Headphones

[ViPER1313]

All three of you can suck it - I have done more listening tests and ABX comparisons than you can imagine - check out hydrogenaudio.org sometime. If you think the surrounds break in and it allows the sound to become more natural, fine, I'm glad it makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside. Cause the truth is it doesnÔÇÖt. If it did change the sound, speaker manufacturers would recommend break in periods the same as car manufacturers do. It would also mean that the surrounds would be tuned completely wrong for every speaker out there.

I will eat my words if you can show me one blind test where people accurately judged the difference between two of the same speakers, one "broken in" and one not.

[Ginger]

And what about the wires? High quality cables can mean the difference between a $5,000 pair of speakers sounding like $500 speakers and the way they should.

I'll also point out that just because something SHOULD be done does not mean that a manufacturer will reccomend it. Markets are not driven by honesty, not even a little bit.

The Grado SR80 requires little enough power that they sound terrific driven off an iPod or your computer's soundcard. Likewise for the SR60's, which sound incredible and are usually reccomended for use without a headphone amp (not to mention are the BEST deal in headphones today, period. They've won portable audio product of the year something like four times in a row from Stereophile magazine).

I won't say anything about break in periods, aside from the reccomendation rant, as I really don't know much about it. But wires, they will make a difference (I HAVE heard a difference between cheapies and decent jobs). I'm with the guys that can suck it.

[Sijray21]

Im looking to buy some nice headphones, but unfortunately I dont know much about them. These would be more to use at my computer, as I am perfectly content with the ones that I got with my ipod. I realize that the description I gave of what I want is kinda broad, but Im sure you guys have had some experience, or know more about quality headphones than I do. Any suggestions?

Im not lookin to spend to much, but Id be willing to spend some decent money for a good pair.

i'll sell you mine for cheap if you're going to the chili cook off -- $10? i'll post a pic later, they're pretty nice, full ear covering and such with a really long cord :thumbup:

[Maengelito]

i have a pair of sennheisers at work and they sound amazing. they cover the whole ear and i bought them off ebay brand new for like $80.

[lillitnn92]

AKG 240's. have been used in studios throughout the world for many years and i guarantee you will not be unhappy. there are 240s, M and DF versions, DF being the most expensive at $200 from Musicians Friend.

http://www.akg.com/products/powerslave,m...ge,EN.html

[ViPER1313]

And what about the wires? High quality cables can mean the difference between a $5,000 pair of speakers sounding like $500 speakers and the way they should.

I'll also point out that just because something SHOULD be done does not mean that a manufacturer will reccomend it. Markets are not driven by honesty, not even a little bit.

The Grado SR80 requires little enough power that they sound terrific driven off an iPod or your computer's soundcard. Likewise for the SR60's, which sound incredible and are usually reccomended for use without a headphone amp (not to mention are the BEST deal in headphones today, period. They've won portable audio product of the year something like four times in a row from Stereophile magazine).

I won't say anything about break in periods, aside from the reccomendation rant, as I really don't know much about it. But wires, they will make a difference (I HAVE heard a difference between cheapies and decent jobs). I'm with the guys that can suck it.

I am not saying that you should try to pump 200w through a piece of 24ga wire, but any good 14/12ga wire from Home Depot should be more than adequate for a nice stereo system.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=33951">http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/ind ... opic=33951</a><!-- m -->

Once again, other than blowhole "audiophiles" ranting about the benefits of expensive shit (must be better cause it's more expensive, right) can you do a blind test and tell the difference? The placebo effect is strong, and anyone who just spent $100 on wires wants them to sound better.

Real blind listening tests of interconnects ranging from $2.50 to $900 -
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.pcavtech.com/abx/abx_wire.htm">http://www.pcavtech.com/abx/abx_wire.htm</a><!-- m -->

On ABX tests - <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=16295">http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/ind ... opic=16295</a><!-- m -->

[Ryan T]

I didn't pay for the $200 cables that my brother put on the surround sound system in our basement, but the sound was certaintly more crisp and defined after he installed the new wires. No placebo effect, I didn't pay a dime.

[ViPER1313]

I didn't pay for the $200 cables that my brother put on the surround sound system in our basement, but the sound was certaintly more crisp and defined after he installed the new wires. No placebo effect, I didn't pay a dime.

