is expensive headphones needed ?

[simeon kalcut]

I bought a cheap headphone which are decent and for a audiophile the only drawback of the darkrion headset, build quality is good.
*Update* I regret buying "gaming headphones" should of looked at audiophile headphones instead better quality atleast I know next time tbh

[arronleeds]

Well if you want the best audio the more expensive ones will deliver but with expensive headphones comes expensive dacs and Amps.
I have the sennheiser g4me one "headset" and it's amazing, but my next purchase is the sennheiser hd600.

[simeon kalcut]

 

Well if you want the best audio the more expensive ones will deliver but with expensive headphones comes expensive dacs and Amps.

 

I regret going for "gaming headsets" tbh Im planning in 3 years time to build a studio so a good audiophile headphone with a mod mic will do the trick

 

 

Well if you want the best audio the more expensive ones will deliver but with expensive headphones comes expensive dacs and Amps.

I will probably be mainly using the speakers so I needed a quick short-term headphone that will do me good for the year the build quality is suprisingly good but it lacks bass in my opinion

[arronleeds]

If you want good headphones for a great price mate look at the sennheiser hd598 or something like the audio technica ad700x.

[simeon kalcut]

If you want good headphones for a great price mate look at the sennheiser hd598 or something like the audio technica ad700x.

 

Yeah I defo will but for now I need to save my money up 

[arronleeds]

Yeah I defo will but for now I need to save my money up

Best of luck mate.

[HeyYouOK?]

Honestly I'm not an audiophile but i bought a pair of "Soul" by Ludacris. Not only is it durable(2 years at this point) the sound is great and i dont have to worry about breaking it since the wires can be detached and switched and it can fold...but then again I probably dont know quality sound *shrugs*

[simeon kalcut]

Honestly I'm not an audiophile but i bought a pair of "Soul" by Ludacris. Not only is it durable(2 years at this point) the sound is great and i dont have to worry about breaking it since the wires can be detached and switched and it can fold...but then again I probably dont know quality sound *shrugs*

 

I got the darkrion on amazon apparently they are really good for the money I noticed the sound is ok but I tested it on a potato laptop so and I  have yet to build my PC so with a better onboard sound it will hopefully boost the sound qulity 

[GoldSrc]

Nope, you don't need expensive headphones, you may want them, but you certainly don't need them.

I have some cheap Sony MDR-MA100 open headphones and they sound fine.

[Counter-Strike Player]

Well you can buy a perfectly functional (and reasonable) membrane keyboard for ~$11, or you spend ~$100 on a mechanical one. Is this comparison not valid when it comes to headphone choice? The keyword you chose to write is "need" so that implies a lot.

[Ryoutarou97]

I dunno, is them? Is them needed you for?

 

I don't really understand what you're asking. Do you want recommendations? Are you asking if you should buy new ones? I think the latter, so it depends whether you value them. I can't answer that, you have to look inside yourself...

 

*chuckles like yoda and walks out*

[mr moose]

When it comes to audio, the price tag causes a lot of confusion.  Generally in life you get what you pay for,  When it comes to objectively measurably attributes you most certainly get what you pay for.  However this doesn't mean that everything that cost more is good, it Just means you'll rarely find a solid product cheap.   when it comes to subjective qualities (audio) the price tag means little.  If you work in a studio and need consistent audio that can be eq'd and you know what you are listening to then the price will go up again, but for games and listening to music at home the price tag is not reflective of a good experience, for that you simply need to listen to a few headphones and choose the one that sounds best to you.

[NeoZeon]

Here is the thing. Before I had CIEMs I didn't think they were that big a deal. Then After 5 years i stepped on them and they broke T_T. I replaced them with a pair of 100 dollar earphones and of course the comfort and sound werent good enough, so I bought a pair of CIEMS again. Nothing quite compares.

[KaminKevCrew]

with expensive headphones comes expensive dacs and Amps.

 

That's not true at all. Not even a little bit. I have a pair of headphones that I paid $700 for, which is a steal for what they're worth, and I run them off a $65 dac/amp combo. And guess what? As long as it's solid state, and reference grade, I won't hear any difference between the $65 one, and a $4000 Yggy and Ragnarok Schiit stack! Funny how that works, isn't it?

