I have a long standing love affair with Stax headphones and have had one since 1976 when I got my SRX MkIII's. I have really learned to listen to the music and enjoy it rather than chase the elusive equipment bug. I just don't have the money to "compete" anymore. Nor do I have a family that appreciates it (read that as respect or keep their hands off it). I haven't turned on my main system in weeks; between the wife, kids, a PhD program and TV there isn't time.

Main system
B&O Penta's run full range
M&K Sub-Woofer w/low pass filter
Adcom Preamp and Tuner
B&O Turntable
Phillips DVD Player for CD's
Sony Walkman WM-D6c Cassette
Monster cable

Gym System
Sony D-EJ711 CD Player or Walkman WM-D6c
Stax SR-003
Stax SRD-P

Train System
Sony D-EJ711 CD player
Mintek 6inch DVD player
Etymotic ER-6
Red Sound Micro Amp

I like them all.

 

[jesse_w]

Both the SR-225 and the ATH-A900 are MILES above and beyond the SR-60 even without an amp. The SR-225 sound signature is much the same as the SR-60 which may be a plus for you. Its more detailed, and more refined... Much easier to listen to. However I believe it terminates in a 1/4 inch plug which may be a problem if you're using it in a portable jack or something. What are you plugging them into? Of course if you decided to go that way I'm sure someone here could help you get around that.

The difference between the SR-225 and the ATH-A900 is largely one of soundstage. People often say the audio-technicas are 'between' the Senns and Grados... I don't think this is true. I think the ATs are much like the Grados except they don't have the strange 'inverted' soundstage as someone here once described it. This is exactly the character of Grados... The ATs on the other hand have a large, natural soundstage compared to anything in the price range (unamped). The other difference is of course in build. The A900 is MUCH more comfortable and far sturdier.

Both will improve with your system for a very long time. I recommend you search the forums for impressions on the ATH-A900, they are usually very good. Duncan's review in particular was about spot-on, I was not surprised by my A900s. I auditioned the SR-225s myself so I haven't looked into what people have said about them as much here, but I imagine you can find the same accuracy if you can't audition them yourself.

I was considering both of these and decided on the A900 in the end. Now that I've heard both extensively I'm happy with my decision, for what its worth.

-jesse

 

[Edwood]

.....mmmmbrap......

.....my master prefer k1000....

.....master gone now....

.....k1000 my use now.....

-Ed Bot

 

[Steve999]

If you could give us an idea what it is would like your new headphones to do better than the SR60s it would be make it easier for people to offer suggestions. Comfort? Isolation? More bass or less high frequency emphasis?

My feeling is that there is no BIG step up from the SR60s for under $200, but I'm probably in the minority on that one. There are some fairly sizeable side-steps though.... AKG240S, Sony MDR-CD780 (nice detail cans, BTW), ATH-A900s, Senn HD580s... Grado fans seem to feel the SR225s hit a very high level of performance, if you really dig your SR60s, if not, maybe consider a side-step.... I like my SR60s a lot and am not tempted to pursue the Grado sound any further. FWIW, my favorite for extended home listening is the CD780, that's what cured my upgraditis, but I admit I'm not a perfectionist when it comes to sound... but there are no lemons out of the above candidates for sure, just different "flavors." Heck, for $200, you could get CD780s plus HD580s or 240Ss.

Quote:

Originally posted by wolfen68 I currently use my Sr60's and E3's out of my Archos portable for most of my listening. The E3's seem to satisfy whenever I'm "on the road". I use the Sr60's mostly around the house. What headphone would be a BIG step up from SR60's for around the house use? I listen to mostly rock/punk/folk type stuff (mp3's), and I really enjoy being able to hear detail in the music.

 

[wallijonn]

Quote:

Originally posted by wolfen68 I listen to mostly rock/punk/folk type stuff (mp3's), and I really enjoy being able to hear detail in the music.

You just may find that a very detailed headphone may make you re-record all your MP3s in 320br. MP4 is around the corner. So you will have to re-record everything again AND get a player that will do MP4.

 

[wolfen68]

Quote:

Originally posted by wallijonn You just may find that a very detailed headphone may make you re-record all your MP3s in 320br. MP4 is around the corner. So you will have to re-record everything again AND get a player that will do MP4.

That's a depressing thought....thanks for nothing

 

[Ihmemies]

Or just go straight for loseless format, like FLAC. Then you can decode them back to wav and mp3 for your portable, for example. Only downside is that one CD takes ~400MB space. Luckily I have 130GB free for my CD's.

 

[reeseboisse]

Wolfen, what do you have your MP3s encoded to right now? Depending on that, a better, more detailed headphone may just make you, as wajillion said, want to re-encode all of your mp3s. And that's if you've ripped them all off of CDs. If you downloaded them off of the internet at a lower bitrate like 192, then re-encoding them won't do anything at all. Personally, I use Ogg Vorbis for all of my rips, and a large portion of my downloads. Sounds great, and with a smaller file size than the lossless codecs. Plus it's gaining support amongst portable players.

 

[wallijonn]

Ihmemies,

You might be scaring some people when you say that 1 CD will take about 400MB of disk space.

On a typical 10 song CD that will work out to about 40MB per song, or roughly 2.5 times more than MP3 320br for about 7 minutes of music each.

There are very few CDs out that one wants to convert the whole album. And how you guys can store 5000 songs on an iPod is beyond me.

reeseboisse,

when I say re-record, I mean re-record from the originals. there's no way that I trust internet downloads. so you just may want to ressurect the MP3 thread where people say that they cannot hear any difference beyond 192br. I say that the better the headphone the more readily one can find sonic defects with lower b.r. recordings.

 

[wolfen68]

Most of my recent stuff is at least 160 with a lot being 192kbps+ VBR using the Fraunhoffer encoder. So far, I have been happy with these as a compromise between quality and space. Why carry a hard drive around if I can't fit everthing on it?

So far, I consider my E3's my most revealing headphone....and so far most of my files are OK with those. Is there an assumption that the SR-225's will lay my files bare? I never realized they could be THAT revealing. That sounds more like CDK3000's or Ety's to have that problem.

I do have a lot of old mp3's at 128 kbps with no intention of ever re-ripping. There are inferior on headphones but OK through speakers.

Also, I know people do this.....but is it in any way unethical to order two sets of headphones with the intention of returning one? I've ordered 225's from TTVJ, but I would also like to try the ATH-A900's (from audiocubes) and keep the pair I favor. I don't want to take advantage of the system.....