/hpg/ - Headphone General

File: myheadphoneshit.png (409KB, 2000x600px) Image search: [Google]

409KB, 2000x600px

>>52867215

File: ckV3UK.png (1MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x720px

>>52867280

File: feels-good-man-trans[1].png (29KB, 330x357px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 330x357px

>that HD 600 and Schiit Magni 2 feel

File: hpg.png (1MB, 1836x635px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1836x635px

Hey guys, what's your opinion on x?

File: 1454644499759.png (7KB, 498x450px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 498x450px

>>52867339
more like this

>>52867361
u h8 us cuz u aint us

>>52867350
sennshill

>>52867392
These are Beyerdynamic headphones though.

Whoops, posted in the dying thread.

Looking for some of those sweet sweet purchase reccomendations, need IEMs for the gym. Wireless would be awesome but if there's other options that do the job and stick in my ears I'm open to em.

>Budget: $100
>Location: US
>Source: Android Phone or iPod Classic
>Preferred type of headphone: IEM
>Comfort level: Why would I want uncomfortable headphones?
>Preferred tonal balance: Balanced, but I don't mind if it errs on the bassy side.
>Preferred music: Music tastes are all over the place. I really would prefer crispness over warmth if that makes sense.
>Past headphones: Loved my Sennheiser CX 300's, put 'em through the washing machine a little while back though. Use Sony MDR V6 at home, never done me wrong.

>Budget
$200, flexible
>Location
USA
>Source
PC
>Preferred type of headphone
Full
>Open or closed
Closed
>Comfort level
Medium
>Preferred tonal balance
Somewhat Neutral, A little bit of bass won't hurt
>Current headphones
Philips SHP9500 and V-Moda M100

>>52867521
msr7

>>52867424
fidelio s2

is steelseries siberia v2 good for just listening to music and watching movies or it's 2 overkill?

>>52867676
its not good at all

File: ayyyyy.png (1MB, 1420x738px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1420x738px

It is the only power alive that can ever cast the shadow of the forcelord back into the pits of doom.

>>52867521
553

>>52867700
quote from what?

>>52867752
Twilight Force!

>>52867424
Responded in the dying thread.

>IEMs for the gym
>$100
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00ELAM8LE

If you are using your smartphone and want wireless you can get a bluetooth AD2P receiver for about $20.

>>52867752
dt770's store page

>>52867771
>>52867424

>gym earbuds
>not bluebuds x

>>52867215
Nishizumi-dono?

File: 1448912481080.gif (249KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 250x250px

>>52867775
i actually laughed at this
thank you

>>52867791
>not bluebuds x
Doesn't work with ipod. Also added volume control/mic is unnecessary and an added component to break which would require replacing the entire unit. Also, while it's "sweat resistant life time warranty" looks appealing it doesn't cover what usually breaks on headphones, housing/wiring.

>>52867339
I'm running the Modi2/Magni2 into some AKG-K7XXs, looking to pick up a pair of HD600/650s soon.

>feels good

>>52867910
have you already heard them? youll finally hear a real headphone

File: 1452402246306.jpg (39KB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 960x540px

>>52867910
>downgrading

>>52867910
I hope that you don't expect that HD6- will blow you away.

>>52867910
> looking to pick up a pair of HD600/650s soon.
Looking to spend more money for a downgrade soon*

File: Shit_taste_2nd_episode.jpg (213KB, 1356x768px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 1356x768px

>>52867280
Yo mate!

>>52867991
like when new akg owners downgraded from their apple earbuds?

>>52868051
It's ok dude, let it all out.

File: images.jpg (3KB, 157x134px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 157x134px

>>52868051
kek we made the sennfag mad

>>52868066
>thinks the sennshills are the mad ones when one of his ilk is the one switching and all the akg retards are mad at him

>>52868089
kek he made the akgfag mad

File: sooth-crying-baby.jpg (15KB, 635x414px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 635x414px

>>52868099
umad bro

>>52868110
seeing butthurt akgfags makes my dick hard

File: 343039399.jpg (27KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 800x533px

>>52868151

>>52868151
same

File: baby-crying-287x300.jpg (13KB, 287x300px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 287x300px

>>52868177
fag

>>52868198
>can't identify samefag correctly
new

File: 1450317884495.png (1MB, 784x757px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 784x757px

>>52868210
projecting much are we? i didnt even say newfag you mong.

>>52868210
>new
of course they are. anyone whos been here long enough should hopefully eventually learn to read a graph

HM5 or MSR7?

>>52868234
you didn't, i did. you can't because you are new.

File: c7ea2db92ae6021a0d085609dd91c26d.png (165KB, 239x242px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 239x242px

>>52868246
seems like the sennfags are out of control today

>>52868260
msr7

>>52868234
>>52868210
>>52868198
>>52868177
>>52868159
>>52868151
>>52868110
>>52868099
>>52868093
>>52868089
>>52868066
>>52868051
>>52867991
>>52867934
Could you guys give it a rest?

You will not agree now and likely never agree on which is the better cans. All you are doing is flooding this thread is completely pointless and subjective shitposts.

>>52868246
>newfag shitposter projects onto someone who never called out newfag
kek your a insecure one aren't you

>>52867910
seriously tho you should keep the dosh and wait for something better

>>52868288
these people stopping suddenly has about the same odds that they would also suddenly like the same headphones

>>52868364
you could have told that to hd600 owners back in 97 and theyd still be waiting

>>52868413
If the only battles you fight are ones you know you can win you are no better than a bully.

>>52868413
sennheiser tried and failed to replace the hd 600 twice top fucking kek

File: 1447031117188.jpg (126KB, 1232x1184px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 1232x1184px

>>52868455
>le ebulli

>>52868455
i think your logic circuits are malfunctioning. a computer that knows the truth would say the same things i am, but surely it has no intention of being mean. saying whats correct is not inherently mean; it is a perception of the receiving end. its their choice to feel wronged.

