Headphone Recommendations for all Categories and all Prices

[rice guru]

20 hours ago, GamerDude said:

The guys are right when they'd mentioned KZ, they do have some budget IEM's that punch well above their weight class

Kz's really budget line this year has been really strong edx, edx pro, the zex all really good for the price. The usual kz treble is not there and overall pretty good sounding especially if you like thame v  shaped sound of kz before but hate the treble like me. 

[Spuriae]

Normally I'd say it's nice to see peoples' reviews and rankings to provide more perspectives, but in this case it doesn't appear you have personal experience with most of these or have a special approach to the ranking and are just recommending things you've heard are popular? That style might be workable in a comparative review aided by measurements or impressions from highly consistent listeners, but here it adds nothing.

 

Part of what makes audio so hard to understand for newcomers is the awful signal to noise ratio of audio discussion, and something that looks like a recommendation list that isn't based on anything doesn't help that problem at all. For all of their drawbacks, at least things like Rtings and the r/headphones recommendation list have some value for comparing different headphones at a glance. Crinacle's list exists. My point is that there are already similar resources out there, and unless you're willing to spend a lot of time or money comparing/measuring/analyzing headphones, this list won't add anything valuable to the discussion, even if you otherwise do everything right.

 

I'm not going to address any specific recommendations other than to say that I disagree with most of them in a "picking the first result on Amazon in each price range would return a similarly useful list" sort of way.

• What are the recommendations based on? Is it perceived sound quality, in your opinion? Without knowing about what you consider good sound, this isn't useful. As it stands this thread can't be construed as anything but a list of popular headphones at different price points.
• On-ears as a whole are a small niche, and there's a false equivalence in giving them their own section, like the way a CPU ranking list having a "best Bulldozer CPU section" could mislead readers into thinking they're comparable or generally a good idea. They're not good for sound quality or portability; they offer all of the drawbacks of other categories with few upsides; they're (from an audio engineering perspective) basically oversized earbuds. IEM's are better sounding and more portable. The KSC75/Portapro family is the only exception that comes to mind because they design for the openness of on-ears.
• Without detailed blurbs about each of the models listed, the thread isn't useful for newcomers trying to do comparative shopping. These blurbs have to be more than roundabout explanations of "sounds good"; does one have more bass than another? Does another suffer from sibilance or bass distortion? Is one easy or difficult to drive? Does one isolation particularly well, or have a particularly good soundstage? Presented with a list of headphones at different budgets, all of which are described as sounding good with no significant qualifiers, the reasonable reaction would be to assume that they all sound basically the same, and go out and buy the cheapest one.
• For audio reproduction purposes the major categories are usually IEMs, closed-backs, and open-backs. If your list is based on something other than sound then different categories could make sense. Open-backs are usually associated with the best sound quality, and the comparative lack of them here is concerning.

Please pay attention to the pinning requirements.

On 10/2/2021 at 11:32 AM, LogicalDrm said:

Unless you give very strict line that list follows (for example Cooling tier list which is purely about performance and based on reviews). Best for X budget is your personal opinion, unless you provide several reviews that will have same products at same places. Pinning request is under review.

A basis for the ranking needs to be provided, and it needs to be something that can be defined so that readers can infer aspects of the products by reading the list. "Best for the budget" and "best overall" don't work absent significant data analysis accompanying each entry. "Best sound" is purely opinion unless you define beforehand what you think constitutes good sound; for instance, Rtings has an algorithm heavily based on the Harman curve. Crinacle defines good sound subjectively but provides subjective tone and technicality ratings, provides objective measurements, and gives a blurb for every ranked headphone that incorporates those elements. Both sites have extensive articles on their rating methodology. A reader might have a different definition of good sound, but they will be able to get useful information from the reviews above because they know what they are based on.