Honestly I'm not an audiophile but i bought a pair of "Soul" by Ludacris. Not only is it durable(2 years at this point) the sound is great and i dont have to worry about breaking it since the wires can be detached and switched and it can fold...but then again I probably dont know quality sound *shrugs*

I'd just like to say that I really appreciate that you pointed out that you don't have a broad experience with headphones (I'm being totally serious). So many people say that $50 headphones (I know yours aren't, it's for the point I'm making) are the best headphones ever, when those are the nicest ones they've ever heard. If you love them and they are the best you've heard, that's great! I have no problem with that. I have a problem when people try to talk about very poor quality headphones as if they are the best things in the whole world when they've heard nothing better. Yeah, thank you for that. It's refreshing to see.

Well you can buy a perfectly functional (and reasonable) membrane keyboard for ~$11, or you spend ~$100 on a mechanical one. Is this comparison not valid when it comes to headphone choice? The keyword you chose to write is "need" so that implies a lot.

Exactly.

subjective qualities (audio)

High Fidelity audio is absolutely NOT a subjective quality. It is entirely quantitative, and so many people fail to understand that. People's opinions of the sound may be subjective, but the actual measurements and level of sound quality (In the context of it being faithful to the source) is absolutely not subjective. Not in the slightest. (I'm talking mostly about headphones, as far as DACs and amps, well that's all a bundle of bullshit. As far as that goes, between $200 and $1900, buy the O2/ODAC. at the $2000 and above mark, get the benchmark DAC2. Anything under that, you get the SMSL 793-II, or any of its alternatives, like the Fiio E10k, etc. If you can't afford those, you need to save up, because you won't get any improvement anyway. Oh, and all of that is excluding Electrostatic headphones, becasue those are a totally different beast. (And tube amps don't count, because by definition, they are not high fidelity.

Here is the thing. Before I had CIEMs I didn't think they were that big a deal. Then After 5 years i stepped on them and they broke T_T. I replaced them with a pair of 100 dollar earphones and of course the comfort and sound werent good enough, so I bought a pair of CIEMS again. Nothing quite compares.

Hehehe, I'm buying my first pair of CIEMs this weekend... I've already got a REALLY nice pair of headphones though, so I have something to fall back on...

[mr moose]

High Fidelity audio is absolutely NOT a subjective quality. It is entirely quantitative, and so many people fail to understand that. People's opinions of the sound may be subjective, but the actual measurements and level of sound quality (In the context of it being faithful to the source) is absolutely not subjective. Not in the slightest.

 

 

Yeah, righto mate.

 

Go one, show me how you objectively prove that the FR from headphone A is better than the FR from headphone B.

[KaminKevCrew]

Yeah, righto mate.

 

Go one, show me how you objectively prove that the FR from headphone A is better than the FR from headphone B.

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that the headphone that can most accurately reproduce the signal from the recording is the best headphone, end of story, no questions asked. If you have a preference for the coloration of sound that a headphone provides, that's fine, but it's not the highest fidelity headphone. You literally quoted what I'm saying here, so let me try this again: People's opinions on the sound of headphone may be subjective, but the headphone that is most accurate to the original signal (Be it from a record, or digital file) is the highest fidelity, and therefore the best headphone. The reason for that is, if you have a headphone with a perfectly flat frequency response, then you can EQ in any sound you want. That's why the headphone with the flattest response is best. That's why Hifi audio is not subjective. It is totally quantitative.

[mr moose]

: People's opinions on the sound of headphone may be subjective

 

Exactly. and that's all there is to it for the average end user.

 

The reason for that is, if you have a headphone with a perfectly flat frequency response, then you can EQ in any sound you want. That's why the headphone with the flattest response is best. That's why Hifi audio is not subjective. It is totally quantitative.

 

No.  Some headphones don't like being pushed around.  Some headphones will distort if you try to add gain to low frequencies, others become shrill when the higher frequencies are boosted.  Just because a headphone measures flat doesn't mean it can handle an EQ.

[KaminKevCrew]

Exactly. and that's all there is to it for the average end user.

 

 

No.  Some headphones don't like being pushed around.  Some headphones will distort if you try to add gain to low frequencies, others become shrill when the higher frequencies are boosted.  Just because a headphone measures flat doesn't mean it can handle an EQ.