>>52868486
anyone thats made a headphone that costs more than the hd600 was an attempt to beat it, and they all failed. almost every company fits into this category; it just goes to show how good they are. i dont see how this is supposed to be negative

>>52868282
Do you think its worth the extra $80?

>>52868538
>a computer that knows the truth would say the same things i am
Go look up "confirmation bias."

>of being mean
No implication of being mean was made nor intended.

>>52868560
... if you have a budget and arent sure what to get, why dont you fill out the form?

>>52868575
>Go look up "confirmation bias."
so you dont think the hd600 is the most neutral headphone? i dont really care on pursuing this in this case.

>No implication of being mean was made nor intended.
so i was a bully that wasnt mean? what does that mean exactly? why is that a negative thing? and if it wasnt meant to be negative, why were you even saying it to me?

>>52868455
why would you fight battles you can't win

File: takstarhd6000.jpg (24KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 400x400px

>>52867215
how bad did i do?

>>52868626
thats not even the point. it has nothing to do with being a bully.

>>52868649
end yourself immediately

>>52868619
>so you dont think the hd600 is the most neutral headphone?
For someone who claims a computer would say the same thing you ask a pretty ludicrous question. Computers have no opinion nor require or even ask for confirmation or refutation from others.

Thank you for proving the point about confirmation bias.

>so i was a bully
And you fail at basic reading comprehension. No one person was accused of being _no better than_ a bully.

>>52868664
i dunno, but the build quality and sound seems good, they are takstars, whats the flaw?

>>52868626
There are numerous reasons.
- Raise awareness of an issue
- Demonstrate resistance
- Minimize losses
- Etc.

File: 1451097674137.png (362KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

362KB, 700x700px

>>52868667
>No one person was accused of being _no better than_ a bully.
so you were saying it at me for no reason????? excellent work

What is a good price for HD600s?

>>52868703
>so you were saying it at me for no
Just because it is not a direct accusation does not mean it does not have meaning.

Have you never read any philosophy at all or even understand the concept of logic or thinking?

>>52868716
camelcamelcamel.com

>>52868692
what world do you live in where fighting a battle you can't win minimizes losses

>>52868725
i wouldnt have said anything about it, though, if it was actually correct in the first place. saying something you think is correct has -absolutely nothing- to do with bullying.

>>52868746
>what world do you live in where fighting a battle you can't win minimizes losses
If you fight you have more proactive control over location, position, disposition _and_ can buy more time for the more vulnerable to escape.

Did you ever watch the movie "The Two Towers" in the Lord of the Rings series? Where the king and his men fought what they expected would be a losing battle to give the women and children in the caves a chance to escape out the back?

>>52868771
>i wouldnt have said anything about it, though
You demonstrate a complete inability to exercise any intellectual honesty so this is not surprising.

Regardless it is apparent that providing you food for thought was a waste of time and trying to get you to stop being so self-absorbed is a waste of time and worse flooding the thread with something other than discussing headphones.

You sir, are by my reasoning, beneath further response.

File: 71NZKs1-SDL._SL1500_.jpg (89KB, 1500x1500px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 1500x1500px

>>52867424

Why not get the MEE M6? They're cheap, sweat resistant, relatively sturdy, come with a stupidly high amount of tips for the price and are specifically made for people who exercise.

I also owned the CX 300's (which broke after 9 months of normal use by the way: does sennheiser even QC their shit?): the M6's are definitely a step down in terms of audio quality but it's not like you will actively be listening to your music anyway if you're gonna use them to exercise.

>>52868837
>it's not like you will actively be listening to your music anyway if you're gonna use them to exercise.
You suggest buying something to listen to music but don't actually care about listening to the music?

ok ya fags

>Budget
150-250, can go higher(but its gonna hurt)
>Location
Germany
>Source
PC
>Preferred type of headphone
Full
>Open or closed
Dont really care but if i had to i would say open
>Comfort level
Medium
>Preferred tonal balance
idk
>Preferred music
Electronical stuff and sometimes a little bit piano
>Past headphones
Razer Blackshark 2.0 (dont kill me, just went into a store and bought random shit)

>>52869217
Grado SR225i

>>52869217
if you don't want to go big boy splurging first try, I'd recommend takstar pro 80 or takstar hi 2050
will help you decide if you ever want to upgrade

it's kind of hard recommending you a pair if you don't know what tonal balance you prefer

get dt 880 pro 250/600 ohms
that being said, prepare for AKGfags to recommend k702

>>52868880
>You suggest buying something to listen to music but don't actually care about listening to the music?

Hearing=/=listening.

If >>52867424 actually use his IEMs to exercise, chances are he will be too focused on his form, keeping count of his sets/reps or checking out the cutie using the threadmill to actively be listening to his music.

Moreover, the gym is not a friendly environment for IEMs: cables are prone to be tugged on, anon will sweat, and theft is also a potential factor. Whatever the case is, breaking/losing 20 dollars IEMs, unlike 100 bucks ones, isn't that big of a deal.

>>52869286
>Hearing=/=listening.
Let's get this straight. You want to hear your music but not listen to it?>>52869286

>breaking/losing 20 dollars IEMs, unlike 100 bucks ones, isn't that big of a deal.
He's already decided he's willing to spend 100. Are you trying to change his mind simply because you are more miserly than he is? It sounds like you are trying to justify your miserliness by not actually listening to your music.

>>52869249
You know why i dont know which i prefer?
Because i dont even really have a idea what exactly that is.
I just went random into /g/ hoping to find something.
Im ok with technic , but sound? theres my limit

>>52869217
K702

>>52869217
DT880 250ohms.

>>52869419
he didn't say he was gay.

>>52869409
If you prefer "electronical and piano" you want something with clarity, resolution, and speed. You likely lean a bit towards the analytical side. Thus why I suggested looking at the Grado SR225e (or the SR125e if you want to stick the lower end of your budget).

>>52869467
i don't like this meme at all

>>52869448
go away beyerfag

>>52869504
What "meme" are you referring to?

