Raptureon

They won't have one of the caps on them, and this build is more about looks than temperatures. Even if that were to make a difference in temperatures (which will be negligible if at all) then it's hypocritical of you to recommend that he shouldn't get motherboard waterblocks but instead change one fitting to increase flow a tiny amount.

How is it improved? Links?
 
It also looks much nicer in my opinion, which is one of the main goals of this build.

He's probably going to be using the 900D though, so space really isn't much of an issue. Plus the fillport's liquid will have a better angle at which to fall down with the Y splitter.

You should be MUCH more worried about a bent tube (not kinked, as shown in your avatar) if the Y-splitter worries you with its "resistance to flow".

I'm not denying that, I'm arguing that you shouldn't accuse others of things you're guilty of yourself. And yes, you actually did say that  only in some instances are they actually good, albeit in different wording.
 
I don't "seem to think that IEMs are better", I'm arguing that they're better than you seem to think. From the way you describe them, you make them sound like very poor performers except on a few select occasions, which simply isn't true. You're trying to prove me wrong on an argument that I'm not even making.
 
What makes you think that soundstage is so important? For (at least) the third time, it doesn't even make much of a difference in FPS games like Battlefield 3, and that's coming from a player with 700 hours+ of game time. You on the other hand are simply saying that if headphones have a narrow soundstage they're automatically exempt from the title of "gaming" headphones, even though it doesn't make nearly as much of a difference as you think.
 
I didn't say that frequency response accuracy is important, I said that sound quality is to the point of being able to hear and distinguish sounds like footsteps (from other noises and whatnot). I don't know why you keep pointing out that comfort is subjective either when sound quality is as well.
 
I said that they seem to because it's one less component that you'll need to reach adequate sound levels for gaming.
 
And by the way, there are people on both sides of the fence that say "IEMs sound better/worse than over ear headphones" in those threads that were linked, which is contrary to what you're saying. At the end of the day it's really up to the listener, why not take your own advice and not talk about subjective factors like sound quality and soundstage?
 
I'm referring to sound quality as in what makes people choose one headphone over another because of how it sounds. In that case it is subjective (a subject's personal perspective, feelings, beliefs, desires or discovery, as opposed to those made from an independent, objective, point of view).
 
There is no such thing as something sounding "better" without there being an opinion (which is what is meant by "quality" in this case) unless you're referring to how well it reproduces an audio sample or that sort of thingand if there's an opinion, that makes it subjective. What you're referring to is how well the audio sample is reproduced, which would be objective, but I'm not talking about that. This is why a headphone may seem to have better sound quality than another because it sounds more punchy rather than realistic.
 
I didn't play in noisy servers, actually. You do realize that you linked a Youtube video that's in a very lossy format, right? Not to mention that the way the person recorded the footage often drastically affects not only the sound but also the visual outcome.
 
I agree that over ear headphones are probably more often optimal for gaming, but the way that you said it made it sound like good gaming IEMs are a slim choosing, which is what I disagree with. To make it clear, I wasn't arguing that IEMs are generally better for gaming, just that they are more than you seem to think. (As a side note, if I were to make a decent gaming setup from scratch, headphones wouldn't be my priority, but rather other hardware like the mouse, monitor and GPU.)
 
I would welcome an argument that omnidirectional microphones are better, because they can be, it's just that the majority of the time they aren't.

I don't think that. As I've said several times, what I'm arguing is that IEMs are better for gaming than you seem to think. Also, what you refer to as an ad hominem was justified since you don't seem to have much experience with Battlefield 3 by saying that it sounds so bad.
 
I brought up the fact that there are so many players that actively play the game because you said that I was cherrypicking. I'd agree that it would be cherrypicking if I picked a random unpopular game and brought up the fact that soundstage doesn't matter, my point is that it's a game that was optimized well for headphones with good soundstage and yet my scores weren't noticeably affected even with headphones that have a poor soundstage.
 
You're cherry picking again by choosing a video with
 
a ) lossy audio to "prove" that it's muddy, etc.
 
b ) heavy action that isn't necessarily how the game actually is (and it wasn't for the majority of the time that I played).
 
I may be reading things that aren't explicitly there, but they definitely seem to be implied. You could argue that "you're reading things that aren't there" after someone said "I wish gays had rights. LOL", it's the implication that's often the most important part of a quote.
 
Do I agree that IEMs aren't the absolute best for gaming? It depends on what you mean by that. If you mean in general, then yes, but there are situations where they will outperform over ear headphones.

This must be the third time I've said how, why not take your own advice and read the posts above?
 
In what way am I overreacting?
 
As I said earlier (what is it, the second time?), it doesn't matter if they're said explicitly or not, they can still be read implicitly.
 
What makes headphones "gaming headphones"?
 
How about we consider what games will actually be played? Since audio equipment rarely excels under all usage scenarios (especially at this price point), we have to determine what games will be played first. You're assuming that they will benefit from soundstage enough to warrant the purchase of these headphones, even though games like Battlefield 3 don't benefit as much as you say they will. If they're playing League of Legends, soundstage is practically meaningless from a score standpoint. And yes, the amount of hours I have in Battlefield 3 is relevant since it's necessary to test whether it makes any noticeable difference to my score when gaming with headphones that have a narrow soundstage.
 
Like I said earlier, it depends on what you mean by sound quality. It seems like it can be subjective or objective, depending on how it's measured. I agree that sound quality isn't necessarily that important for gaming just as soundstage isn't always either, but it can be and it's another factor to consider (which is my point).
 
