[utdeep]

Sorry for the title of this thread, but I felt it was necessary.
Have you ever wondered if perhaps your ears were the real interference between your headphone and true musical bliss? Is it possible that a concert that you went to when you were young blew out some delicate apparatus in your ear required for careful listening? Or maybe you were born with it... could there be frequency gap in your brain and not in the headphone you're listening to? And you just don't know it, and worse yet, everybody else doesn't have that problem?
As I look at reviews of phones in the website, I often wonder if I'm really missing out. I wonder why I can't "see" the glaring flaws in the headphones, or the elements that they are famous for. I wonder if the "astounding" sound of a Creek/HD600 combo would appear to me, when I have trouble recognizing the differences with the Ety 4P and 4S. But then there are times when the differences seem clearer to me than they do to other people... when some headphones are more magical to my ears. I know that someday I will get to try out an orpheus or an R10, but I wonder if I have the ability to truly enjoy them. I almost wish I had an optical input to my brain to know what I should be looking for and what I might be missing!
I want to know what the headphone elites think... does this obsession ever stop? Do you ever question if you're somehow missing out on the best experience despite having the latest and greatest headphone? Do you ever question your hearing abilities when you fail to hear the lustre of a headphone that others rave about?
Sorry about the lame title and the rambling message, but I'm very curious.

 

[Xevion]

utdeep - I am far from being one of the "elite", but here are my experiences with headphones, and to a lesser extent audio in general.

We all have personal tastes, and that is what it comes down to. I would be willing to assume that most of us have decent hearing, and the more I or you hear, the more we have a basis to compare with. Also, playing around with an EQ will help you understand the basic sonic differences.

I have listened to exactly 2 hi-fi headphones for more then five minutes. One is mine, and I have had it for 8 months or so. Befoer that I liked my HD500s. One of them in a restaraunt a couple days ago (Grado RS-2). A somewhat noisy restarunt no less, and I was listening out of a Panasonic 470. I could easily tell that the sound was different from my HD600s. They seemed to image more precicely, but had a more narrow soundstage, I detected a frequency hump somewhere in the upper mids, I don't know if I would call it a coloration or what, but one is certainly there compare with my HD600s, I could tell what people mean by the Grado "impact", the bass did have a more visceral feel, and was much more present then on the Senns hooked up to portable equipment. I expected them to sound brighter then they did, in fact I would have a hard time describing their sound as bright (Well, a little bright, but definantly not the sparkle I was expecting). This was without making a direct comparison to the HD600s, and it was in a noisy environment, listening to music at normal volumes, which had the CD player running around 3-5 out of 10. I could carry on a conversation when most of the music was playing if I really wanted to.

At the same time, I don't think I hear half of the differences of some of the "elite" people here, but I don't care. I just want something that sounds good to me. I can say with confidence that my hearing is fine, given that I could describe the Grados sound in a canned fashion from a 15 minute listen in a restarunt on a portable player.

I doubt I would be able to hear what I consider a significant difference between the clou red cable and the regular sennheiser one, and I don't care either.

Compared to the average joe, I am an audiophile, but I feel myself far from it. Then again, I haven't even had these headphones a year, that isn't much time at all. I am willing to bet that over time, as long as I continue to refine and compare my tastes, I will become a better listener, and more importantly, still like the music

.

I think the best thing you can do to see how your critical listening skills are are this -

Get a pad of paper and a couple pens. Get someone else who is at least as good of a listener as you. For instance, if you live by anyone on this forum

.

Now, swap headphones for a while. Use your own source/amp/music, just listen using their headphones. Listen, relax, and write down what you think of them, in comparison with the headphones you brought and how you like them/dislike them. Then do the same right after using your headphones, and have the other person do the same. Don't discuss anything untill after the papers are written. Now, after a couple hours of listening and writing, and relaxing, and thinking, read your paper aloud to your listening buddy, and have him/her do the same with you. You will then see someone else's perception of what you were just percieving, and how they were similar, and different. This is probably the best way to learn about your listening ability, if the person you are comparing with is a good listener.

Now, when you read people's impressions of a headphone, if you have heard it, try and compare it with what you remember. If you havent heard it, use it to paint an image of how you think the headphone might sound to you. To do this optimally, you really need to know the reviewers tastes, but fortunately most of us have rather similar tastes so our impressions from person to person might change, but not too drastically in most cases (Although my ears tell me the MX500s sound like garbage, but I don't think they were made for earbuds).

Now, when you try a new headphone, remember what your idea of its sound would be. The more accurate your impression is compared to how you thought it would sound, the better listener you are. The RS2s sounded a fair bit like I expected, but didn't fit anything like what I expected

.