>>52869467
>clarity,
Ok.
>resolution
Wait, what are you...
>and speed
Fuck thisshit, i'm out.

>>52869524
the "grados are anything but trash" meme

>>52869515
Wow, that is a good point, you totally ruined my suggestion.

File: confuzed-thumb.jpg (13KB, 278x302px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 278x302px

I feel so out of place

>>52869467
lol

File: gradousingcuck.jpg (752KB, 750x984px) Image search: [Google]

752KB, 750x984px

>>52869540
grados are also a favorite of white guilt cucks

>>52869525
Do you not understand what "resolution" and "speed" refers to or just shitposting?

>>52869540
I didn't realize there was a meme that "Grados are anything but trash" but I agree with you that it is not a worthwhile meme. Grados are very good for what they are. It would stand to reason that they have been selling, and updating, their headphones for decades now.

>>52869564
it's okay, nobody knows what goes on in here
it's shills argueing with other shills

>>52869467
>>52869246
atleast suggest something over ear, like he asked

>>52868833
>tips fedora

>>52869574
>Grados are very good for what they are
rehashes of the same headphone using identical drivers, keeping mostly to a terrible house sound and varying greatly in price despite not sounding any better than the sr60, and often times worse? yeah Grados are great for that.

>>52869571
is this LAWHF

>>52869574
I'll take you are new here.

>>52869600
>keeping mostly to a terrible house sound
Supposedly the i to e changed the housing. Of course this is limited to their lower end models and the wood and higher end models did not suffer from resonance issues.

>not sounding any better than the sr60
And that just proved you have no idea what you are posting about.

>>52869632
No, but it has been some time since I last lurked /hpg/.

>>52869327

>You want to hear your music but not listen to it?

There is a difference between active and passive listening, genius. If anon is going to exercise, he won't be able to do the former hence why it makes sense to sacrifice some audio quality in favour of other factors.

>He's already decided he's willing to spend 100. Are you trying to change his mind simply because you are more miserly than he is? It sounds like you are trying to justify your miserliness by not actually listening to your music.

Nice projecting. Anon is free to do whatever he wants with his money: I simply fail to see the point in buying expensive IEMs if he isn't going to do them justice.

>>52869650
Grados in general are frowned upon in /hpg/, it has being like this since the beggining, speed and resolution are considered Audiophile non-sense since it doesn't affect audio unless they are both very shitty, which simply doesn't occur these days with most modern headphones.

>>52869635
sorry, i'll keep to headphones that genuinely sound good and aren't boutique trash with absolutely no science behind their design and manufacture.

>>52869691
>If anon is going to exercise, he won't be able to do the former
Only, by your own admission, if he focuses on other things. Rather contrived things because, I don't know about you, but when I'm on the treadmill I've got my form down and don't bother with HR after it gets to the target range, ie. I am _listening_ to my music.

>Nice projecting.
Oh the ironing.

>I simply fail to see the point in buying expensive IEMs if he isn't going to do them justice.
There is your projection you hypocrite.

>>52869694
>speed and resolution are considered Audiophile non-sense
Being able to identify (resolution) and separate notes (speed) is "audiophile nonsense?"

>>52869770
lol shut the fuck up moron. go buy a $200 cable

>>52869770
No, that's what any headphone that doesn't suck does, thinking one model is much better than another for this is nonsense, hence why no one even talks about it, besides, a signature that doesn't masks everything is usually more important regarding separation and identification of notes.

Alright, my Yuin PK2 earphones died on me for the second time and I want something different since the build quality is obviously very poor.

I'm interested in canalphones but the problem is I can't really have anything that cancels out noise too much. I work as an intern MD at a hospital, and I have a really comfy position where I can basically listen to music most of the time. However, I need to be able to leap into action if one of the nurses hits an alarm because a patient is like choking on their dinner and turning blue. The Yuin PK2 were pretty much the perfect balance since they cancelled out a decent amount of background sound, but still made the hospital alarm perfectly audible.

So what the fuck do I buy?

>>52869846
spoonfeed link pls

>>52869846
What a well worded and thought out argument you presented.

>>52869852
Then what is "considered audiophile nonsense" was a completely specious. Just because YOU do not appreciate the differences in headphones does not mean others do not or that it is "nonsense." Thus why we have, even in this thread, the argument of which is better between the big 3.

>a signature
Is a trend among a certain brand of headphones, ie. what the manufacturer's tune their housing/drivers to focus on. That does not define nor even determine resolution or speed which are functions of sound decay speeds rather than any "signature."

It seems you are trying to "mask" your ignorance by calling anything you do not understand as "nonsense."

>>52869908
keep only one in?

>>52869750

>I am _listening_ to my music.

Okay, whatever you say anon. Either you have never actively listened to music with your eyes closed in a nice, comfy armchair or we don't the same definition of exercising.

reminder not to reply to retarded gradofags from head-fi

>>52869958
I thought I made it pretty clear that we don't have the same definition of exercising. You seem to exercise in such a focused and scattered way that your mind never has any free-time.

>>52869943
I was hoping that would be the last resort...before I could keep them both in my ears without a problem.

>>52869926
>between the big 3.
Except no one ever mentions "speed" or "resolution" in those debates.
A headphone signature fr is not a brand fr, unless you think M50 and AD700 sound the same.
I'm just calling you out on caring about things that don't matter and no one cares about here, go on, keep talking about speed and let the shitposting begging.

File: Waifu headphones and albums 2.png (776KB, 1446x958px) Image search: [Google]

776KB, 1446x958px

>>52869217
>Electronical stuff and sometimes a little bit piano
I'd go either with something bright or v-shapped.
Are you going to get an Amp in the future?

>>52870046
>Except no one ever mentions "speed" or "resolution" in those debates.
An argument based upon popular opinion? Do you also own Monster Beats?

>A headphone signature fr is not a brand fr, unless you think M50 and AD700 sound the same.
Let me get this straight. You are using the term "signature" to mean something other than the common usage of the term to mean something similar, aka a trend, that is consistent but not exactly the same?

