Comments on: Three of the world's best headphones

This shootout with three contenders for the world's best luxury headphone--the Denon AH-D5000, Grado Labs GS-1000, and the Ultrasone Edition 9--was a tough assignment for the Audiophiliac.

[4schler]

I'm quite partial to my Beyerdynamic DT880s, but I've tried the Denons and their little brother, the AH-D2000s, and they both sound great.

I'm still trying to find a headphone amp to upgrade to from my CMoy DIY altoids-tin, though, and it's a lot harder to find those to try before buying.

[tek-ed]

My beef with this review is that the reviewer lost all credibility when he mentioned that he tested these headphones with an iPod.
An iPod? Come on! you plugged a $1,500 pair of headphones into a crappy (industry wide know fact) sounding iPod?
And you lost further points by not telling us the bitrate at which the song you were listening to was ripped at.
come on now...are you seriously going to tell us that these facts don't matter? And again...an iPod? OMG. That's like telling Robert Fripp that he has to play Pachibel on a plastic toy ukelele!
An iPod...sheesh...What are you going to test them in next? Various assorted friuts and vegitables?
Ed

[WhyFi]

You might have some credibility if he had ONLY tested them with an iPod, but that's not the case. It seems to me (and most people that read for comprehension, I would wager) that most of the testing was done on home gear (do you really think that he performed the home theater tests on the Nano?) and the iPod listening was secondary. If you really want a bone to pick, it would be with the fact that he didn't list the amplification used for the home listening (then again, you'll find that info if you follow the link to the full review).

[moretroops]

It seems to me that ipod performance is still relevant -- people will use these with ipods bro, whether you're offended or not. Relax.

[rhyno1]

You lost all credibility with your rebuttal with the horrific grammar. I am guessing you mean an industry wide knowN fact. Also, the c in "come on now" should be capitalized as it is the beginning of a new sentence. I, for one, cannot stand when people complain about an article and do so with improper grammar. If you are going to be so critical, use correct grammar please.

[sunn190l]

Not to mention the spelling of composer Pachelbel (I assume that's who yr referring to). Though I agree, testing a high end set of phones on an ipod sounds pretty weird to me. Then again, I have found listening to recordings on a crap set of phones at the record store can lead to gold. Kim's in NYC used to provide listening stations with those junky retro 70s phones that I remember from the public schools. Great production always managed to shine through.

Introducing a layer of consistent inferiority can be revealing.

How about a review of under cans under 250 bucks. Open and closed. Has the Audiophile done this? (I haven't checked) Or a review of earbuds?

[Seaspray0]

I lost all credibility by replying to this comment.

[BigGuns149]

I have to agree that without context the review is pretty useless.

[fzuccaro]

Wonderful observation.
These should be tested on Levinson or Audio Research gear, not a crappy iPod. I especially like the toy ukelele analogy. Stick the headphone jack in a Conch shell and listen to the ocean.

[curcioj]

Failure to cite Stax invalidates this reviewer from claiming he is aware of best in class contenders

[one_flat_monkey]

ditto re: the completely vacuous thinking that allowed using the iPod Nano as the source. that would be akin to using a Yamaha receiver as the source for the Maggies or the Magicos SG was pimping earlier.

moretroops - yo! i don't think that many people who drop 1K for headphones are plugging them into iPods, whether you think so or not. most people listen to iPods in environments that are not quiet to begin with. regardless of whether the cans SG is discussing have noise-canceling characteristic or seal off the outer noise, they weren't manufactured to use with iPods.

[soundman45]

Guys, I think what Steve Guttenberg is getting at in his article is that everthing sounds better when using one of these pairs of high quality headphones, I don't think you should take it so literally.

[one_flat_monkey]

i have no idea what kind of music you like or what sort of system you listen through, but listening to a iPod Nano with $1K headphones is absurd. what does "take so literally" mean in this context? you think he was making a metaphor for life's great mysteries? sorry, but when a supposed hi-end music pundit tells me that an iPod Nano sounds better with $1K headphones, i'm gonna be all "like were you like jogging when you like listened to 'Black Dog'?" maybe he was being chased by a black dog. but that would be taking it too literally.

[make_or_break]

"...but listening to a iPod Nano with $1K headphones is absurd..."

Why? What would you define as the appropriate monetary cutoff point? I have no problem using my $500-700 cans (price excluding aftermarket wires and mods) with ANY of my MP3 players, and that's INCLUDING iPods. Yes, there's plenty of better sounding gear available, but it's not like iPods are absolute crap even if there's better sounding portables available. And I DARE you to find any gear that's intrinsically tied to your power company's power grid and CALL THAT portable...or take AND use on the city bus or commuter train.