That $200 would have been much better spent on better speakers / amplifier. Glad he paid for it and not you :roll: .

[Evan]

interference is real
signal degredation is real
analog signal accuracy is real

if you are buying twisted copper wire from home depot (excuse me while i laugh) then you might as well buy a cheap shelf unit from circuit city, because your nice spendy rig is going to sound about the same as it.

ask any audiophile, audio magazine, etc and they will tell you that you need to spend at least 20% of your audio budget on interconnects/wiring.

[ViPER1313]

Yet I still see no proof or blind listening tests from you guys that prove there is a difference. Interference and signal degradation are only concerns if you are running very long lengths of cable that have weak signals to begin with. If the length of the cable is long enough (as in VERY long), then some sort of shielded wire may be needed.

I have a 25ft RCA cable (Radio Shack brand, ~$9) that is able to accurately transmit digital data from the SPDIF on my soundcard to the digital decoder in my receiver (both DD and DTS) - there would be no sound if there was too much signal degradation or interference, as the decoder would not be able to recognize the signal. On top of its length, the cable was sitting right next to a power strip. That digital signal was incredibly weak compared to what is output from a receiver to a pair of speakers, and the cable was 6x as long as any interconnects should be on the back of a component system.

I have shown real blind listening tests above on high end equipment to prove my point - where is your proof?

[JackoliciousLegs]

I will eat my words if you can show me one blind test

where is your proof?

DAMMIT JOHNSON!!! SHOW ME SOME EVIDENCE!!!

[ViPER1313]

^
|
|

lol - Damn straight 8)

[JackoliciousLegs]

Ohhh tom cruise... how you provide the world with much joy and laughter....

[Evan]

Yet I still see no proof or blind listening tests from you guys that prove there is a difference. Interference and signal degradation are only concerns if you are running very long lengths of cable that have weak signals to begin with. If the length of the cable is long enough (as in VERY long), then some sort of shielded wire may be needed.

I have a 25ft RCA cable (Radio Shack brand, ~$9) that is able to accurately transmit digital data from the SPDIF on my soundcard to the digital decoder in my receiver (both DD and DTS) - there would be no sound if there was too much signal degradation or interference, as the decoder would not be able to recognize the signal. On top of its length, the cable was sitting right next to a power strip. That digital signal was incredibly weak compared to what is output from a receiver to a pair of speakers, and the cable was 6x as long as any interconnects should be on the back of a component system.

I have shown real blind listening tests above on high end equipment to prove my point - where is your proof?

This argument is now officially retarded. You say you have "proof" when its really just your own perception. But you disregard several other people's perceptions in this thread as not proof. Go off and sit in your own little world, I give not a shit if you want to buy home depot cables.

Your "blind test" doesnt say a damn thing, "proof" is laughable. Not only have I been talking about analog wiring here, but your statements about "there would be no sound if there was too much signal degradation or interference" reveals that you have absolutely no clue as to how digital audio works in the first place.

interference is real
signal degredation is real
analog signal accuracy is real
and here is an extra one for you since you brought up digital
bit-loss is real

[JackoliciousLegs]

We should promote a new MM campaign: "We hate everyone, even ourselves!" lol....

[G.Irish]

You're both wrong.

The blind test link is a laughably small sample, so much so that I'd have to say its irrelevant. That would be like asking ten average people which car handles better out of two. Some people would say that the one that soaks up bumps best handles better and of course those people would be wrong. And there are A LOT more statistical errors that could come from such a small sample size.

However saying that the "extra special cost" wires are going to be appreciably better than Home Despot wire is just about as suspect. Signal degradation and signal interference are real phenomenons but they are also quantifiable. Until someone shows up with some empirical data for these variables the jury is out.

Of course if you use gold cables with super-shielding you're going to get a better signal, that's not debateable. What is debateable is whether the difference leads to significant and appreciable differences in end product sound quality. Then the next question is whether the difference is worth the price premium.

[ViPER1313]

You're both wrong.

The blind test link is a laughably small sample, so much so that I'd have to say its irrelevant. That would be like asking ten average people which car handles better out of two. Some people would say that the one that soaks up bumps best handles better and of course those people would be wrong. And there are A LOT more statistical errors that could come from such a small sample size.

