[grape ape]

Pleasure Experience Of Wine Goes Up With Price

 

[sacd lover]

Ultrasone PL 2500 .... a peaky, sibilant treble ..... boomy, ill defined bass .... combined with strange muffled midrange. Definitely, the worst sounding headphone I have ever owned.

Ultrasone PL 750 .... I defer to Headrooms description that is much kinder than mine.

These sealed headphones from the German-based Ultrasone company are perched right at the top of their closed-earcup line. Unfortunately, the ballyhooed high-tech titanium drivers in the 750 tend to produce a rather over-articulated, 'peaky' sound in the uppermost treble frequencies -- at least to our ears. The ProLine 750's bass response also sounds somewhat boomy and undistinguished for such an upscale headphone with a signature veiling of the mid-ranges that seems to place further emphasis on the edges of the sonic spectrum; Thus, the upper highs/lowest lows are certainly very present but not quite musically transparent or "neutral" enough to earn our undying sonic admiration given the steep pricepoint.

Headphile Darth Beyer .... doesnt NOTICEABLY improve the 770's flaws and adds a few new ones while costing much more. The Darth Beyers do look really nice though.

Headphile HP3000 Custom/ Headphile K3000 Custom .... headphones that make the legendary HP1000 and K1000 drivers sound dark, muddy and just plain bad.

 

[jellojoe]

I might catch some hell for this one, but I was not impressed by the Grado HP1000 (HP1?) at the recent NJ meet.

 

[texashorn91]

joe, I am with you. I have never been impressed by Grados at any level. They just are not for me.

 

[Wodgy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jp11801 /img/forum/go_quote.gif actually there is a strong correlation between high end sound and price. maybe you could attend a meet and listen to a rig that cost $1000, $3000 and $10,000 then talk about the corellation between price and sound quality.

I would suggest you try your own experiment. There is only a vague correlation between price and sound quality, and once you pass the $2000 point it's basically a crapshoot. After $8-10,000, you progress into a realm where the gear is more often junk than not.

Worst for me would be Zu Druids ($3400/pair currently).

 

[M0T0XGUY]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jp11801 /img/forum/go_quote.gif actually there is a strong correlation between high end sound and price. maybe you could attend a meet and listen to a rig that cost $1000, $3000 and $10,000 then talk about the corellation between price and sound quality. If you hyposis were true then $100 headphones could compete with $1000 headphones and that saly is not the case. While there are examples of lesser priced gear beating higher priced gear it typically happens after a price threshold has been acheived. An example might be (for me at least) the Edition 9 vs the vintage rs1. Your statement tends to be the exception rather than the rule.

It depends, really. In many cases, sound-signature plays a big role in defining that line between high-end and mid-fi. A-typical audiophile qualities (resolution, neutrality) are simply irrelevant if a listener finds fault in presentation or naturalism, for example. Along those lines, I find price a relevant factor only so long as a headphone maintains a pleasing / emotionally grabbing basic sound signature.

I'd take a pair of SR-80's over UE9's at any price, for instance, simply because the Ultrasone sound-sig just isn't my thing. On the other hand - and here price matters - I'd also take a pair of RS-1's over SR-80's in less than a heartbeat; as the more expensive model adds a few of those audiophile qualities while keeping the SS relatively untouched.

In that sense, it is possible for a pair of $100 headphones to beat out those of $1000 or more.

 

[QQQ]

Quote:

actually there is a strong correlation between high end sound and price. maybe you could attend a meet and listen to a rig that cost $1000, $3000 and $10,000 then talk about the corellation between price and sound quality. If you hyposis were true then $100 headphones could compete with $1000 headphones and that saly is not the case. While there are examples of lesser priced gear beating higher priced gear it typically happens after a price threshold has been acheived. An example might be (for me at least) the Edition 9 vs the vintage rs1. Your statement tends to be the exception rather than the rule.

I said:There's no DIRECT affiliation between high-end sound and price. I didn't like how the author defined a"almost high-end" saying it's "(figure $450 - $1500 for an amp)?" Standalone price can't tell anything about if certain piece of gear high-end or not.

I'm talking that high-end is a term, which SHOULD be applied when describing sound, not price-range. Even though it takes a lot of effort to make a really high-end sounding gear which leads to high retail prices, we should not automatically correlate sound quality and price. As a matter of principle if you want. Because the moment we declare big money=great sound, we will suffer from bad, bad pricy products which "positioned" as high-end. High-end sound is perception, not technical specs&price which guarantee any expensive piece of **** is automatically good. Any product CAN and first and foremost must earn the high-end tag from users. Also a high-end sounding product can be found at any price point, but if course, you will be hard-pressed to find it among cheapies. Am i any clearer now? Sorry for bad language.

Also, personally for jp11801
Quote:

maybe you could attend a meet and listen to a rig that cost $1000, $3000 and $10,000 then talk about the corellation between price and sound quality.

To me it sounds sarcastic and disrespectful.. Are you prohibiting me from talking about subject without even know what kind of gear i experienced to listen? I hope you are not.