 

[tangent]

There are two ways you can go: you can say it's all subjective, or you can strive towards some measurable absolute.

The advantage of the subjectivist approach is that you only have to buy what sounds good. Once you hit the limits of your discrimination abilities or the limits your willingness to discriminate, you can stop upgrading. A subjectivist can happily listen to a "mid fi" or "lo fi" system.

If you have good ears and a low tolerance for imperfection, you can subjectively pick a high end system by what sounds good. Or, you can strive for an absolute. To do this, you have to have some known reference, and some way of accurately measuring that reference and comparing that measurement to others. For example, you might spend a lot of time listening to live unamplified music to train your ears to recognize what each instrument should sound like. Then you listen to high quality recordings of unamplified music an try to find the differences between that and live music. Since only the highest-quality equipment playing back an excellent recording can closely approach the absolute, this path requires a lot of money and careful selection of recordings. If you compromise on equipment or recordings, you ipso facto miss the absolute.

Many people become unhappy following the absolutist path, because they usually run out of money before they can buy equipment good enough to match their reference sound. They end up settling for equipment that doesn't sound as good as their reference. Since their ultimate goal is to match that reference, they effectively fail in their quest.

I am a subjectivist. I use measurements and reviews to guide me, but I find that most of the time I don't fully understand the measurements and the reviewers apparently don't live in the same world I do. I don't doubt for a minute that there are $25,000 CD players that sound absolutely wonderful, and represent the literal state of the art of CD playback. Yet, the chances are near zilch that I will ever own such a thing, since buying a $25,000 CD player implies that I'll spend another $100,000 or so on other components, cables, power, etc. This is quite simply out of my league, for now and probably forever. I think most people are the same way -- my job pays me an above-average salary and I'm single with no debt, so I have lots of discretionary income. Yet most of the magazine reviews I read cover products my pocketbook simply can't bear -- the reviews seem like they're aimed at the truly rich and the starry-eyed dreamer class.

It boggles my mind that there cables costing more than the street value of my car, especially considering that any reasonable system will require several pairs of such cables. I am simply floored when I read of such things, and I try to imagine who would buy them. I'm even more floored when I get to the "Conclusion" of each review where they insist that the product is worth having. Where is the value? Is there no concept in the high end audio world of getting a fair return on your investment? Even if a $4000 interconnect does make your system sound better, why is it worth mentioning at all, if it doesn't make it 40x better than a $100 interconnect? Or even 5x better?

I just picked up a copy of The Absolute Sound from the newsstand -- I tossed the magazine into the round file out of disgust, but as I recall, all of the major components reviewed in that issue cost thousands of dollars, and many cost in the tens of thousands of dollars. Even the accessories often cost thousands of dollars. Yet the magazine has the clout to command a space at my local newsstand, out here in the middle of nowhere. I'll bet there are less than 1000 people within 100 miles of where I live with the kind of discretionary income to buy the kind of systems mentioned in magazines like this, and of course only a small fraction will actually have the desire to do so. Yet, the magazine makes a regular appearance on my local newsstand. Why???

End of rant.

(P.S. All of the questions posed here are rhetorical.)

 

[PC Corp]

I think it's not about your equipments or your ears, it's about your heart.
Enjoyment and happiness are something you cannot measure, or compare with other people. When I was young my family was damn poor, back in China. If you give me a piece of cake, I would be happy for a whole day. Now... it's a shame to say that I don't enjoy the "average" food that much now, but it's true. Sometimes I wish I were so poor so I can enjoy the (junk) food again.

Come on utdeep, you have to know what do you want? If you want to have the higtest quality of sound, then I'd suggest you to spend $40 to go to a live concert. Just a matter of fact, no hifi systems, including the BIG O, can beat a live performance. If you love music, then stop complaining about your cans. Go out and buy some good CDs. Portishead will fit your mood now, haha. After all, music is not about cans. It's about the melody, the meaning of the song, etc. My brother can play the guitar very very well. But he never complains about MY lo-fi system. He spent all his money on CDs while I wasted all my money on equipments. And you guess who's the one who didn't enjoy the sound??

I had some HongKong friends in Vancouver a few years ago. They were rich and young. Driving Bimmers and sports cars and living in a million hour, but they were never happy. You guess what they wanted?? More family time.

Another expamle I would like to say is about girlfriends. Some girls are very pretty, but beauty is skin deep. I had a few gf in the past but the one I miss most is not the prettiest.