>>52870099
>An argument based upon popular opinion?
not him but you're literally basing your argument on terms made up by subjectivists who ignore any sort of measurement entirely, not to mention the terms can't be measured in any way either.
>inb4 CSD/impulse response

>>52870094
I would if i had money, maybe in 1-2 years

>>52870141
>not him but you're literally basing your argument on terms made up by subjectivists
Because there are not graphs measuring sound decay?

Just a quick google search that took less than .00003 seconds proves that to be wrong.

>>52869926
>resolution or speed which are functions of sound decay speeds rather than any "signature."
"no"

>>52870171
it takes a google search just as fast to see why CSD and impulse response are useless and gimmicky measurements for headphones.

>>52870179
[citation needed]

>>52870186
Straw man? I'm rather certain that the point was about sound decay and the only one who raised CSD and impulse response was you in refutation of the measurability of sound decay.

>>52870216
i'm yet to see you produce any sort of valid measurement correlating to your 'speed' and 'resolution' with evidence to suggest it. preferably a scientific study.

>>52870259
Now you are trying to shift the burden of proof? Yeah, no.

>>52870270
the burden of proof was always on you. you're the one making these ridiculous claims.

>>52870270
>getting told this hard

>>52870279
>the burden of proof was always on you.
Just because you reject them they are ridiculous and your beliefs are more established than mine?

Do you also suffer from a ego issue to complicate your belief in popular opinion?

Let me ask you this. How do you think an ultrasound scan works? If there was not tight control over decay and measurements in differences do you think an ultrasound would be able to present any image?

>>52870350
why are you avoiding the issue now? i take it you can't find anything to suggest what you're saying is anything but horseshit.

>>52870362
>why are you avoiding the issue now?
I am avoiding the issue by explaining things to you without dignifying your attempt to shift the burden of proof?

I guess I am wasting my time presenting inconvenient evidence, in the form of an ultrasound, as you are just going to disregard it out of hand.

>>52870350
>ultrasound
Indeed, that has everything to do with headphones, after all, we are all bats and our hearing can form images with better resolution if the speed is better.

>>52870387
again, burden of proof was always on you and since you simply can't seem to prove anything we're done here. i hope you find somebody else who will waste more time than i have with somebody who has their head so far up their own ass they think everything they spout is fact.

>>52870415
What a shame, it's always fun to see people burning audiofools.

>>52870216
>CSD and impulse response
That's the same thing as frequency response, merely visualized differently. They all display the same information.

I'd be interested to hear what do you think resolution means in an audio transducer and sound reproduction when you get past the electrical circuits. And also what is speed?

>>52870350
>How do you think an ultrasound scan works?
Do tell.

>>52870473
>That's the same thing as frequency response, merely visualized differently. They all display the same information.
No.

>>52870170
I see, anyway, i still suggest something bright o v-shapped, DT880 works mostly fine straight from PC, but i think it sounds better with an amp. Maybe something like the MDR V6 for bright or M50 for bassy (assuming you like bassy)? AD900X is bright and doesn't need amping at all, sounds great for piano imho, but not very good for electronic, HD558 is also cheap, versatile and doesn't see much benefit from amping.

>>52870578
Holy shit, someone who is not fighting

>>52870473
>what is speed?
>yfw speed force influences how hearing perceives decay
>yfw it requires fast hearing
>yfw anon is the flash and that's why he is the only one who can undestand it

>>52870409
>that has everything to do with headphones
Moving the goalposts now?
> any sort of valid measurement correlating to your 'speed' and 'resolution' with evidence to suggest it.
You were provided evidence to suggest valid measurements correlating to my "speed" and "resolution."' Now it seems you are trying to change the requirement.

>>52870415
Repeating the attempt to shift the burden of proof will not make it any more valid.

It would have been easy enough to ask for some proof, which I think is amply met with the ultrasound example, but that was not requested. It is reasonable to assume that there was a shared understanding of what sound decay involves, it's importance in regards to what is being discussed and the only time it was brought to the otherwise is _after_ the burden of proof was placed.

I see no point in responding to what is clearly a petty and vindictive request for proof. Especially after an attempt to move the goalpost is tried as well.

>>52870473
>That's the same thing as frequency response
Thank you for admitting it was a straw man response.

>>52870604
lol, i guess i just don't care enough to argue about some things.

>>52870526
>Do tell.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrasound
>After each burst, the electronics looks for a return signal within a small window of time corresponding to the time it takes for the energy to pass through the vessel. Only a signal received during this window will qualify for additional signal processing.

>>52870722
Im didnt even argue in this trade. im an noob in Headphone stuff so everything here is mostly fucking confusing.
(Also im the person he answerd to)

>>52870756
Check the wiki on Op, it will help a bit, later you can research on your own, i just recommend that you take everything with a grain of salt, lots of subjective views on the subject around the internet.

>>52870756
>in this trade. im an noob
cute little retard :3c

>>52870526
>No.
No? It's merely the same information you already have in the impulse response. Sure different graphs let you look at the information in a different way and possibly reveal something that wasn't obvious in one graph but it's the same information regardless.

>>52870756
Think of speed and resolution and sound decay kind of like the chassis and suspension in your car. You hit a bump in the road (your headphones make a sound) your chassis is going to respond to that bump and translate it so you can feel it through your steering and body. The better the chassis the easier it is to tell if you hit a pothole or ran over a pebble so long as your car doesn't wobble about and continue bouncing (resolution as an aspect of sound decay). Your suspension's bound, rebound, anti-roll, etc. is what limits the wobble and bounce (speed) and depending on how good it is it will respond quickly and accurately to minimize it.

Does that make any sense?

>>52870732
The signal processing.

>>52870930
>>52870930
>merely the same information you already have in the impulse response
Didn't anyone ever tell you what allpass filter does?

>>52871034
>The signal processing.
In response to what? A "return signal?" Which is a measurement of what?

>>52871052
What is the processing done?

