The WSJ article has no credibility because it starts with, "Headphones as fashion statement makes total sense." First, headphones always look ugly. Second, fashion statements, by definition, never make any sense.
The Nov., 2011 Consumer Reports said $35 Sony PIIQ Giiq MDR-PQ2 headphones sounded good. I can't find the original evaluation article to tell how other models performed.
The hi-fi business pushes a lot of junk science and fashion over substance, as a quick check of any high-end hi-fi magazine will show.
I've found Consumer reports to be extremely unreliable when it comes to ratings of audio gear. I have no idea what their criteria are, they are too concerned with non-sonic issues, and they concentrate on mass market products, ignoring brands that potentially provide much better value.
_________________ Too bad. If UN were moderated I'd vote to merge this thread with mine from a few days ago, where we were discussing freq response and impedance and such.
But while I'm here, I'd wager a bet that most folks on this thread, as well as the one I started
formatting link
, probably already have "headphone amps" at home, either as part of their rig or perhaps a spare one collecting dust in the attic. They're called RECEIVERS.
Don't get me wrong. If you spend most of your headphone time in front of the PC at home, or in a cubicle at work, then a headphone amp is the way to go - it's compact and probably makes most headphones over $50 really shine.
But I find my 80w/ch JVC receiver from the late '90s to be quite revealing through the pairs I own.
Everybody hears a little differently, so what sounds good to you is the "right" set of headphones. And at this level and these prices, you're only going to make that decision once, so money (within reason) isn't really the issue.
I play piano, and my dachshund (at the time, may he R.I.P.) would just howl whenever I sat down to play. Now, my playing isn't "that" bad! He was probably just trying to sing along. But it was clear I could get no peace until I plugged in the headphones.
So I got a a pair of the AKG K240's. Two pairs actually. Really nice sound. A bit pricey.
And the new dachshund? Well, no howling - but I'm pretty sure he'd much prefer to chew on the cords! :)
Yes. They were good 20 years ago, but they're bulky. The field has gone on. They are good for $35, but there is a much wider range of choices if you consider phones up to $100/pair.
Not really. I just bought (just received them today, actually) a pair of Shure SRH-840s. They sound AMAZING, much more balanced than any headphones I've ever had before. I've had probably something from every style under $100 MSRP (not counting ridiculous Amazon discounts), but these were $200 ($130 on Amazon). I'm hearing stuff I've never heard before, no exaggerated bass, mids OR highs, and they are overall MUCH clearer than other stuff. I'm a young audiophile (I'm
16), and still learning, but these are great. Still waiting for the FiiO E6 to come in for portable hi-fi amplification.
All of those styles can sound really good on decent headphones. Not, in any sense, realistic (since I doubt that anyone really has a banjo playing in the center of their skull), but enjoyable.
You were asking whether headphones needed to cost a lot, and the answer (as always) is "It depends." Good transducers often cost more to produce, and a good deal more to produce repeatably (so that the left and right ones sound the same as one another, and so that the pair of headphones you buy on Tuesday sounds like the one you bought last March). The side-to-side match is important for everybody, and the unit-to-unit match is important for professionals who need predictability.
How well do the cans, if sealed, shut out the outside world, and how well do they keep the music inside from leaking out audibly? That may not matter to a home listener, but to a studio user it may be crucial. (Think of a singer overdubbing a vocal to a recorded backing track; you don't want the backing track leaking out of the cans, to be picked up -- tinnily -- by the singer's microphone.)
How well do the headphones hold up to being dropped on the floor over and over, to having their cords yanked at either end? Those things aren't necessarily big issues for most home users, but they matter to professional studio people, whose cans have to withstand all sorts of abuse. Ruggedness costs money, and the studio owner would usually prefer to pay twice as much for headphones that last ten times as long.
And a lot if them work by putting a relatively large resistor in series with the headphones across the speaker output, so vastly increasing the ouput impedance, and reducing the damping, which does horrible things to the quality.
A proper, well designed, headphone amp is the best way to drive headphones, as it will have a low output impedance, and the correct output levels.
You suggest *many* more by writing "They sound AMAZING, much more balanced than any headphones I've ever had before.". (Which is actually not saying much.)
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.