Muddy can mean "poorly defined", which is what lossy audio can cause. I can actually tell the difference between all of the weapons, including the MP443 and M9. And even if lossy audio didn't cause muddy audio, you still aren't accounting for the capture card used to record the video, which often makes a drastic difference.
 
There are two people that agreed on that page, and one that disagreed, that's not incredibly convincing evidence. Anyway, I've played both games thoroughly and can say that Battlefield 3 definitely sounds more convincing. It's all subjective though, take your own advice and stop talking about it since everyone has their own opinion.

Holy crap, you haven't been reading my posts, have you? It's because you're implying that IEMs are rarely a good choice, that's what I disagree with. When did I ever say that IEMs are usually better than full sized and over ear headphones? "Stop putting words in to my mouth".
 
Me: "They can outperform over ear headphones by quite a substantial amount, look at the Westone ES5's or 4/4R's for example. From my experience their performance/dollar ratio is superior to that of over ear headphones, actually." (not always).

Me: "What I'm saying is that they're better than you think, to be completely honest it doesn't sound like you have much experience with using them in games at all."
 
I'm not trying to attack you (if that's considered attacking at all). It's a relevant point since you act like you know these games when you're just quoting what other people say and ignoring posts that disagree with you. I'm not trying to attack you (if that's considered attacking at all).
 
You still haven't proven that the sounds so muddy. You back it up by saying that other people agree with you even though there are people that disagree as well. If that isn't cherry picking, what is?
 
"Soundstage is above average.  The UE Triple.Fi 10 is the only IEM I own with a larger soundstage.  However the TF10 makes you feel about 15 rows deep at a concert and the W4 seems to bring you closer, maybe to within 5 rows."
 
"Other attributes that bear mentioning, soundstage on the Westone 4 is very good. "
 
"Soundstage
Feels like the band is just infront of me!"
 
http://www.head-fi.org/products/westone-4-true-fit-earphones
 
Those were just the first three in chronological order, sorted from most helpful first. From my experience I didn't find sounds to not be directional other than when they're an echo, which is understandable since echos change where the sound is perceived to be coming from...
 
If you want to prove that the sounds are muddy, Youtube videos are a biased way of doing so. At LEAST present less lossy audio samples rather than a link to some poorly recorded Youtube video.
 
We agree on some things, not all. We can leave it at that.

So you're saying that if someone told you "HA! Nice haircut.", it's stupid to argue against that? Just because you didn't explicitly say something doesn't mean that there isn't an implied message.
 
I hate to ask since it'll probably just make the argument last longer, but when did I "change what I said"? You have clearly been changing the quoted text, which is something that should probably be fixed soon...
 
And finally, I never said that you were talking about all IEMs, and I understand that you aren't. We've both misinterpreted each other's posts at one point or another, it's silly to point out that I did when you have just as many times.

zm-mic1

ya i disagree  :P they just dont match every rig but they can look good

What's your budget?

A good mouse, keyboard and a fast monitor are very important. Also, be sure that you have at least 60 frames per second constantly, it'll help you out the most.

Tearing generally occurs when an LCD monitor receives a signal that exceeds its refresh rate. In theory, a 120Hz monitor won't have this issue as much as a 60Hz monitor would (at least with current hardware), and this seems to be the case, at least for me.
 
I highly recommend choosing a 120Hz+ panel if you don't mind having worse colors and want to maximize your gaming experience (in terms of your score). The difference is very noticeable, it's a must-have for any extremely competitive player, but I don't recommend using it for all purposes.

Handles are unnecessary for the most part, unless your rig is extremely heavy. The 350D seems like the ideal solution for you.

You'll probably be interested in the 802.11ac solutions such as these: 
Router: http://ncix.com/products/?sku=74214&vpn=RT-AC66U&manufacture=ASUS&promoid=1280
 
PCI-E Adapter: http://ncix.com/products/?sku=77959&vpn=PCE-AC66&manufacture=ASUS
 
With the recent flagship phones such as the ASUS Padfone Infinity and the HTC One providing 802.11ac support, it's likely that we'll see an abundance of 802.11ac devices in the near future.

Nice build, and that's one impressive camera

ASUS Rampage IV Formula.

Many efficient 750W+ PSUs will suffice. Personally I'd go for a Corsair AX760 or above to match the color scheme you seem to be going for. They're extremely efficient, by the way, and practically silent, I love mine.

Most of your parts are well picked, but I have a few recommendations.
 
First of all, two GTX 670's won't always get you a constant 120FPS in-game, but 60FPS shouldn't be a problem.
 
16GB of RAM is excessive for almost everyone. For reference, most games can only utilize up to ~4GB since they're 32-bit applications.
 
The G600 is more suitable for MMOs, if that's fine with you. If you want a mouse better suited for shooters, I can vouch for the Razer Mamba 2012.
 
Other than that, it's a good build. Just keep in mind that a cyan case with red RAM and a black motherboard is a little bit of an odd color scheme, so you might like these RAM sticks: http://ncix.com/products/?sku=59431&vpn=CMZ8GX3M2A1600C9B&manufacture=Corsair&promoid=1280

The 3930K is very comparable to the 3960X. It's great for video editing, but is overkill for most games.
 
As for the GPU, it really depends on what you play.

There seem to be some issues with Sony Vegas Pro and hyper threading, as described here: http://www.videoforums.co.uk/sony-vegas-media-studio/28851-warning-intel-core-i7-users.html
 
It seems like the 3570K would be the better choice. Good luck.

It really depends on what you're using it for. I'd choose the Corsair 900D for an X79 water cooled build, the Bitfenix Prodigy for a Mini-ITX build, and the Intel NUC or a tablet for portability.