>>52871210
How is that relevant to the point?

File: 880 (decibels at 10khz).jpg (24KB, 628x800px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 628x800px

do you guys like my headphones

>>52871446
kek, but i think it would be more subtle without the file name.

Should I get the Brainwavz HM5 + Fiio E07K or Audio Technica MSR7

>>52867701
Heh, knew it.

>>52859448
Why MK5 over the ER4 lineup? Any headphones there which you didn't enjoy at all and if so, why?

>>52871555
msr7

lol you guys are talking about some gay shit

>>52870409
Oh, and you should know, that the only difference between ultrasound and otherwise is that it is higher than normal human hearing range. The same principle applies to, you guessed it, sound within normal hearing range.

I do believe that is one "audiophile" schooling a bunch of contrarians who refuse to think beyond Monster Beats level popular thinking.

>>52871827
what kinda dick do you like

>>52871928
Not the Anon you are talking too, but i'm confused about this whole speed decay thing, can you post some links to explanations about it?
Google is only showing what decay speed means in soudwaves, not headphones.

>>52871990
>decay speed means in soudwaves, not headphones.
It also applies to sound systems and subwoofers (Velodyne is one of the pioneers thanks to understandings in sound decay). Sound reproduction is sound reproduction. If you are limiting yourself purely to headphones then you are missing the point.

>>52871245
I think you might be full of crap and talking beyond your knowledge.
I would also genuinely like to know how ultrasound imaging operates, and the most important part about it, the multi-dimensional transform, is the bit that you haven't talked about.

>>52872026
>missing the point.
Exactly, i have no idea what you are talking about, and like a said, google isn't helping that's why i asked for some links on the subject

>>52872200
>i have no idea what you are talking about
I tried to explain my experience with Grado headphones. For this, people tried to refute my experience with bullshit like "sound and resolution are audiophile nonsense." It took several posts and dealing with a lot of idiocy to point out that it is not nonsense. It is measurable, understandable, explainable, and thus valid in communicating information.

>i asked for some links on the subject
Which you stated you found but disregarded as you were only looking for links specifically about headphones. That is retarded. Headphones use the same technology and principles to produce sound waves just like everything else. That's the reason why we still debate over the big three which have been around for decades.

>>52872260
Grados are measurably garbage.

>>52872279
Thank you for proving my point.

>>52872307
That was in no way relevant to the point you were making.

>>52872335
You were trying to refute my experience with bullshit.

Unless you want to provide a citation that demonstrates "Grados are measurably garbage" is not bullshit?

>>52872260
>"Proves" point without posting reliable data
>makes poor car analogies to explain something, still not posting any sort of source.
>resorts to "burden of proof" when a simple link with measurements could prove claim.
>says people who cared enough to look it up are to blame for no finding said data.

>>52872366
http://www.innerfidelity.com/headphone-data-sheet-downloads

Any Grado measurement here. Actually I challenge you to find any that show a Grado headphone being good.

File: 1446594058561.png (1MB, 1435x691px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1435x691px

Considering picking up a pair of Shure SE-215s for when I'm on the go, unless someone has a better recc in the $100 range I should look into

>>52872415
your waifu is a qt3.14

also fuck 650s

>>52872388
>>"Proves" point without posting reliable data
I've already provided a link to wikipedia proving the principle and measurements are sound. I provided a layman explanation in regards to explaining it. Clearly you have proven me wrong by my failing to provide these.

>>52872400
>Any Grado measurement here
Thanks for providing a lot of measurements but where is there any authority, ie. a citation, that determines which of these measurements are, as you asserted, "garbage?"

>>52872415
who the fuck is that jewish abomination

File: hpg.jpg (456KB, 2700x900px) Image search: [Google]

456KB, 2700x900px

>>52872415
I wouldn't get the SE-215 unless you are really into bassy shit/electronic music only. They sound kind of muddy with most other genres. I'd go with any Sennheiser IEMs within that price range instead, even if the isolation wouldn't be as good.

>>52872447
Well since you want to play dummy now and apparently can't interpret graphs yourself, is Tyll using Grados as an example of a poor result enough 'citation' for you?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDRHFNfFCFU

>>52872464
rip your fucking wallet bro

>>52872492
>1 hour
eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

>>52872492
>Finding flat
And what if some people prefer a different sound than "flat" and "analytical?" Like say, someone who prefers to listen to electronic and some piano music versus orchestra (which would shine for flat) or jazz and lounge (which would shine for warmer sounding headphones)?

>>52872447
Yeah, that link explains nothing about speed and resolution on speakers, care to copy/paste what part exactly are you talking about? let me guess, you can't, because it's not your fault for doing a half assed job about it.
For real, you have a golden chance to shut every one's mouths here in your hands.

>>52872536
unless you want shit headphones, you should aim for the same type of graph, only it'll be higher or lower at certain points depending on your preference

>>52872536
Preferences are preferences but accuracy is not determined by preference.

Also I doubt anyone would 'prefer' near 100% bass distortion (see: PS1000) for any genre of music.

Still I'm not sure who on earth would like the "no bass, treble that makes you wish you had Beyer headphones" Grado house sound for anything, really. Certainly not anyone who wants to listen to music and not their equipment.

>>52872536
Brace for EQfag attack.

>>52872536
Flat for everything, neutral and extended. Genre is irrelevant.

>>52872492
Oh, and you might want to watch your own citation. Starting from 1:00 or so, he admits that "I'm not saying perfectly flat is best. . . it is reference." It seems your citation for what is and is not garbage is actually arguing against determining garbage as being anything but flat.

File: 0812juliaholter_lg.gif (105KB, 500x631px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 500x631px

>>52872438
she makes good music too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2JgMniIpRM
also fuck you i like them
>>52872449
:( rude
>>52872464
Fuck I just really need the isolation from the Shures, I don't mind nigger bass though, I dealt with it for like 3 years when I owned a pair of ATH-M50s

>>52872582
>unless you want shit headphones, you should aim for the same type of graph
See >>52872598
>I'm not saying perfectly flat is best. . . it is reference.
Tyll states to the otherwise.