For decades I lived by a general rule of thumb when it came to audio: whatever you spent on your music source, at least double that budget for the speakers. Although there have been bargain exceptions along the way, with all the electronics gear I've gone through it's a guide that by and large has worked pretty well for me and my ears. For me the speaker has always been the main component that influences what I hear the most, followed closely by the amplifier. The source equipment? Just as long as it's good enough.

iPods are compromises for sure. I agree that they are not the best sonically capable gear, even in their own product class. I don't choose to take my 2G Touch out strictly for its SQ, or exclude it for its lack thereof. It does a hell of a lot more things than my top-sounding Sony NWZ-A729, Zen X-Fi or my Zune 80; that's where its real nuggets are. I'm sure that for others the nano and the Apple eco-system make it THE worthwhile choice as well. iPods for all their flaws still have generally acceptable sound that definitely benefits from a set of excellent cans. If dropping a grand for some ear candy causes someone to derive sonic pleasure out of an iPod, so be it.

[one_flat_monkey]

it's simply a waste of technology and money to listen to an iPod with headphones of that caliber.

what do you mean by source? if you mean turntable, then it's completely reasonable to spend half the money you spent on a Linn LP 12 (including tone arm and cartridge), certainly a decent turntable, on a pair of speakers, like the PSB G-Design-GB1 ( http://www.psbspeakers.com/products/G-Design/G-Design-GB1-Monitor ), or B & W CM1s.

[soundman45]

make_or_break, I agree with you. one_flat_monkey, FYI I record music for a living. I've been a recording engineer for over twenty years. I've worked in some of the best studios in the world. What i'm saying from my experience in the pro industry is that the better the speaker, headphone, transducer, whatever you want to call it, the better the sound coming out of the device it's plugged into, whether it be a cheap mp3 player or a half a million dollar Neve or SSL recording console. Audio is a subtractive process. You can only squeeze so much fidelity out of an Ipod. but the better the headphones, the better the resolution of the audio being produced out of that device it's repruducing. Do I use my mp3 player as anything other than a casual listening device ? No I don't. I prefer high resolution audio, 24 bit/96k or DSD. these are the formats I use everday. at work.

[one_flat_monkey]

of course the sound will be "better", in the sense that it will sound better than $29.99 earbuds, but part of the reason is that you're using headphones rather than earbuds. it's a completely different kind of acoustic experience. it might be the case for some people that they would prefer the sound of $100 Sennheiser headphones to $500 Shure earbuds, mostly because of the fact that they have something surrounding their ear.

when you say that audio is a subtractive process, you are saying that you cannot get 100% of the original acoustic information from any system. when you start with a system, like an iPod, where you can only get 96% ( an arbitrary figure ) of the information, it may be that using a $1K headphone allows you to get 95.5% ( or 99.5% of the 96% ), but in actuality, you might get 95% using a pair of $50 Koss headphones. can you really tell the difference? i don't think so, but i think you get the subjective feeling of "better" partly because the Grados are so well-made.

if someone wants to spend $1000 for a pair of headphones, more power to them. as long as they have an iPod, i figure they might as well plug them into the iPod, but, as i said before, those headphones were not manufactured with iPod use in mind, and you know that as well as i do.

[sharmajunior]

I would rather stick to my Senhhiesers. They are all I need. Better spend the 1000 bucks on something more useful like paying your bills in this crap economy.

[clem_cowsie]

I agree with make_or_break.
Why is almost everyone who posted a comment here going crazy over the fact that Steve Guttenburg tested three pairs of the world's greatest headphones on an iPod? Is there really an issue?
Firstly, I understand that iPods don't have the best sound quality out there or the best mp3s to test world-class headphones on, but still. So many people use iPods that the fact Mr. Guttenburg tested such high-class headphones on them is just a bit of extra trivia for iPod owners. Besides, with so many people using iPods, how is it a surprise that some people have the money to get headphones like that?
Bottom line is, no one has any right to tell anyone else what is absurd when it comes to things like this. If someone wants to spend $1000 on a pair of headphones for their iPod, then let them.

[one_flat_monkey]

i'm sorry for the "rights" infringement.

but do you have the right to say that i don't have the right? lol

[jscott418]

The trouble is where is all the high quality media that would show off these fine headphones?
Certainly not any of the online media which is compressed enough to show its flaws on these type of headphones. People for the most tend to go with price and convinence and not quality. iTunes has certaily shown that. You could probably get better quality buying a CD rather then downloading.
Its sad that digital has not brought on the higher quality we at first thought would happen. It has only given a option to tweak quality and to allow data to be shrunk to save space. Without the perception of reduction in quality. This of course is not the case. I am only hoping for a day when audio reproduction from the studio to the home is thought of as seriously as HD content is. Only then will these headphone be worth buying.

