Slashdot Mirror

I've never done it but I've always wanted to play with acoustic imaging in heaphones. Clearly a two speaker system has 2 degrees of freedom and therefore cannot have any 3D effects. Yet we know that our ears can tell sounds that come from behind from those that come from ahead. This is because our brains process the sound for a reverb or delayed echo. So you cread the 3D effect by delaying the left ear's sound slightly and feeding it to the right ear.

that of course is just fake spacial assignment. THere's some way to be more clever about what you delay based on the dolby encoding to assign the delayed sound correctly. I don't know what that is but it can't be a lot more complex than your matrix decoding of the sum and difference channel. The difference is that instead of sending it to the rear speakers, you now have to delay it. Here's a websearch with a couple leads on this:

http://www.headphone.com/pages...

A good pair of headphones can easily run you $500 (that's considered mid-tier).

You can easily spend that much if you don't find the less-known options while doing your research, that's very true. Stay away from the marked-up versions that are easily accessible and order yourself something for professionals instead. Especially look out for the brands like Sony, which may have innovated with their high end MDRs in the 1980s, but can't really justify the price tag today when everyone else is using the same drivers for much less money. You don't have to spend that kind of money.

I am a sound engineer, live and in the studio. I have to have accurate, reliable cans that I can use for hours every day and I can find them for far less than $500. You can get Etymotic in-ears for vocalists, drummers, etc onstage for $200-250. You can buy a nice pair of professional 250-ohm DT990 over-the-ears for $160 (new on Amazon no less) that you can wear all day. They stand up very well to a pair of $1500 electrostatic headphones and blow everything under $1500 away. Haven't heard them? Don't believe me? Try them out, A/B test with any more expensive pair through a few different audio clips, and you'll see exactly what I mean if your ears aren't shot. I acknowledge that some people have blown out their ears with concerts and construction equipment, or old age has taken its unfair toll on the ears. To them, there will be no difference and you just want comfort and construction quality at that point. But for those of us who somehow retained good hearing despite the odds... Talk to studio professionals to find out how to get a good pair of headphones, not gamers or people listening to their iPod on the bus. Good involves accurate sound, wearability all day, and replaceable parts that you can still order 10 years down the road. If you're spending that kind of money, you want it to be good.

To gamers: I guess that at the end of the day though, if you really want that unnatural jaw-vibrating bass boost for your explosions and dubstep soundtracks (and who wouldn't want that for their entertainment!!) you will probably want to start with good headphones that reach down very low and boost that bass with active electronics like an EQ or old DFX box. There's no substitute. Otherwise you'll have to buy the gimmicky crap like those battery-powered Beats / Monster headphones, but you know you're getting ripped off the whole time you do it. Get something that makes you happy but shop around for goodness' sake, you can be happy for a lot less than $500.

Helpful link to check out objective qualities of headphone sound: http://www.headphone.com/buildAGraph.php - and if you only shop by frequency response curves... you're missing the point. Look at the harmonic distortion curves as well.

These are the best bang for the buck, slightly above OP's price, but worth it. Read some reviews online, there's not many bad things to say about these cans. http://www.headphone.com/headphones/grado-sr-60i.php

I have a pair of Koss headphones that are just like you describe, I'm a big fan of them. They are quite comfortable and sound pretty good too. http://www.headphone.com/headphones/koss-ksc-75.php

HeadRoom tests more headphones than probably anyone. They're unbiased enough to say when a $40 pair is better than $100 pair that they sell.

Try sealed headphones.

There are plenty of headphones with larger circumference ear pads that actually completely contain your ears. For good work sealed can the Seinheiser 280 Pro's are a good choice. Fairly inexpensive at $100 with excellent sound reproduction, large ear pads, and really excellent exterior noise deadening. I use them both at work hooked up to my PC and on plane trips powered by nothing more than my iPod Nano. They work so well at blocking exterior noise that most people ask if they are active noise canceling. Very comfy, too. I have moderately large ears and I've gone for 8+ hours at a stretch with no discomfort.

For semi-open and open cans I really like AKG headphones. My old K501's are still going strong. Sure they ran $350 when brand new, but the sound reproduction is really accurate and they are extremely comfortable (more so than the Seinheisers as they use a fabric covering for the pads rather than imitation leather).

By far the best place for headphone shopping I have found is HeadRoom . Their reviews are spot on and their prices are better than just about anyone else's.

The idea of a flat frequency response on a set of cans is laughable. Even a $27,600 pair of ADAM mastering monitors can't provide a flat frequency response, so don't mislead casual readers into thinking that your HD650s are flat -- here is their "flat" frequency response.

One of the completely ignored problems with headphones (other than ones I'm sure you've heard before) is that physical positioning (distance and angle) of the speakers relative to the user's ear canal makes a big difference in the sound heard by the user, but the standard for putting on cans is generally just put them on how they're comfortable. It's been a little while since I went shopping for cans, but I haven't heard of any headphones employing a way of making sure the speakers will sit precisely right for every user.