 

[Cankin]

^ fill out your profile please

 

[AdamP88]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wodgy /img/forum/go_quote.gif I would suggest you try your own experiment. There is only a vague correlation between price and sound quality, and once you pass the $2000 point it's basically a crapshoot. After $8-10,000, you progress into a realm where the gear is more often junk than not.

Exactly. High price in no way guarantees a quality product.

 

[Lornecherry]

I have heard $300K systems crammed into show hotel rooms that were acoustic mirrors...hence, the show systems sounded worse then a $5K system that's setup properly. Bad power, poor room acoustics can turn a Jadis into junk quickly. Although there's no excuse for it, many audio dealers also pay no homage to the room and what's in it.

With headphones, we at least eliminate the room equation ...so it's all about synergy between components in the downstream chain. And some phone are extremely sensitive to what's in front of them. My GS1000 sound like I dropped a brick on my cat's tail - screechy, whining and etched, unless the Grados are tamed with the correct amp. No where have I seen such a difficult can to match, and that's why we see so many for resale here. But paired with the correct amp and DAC, the GS100's go from zero to hero. Grados are perhaps the best of example of an expensive mid to high-end phone that's easy to make sound bad and so so elusive to get them to behave.

In short, the more revealing your gear, the more sensitive it is to synergistic component matching. (and there is certainly a correlation between revealing, high-end, and money spent) That's why we have those that can't stand headphone X, even though it cost two right arms and your left ear. I'm sure I can make R10s sound like crap with wrong stuff in front of them.

Now toss in human perception factor, and what sounds etched to me, may be revealing and open to you.

Wait, did I even answer the question?

 

[sacd lover]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lornecherry /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have heard $300K systems crammed into show hotel rooms that were acoustic mirrors...hence, the show systems sounded worse then a $5K system that's setup properly. Bad power, poor room acoustics can turn a Jadis into junk quickly. Although there's no excuse for it, many audio dealers also pay no homage to the room and what's in it. With headphones, we at least eliminate the room equation ...so it's all about synergy between components in the downstream chain. And some phone are extremely sensitive to what's in front of them. My GS1000 sound like I dropped a brick on my cat's tail - screechy, whining and etched, unless the Grados are tamed with the correct amp. No where have I seen such a difficult can to match, and that's why we see so many for resale here. But paired with the correct amp and DAC, the GS100's go from zero to hero. Grados are perhaps the best of example of an expensive mid to high-end phone that's easy to make sound bad and so so elusive to get them to behave. In short, the more revealing your gear, the more sensitive it is to synergistic component matching. (and there is certainly a correlation between revealing, high-end, and money spent) That's why we have those that can't stand headphone X, even though it cost two right arms and your left ear. I'm sure I can make R10s sound like crap with wrong stuff in front of them. Now toss in human perception factor, and what sounds etched to me, may be revealing and open to you. Wait, did I even answer the question?

What does make them "behave" .... because I have yet to hear the GS1000 sound really good. Fair is the farthest I have come and fair in relation to their cost is unacceptable.

 

[MD1032]

Hands down, the Sony Qualia 010 for me. That headphone just sounded like complete crap to me when I heard it a couple years ago. Zero bass.

 

[digger945]

I listened to the mighty Sony R-10 last Saturday, and I must admit, it wasn't at all what I expected.

 

[M0T0XGUY]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MD1032 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hands down, the Sony Qualia 010 for me. That headphone just sounded like complete crap to me when I heard it a couple years ago. Zero bass.

It's very possible that you just didn't get a proper seal. According to people more familiar with the subject, fit is crucial to the Qualia's sound signature; even a small leak completely zaps the bass response.

 

[flashnolan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sacd lover /img/forum/go_quote.gif Ultrasone PL 2500 .... a peaky, sibilant treble ..... boomy, ill defined bass .... combined with strange muffled midrange. Definitely, the worst sounding headphone I have ever owned. Ultrasone PL 750 .... I defer to Headrooms description that is much kinder than mine. These sealed headphones from the German-based Ultrasone company are perched right at the top of their closed-earcup line. Unfortunately, the ballyhooed high-tech titanium drivers in the 750 tend to produce a rather over-articulated, 'peaky' sound in the uppermost treble frequencies -- at least to our ears. The ProLine 750's bass response also sounds somewhat boomy and undistinguished for such an upscale headphone with a signature veiling of the mid-ranges that seems to place further emphasis on the edges of the sonic spectrum; Thus, the upper highs/lowest lows are certainly very present but not quite musically transparent or "neutral" enough to earn our undying sonic admiration given the steep pricepoint. Headphile Darth Beyer .... doesnt NOTICEABLY improve the 770's flaws and adds a few new ones while costing much more. The Darth Beyers do look really nice though. Headphile HP3000 Custom/ Headphile K3000 Custom .... headphones that make the legendary HP1000 and K1000 drivers sound dark, muddy and just plain bad.

I have to disagree. I tried a lot of cans at a recent NJ meet. IMO the 2500 stacked up against any of them. My opinion of the Grados did change though. I might buy a pair soon.