That may very well be all there is to it for the average user, which, by the way, I don't disagree with. However, that doesn't change the fact that there are objectively better headphones, despite the fact that some people will not like them as much as a subjectively worse headphone.

 

If you have a perfect pistonic movement of the driver, and it is not impeded by it's own mass, and it is allowed to move as far as needed without restriction, then any of those issues you just listed will become non-existent. The more expensive a headphone gets, the closer it tries to get to that perfect ideal. Shrill highs would be a product of resonances in the driver because it is made of something like mylar that can have weird waves in the material. Lows are a function of the driver needing enough room to perform excursions of a sufficient distance. All of which would be fixed in a perfect system. The more you pay for a headphone the more it (should) try to reach the perfect ideal. That's why it's not subjective. There is a definite marker of perfection, and whatever headphone is the closest to that ideal is the best headphone. As such, it is not subjective.

[mr moose]

That may very well be all there is to it for the average user, which, by the way, I don't disagree with. However, that doesn't change the fact that there are objectively better headphones, despite the fact that some people will not like them as much as a subjectively worse headphone.

 

So there are objectively better headphones that people find subjectively worse?  I think this sums it up better:

 

 

 for games and listening to music at home the price tag is not reflective of a good experience, for that you simply need to listen to a few headphones and choose the one that sounds best to you.

 

 

 

 

 

If you have a perfect pistonic movement of the driver, and it is not impeded by it's own mass, and it is allowed to move as far as needed without restriction, then any of those issues you just listed will become non-existent. The more expensive a headphone gets, the closer it tries to get to that perfect ideal. Shrill highs would be a product of resonances in the driver because it is made of something like mylar that can have weird waves in the material. Lows are a function of the driver needing enough room to perform excursions of a sufficient distance. All of which would be fixed in a perfect system. The more you pay for a headphone the more it (should) try to reach the perfect ideal. That's why it's not subjective. There is a definite marker of perfection, and whatever headphone is the closest to that ideal is the best headphone. As such, it is not subjective.

 

You are describing an impossible product.   The perfect headphone that defies the laws of physics does not exist, and given everyone likes a different amplitude structure to their spectral wave cycle, even if it was possible not everyone would like how it sounds thus making headphones a subjective experience.

[KaminKevCrew]

So there are objectively better headphones that people find subjectively worse?  I think this sums it up better:

 

 

 

 

 

You are describing an impossible product.   The perfect headphone that defies the laws of physics does not exist, and given everyone likes a different amplitude structure to their spectral wave cycle, even if it was possible not everyone would like how it sounds thus making headphones a subjective experience.

Yes, there are. For instance, I don't like electric cars, but they are certainly objectively better than their fossil fueled counterparts in just about every way.

 

I know I am describing an impossible product. However, that doesn't mean that headphones don't strive for that ideal. I think we can all agree that it would make the best headphone, period. As such, the closest thing to that would be the best (objectively) headphone. 

[mr moose]

Yes, there are. For instance, I don't like electric cars, but they are certainly objectively better than their fossil fueled counterparts in just about every way.

 

Except in travel range, especially when you try to carry any weight.

 

 

 

I know I am describing an impossible product. However, that doesn't mean that headphones don't strive for that ideal. I think we can all agree that it would make the best headphone, period. As such, the closest thing to that would be the best (objectively) headphone. 

 

No, we can't agree on that because the best headphone is subjective, not objective.

[KaminKevCrew]

Except in travel range, especially when you try to carry any weight.

 

 

No, we can't agree on that because the best headphone is subjective, not objective.

Travel range is only valid for now, and differing weight does not make a difference when you are traveling at a constant speed. It only matters when you are stopping and starting. 

 

As for the second part, it looks like we can't reach a consensus, so I think we might as well leave it here rather than muddling this thread more than we have  

[mr moose]

Travel range is only valid for now, and differing weight does not make a difference when you are traveling at a constant speed.

 

but it still is an issue now thus not objectively better.  Your point about constant speed only stands if there are no external factors like wind or hills.

 

With regards to objective/subjective audio you can be sure I know what I am talking about, I may not be the best or most knowledgeable in the field but I certainly am experienced professionally.

[h264]

no

[SSL]

... everyone likes a different amplitude structure to their spectral wave cycle, even if it was possible not everyone would like how it sounds thus making headphones a subjective experience.

 

This is why expensive (i.e. most) headphones are dumb.