So it's you choice, utdeep. You may hear more details with hi-end gears, but the melody will be always the same. If you enjoy the "music" rather than the "sound effect", ****ty cans are still enjoyable. Obviously, every day you can see there's a head-fier to upgrade his/her gears here, but I wonder how long will they enjoy their new pet. I believe when Bethoveen wrote his 9th symphony he was close to deaf. But I don't think he has said he cannot enjoy the music because he cannot hear clearly.

That's it.
I have to go back to hear more Eva Cassidy with my $5 ear-buds. It's a joke for 99% of the folks here but they are the only headphones I have now. And Miss Cassidy SINGS wonderfully according to my ears.

 

[M Rael]

Wow, some great stuff on this thread! Lots of it points to the larger human issues of satisfaction, material desires, how we experience life, ..and the pleasures of junk food.
But I would downplay the money equation.
Rich so's-and-so's dont buy $10k interconnects because they sound a thousand times better, its a perception thing; they have the pleasure of knowing they *have* $10k interconnects. Whether such people can tell the difference between them and say, cheapie $1k interconnects isnt the point. And if you tried to make it the point, they would no doubt make you feel stupid. Who are you to question their intentions? Mind your own damn business, etc. Thats the way its always been. We also wouldnt have the pyramids if some ancient dude didnt think he needed the baddest burial place on the planet, and then 'bought it for himself'. A pine box would have vanished long ago.

I dont think live music, live rock music that is, is any way to form ideas about what good recorded music should sound like. Theres probably quite a few jokes in there about why that is true. Personally I take recorded rock music all on its own, and without reference to other things. Recorded music is its own pleasure and it doesnt need to lean on live music for support or validation. Its not a contest.

We all know that a piece of **** transistor AM radio would be a blessing beyond measure in certain abstract situations we might imagine ourselves being in. But we arent Afghani peasants or rural folk, and we dont live in a country subject to bloody military coups. We are in fact amazingly fortunate right now. If you can afford an expensive toy, I say- go ahead! Our life might be short or it might be long. We dont know. We dont know!! And if a headphone that makes us happy can in a small way ease the nervousness of uncertainty, then god bless them.

 

[andrzejpw]

wow, good thread.

Well, I'm a budding audiophile. First it was mx500s, now its hd580s. I still can't really tell how phones SOUND. I mean, I can say, this one's better most of the time, but not to the extent you guys can. I guess it all comes with time. . .

 

[TerriblySorry]

It's like this: I paid a heckuva lot of money for my system, so why doesn't it sound better than the real thing?!?

 

[PC Corp]

Quote:

It's like this: I paid a heckuva lot of money for my system, so why doesn't it sound better than the real thing?!?

Can anything not real be more real then the real thing???

 

[cajunchrist]

You guys have brought up some excellent points that I often discuss with others when talking about quality equipment. I am a firm believer that you get what you pay for, and indeed, for much equipment you have to put a good investment in to get excellent sound. However:

Quote:

I'm even more floored when I get to the "Conclusion" of each review where they insist that the product is worth having. Where is the value?

I could not agree more. I don't remember where I read it, but one website indicated that beyond 2000 dollars, sonic improvements in loudspeakers are minimal. I am sure a proprietary, state of the art 100,000 dollar set of speakers with the necessary equipment to drive them sound awesome, but could they possibly sound 50 times better than the 2000 dollars speakers? Cost/benefit ratio is one of my main considerations when I consider anything, from buying equipment to taking a job to deciding if I want to date a girl or not. Yeah, the blonde might be gorgeous and a demon in the sack, but can I afford her?

Of course, manufacturers work on pushing the limits of technology so they can a) have the bragging rights of having the biggest - baddest - best of whatever it is that they make and b) they have solid research into their product that they can use when making lower grade equipment. A state of the art computer 20 years ago is about equal to the microchip in your cellphone now. But I am willing to bet money that there are exactly zero reviewers for magazines such as these whose annual income even begins to approach the cost of one of the audio systems they recommend.
Quote:

If you want to have the higtest quality of sound, then I'd suggest you to spend $40 to go to a live concert.

Hear, hear. The Block Party Package system headphone.com offers is over 4000 dollars. That would pay for 100 - 40 dollar concerts: if you attended shows once per week, you could be entertained for nearly two years. The energy of a live show simply can't be captured on any medium, however sonically accurate. Though:
Quote:

Recorded music is its own pleasure and it doesnt need to lean on live music for support or validation. Its not a contest.

This is also quite true. Plus, I'm not willing to wait to listen to music only once per week, and even if I did I'm limited to the bands that come through my town. The advantage of pre-recorded music is the instant accesability anytime. With good equipment, you can have a unique experience anytime you want.