[HokiePS7]

Speakers (in any form) are soooooooo subjective. What you consider bright, I may find neutral, etc, etc, etc. It all boils down to what sounds good to you and what your budget is (and/or what your wife will actually let you spend). I have B&Ws in my home theater and use Shure SCL4's for my iPhone. To me both sound amazing. They may sound like crap to you, but since I am the one listening to it.......the only opinion that matters is mine. ;)

[tech_junky48]

Wait....

Am I the only one thinking that, if he's caliming to use the world's best headphones, he should also have a pair of Sennheiser Orpheus's?

[Esquirrel]

I don't know that I'd choose Gil Evans/Miles Davis recordings from the 1950s to test the soundstage generated by headphones.

I also don't think that the test is much good unless you use a decent headphone amplifier and source. Otherwise, the review should be titled something along the lines of "How really expensive headphones sound with a Nano." I think the limitations of the source make the review superfluous. Refinements in headphones will be lost or inaudible if listening to compressed music from a weak source. At least use a simple amp like a HeadRoom Total Bithead or something that can, you know, drive the headphones.

And who goes around town wearing huge headphones with wood earcups? They aren't exactly portable.

Were these cans broken in, or is the review of them new, without burn in? The sound can change significantly as cans break in.

The review doesn't measure up to the items being reviewed.

[acdr92]

this is a good article but useless to me since i will not even consider spending more than $200 on a pair of headphones. I currently have a pair of $30 over-the-ear headphones and am very satisfied with them. $699 headphones? Whoever has that kind of money should donate it to those poor people who can only afford headphones less than $200.

[Seeking_humility]

So perhaps I should wait for the review "Three of the Best Headphones for Cheap Tin Ear iPod Owners". If you are like me (wife, kids, JOB!!!!) the only time you may actually have time to listen to music is through an iPod at the gym. I doubt that I will go out and buy a $1600 set of headphones but I'm not satisfied with a set of cheap stock earbuds either.

[mrmarano]

Who cares how they sound if they don't hold up? I purchased a pair of Grado GS1000s from a reputable dealer based in Montana. A defective amp switch destroyed them in just a few months, so I can never know how long they'd have lasted. Regardless, the replacement pair fell apart in my hands as I withdrew them from the box; the gimbal detached from the headband post. The next pair lasted a couple of weeks before the earcup grille collapsed into the wooden bowl. Believe me, I'm not rough on expensive gear, and I handled those babies like, well, babies. By three pairs I'd had enough. I requested a pair of Sennheiser HD650s and got the balance back.

AH-D5000 from Denon has been designed for music lovers who want to enjoy a realistic sound in complete peace. The enclosures employ housings made of natural wood Mahogany with superior acoustic characteristics that are rich with a broad, natural sound. Mahogany is a very popular material for drum making and guitars because of its great integrity and capability to produce very dark, warm tones compared to other more common wood types like maple or birch. Along with its acoustic characteristics, mahogany's light weight makes it an excellent headphone material as well. A micro-fiber has been used to form the diaphragm so that it faithfully reproduces the sonic details and delicate reverberations that occur in concert halls. The size of the micro-fibers is approximately 1/100 that of natural cellulose used in ordinary diaphragms, and with this density, transmission rates are increased. In comparison, Micro-fiber diaphragms are (x20,000) and natural cellulose fiber diaphragms are (x150).


posted by www.thegiftmallonline.com/
<a href="http://www.thegiftmallonline.com/category/mp4_players/">Mp4 Players</a> supplier

[tbarbanti]

I think that you forgot the impressive headphone of sennheiser, HD800, in opinion of the most referenced magazines about musci production like Electronic Musician, Computer Music, Mix Magazine is the best headphone of all.

Please see

A novel ring-type transducer and innovative ear-cup design make the new Sennheiser HD 800 ($1,395) headphones unique in their class. The 56mm transducer claims to minimize distortion, offering THD of 0.02% (at 1 kHz and 100dB SPL) and a frequency response of 6-51k Hz. The ear-cup aims the transducer at the ear at an angle, mimicking key factors in spatial perception and in the localization of the sound offered when listening to speakers.


http://crave.cnet.co.uk/cnetuk/crave/accessories/0,39101000,49300537,00.htm

http://blog.digitalcontentproducer.com/briefingroom/2009/01/29/sennheiser-introduces-audiophile-hd-800-headphones-at-winter-namm/

http://mixonline.com/gear/newproducts/tech-new-products-march/