Help me choose a pair of canalphones

Discussion in 'Audio Visual' started by antikk, May 2, 2012.

  1. connico

    connico Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    2,659
    Location:
    Sydney
    I break canal headphones all the time, maybe once a year. So i tend to stick to anything under 100 bucks.

    Currently using Vsonic GR02 which have been pretty durable for me.

    It all depends on budget. Just make sure you get comfortable plugs.
     
  2. antikk

    antikk Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    Messages:
    641
    Location:
    Melb
    Ordered a pair of M2's, when I get back i'll compare them to my $40 Philips lol
     
  3. mareke

    mareke Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2003
    Messages:
    6,814
    Location:
    Sydney, NSW
    They were the first one the Sony MDR-E818LP. Sensitivity is 108 DB, Frequency response 12 - 22,000 Hz which is not bad for $8.95 speakers. Comparing the sound with a far more expensive set of Sennheiser earphones I have the $8.95 headphones sound better to me. The Sennheiser may have a tiny bit more bass but the bass sounds woolly to me whereas the sound in the $8.95 ones is clearer and the bass is very good. The overall quality of the sound in each is very close so the $8.95 earphones are far better value. It would have been 5 or 6 months ago that I bought them and according to the JB Hi-Fi website they don't sell them any more. The cheap models that are comparable all look to have a much shorter pipe leading off the part that fits in your ear which suggests they would have inferior sound particularly bass. The length of the pipe in the $8.95 earphones is actually slightly longer and thicker than in the Sennheisers.
     
  4. Comma

    Comma Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2007
    Messages:
    3,683
    Location:
    Perth
    Frequency response is an utterly useless specification if it does not have any other information attached to it.

    So what if it can reproduce 12Hz, what accuracy? -30 dB? Being able to make a sound is different from being able to make a sound as intended...
     
  5. Benno1988

    Benno1988 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    3,547
    Location:
    Brisbane
    $8.95 of awesome says you're wrong.
     
  6. mareke

    mareke Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2003
    Messages:
    6,814
    Location:
    Sydney, NSW
    I mainly go by what headphones sound like but I look at the specifications as well. The sensitivity figure is one I like to check. The higher the better is what I've found. In the past I've always believed that the more you pay the better the sound will be and in the main I've found this to be true but I was pleasantly surprised by the sound with the $8.95 headphones. I've got 3 pairs (2 spares and the ones I'm currently using) and I'm glad I had the presence of mind to buy the extra ones when I realised how good the sound was for the price. I also have $80 ones but the $8.95 ones sound better to me.
     
  7. Benno1988

    Benno1988 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    3,547
    Location:
    Brisbane
    And thats all that matters.

    /thread
     
  8. Comma

    Comma Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2007
    Messages:
    3,683
    Location:
    Perth
    My statement was a purely quantitative one. One that takes away any subjective exposure and preference to sound.

    I could use a analogy perhaps?

    A frequency response such as that listed, outside the 20-20kHz range, is about as useful as saying "10% more bass".

    10% more bass than what?
     
  9. Benno1988

    Benno1988 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    3,547
    Location:
    Brisbane
    10% more bass than than other similarily priced earphones obviously.

    Even the 20-20k Hz is a load, majority of people can't hear that high can they?
     
  10. Comma

    Comma Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2007
    Messages:
    3,683
    Location:
    Perth
    10% more bass than a rock!

    Standard hearing is generally accepted at 20-20kHz, so most things are rated for that anyway.

    I'd say most 25 year olds would be tapering off at the 20kHz end around 14-16kHz and at the bottom around 30-50Hz
     
  11. Benno1988

    Benno1988 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    3,547
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Yeah. 20-20kHz (huh...20/20 for perfect eyesight, 20/20 for perfect hearing) is the reasonable absolute extents someon in their prime could hear. Obviously there would be a few outside those bounds, but the vast majority of people would be well within them, obvsiouly heavier tapering at the higher end than lower.
     
  12. nalef

    nalef New Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2012
    Messages:
    1
  13. Snufkin

    Snufkin Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2001
    Messages:
    6,938
    Location:
    Surrounded by headphones
    Except it's a fake.
     

Share This Page