 

Simply linking reviews isn't sufficient. The reviews need to provide evidence that the products are reasonably ranked in the way stated. For instance, both of the reviews you linked for the Jabra Elite say it's better than the Airpods. These reviews cannot be used as evidence supporting a bang-for-the-buck list which places the Airpods in a higher price bracket. Similarly reviews that do not compare products in any way cannot be used to justify ranking one product over another in general, absent a specific characteristic which can be compared between the reviews.

[The Flying Sloth]

16 hours ago, Nimrodor said:

Please pay attention to the pinning requirements.

A basis for the ranking needs to be provided, and it needs to be something that can be defined so that readers can infer aspects of the products by reading the list. "Best for the budget" and "best overall" don't work absent significant data analysis accompanying each entry. "Best sound" is purely opinion unless you define beforehand what you think constitutes good sound; for instance, Rtings has an algorithm heavily based on the Harman curve. Crinacle defines good sound subjectively but provides subjective tone and technicality ratings, provides objective measurements, and gives a blurb for every ranked headphone that incorporates those elements. Both sites have extensive articles on their rating methodology. A reader might have a different definition of good sound, but they will be able to get useful information from the reviews above because they know what they are based on.

 

Simply linking reviews isn't sufficient. The reviews need to provide evidence that the products are reasonably ranked in the way stated. For instance, both of the reviews you linked for the Jabra Elite say it's better than the Airpods. These reviews cannot be used as evidence supporting a bang-for-the-buck list which places the Airpods in a higher price bracket. Similarly reviews that do not compare products in any way cannot be used to justify ranking one product over another in general, absent a specific characteristic which can be compared between the reviews.

Completely agreed,
You cannot hope to create an objective tier list for audio (a highly subjective field) taking all aspects into consuideration without considerable experience to help you make an accurate analysis and considerable funds to continue to purchase new products.

 

This is one of the main reasons that I never attempted to get my mic and interface guide and recommendations pinned, because I knew full well it was my opinion adn that there was no way I was going to personally use enough gear to make the guide all-encompassing. While I believe my gear guide and the included recommendations are helpful to get the uninitiated to a point where they can make an informed decision for themselves, I find it difficult to see how this post could achieve a similar goal, it doesn't talk about the different technologies at play nor any background information to help learn anything beyond the iopinions of the OP, besides, a large portion of the list at release seemed to be products the audiophile communite tends to consider sub-par at best (airpods, Beats and the like) which makes it more difficult to take the OPs recommendations with much more than a grain of salt.

[Frugivore8894]

Ok I think I have a few things I need to address. 

This is on relation to the two posts above by @The Flying Slothand @Nimrodor

First is pinning. when I first posted this yes the intention was to maybe get pinned but that is not longer what I am really aiming for because of the subjective nature of this field. Second is the way I rank things. The way decide how/ where something goes on the list is not great and I recognizes that but here it is. The first thing I do is think if me (or my friend who sometimes helps me with this) has any experience with a good option for the price bracket. If we do than I take that in to consideration for the next step. Then I google something like "Best budget wireless on ear headphones" and I get like 3-5 lists for sites like "sound guys", "toms hardware", "Rtings.com", and others. I look a most of the lists that come up for good sources and see which products come where in each list. If one product is rated the best in each list then I usually do a quick google to look at a few specific reviews of them and if they look go then they go on the list. And now back to my experience, I take my experience with the product and if its good then I compare it against the other options in the price range. I usually put both if they are good but I have cut some of the ones I have experience with. and for reviews I just try to get a few diverse opinions in there. And finally some of my choices are just crap. Yes I am aware that some things like the beats are just bad and yes I am working on changing those options. And one quick note about the open back and closed back issue. I know they should be in there own categories and its on my list but again this is a work in progress and its not a part I have gotten to yet. 

 

Like I have said so many times this is still a work in progress and I want people that have experience to share that so that I can include notes about specific things that you just don't get form online reviews. For example @GamerDude's post about the IEMs was packed full of info and (when I have time) I am excited to unpack and share on the list. 

 

I hope this clears a few things up I know I didn't address everything but I think I did a good job at getting the big things.