Rooms do provide problems with frequency response using monitors, but people like Ethan Winer help you to figure out how to measure, reduce, or compensate for them. How do you compensate for that frequency response curve of your HD650s?

Headphones can provide a better transient response time compared with single speaker monitors because cans are smaller, but that's a very limited notion of accuracy - and one that goes away when you get a monitor with more than one speaker. Heck, I bet some small-coned cheap-ass computer speakers could match the transient response of headphones but I doubt you'd recommend them for accuracy.

Headphones may well be better for your usage, but their abilities are very limited compared with monitors when the ultimate goal is accuracy. Not to mention, broadcasting is not exactly a forum where accuracy reigns supreme - e.g., high compression and scooping are usually the end goal, not an aberrant occurrence.

There's a point well past the $100 mark - the question is is it worth the money, which depends on how much money you happen to have sitting around doing nothing as well as the relative objective quality of the product.

That said I'm not buying anything more expensive than the HD555 in the foreseeable future. In fact with digital room correction techniques I might not be spending anywhere near that much on headphones again, ever.

Also headphones are not just for the sound, they have to feel comfortable too. And personally I would not be happy to pay 1500 bucks for headphones that LOOK like the HD800s. :-P

I like my Grado SR-60 cans 95% as much as my older Stax electrostatic ones. They really are that good.

Instead of spending $300 on Bose headphones with active noise cancellation, consider spending $80 to $100 on some headphones that simply block background noise very well.

As I type this, I am listening to music on my Sennheiser HD-280 Pro headphones. According to Sennheiser they provide 30 dB of attenuation for background noise. They simply seal around your ears and passively block noise.

I was talking to a world-class expert on audio stuff one time, and if I recall correctly he was concerned about the noise canceling headphones possibly having a negative effect on your hearing. The active noise cancellation works by measuring the noise, and generating more noise with the phase opposite; if all goes well, the noise and the anti-noise cancel. But the active cancellation is pumping more energy out right next to your ear.

I'm not 100% certain I am remembering correctly what he said. I mean, if you wear the active cancellation headphones and the noise sounds quieter, doesn't that mean that less energy is reaching your ears? I'll have to ask him when I see him again. But that will be too late for this Slashdot discussion.

But you can spend less money to get a simpler device that passively blocks noise, so it seems like the way to go in any event.

By the way, I am quite satisfied with the audio quality of my HD 280 Pro headphones. They are the best headphones I have owned so far.

http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/sealed-and-noise-canceling/sennheiser-hd-280-pro.php

There are other sealed headphones you can get, including several that are under US$30.

http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/sealed-and-noise-canceling/

Protect your hearing, folks. You will miss it if you lose it.

steveha

Instead of spending $300 on Bose headphones with active noise cancellation, consider spending $80 to $100 on some headphones that simply block background noise very well.

As I type this, I am listening to music on my Sennheiser HD-280 Pro headphones. According to Sennheiser they provide 30 dB of attenuation for background noise. They simply seal around your ears and passively block noise.

I was talking to a world-class expert on audio stuff one time, and if I recall correctly he was concerned about the noise canceling headphones possibly having a negative effect on your hearing. The active noise cancellation works by measuring the noise, and generating more noise with the phase opposite; if all goes well, the noise and the anti-noise cancel. But the active cancellation is pumping more energy out right next to your ear.

I'm not 100% certain I am remembering correctly what he said. I mean, if you wear the active cancellation headphones and the noise sounds quieter, doesn't that mean that less energy is reaching your ears? I'll have to ask him when I see him again. But that will be too late for this Slashdot discussion.

But you can spend less money to get a simpler device that passively blocks noise, so it seems like the way to go in any event.

By the way, I am quite satisfied with the audio quality of my HD 280 Pro headphones. They are the best headphones I have owned so far.

http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/sealed-and-noise-canceling/sennheiser-hd-280-pro.php

There are other sealed headphones you can get, including several that are under US$30.

http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/sealed-and-noise-canceling/

Protect your hearing, folks. You will miss it if you lose it.

steveha

I think of my earphones much in the way I think of my home stereo speakers, they are often the weak link in the sound system. You don't wanna go cheap on your home speakers...so, why try to be cheap on earphones?

I personally LOVE my SE530's. They sound GREAT...and I like how they fit snug in ear, and are sound isolating. You hear great music through them, good bass for small earbuds...and even on an airplane, you don't have to turn the volume up much. I know this from recently, when my dog (or the dogs where I was staying during Hurricane Gustav) chewed the ends on both phones right at the nozzle. I've sent them back into Shure, who said they'd replace them for about $145. Expensive? Yes...but, oh man..if you like good sound it is worth it. And they are great for the gym. I found that the battery time on my shuffle is MUCH longer with the shures than with the original earbuds I've had to temporarily switch back to...and I think it is due to not having to turn the volume up as much on the good cans.

You can get these at a better price...call into this place, and they'll give you a code to type in that usually knocks about $100 or more off the best price I've found anywhere....I think you can get the SE530's for like $360 there.