However saying that the "extra special cost" wires are going to be appreciably better than Home Despot wire is just about as suspect. Signal degradation and signal interference are real phenomenons but they are also quantifiable. Until someone shows up with some empirical data for these variables the jury is out.

Of course if you use gold cables with super-shielding you're going to get a better signal, that's not debateable. What is debateable is whether the difference leads to significant and appreciable differences in end product sound quality. Then the next question is whether the difference is worth the price premium.

The test does not try to show which sounds "better," it is to show if there is any perceivable difference. If a person can tell the difference between two sources 7 out of 7 times, there is less than a 1 percent chance that they are guessing correctly. Even though the sample was lacking the almost 50% split between correct and incorrect guesses shows there was no apparent difference.

The car example is not valid at all, and the results are statistically valid. A valid analogy would be to ask 10 average people to get behind the wheel of a BMW 330i and an M3, alternating between the two for 7 trials with a blindfold on, and ask them which car they were driving each time. That's all I'm trying to say, there is no perceivable difference, thus 10 cent a foot wire is as good as $100 a foot wire.

Many times, these special "oxygen free" copper wires, cryo frozen wires, etc, have more resistance than a regular piece of 14ga wire and alter high end frequencies in a weird way.

[G.Irish]

The test does not try to show which sounds "better," it is to show if there is any perceivable difference. If a person can tell the difference between two sources 7 out of 7 times, there is less than a 1 percent chance that they are guessing correctly. Even though the sample was lacking the almost 50% split between correct and incorrect guesses shows there was no apparent difference.

The car example is not valid at all, and the results are statistically valid. A valid analogy would be to ask 10 average people to get behind the wheel of a BMW 330i and an M3, alternating between the two for 7 trials with a blindfold on, and ask them which car they were driving each time. That's all I'm trying to say, there is no perceivable difference, thus 10 cent a foot wire is as good as $100 a foot wire.

Many times, these special "oxygen free" copper wires, cryo frozen wires, etc, have more resistance than a regular piece of 14ga wire and alter high end frequencies in a weird way.

Still wrong. Care to compute the confidence interval for that 7 person blind test they did? Were the candidates selected randomly? How many randomly selected participants would you need for your test for a statistical significant sample? What about some possible sources of response bias? Not trying to be an ass but good statistics are not that simple.

I could survey 7 people sitting around me right now and ask them if they've graduated college and all of them will say yes. Does that mean 100% of Americans go to college? No, it just means I'm at work surrounded by a bunch of people with degrees. So with my incredible unscientific sample of 7 people I've managed to come up with a totally wrong conclusion.

The car example was meant to illustrate that the question you ask, how you ask it, and how you expose the subjects to the test condition could give you totally erroneous results.

I'm not saying that in the end that your assertion is wrong, I'm just saying that the blind test you posted the link to is of little value in proving your point.

[JackoliciousLegs]

SHOW ME THE MONEYYYYYYYYYY!!!!

[Evan]

However saying that the "extra special cost" wires are going to be appreciably better than Home Despot wire is just about as suspect. Signal degradation and signal interference are real phenomenons but they are also quantifiable. Until someone shows up with some empirical data for these variables the jury is out.

Of course if you use gold cables with super-shielding you're going to get a better signal, that's not debateable. What is debateable is whether the difference leads to significant and appreciable differences in end product sound quality. Then the next question is whether the difference is worth the price premium.

One important thing to consider when it comes to audio is that any small bit of interference or degredation (any anomoly) is amplified, and makes a big difference in final quality. So while it may not seem that a home depot roll of twisted copper pair is much different, even if it lets in a tiny bit more interference or cross-signal then it is going to come out in the audio.

And as for price difference, this is why the experts recommend your interconnect budget as a percentage of your total budget. NOt a flat out "buy the best shit period"
If you have a $200 sony reciever and dvd player, getting high dollar kimber cables wont make a damn difference.

And dont think that Im just sitting here justifying my purchases to everyone. I dont buy the expensive shit. I use esoteric and AR wires, which are a good deal for the money and better than any monster shit, but still reasonably priced. (I admit, I have some Monster stuff too from when I worked at circuit city. it is silly cheap when gotten at cost)