Headphones

[vonage6591]

I've been looking around for a new pair of circumaural closed back headphones but as with all audio products it's hard to get a real feel without hearing them in person. They'd be mainly for music and the occasional movie so I'm not looking for a 5.1 set. Basically I'm not looking for the worlds greatest pair but I'd like to get something solid for about $100-150, and so far all i've really seen with pretty good reviews is the Sennheiser HD280 Pro's. Any suggestions?

[Vettezuki]

I've been looking around for a new pair of circumaural closed back headphones but as with all audio products it's hard to get a real feel without hearing them in person. They'd be mainly for music and the occasional movie so I'm not looking for a 5.1 set. Basically I'm not looking for the worlds greatest pair but I'd like to get something solid for about $100-150, and so far all i've really seen with pretty good reviews is the Sennheiser HD280 Pro's. Any suggestions?

They're a bit more, but I'm a big fan of the AKG-270s. They are pretty hi-empedance, so you need a potent source to drive them. However, they're comfortable for long periods of time and sound good.

http://www.audioreview.com/cat/headphones-home-audio/headphones/akg-acoustics/PRD_125820_2750crx.aspx

[SeanPlunk]

Holy crap, I forgot how expensive headphones can be. I'm skeptical any headphone can really make an MP3 sound all that good though. the quality of MP3 seems to be pretty marginal no matter what.

[SexyLxy]

Sounds about normal.....

[Vettezuki]

Holy crap, I forgot how expensive headphones can be. I'm skeptical any headphone can really make an MP3 sound all that good though. the quality of MP3 seems to be pretty marginal no matter what.

Good headphones will HIGH LITE how bad an encoded file is because of their spectral clarity and low noise.

I'm listening on Sennheiser HD 265's, which are closer to $100 I think. They're ok. Not as comfortable or clear as the AKGs, but they're low impedance so you can drive them hard with a weak source.

[vonage6591]

Holy crap, I forgot how expensive headphones can be. I'm skeptical any headphone can really make an MP3 sound all that good though. the quality of MP3 seems to be pretty marginal no matter what.

Depending on the bit rate very much so yes pretty much though anything encoded at 256 or higher is indistinguishable from the wave file. Now on some very very very high end setups there may be slight differences but most not even audible

[vonage6591]

Good headphones will HIGH LITE how bad an encoded file is because of their spectral clarity and low noise.

I'm listening on Sennheiser HD 265's, which are closer to $100 I think. They're ok. Not as comfortable or clear as the AKGs, but they're low impedance so you can drive them hard with a weak source.

yeah it'd be run off of an old onkyo 5.1 in pure direct or possibly the old carver m-200t have. But if i ever wanted to listen to my ipod on a plane i'd imagine it wouldn't be so great

[CorruptCulture]

Holy crap, I forgot how expensive headphones can be. I'm skeptical any headphone can really make an MP3 sound all that good though. the quality of MP3 seems to be pretty marginal no matter what.

That's why I have nothing but .FLACs on my computer now.

I don't download anything else. ;)

[vonage6591]

That's why I have nothing but .FLACs on my computer now.

I don't download anything else. ;)

I think that FLACs can tend to be a little overkill. Once you get into the 320 kb/s or VBR area of mp3's the differences are inaudible. Yes I know there is less data in the file, however when it truly comes down to the human ear cannot detect the difference especially given the listening environments most of us listen to our music in.

[Vettezuki]

I think that FLACs can tend to be a little overkill. Once you get into the 320 kb/s or VBR area of mp3's the differences are inaudible. Yes I know there is less data in the file, however when it truly comes down to the human ear cannot detect the difference especially given the listening environments most of us listen to our music in.

The human ear (good ones) can easily tell the difference if the environmental conditions are good. We're also talking about as compared to a given CD reference. Also depends on the nature of the material. Spectrally and dynamically complex material (like some classical music) does

[vonage6591]

I dunno i've seen quite a few different forum threads on the subject where 3 tracks samples are prepared at 192 256 320 kb/s and lossless. The users always put down 192 as the lowest quality, however after that it is more or less different for everyone. I don't think that most of us could tell the difference between 320/VBR and lossless. Maybe the guys on there are just old, but I couldn't tell the difference.

[CorruptCulture]

I think that FLACs can tend to be a little overkill. Once you get into the 320 kb/s or VBR area of mp3's the differences are inaudible. Yes I know there is less data in the file, however when it truly comes down to the human ear cannot detect the difference especially given the listening environments most of us listen to our music in.

I have the hard drive space, the connection and the means to get them in .flac, so I download flacs. It's nice when I do editing projects or cut music for my girl friend's dance teams. I can definitely tell a difference on a PA system between and mp3 and lossless.

[Vettezuki]

I'm having this exact problem right now. I have a Rhapsody subscription. I like it for its convenience and legality, but the encoding is really sub-par. I might bail. Or I'll keep it to maintain the facade of legality and download the lossless versions. Or do you know of a subscription service that offers at least higher-quality encoding. Rhapsody particularly sucks with the classics, can't even listen to Hendrix.

[vonage6591]

I have the hard drive space, the connection and the means to get them in .flac, so I download flacs. It's nice when I do editing projects or cut music for my girl friend's dance teams. I can definitely tell a difference on a PA system between and mp3 and lossless.

Where do you get all your stuff in .flac?

[keithc]

I have the hard drive space

How much are you up to now?

[vonage6591]

How much are you up to now?

its amazing how cheap storage has become, 1 TB for less than $200

[keithc]

Yeah, I have a 1 TB external hard drive that works great. I just know Steve downloads stuff like mad and I'm wondering how many TB he has now...5?

[CorruptCulture]

Yeah, I have a 1 TB external hard drive that works great. I just know Steve downloads stuff like mad and I'm wondering how many TB he has now...5?

I have 1.2tb on my computer but the .2 is a redundant partition for important stuff. I also have another 400gb on the network that I share for my roommate to watch movies and what not.

At this point, I have 56gb in mp3s and about 250gb in flac.

[vonage6591]

Well i ordered them and they came today. Very comfortable. Definitely do not disappoint, very nice warm clean sound. Highs aren't too harsh at all, no real eq-ing however low end extension could be a little flatter and the frequency response has a peak and dip here and there but overall definitely well worth the money.

[Vettezuki]

Well i ordered them and they came today. Very comfortable. Definitely do not disappoint, very nice warm clean sound. Highs aren't too harsh at all, no real eq-ing however low end extension could be a little flatter and the frequency response has a peak and dip here and there but overall definitely well worth the money.


What arrived? Nice review . . . talk about left handed compliments. :leaving:

[vonage6591]

The Sennheiser 280's I had talked about earlier. Well i mean hey they're not the biggest pimp daddy phones out there but they're quite pleasing to me and in the end, that's all that really matters. Even in nice things i always have to pick out the flaws... i can't help it.:(

[gunfish]

Even in nice things i always have to pick out the flaws... i can't help it.:(

So please don't get him started on his family:D!