Huh. I've never really had an issue because I chalked it up more to people buying cheap crap and expecting it to be good. But $65 for a pair of headphones isn't exactly cheap. Was it a familiar brand but maybe a counterfeit? Or was it a brand you've never heard of, but the price is justified by very positive reviews? I'm curious.
Headphones seem to be a very strange category in general. You can get exceptional good value for money if you know what to buy and on the other hand pay a lot for utter crap.
My secret weapon for headphones is to buy pro audio/studio headphones. Their market just won't let them get away with gimmicks.
If you want closed back (recommended for office listening - keeps noise in an out) get AKG k550/k553 (negligibly different editions of the same thing)
If you want open back (scary accurate but bleeds sound like crazy) get a pair of Grados, the lower end ones like the 65 will do fine. I say this with love, but those headphones ruined some records for me. You can tell where they cut vocal takes on major label records because the noise floor drops. Crazy stuff.
Listening is extremely subjective though. Headphone types can be better / worse for certain listening habits (there are people out there who don't think great bass makes great music, folks), and for different ears. Music taste itself is extremely subjective. Best thing is still to get to a trusted hifi store nearby with your own, known music in best quality and your current best headphone model and test through candidate models yourself. (Admittedly, I'd still read some reviews before investing a few hundred dollars into headphones.)
> Headphone types can be better / worse for certain listening habits
No they can't. Loudspeakers (of all kinds) can either faithfully convert electrical signals into the vibrations they represent, or they can't. Equalizer presets can be better / worse for certain listening habits. There is no reason, when even a $5 MP3 player has EQ presets, that headphones shouldn't be aiming for a flat frequency-response curve.
Now, admittedly, there might be some preference axis between being able to faithfully replicate high amplitude signals, vs. having low impedance and therefore being kinder to the batteries of portable devices (and/or not requiring an extra in-line portable headphone amp.) But other than that one distinction, headphones can really only be "better" or "worse" at doing their one job.
For loudspeakers it's more complicated than a simple flat on-axis response; the dispersion into the room is critically important. Which in turn means that a flat frequency response curve is the wrong target for headphones designed to mimic good speakers, because a flat loudspeaker is not flat when measured at the ear, which is where headphone drivers are located.
Good point, but I do wonder—is "full fidelity" really best defined as matching the sound profile of good speakers? Or is it better defined by e.g. whatever the sound engineer was hearing on their studio monitors when they finished the mastering process?
That is: in most digital artistic media, the goal of the reproduction process is to faithfully carry across the art (and engineering) that "went in" on the other side. Listeners can tweak to their preference from there, but the baseline should be to replicate the work as the artist experiences it, rather than as the artist expects their audience to experience it. (An analogy: the "default", pre-choice-of-audience way to reproduce a painting shouldn't involve a frame and gallery wall, but rather should involve the painting standing alone as a canvas on an easel in a room in the same lighting conditions it was painted in.)
That is: in most digital artistic media, the goal of the reproduction process is to faithfully carry across the art (and engineering) that "went in" on the other side
I can't agree with this. I don't think it's right at all. Art is targeted at a broad band of senses, from aesthetic through sensory to emotional. You're hung up on the narrow band of sensory reproduction, but that isn't what's most important to actual humans.
Take an example: some electro house track that person A might have heard on a night out, where they had a really good time. They would have heard it in the middle of a crowd (dampening a significant chunk of the sound), probably overly loud, probably with the bass pumped up.
If person A later listens to that track on studio headphones focused on faithfully carrying across engineering and "art", they'll be hearing the mechanics of the music and how it was constructed, but it will be subjectively a poorer reproduction of the remembered moment and experience. They'd actually be better off listening on much lower quality headphones that had boosted bass and muddy reproduction that let different frequencies intermingle, to make sure it doesn't sound spare and separated out like high quality headphones tend to.
Another example: person B might have been to a symphony or opera. They'll have a much happier time with high quality headphones separating out each instrument, appreciating the individuals even as they form the symphony.
Context.
An analogy: the "default", pre-choice-of-audience way to reproduce a painting shouldn't involve a frame and gallery wall, but rather should involve the painting standing alone as a canvas on an easel in a room in the same lighting conditions it was painted in
I think you're nuts! There's multiple frames to view a piece of visual art; from the artist's perspective, they may have designed the piece for a specific location, so you're better off if it's shown that way. It may have been designed to be contextualized (e.g. in a triptych, or as ironic contrast with its original commission). But the passage of time also contextualizes art; art can become meaningful not for its intrinsic artistry or aesthetic, but because of the narrative around the piece, or the artist, or the city / country at the time. A piece of art might be interesting only because e.g. it was once stolen by a very interesting person and got into the news that way; it might not have anything to do with the artifact as a thing-in-itself.
And I hasten to add that that doesn't mean it's bad art. Art is about provoking broad band reaction in the viewer. In order to do that, it needs to trigger the viewer's pattern matching neurobiology relating to different aspects of their lived experience. That's inherently contextual, both on the subject side and on the object side. There's no escaping context.
There is no reason, when even a $5 MP3 player has EQ presets, that headphones shouldn't be aiming for a flat frequency-response curve.
