Headphone/Earphone Help

Hey guys, I am in need of some GOOD quality headphones for my laptop.

I personally like the noise canceling ones that completely cover the ears, but they are not a must have (I would prefer the headphone to completely cover the ear though). I DO NOT want a mic attached to the headphones please.

Also, I have heard alot about some very nice earphones that are out on the market today, I usually don't like earphones because they tend to hurt after using them for a while... Any input on this? And if so, why do you prefer earphones over headphones?

Thanks a bunch guys!

Budget= Up to $250.

 

I love my shure se210 personally. Remember that the sound output device is jsut as important as the ear/headphones. My shures sound ok on an Ipod touch but they sound amazing on an archos or hooked up to any sound amplifier. I use a creative x-fi I got on ebay for my laptop audio. Also, make sure you encode your music at high bitrates.

 

Just go to head-fi.org and check out the recommendations there.

 

I can recommend some, although I agree that you have much better chance at Head-Fi.

Overall, I don't recommend noise-cancelling headphone at all. Considerably inferior sound quality for price, and inner-ear earphones are much better bet for noise-isolation.

I like full-sized headphones myself, though - and you should have quite a bit of options as 250$. Actual recommendation would depend on what you use your headphones for, and that kind of information.

 

I recommend the ones I have. UltimateEars Super.Fi Pro 5. I spent a long time researching various headphones, and these are the ones I decided on. But yeah, I'd say you should probably head to a headphone forum too.

 

I'll recomend my Shure SE420. Goes for like $266 on amazon right now. That's $133 under the MSRP of $399.

But yeah, go to headfi.

 

You should check out AKG-K701 ( open-back dynamic headphones, which offer the most accurate sound reproduction ). They can be found for around $230 online and sound unbelievably clear with a huge soundstage, although they are best with a dedicated amplifier... but yeah, head-fi is where it's at. Look under the section " computer as a source ". You'll find that you probably are going to want an external soundcard, and if you take the popular advice from head-fi then you are probably going to avoid creative cards. Emu0202 is an affordable option, as well as a few others.

 

I just ordered the Sleek Audio SA6. They're getting raved about over on Head-Fi, they're supposed to be very balanced, and somewhat customizable by swappable bass ports and treble tubes. I can't wait til they come...

I was strongly considering the Future Sonics Atrio as well, but decided the bass would probably be too much for me (even though many claim it's just deep, not out of proportion or boomy). Another front runner was the Klipsch Image, but sound quality takes a little bit of a back seat to size and comfort.

 

these seem reasonable for you, i hope this helps smartguider.com
http://www.smartguider.com/headphon...eId=246&productTypeFilter=filter&guideId=1701

 

in-ear cannot compete with the sound quality from circumaural open-backed headphones.

 

While that may be true in general, at $250 they certainly can. You can get some excellent IEM's for that price, but far from the best circumaural cans. Besides, the OP said he wants noise isolating headphones, and closed circumaural cans can't compete with open air models, either.

Full size headphones with dynamic drivers are much harder to drive, too, not to mention they're full size, and take up a lot of bag space.

 

I guess I overlooked the importance of noise isolation in the OP, but it's not at all true that IEM's are going to deliver equally to good open-air headphones. The AKG K701 is rated as one of the best open-air sets; although they retail for $450 they can be found for under $250, and will best any IEM in every category besides portability and noise isolation. Also I mentioned in my previous post that a dedicated amplifier would be necessary.

 

Thanks a bunch for ALL of your replies - I appreciate it!

Last thing: I noticed on some of the higher-tier products many state that when playing "crappy" music they make it sound horrible. An amplifier and high quality music is heavily recommended when using them.

95% of the music I listen to have been downloaded from LW - does this mean If I buy a $200-$300 headphone/earphone it will sound worse than a cheaper one?

 

A good audiophile quality headphone won't make the music anything, it faithfully represents it. Thus, if the recording quality is crap, or it's compressed all to hell, the headphone will reveal those deficiencies with great detail.

Saintalfonzo, I think you're not giving a good IEM enough credit. Some, like the Future Sonics, actually have expansive sound stages, and even some single driver armature models are getting impressive frequency response ranges these days. As far as sound signatures, they can vary just as widely as a circumaural can, from bass heavy and warm to highly detailed and punchy to outright accurate.

 

If you're going to get a high quality setup to listen through, you are going to want to steer toward FLAC ( basically a zip file for music that retains all the quality of Wave ) quality files or at least mp3 320kbps ( lossy, but the least lossy mp3 ). According to some it's not just the bitrate but also the type of encoding used that can determine the quality of mp3s - LAME is a good quality and popular encoder if you are going to stick with mp3, although I can't say I've personally felt there was much difference. I go with FLAC as much as possible.

