[takato14]

Quote:

<other stuff snip>
 

I can NOT admit that, because I like those genres, and when I tried the Pros at Best Buy, they were absolutely horrible. 

Absolutely horrible for their retail price - yes, but abolutely horrible sounding, berating it to that level by your description, I think you're just overemphasising it bit too much, their are better out their but as I said, thanks to the EQ chip in the Studio's (not sure if the Pro's have one too), they don't sound that bad with rap/hip hop at all, actually to tell you the truth, for just rap and hip hop, if the Studio's/Pro's were a lot cheaper I'd easily pick it over the Pro700MK2's and M50's solely just for those genre's only.
 
The shame thing is also is that while it is sort of over rated and over priced crap (for their value), a lot of people talk smack when it comes to Beat's or Skullcandy or whatever, bad labelling it even when they have not heard it, given that their are also alot of crap headphones/earphones from big reputable companies out their as well, it's worth a thought, but remember at the end of the day's it doesn't matter if your an audiophile or not, as long as you enjoy your music from whatever headphone/equipment component, that's all that matter's.
 
 

 
Please do research next time. Also, "flat" headphones do exist. One I know of is the SS-100. Not sure of the general sound, but most describe it as "special".
 

 
Do you own, heard or have measured the SS-100 before?

I'm not exaggerating. The $400 Beats Pro is worse at Hip-Hop and Rap than the $300 DT1350. Far worse. I was not able to find enjoyment in listening to them. The low end was bloated and muddy, and overshrowded and bled into the other ranges. Not to mention the general lack of sub-bass was pretty pathetic. Even my Pro/4AAA (37 years old) has more sub bass than a Beats Pro. More treble too...
 
Sadly I don't have the SS-100, I'm currently trying to get one. I have however seen the SS-100s graph, it was in its instruction manual if I remember correctly. Check Wikiphonia, they have the scans.

 

[HalidePisces]

You know you're an audiophile when your portable headphones have been re-cabled with wires 14 AWG or bigger.

 

[wuwhere]

Quote:

You know you're an audiophile when your portable headphones have been re-cabled with wires 14 AWG or bigger.

 
Not if you're 85 years old and hard at hearing.

 

[ZMZB]

Quote:

You know you're an audiophile when your portable headphones have been re-cabled with wires 14 AWG or bigger.

Are you being serious?

 

[DefQon]

Quote:

 Not to mention the general lack of sub-bass was pretty pathetic. Even my Pro/4AAA (37 years old) has more sub bass than a Beats Pro. More treble too...

 
Hmmm.

 

[streetdragon]

headphones with a midbass mountain without subbass are like the saying: all fluff but no fury. or a lizard trying to be a dragon
(other more neutral headphones with slight midbass hump are not that bad though, since it isn't overly exaggerated)

 

[BBBS]

Yeah, all the Beats hate bores me a little. It's like with cars there's always one marque or model getting unfair treatment. For example, BMWs seem to inspire a lot of spite and jealousy and passed down stories. With this is mind, Beats must be the Escalade of headphones: obnoxious, overpriced, but extremely popular and not really that bad if you accept it for what it is.

Well then Grado's are not good because they're mainly for rock music.

Any headphone, even HD800', Tesla T1's, even the HE90's, will "alter" the sound. The only way the sound would not be "altered" is by listening to the recording in the exact same studio where it was recorded, with the exact same equipement it was mastered. And even then you might not like how it sounds.

I think what you meant is that the bias should not be so exaggerated, or that a headphone should not be limited to one (or very few) music genre(s).

I don't agree. Some studios have stuff like HD650s for their musicality. They usually don't just use one set of headphones or speakers, but instead work with near field monitors and then replay on, say, some big B&Ws or even something closer to what their audience will listen with. You have to wonder if they use filters to hear stuff with the sound signature of Beats and Apple buds, since they're the norm for most consumers.

I would say the closest to neutral would be top-end single driver speakers playing studio masters, but many people will probably point out that single drivers have poor bass extension.

 

[ipmaham]

When your co-workers gawk at the amount of $$$ you spent on your headphones and amp..

 

[ZMZB]

Quote:

When your co-workers gawk at the amount of $$$ you spent on your headphones and amp..

...when you'd be disappointed if they didn't.

 

[stevenswall]

Quote:

No... 
 
Flat response =//////////////////////////////= neutral
 
Neutrality of a headphone is determined by how closely it follows the human hearing curve. We do not hear flat. 
 

 
This is the human ear. As you can see, the hearing curve varies at different volume levels.
 
You can't just look at a graph and say "this is exactly what the headphone sounds like". Headphone graphs are corrected for HRTF (read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head-related_transfer_function), so they're only usable for comparisons. What you see on the graph is not the raw curve from what the measuring mic heard.
 
Please do research next time. Also, "flat" headphones do exist. One I know of is the SS-100. Not sure of the general sound, but most describe it as "special".

Sorry, you are right to correct me. I did not remember that the graphs are tweaked with HRTF, and neglected to mention this fact. However, the point I was trying to make is that flat is flat (ruler flat) and the ear will not hear a flat headphone as such. The ear will hear a flat/neutral headphone as bright. I was trying to differentiate between a theoretically flat headphone, and one that is perceived as being flat. If a headphone is actually neutral, it is a flat line. If it sounds neutral (is perceived) neutral, it will have a frequency response based on the human hearing curve. Personally, I'd probably call this a 'natural' curve, as it's following the natural FR curve of the human ear.

I've done some research, and looked at many Headroom graphs, as well as raw graphs from InnerFidelity and elsewhere. We seem to have a misunderstanding based on terminology, and because we disagree as to whether or not there is a flat or perceived flat headphone. I have yet to find a flat raw FR graph, or an HRTF one that exactly follows the loudness contour of the human ear.

 

[mikiphile]

Slightly off topic but.. 

Have you ever wondered what a wannabe audiophile looks like?
 
There you go..
 
 
 

Spoiler: Wannabe%20Audiophile

 
 

 

[Doc-holliday]

I have never wondered. I don't really grade people on their "audiophileness".

 

[miceblue]

...when you spend a few hours listening to music instead of doing your homework. This happens waaay too often... :/

 

[Han Bao Quan]

...when you spend a few hours listening to music instead of doing your homework. This happens waaay too often... :/

you don't have to be an audiophile to listen to music for hours. But I know what you mean

 

[Argyris]

Quote:

...when you spend a few hours listening to music instead of doing your homework. This happens waaay too often... :/

 
I'm sort of doing that now, but since I just spent the past few days knocking out a big project, I figure I'm entitled to a little break.
 
 
 
You know you're an audiophile when you've run out of things to complete this phrase with but you can still listen to your favorite songs an infinite number of additional times without enjoying them any less.