>>52872598
I would prefer you actually watch the video before trying to counter and also strawman at the same time.

>>52872449
kill yourself hick

>>52872577
>that link explains nothing about speed and resolution on speakers
Thus why I provided car analogy above.

>care to copy/paste what part exactly are you talking about
What exactly are you asking for in regards to my point, ie. my experience with Grado headphones and trying to convey that information by using terms like "speed and resolution" after it was further elaborated with the above car analogy?

>>52872613
>I would prefer you actually watch the video
Let me see if I understand you correctly. You are claiming that somewhere later in the video he refutes what he clearly stated in the first minute or so in the video?

File: graph_se215.png (43KB, 630x489px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 630x489px

>>52872605
>Fuck I just really need the isolation from the Shures, I don't mind nigger bass though, I dealt with it for like 3 years when I owned a pair of ATH-M50s

If the isolation is priority I guess you could go for it. I hear lower end Etymotics isolate well too, but they're excruciatingly painful for tighter ear canals.

I'd be interested in trying SE315 or 425 out at some point if they'd sound better, but I've got enough IEMs as it is already.

>>52872696
I am claiming the Grado are all poorly measuring headphones, hence "measurably garbage". I also claim that he uses Grado headphones as an example of a very poorly measuring headphone. Nowhere have I said perfectly flat was best. I am however claiming that the Grado are so off 'flat' that nobody could possibly consider them good for anything. Good headphones tend to have some deviations from flat but they aren't so extreme.

>>52872586
>Preferences are preferences but accuracy is not determined by preference.
No, the importance of accuracy (which seems to be merely a rewording of "analytical" or "flat") is a preference. That is kind of a questionable interpretation though as you can have a lot of accuracy and some distortion with headphones that are not known for being "analytical."

>>52872767
Analytical is simply a buzzword term.

>>52872742
>I am claiming the Grado are all poorly measuring headphones
In a quest for a "flat" preference? Are you now admitting for people who do not care for, or are fatigued by, "flat" measuring headphones it would not be "garbage?"

>>52872794
So what you're saying is Grado headphones are good just like Beats headphones are good? Because to me it looks like you used liking Beats as an insult in the thread earlier, but here you are trying to defend headphones with the same level of fidelity as Beats.

>>52872782
Just because you do not accept its validity does not mean that you do not understand the meaning behind it.

Are you trying to argue that there are not clear distinctions between "flat" headphones and others that are still very popular and accurate but not known as or measurably similar to "flat?"

>>52872816
Until there is evidence to suggest its validity, it is not valid. You're literally basing things off of highly subjective reviews of headphones that like to throw around terms such as 'analytical' and trying to counter against documented measurements suggesting otherwise.

>>52872812
>So what you're saying is Grado headphones are good just like Beats headphones are good?
Not at all. I'm pointing out the idiocy of claiming one set of headphones as "garbage" merely because they do not fulfill one's personal and subjective standard. Unless you want to argue all headphones that are not measurably "flat" are the same quality as Monster Beats. This thread seems to indicate that there are quite at least two of the three big ones that would not measure "flat" and are of much higher quality than Monster Beats headphones.

>>52872845
>Until there is evidence to suggest its validity, it is not valid.
What would you accept as evidence to suggest its validity? Popular use in headphone discussion on multiple boards through years and decades of discussion are not evidence? Is that not how new words and terms are not only adopted by established like say "google" in the Oxford Dictionary?

>>52872846
>and are of much higher quality than Monster Beats headphones.
You're the one implying this. >>52870099

>>52872868
Oh god I can't even keep up with all these logical fallacies, I'm done.

>>52872871
Nowhere did I claim that Monster Beats are good.
Or to fix what you think I imply:
>what you're saying is Grado headphones are good just like Beats headphones are good?
It seems that I actually imply the opposite.

>>52872886
You raised the issue of valid based upon evidence and when you are asked to provide an objective standard for evidence you run off claiming some sort of "fallacy?"

Pathetic. Go on. Run away with your tail between your legs.

File: son_i_am_disappoint.gif (62KB, 480x600px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 480x600px

>>52872680
>What exactly are you asking
From this point it's more than clear that you are just trying to make people waste their time, You link explains nothing about your claims and you provided nothing else, what i asked for was for you copy/paste what part, any part, that explains speed and resolution in speakers in the link, it's very simple and you pretended not to understand.
>>52872868
>Popular...discussion is not evidence?
No, exactly as you expressed here >>52870099
>An argument based upon popular opinion? Do you also own Monster Beats?

Measurable data is evidence, and you failed to provide that.
From here on it's a "you can't prove what i believe doesn't exist" debate.

>>52872928
>Nowhere did I claim that Monster Beats are good.
Exactly, you claimed otherwise.
>>52872812
>Because to me it looks like you used liking Beats as an insult in the thread earlier, but here you are trying to defend headphones with the same level of fidelity as Beats.

Please consider actually reading the posts you're replying to.

>>52872949
>>52872950
Damn, Grados anon is getting told!

>>52872949
>From this point it's more than clear that you are just trying to make people waste their time
From your refusal to make it clear what you are asking it is more than clear you are trying to make people waste their time. I am trying to carry on my side of a discussion and convey to you that I do not understand where you are having a problem with my side of the discussion. You seem to try and equate that attempt to understand what you are asking as if somehow I'm either lying in not understand what you are asking for or expecting me to be able to read your mind in direct contradiction to words to the otherwise.

This conclusion is further supported by bullshit like:
>You link explains
You kept asking for a link which was never provided. Now it seems like you are blaming for things that don't exist based upon something you are asking for that I do not understand.

>what i asked for was for you copy/paste what part, any part, that explains speed and resolution in speakers in the link
Which was responded to above with the statement "sound production is sound production." There was no link provided for headphones or speakers. The poster stated upfront that the principles of sound decay was found for soundwaves.