 

Generally, type of encoding doesn't really matter at high birate (more than 200kps). Also, for most people, mp3 lame will achieve sound transparency with 175kps vbr(160 for ogg aotuv).

However:

Most people don't know how to encode music. So files from LW are generally at 128kps, which is acceptable, but not very good.

If you have a 50$ earphone with high quality audio file, it will sound better than a low quality audio file with a 200$ earphone (in fact, with you premium earphone, you will hear every details, and every artifacts).

 

even with the ipod earbuds you can tell 192 kbps is terrible and 128 is worse, unless you are desensitzed by chronically listening to s**t bitrates

 

Bad comparison. Flac's sound awful on ipod earbuds.

Over 192 kbps mp3, it gets really hard to tell the difference (there are tests you can take, and few actually hear the difference).


Note: I may be wrong about the bitrate, but sound transparancy occurs at lower bitrates than most think.

 

Good and cheaper headphones are available in the market.Good headphones are actually coming with microphone.Its good to search for a headphone rather than earphone it might be damage your ear.


---------------------
Steve Eric

Email Marketing

 

http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Lame

with MP3 lame, 175 kps (even 160 kps) is okay.

So, I can't understand how:

this is possible for most people with a good encoder and decoder(I have heard 160kps files having with artifacts than a 192 kps files, but it's not problem related to bitrates).

Those are headsets. You don't travel with headsets.

 

Yes, there are cheaper headphones that perform well, but besides an occasional diamond in the ruff, they just don't compare to the better ones we're talking about. Now some people prefer the deceit and sound signature of a lower cost headphone, but that really doesn't make them any better. It's pretty clear that, despite preference, better = more clarity and accuracy.

I'm not saying active noise cancelling isn't a good and interesting tech, but it has no place on a high end headphone. After someone spends a fortune on their headphones, a good clean source, and a nice amp, the last thing they'll want is a hiss from noise cancellation inaccuracies.

Nah, not so much. The closer the sound source is to your ear drum, the fewer decibels you need to perceive the same level of sound.

 

How is that possible? Do wav's sound awful, as well?

 

Of course, don't except iPod's earbud to give you anything magic.

 

?? I'm not quite sure what your first statement means. My point was that even through the lowly ipod earbuds a distinction can be made between a FLAC and a 192kbps or lower mp3 of the same song. FLACs will not sound worse than any compressed format through any speaker, if that's what you're insinuating.

Also, I've taken a test online that used the DMB intro to "Two Step". You are supposed to try to distinguish the difference between the highest quality LAME vbr (V0) and a wave file of the same song. I got 7/10 correct through my AKGs which were being fed from my crappy onboard soundcard through a LD MKV amplifier. I believe that there will be a more apparent difference when I switch to an external DAC/soundcard. Either way the test is flawed; you should be able to switch between the different sound formats on the fly. Both files should play simultaneously, allowing the user to manually switch between them at the same point in time. If you could do that rather than hearing one 30 second clip and then starting the other one from the beginning, I think the average scores would rise. At the same time it goes to show that V0 files are high quality, even if not the absolute best.

 

There was supposed to be an "even", as in even Flacs sound awful on ipod earphones. Since everything sounds bad on them, they're not a good choice for comparison.

Do the test in the post quoted below. And be honest about it. I mean really honest. Then we'll talk.

 

Yeah, and that doesn't just mean your sound card; with decent headphones there is a noticable increase in quality encoding at 192kb/s WMA from the default 128kb/s WMA.

EDIT: Oh, I didn't realise this has already been discussed in this thread, sorry.

 

I was already honest... really honest. I took the hardest level test. Some people can hear things others can't. What did you get on the test, Fabarati, and through what setup?

 

Haven't taken it yet. Haven't bothered. Probably won't hear the difference. I don't have a good amp connected to my laptop, though I have pretty good IEM's (Shure SE420).

 

I am with saintalfonzo here, I "think" can notice the difference between FLAC and 226k OGG..

And its not just me. My mother is no audiophile, and she used to like to listen to MD copy of music CD. One day, I played original CD for her instead, and she noticed difference even before I told her that I put Cd instead...Now, MD uses inefficient compression, at its bitrate is 384k bps...

But then, recent music CDs are way over-compressed and horrible-sounding to begin with, so those who enjoy these CDs probably won't care for any degrades in sound quality because of compression.

 

...er-4p...

 

I'd get the Ultrasone HFI-780's if I was you.

 

For that price ($250) I think you can better headsets.

 

You can find them for 200 shipped, but what other headphones do you think are better? I'm open to hear other opinions.

 

ATH-ANC3.----i feeling this model sound is good