Just set up a budget, don't go too far past it, and don't get hung up on others opinions of what the ultimate gear should be. If you spent 10,000 dollars on a supreme listening station, and you'll have to worry about debt for years to come to pay it off, will you really be able to enjoy it?

cajunchrist

 

[Xevion]

Quote:

could not agree more. I don't remember where I read it, but one website indicated that beyond 2000 dollars, sonic improvements in loudspeakers are minimal

I would have to agree with that, at $2000 bucks a pop you can get some pretty incredible speakers. Of course the nice Sonus Fabers that are $22k a pair probably sound better then anything in the $2000 range, but I would say that nothing in the cheaper price range offers nearly the same dynamics of the Sonus Faber - well, any speaker that has excellent sound quality.

 

[PC Corp]

Quote:

I would have to agree with that, at $2000 bucks a pop you can get some pretty incredible speakers. Of course the nice Sonus Fabers that are $22k a pair probably sound better then anything in the $2000 range, but I would say that nothing in the cheaper price range offers nearly the same dynamics of the Sonus Faber - well, any speaker that has excellent sound quality.

Yeah, Sonus Faber makes gorgeous speakers.
Before last month, I was a big ProAc fan, but I just found out that they manufacture their speaker in China now...
Don't get me wrong. I'm Chinese. But do I want to play top money for so so quality products? No thanks.
so, Dynaudio and Sonus Faber will be my speakers of choice now.

Anyway, a good head-fi system will always worth the money.

 

[Hirsch]

Quote:

With good equipment, you can have a unique experience anytime you want.

Actually, this is not quite true. With good equipment, you can have a good musical experience anytime you want. But unique? That's a charateristic of live, not recorded, music. Rarely does the same piece of live music ever sound exactly the same twice. Even if the music in question is not necessarily improvisational in nature, perhaps you're listening from a different seat, the lead quitartist is trying some new licks, the first violin hits his solo exactly right...who knows?

Recorded music attempts to capture this dynamism in a static medium. Theoretically, if we play the same piece of music on the same equipment, we will hear the same sounds. Any change in the music is due to our perception of the stimulus, not change in the stimulus itself. The first few plays will still yield surprizes, as we hear parts of the music that we didn't notice in the first place...but ultimately we will know a particular piece well enough so that we know everything that is about to happen sonically well before it actually occurs. There is no novelty or sense of surprize left. Not necessarily bad, particularly on a favorite piece, but IMO a key difference between recorded and live music.

What happens when we put in a new piece of equipment? If it's good, we will hear different sounds in the same piece of music. Surprize is restored...we hear sounds we weren't previously aware of in the music. Although the music is still static, we are able to restore some of the dynamism by altering the sound through our equipment, recreating a sense of novelty. I have often wondered if this is a key element in the upgrade cycle- the attempt to create an illusion of novelty in a medium that is essentially static.

 

[ai0tron]

Newbies always question the fold but they will be one with us soon enough.

 

[utdeep]

I think you may have hit something there... perhaps we continue to upgrade for the potential "new" experience more than anything else. Or maybe we spend money for new equipment because we CAN. Or perhaps because it makes us happy. Or perhaps its our strive for perfection.
I've learned a lot so far, but I still have one question... possibly because I'm one of those anal retentive perfectionists. Is there ever a point that you stop questioning the quality of your purchased equipment and examine the tools you were born with?
While everything else can be upgraded, its difficult to figure out where you stand on the natural scale. Do audiophiles just recognize distinctive characteristics of headphones (which can be pointed out to non-audiophiles who will then say "oh, I can hear that... so that's what you were talking about") or do they hear things that others cannot even perceive?
Is there a test to measure this, or do I keep purchasing things to figure it out? There's no doubt that I'm happy with my current equipment, but the chance the I could be happier keeps me searching.
This may be the most moronic thing I say, but I live in one of the best towns for live music and I consider it a completely different experience from headphone listening. Its dynamic and energetic, with visuals and physical energy that are lacking in recorded music. However, for the music alone I would NEVER want each headphone listening session to be like that. Recorded music is almost a flawless rendering, while live music is imperfect (audiences, weather, seating, etc). While some may believe that going to a bunch of $40 concerts is better than a private listening session at home, I would disagree. I love headphones because I want to hear the band play their best for me and I'm in the BEST seat in the house.... I don't ever get that in the live performances

!!

Sorry for that diatribe.

 

[andrzejpw]

cheapie 1k interconnects !!?????

I hope thats in relation to the 10k ones. . .