I also proved the principle with the ultrasound.

Are you the same retard who tried to shift the burden of proof long ago and still trying to shift the burden of proof after it was long since noted that such an attempt was invalid and that I could even prove the point with modern and prevalent technology, i.e. ultrasounds?

>>52872950
>Exactly, you claimed otherwise
Then it is established that I did not imply anything in regards to quality of headphones when it comes to the Monster Beats. The only purpose that I mentioned the Monster Beats was to point out how weak an argument to popular opinion is.

Are you confusing the point about popular opinion with what is traditional and common usage of words?

>>52873025
>gets told
>wall of text

>>52873065
Well at least I tried to understand what someone was asking but clearly that was a waste of time.

File: 81pCYdxU0BL._SL1500_.jpg (180KB, 1131x1500px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 1131x1500px

Been using MDR-V6's for a couple years, getting bored and want to try some open headphones that are preferably an upgrade as well.

Will I be happy with AKG K240 mk2's? What are some alternatives in the $90-110 range?

Also looked at the Sennheiser HD 558 but most comparisons say the AKG's are better.

I just want to know what other options I have. I don't know any brand names or models.

>>52873078
you focus on what people say and provide no measurable data to back up your claims, that's what everyone has being saying and you are still "trying to understand".

Anyway, bashing your stupidity has being fun, but i have other things to do right now, have fun going in circles even further.

File: RS1 L flatpads.txt50fc.jpg (109KB, 799x537px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 799x537px

Grado "speed"

>>52873124
>you focus on what people say and provide no measurable data to back up your claim
What claim am I supposed to back up? My own experience with Grados? That is, as far as I can recall, is the only claim I made.

>>52871633
Some of them were pretty far off from what I would want to listen to. Treble peaks get grating, but severe dips and plunges can wreck tonality as well. Quite a few of those in-ears fall into that category if played back from good voltage source.
ADDIEM had the problem of high distortion with high playback level, something that is normally more limited with in-ears.

As for MK5, it wasn't lacking in treble extension, and I end up using EQ on the ER-4S and 4B anyway. Both are fairly insensitve, but the MK5 costs less with and still has the isolation.

>>52872464
Not like Sennheiser earphones are the pinnacle of clarity either.
>>52872699
You can get different tips. The Shure tips fit on Etys for example.
I wouldn't spend any time on the mid level Shure in-ears.

>>52873092
k240 is semi-open, so they're not actually open headphones

>>52873137
isn't this really bad?

>>52873092
hi2050

>>52873137
they're certainly quick to come off my head.

>>52873137
>>52873158
Thanks for those. Led to further explanations on head-fi that support my point.

>You very specifically mention detail retrieval as a top priority. As an owner of an HD600 thats been modded with HD650 cable + silver mesh drivers, neither of these cans have ever been my best at detail retrieval. Particularly in the upper midrange-lower treble tones where female vocals and solo instrumentation reside. In terms of detail retrieval in this frequency range my [Grado] RS1, MS2 (while I owned it) and [AKG] K701 were better.

>>52867910
>Foobark2k-Modi2-Magni2U-K7XX

If not the HD600/650, what should I be getting around ~$300 to complement my current set up?

Might also buy a bottlehead crack sometime this summer.

>>52873339
HD600 or DT880 600 ohm premium

pick one

File: 1448533196659.jpg (25KB, 353x353px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 353x353px

>>52873196
ok, so? what does that mean?

>>52873339
>memehead crack
why

>>52873339
>bullshit crack
why

>>52873124
And silence yet again. I guess these "claims" were manufactured so you can make up some bullshit to blame me for your ignorance.

>>52873160
Not that Anon, but from what i've read on this argument, he is talking about >>52869770, "Resolution" and "Speed" not being nonsense.
It's fair that you like any headphones that pleases you though.

>>52873478
That looks rather like a question rather than an assertion. In implication, at best, an attack on another's assertion requiring some substantiation/explanation.

>>52873092
go for the 240 anon

>>52873358
Perfect thanks.

>>52873433
>>52873393
I haven't rolled many tubes, are they truly inaudible? Is digital the new audio master race?

>>52873339
HE 400i or save up a bit and get the TH X00 next time it comes to massdrop or now if you must

>>52873602
It isn't audible. But by the way you listen to the tubes. It isn't music that you listen anymore.

>>52873358
this >>52873626 is a way better suggestion

>>52873626
>>52873641
Was literally reading the head-fi review on these as you posted this. I'll have to wait for them to come back around again to order, but that's probably what I'll go with.

>>52873824
>reading the head-fi review
never, ever do this.

>>52873321
Interestingly both the rs1 and k701 have little blips in the impedance and subsequent rise in distortion in that range. Detail retrieval or added detail?

>>52873914
You'd have to ask the original poster but having both HD650 and SR225i I'd say retrieval rather than addition. It seems fanciful to credit creation over retrieval. Distortion, clipping, etc. usually affects what is being reproduced rather than producing new effects.

File: px22_1.jpg (33KB, 476x564px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 476x564px

Is this Turtle Beach any good or is just another gamer meme thinghy?

>>52874423
total shit

What do you guys think of the Fostex x Massdrop TH-X00? Would they be an upgrade from K7XX's at all? Mainly listen to blackmetal and emo.

>>52874700
they would more or less complement it

File: 0000013639__MDR-100AAPYCE__M_450_450.jpg (20KB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 450x450px

Any opinion on the MDR-100AAP?
(gay colors aside)

>>52874754
M50x is better, and that saying much about it.

>Budget
50~100
>Location
U.S.A.
>Source
Computer, android phone
>Preferred type of headphone
IEMs
>Comfort level
Plan on sleeping with them, need to be comfy
>Preferred tonal balance
Bassy or V shaped
>Preferred music
DnB, and some chillwave
>Past headphones
Shitty Rosewill's and now Superlux HD668b

Also it would be nice if theyre pretty durable, for some reason my headsets don't last very long

>>52874786
Shure SE215 or SE215 SPE.