Sure there is. The market might prefer a baked-in EQ preset. In fact, different subsets of the market may prefer different presets. And that brings it back to the grandparent's point. The customer is always right; even when they're technically wrong, their preferences are what count.
Can confirm - for everyday in-ears, these Panasonic in-ears are indeed good and durable.
Cheap but surprisingly good end:
Superlux HD668B (20-40$, as they got popular you may need to watch out for counterfeits). IMHO they are on par with some popular 200$ - 300$ Beyerdynamic / Sennheiser / AKG models. You may want to follow one of the online guides to replace the ear cup plastic with velour.
Fakespot: A (90%)
Expensive end: AudioQuest Nighthawk, 1st model. Their sound is unique and "purist audiophiles" may not like it, but they work pretty well with my listening habits; the experience has been pure joy so far and they are very comfortable.
Fakespot: A (90%)
Listening habits: Metal (symphonic-, power-, progressive-, i.e. complex and with classical music elements; e.g. Blind Guardian) and some Depeche Mode
Happens all the time. Last few times I've purchased electronics on Amazon that have been relatively recently listed (i.e 20 reviews or less), I've made a point of looking at the reviews.
Click on first reviewer's name, and that reviewer has just happened to review 5 items all on the same day, and those are the only 5 items they have ever reviewed. And all 5 items are completely random (electronics, bed linen, garden equipment, clothing, etc). Rinse and repeat with second, third, fourth reviewer and a similar pattern arises.
Majority of recently listed electronic items that I've been looking to purchase follow the same pattern.
You just described my reviewing behavior, and mine are legitimate reviews. I buy a variety of products. My purchase history is listed in my account, and every once in a while I go and review a bunch of them at the same time, in reverse order of purchase because that's the order in which they appear.
The brand is Bluedio. They have pretty good reviews considering the price. I have used Xiaomi before and was amazed by quality/price. I was hoping Bluedio, which is another Chinese brand would be also good. I was wrong.
Say you want bookshelf speakers. Going with the budget pick I might get Pioneer SP-BS22-LRs, but they're around 4500RMB here in China. Other reputable brands come in around 10000RMB, which is so far outside my budget its not even funny. But most of these speakers are made in China anyways, so you start sleuthing. K, i find a post on an Audiophile forum that tells me that HiVi(/Swan) makes the drivers for most upscale Audio equipment. Let's check what HiVi has. Ahh, they've got a bloody gorgeous pair of speakers for 1699RMB[0], and a passable one for 699RMB, and an official Taobao store. And they'll do.
Boots I would not buy from China, in China, you can return them and test.
For budget headphones, Senneheiser is what I get in Germany, Tascam if you're in the US, JVC for Asia. Don't know any Chinese brands of note there.
For smartphones Xiaomi is blowing it out of the water right now. Their Redmi（红米） line is incredible value. Then there's Huawei, Meizu, OPPO, Honor, and whatever Hammer(Chuizi) is.
Most of the problematic products as they relate to reviews on Amazon are Chinese products. When I used to do incentivized reviews, all but one single company who approached me for a product review (this does not include eBook authors) was not Chinese.
>> For a certain class of goods and for reasonable price points, you do get what you pay for.
This is 100% true, but I find a lot of Chinese products punched above their weight. During my time reviewing, I turned down the cheap sketchy products and focused mainly on stuff that I wanted that looked like they were well made. And you know what, a lot of the products I got were actually fantastic relative to their selling price.
That's true. Buying Chinese electronics is a lottery (usually). I would, however, recommend some Xiaomi products. They are really excellent considering the price.
BTW I actually ended up buying Sennheiser headphones after I returned the crappy ones.
I bought a Bang & Olufsen Bluetooth speaker this year. It broke after a month. It was just sitting on a table. I've also bought some no-name Chinese crap Bluetooth earbuds that have never failed. All of this is really anecdotal, and it's a complete lottery.
right? I have a HD280 from ~12 years ago? the headband started to disintegrate maybe 5 years ago but it's still quite usable at home and the sound and comfort is still as wonderful. bought a 2nd pair maybe 5+ years ago when it was discounted at literally half-price, so that's the one that gets taken outside on field-trips.
Joining this bandwagon. The headband on mine just sort of started to disintegrate into a weird sticky mess after 2-3 years. Then someone pulled them open too hard and cracked the plastic. Mine are from 2004, still working perfectly, but the whole headband area is now pretty much duct tape and glue.
I've never heard a Sony audio product that actually sounded bad, and I've owned a lot of them, including earbuds, headphones, MP3 players, cassette players, audio systems, Blu-ray, SACD and MiniDisc ;-)
They haven't all been the best sounding, or even the best value, but they've all had decent sound quality. Some of them have had exceptional sound quality.
I have to agree. I owned several Sony audio products and listened to many (earbuds, amps and portable players) and they always sounded good for the money. I especially like the way their portable players sound, they seem to have really nice amps.
(Darn, had to create an account to post this comment)
Yeah, where I’m reading online reviews and sold statistics, I always have to mentally normalize for the fact that most people just buy the cheapest item.
I wish sites like Amazon had a feature such as “people who buy similar quality items to you, also bought this...”