>>52867215
Where can I get sexy japanese bunny suit :3

>>52874862
>>>/a/

so i almost bought Sennheiser RS120 on ebay but then i realized that it was 12 YEARS OLD

holy shit i wish they put the release dates of products in descriptions so I don't accidentally buy some fucking outdated technology

the Sennheiser website doesn't even list any of their products' release dates anywhere. what a scam.

>>52874924
why are you buying wireless shit

>>52875142
because not having a cord is better.

unlike you i live alone so i have expensive speakers for all the audio quality i need.

>>52875195
>muh speakers
i do to family

>>52875299
i'd do your family

>Budget
200ish
>Location
USA
>Source
Behringer Q1202USB
>Preferred type of headphone
Open I guess
>Open or closed
Open
>Comfort level
Yes?
>Preferred tonal balance
Dont know.
>Preferred music
Electroswing and video game explosions
>Past headphones
MH30 and G35s

If it sounds decent as is comfortable for 2+ hours then I am happy.

where can I get a good quality 3.5mm male to male cable? Need about 4 foot length.

>>52875374
AKG K702

>>52875759
he didn't say that he was gay so K702 is out.

File: 1452207044439.jpg (79KB, 630x891px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 630x891px

>>52875856
>being this mad

>>52875759
>preferred music: video game explosions
>recommends nobass
You really thought this one through didn't you.

PM-3 or those Fostex that are on Massdrop?

>>52875926
Probably the Fostex if you can wait until May and can put up with the thick ass non-detachable cable with 1/4" jack.

>>52875926
the fostex

>Budget
300$ (before tax) hard limit
>Location
Canada
>Source
Android and PC
>Preferred type of headphone
Over ear preferred but I can settle with on ears
>Open or closed
Closed
>Comfort level
Medium I guess?
>Preferred music
Hip-hop/Piano/Pop/Rock. Honestly a little bit of everything.
>Past headphones
None

[spoiler]I also really like how headphones like the AKG K701, Sennheiser Momentum (I'm thinking maybe of getting the ivory coloured one?) and Sennheiser HD 598s look. So bonus points if they're nice to look at.[/spoiler]

>>52876348
Forget the 701 the K702 is better

>>52876382
I believe they're out of my price range.

>>52876403
You can find K702 for around $200. If you're lucky you can find them below $200.

File: ggmm cuckoo.jpg (125KB, 790x528px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 790x528px

Had these fucking things for THREE (3) days before the connection piece broke off while unplugging them. Damn shame cause they were actually quite comfy and sounded pretty good.

Now I have to wait a while to get my damn 60 bucks back.

Is any headphone made in china basically utter crap?

>>52876451
no that things just shit

>>52876431
Aren't they open? I'm looking for closed ones.

>>52876544
why would you want closed

>>52876348
>>52876544
Get an extra $100 and buy the Fostex

If that's really not an option then consider the MSR7

>>52875943
>thick cable
>non-detachable
>10ft
>1/4th in.

Fucking why? Closed headphones are only good for portable use in my eyes, and this totally ruins that.

I was actually considering these for portable use until I saw that

>>52876725
>in my eyes
full-sized headphones in public make anyone look autistic. in-ears/earbuds are for portable use.

Reaching limit, you know the drill.

>>52876730
>>52876730
>>52876730

>>52876737
depends what kind of portable you're talking about

wearing headphones during errands or working or school is fedora tier

but if you're traveling, sitting on a train or plane or passenger of a car etc then they are acceptable

>>52876778
>passenger of a car
damn that just about as antisocial as it gets

>>52876790
1. you mean asocial

2. you shouldn't distract the driver from driving

>>52876817
this isn't a bus, if you seriously can't talk to your driver while they're driving you should consider being driven by somebody who can do both.

>>52876840
uh no, distracted driving is bad

if you're comfortable with riding with a distracted driver then you should see a psychiatrist, which you should see anyways because apparently you require social stimulation constantly

File: hpg.png (1MB, 1462x734px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1462x734px

>>52872415
>Julia Holter
yes

I have the sennheiser hd 558 and an xlr mic. would the Focusrite Scarlett Solo be good to drive my headphones louder and be able to use my mic? any suggestions possibly?

>>52876864
tends to happen when you're a social person. you really don't get out much if you don't think most people are talking in the car

>>52876944
normal social people think before they speak and are comfortable with quietness, if you're talking constantly you probably have an IQ below 80

>>52876965
normal people speak in the car.

>Budget
$70 - $100
>Location
US
>Source
IDK, but it's a decent ~$30 sound card I think, don't have any amps or that
>Preferred type of headphone
Over the ear
>Open or closed
Closed
>Comfort level
As long as its not painful for extended periods of time
>Preferred tonal balance
Bassy
>Preferred music
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJYlnIMFVBo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWlkTPIX2i0
>Past headphones
http://av.jvc.com/product.jsp?pathId=210&modelId=MODL029436&page=1
Very good sound quality for the price I suppose, only complaint is that they're not over the ear, can fuck up sound quality if they're not on perfectly

I like colorful headphones too, but I wouldn't mind a pair of black headphones if need be

What are the best and most durable earbuds on the market? My old ones (Razer hammerheads) just stopped working on me today. I'm looking for something $50 or below. Can anyone give recommendations?

>>52877246
takstar pro80

>>52877320
Looks perfect, thanks
I've worn Razer Blacksharks for 2 years for roughly 5-6 hours straight every other day, my ears are impervious to pain

>>52877373
if you want added comfort, buy some brainwavz hm5 pads too. the hybrids are really nice as they have the velour on the front face that will be against your face. i have a friend i gave my spare hm5 pads to on his pro80s and it's much nicer than the stock ones.

why is the headphones mascot always blonde?

>>52872415


I had 3 sets of se215. cables suck, connectors suck. comply tips are pretty nice, isolation is really nice, but they sound a little anemic. almost like listening to music with stuffy ears while travelling up a mountain.

they do have good customer service if that means anything to you.