I have to say I agree with the basic premise about spending a fortune on audio, but spending a chunk can sometimes be helpful depending on what you are buying. I moved from a $200.00 pair of headphones in 1997 to a $250 pair from the same maker (Sennheiser) in 2006. the new pair was "OK." so I returned them. After 2 months of poking around and reading reviews (some were informative and some not so) and looking at specifications I opted for Grado GS1000's instead. They cost $950, but the sound was much better. Some of the improvement was apparent right away, but the rest became more noticeable after a day or two: I heard subtle details and clarity I'd missed before (on the same equipment, mind you). I wanted to be able to listen to tunes directly on my MP3 player and Laptop without any bulky amps.

I think headphones generally are in a different camp than cables in that you get what you pay for, as long as you know what kind of listening experience you want. But as you spend more and more, the less improvement you get for your money (at least with headphones, but this is likely true with many other things as well), so you have to really want the uber-quality stuff if you're not made of money. Those headphones are the most expensive audio equipment I own: I have no fancy CD players, stereos, amps, speakers or cables, but I do have a pair of really good headphones.

Oh, and I got them from the same company, BTW: http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/full-size/grado-gs-1000.php

My opinion, FWIW.

I forgot to add... here is a FAQ that explains why you NEED this headphone amp....

http://www.headphone.com/products/faqs/balanced-headphones/balanced-vs-unbalanced/

If you know anything about analog circuits and audio you're going to have to try not to laugh out loud.

We had a good laugh at work about this balanced headphone amp: http://www.headphone.com/products/headphone-amps/the-max-line/headroom-balanced-max-amp.php

We were thinking if there are really people paying $4k for this stuff, we're in the wrong business (Analog Integrated Circuits)

Audiophiles are idiots. The issue is they have more pretension than technical acumen... so they are easily taken.

Carl

I've had a lot of arguments regarding when blind testing is necessary. It's sometimes hard to draw a line. But it's not at all clear that it's needed here to distinguish from a placebo effect, as you imply.

For an example, suppose you're looking for the best cookie recipe. You run two different trials to see which is preferred in each.

- In trial #1, you compare the Nestle Tollhouse recipe to the same recipe with 10% more butter.
- In trial #2, you compare the Nestle Tollhouse recipe to the same recipe with the quantities of baking soda and sugar switched.

Now in trial#1, I'd say that, to get a meaningful result, you had better do it blind. Maybe even literally blindfolded, putting pieces of cookies in people's mouths. But in trial #2, it just doesn't make any difference whether you use careful, blind methods, because the results will be so dramatic and unanimous that there will be no room for error introduced by subtle mechanisms.

I like to listen to my music on CD through a Wheatfield Audio HA-1 tube headphone amplifier driving a pair of Sennheiser HD-600 headphones. For those of you not familiar with audiophile stuff, this is low on the totem poll of high-end equipment, but we're still talking about a roughly $1000 investment just for a pair of headphones and an amp. And when I listen to the difference between audio that's highly compressed and the real, high dynamic-range thing, it's the difference between night and day. If we're standing outside and you ask me if it's night or day out, I don't feel that I need to find a hundred other people to survey in a double-blind clinical setting before I get back to you with an answer. The answer is usually perfectly clear.

I'd also like to note that sometimes, highly compressed audio is desirable. For example, in my car on the freeway, there's pretty much background noise, and if you maintain high dynamic range in a recording, you'll either have painfully loud loud parts, or inaudible quiet parts. You need to compress the hell out of the music to make it sound decent over background noise. That, or (inadvisably) wear noise-canceling headphones in your car.

Does this mean they should sell two versions of CD's, one for audiophiles, and one for car-listeners? No. Because it's a piece of cake for a filter to compress the dynamic range of audio, but it's much more difficult to accurately re-extend that dynamic range. So car stereos should just offer a high compression setting, and probably default to having it on. I'm surprised I haven't heard of car stereos with a microphone that determines the volume of background noise in the car and then compresses the dynamic range of the audio appropriately to keep the low volume bits audible, and just uses the volume setting to set the maximum volume of the highs. (within certain limitations ion the compression. For example, if the volume were turned down such that the highs are below the background noise, you probably don't want to let the stereo invert the wave form.)

Buy a headset from this shop and have a try.
http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/in-ea r-monitor/

People just looked at me when I bough my first Etymotic ER-4. It was realitively expensive compared to looks, but they changed their minds when they tried them. Several bought their own after they have used mine.

Several other companies make this kind of headset now. I bought mine from that web store I linked to.

Much cheaper than a monitor quality stereo system.

Well I think the big issue here is they are earbuds, not speakers. I work with closed heaphones pretty much all day and nothing beats the Sennhesier HD 650. It's pricey but it gives a me the absolute best sound when working with film. I'm not a sound mixer or designer but the ones I work with turned me onto them and I haven't gone back since. The close cups block out outside noise and help you focus on the sound.

Earbuds are tiny little speakers shoved in your ears the total amount of accuracy is hard to gage and there is very little difference between most earbuds. Now the Shure are ear canal earbuds but honestly its hard for me to tell the difference. No one in the editing room that I know uses earbuds for that reason. Now for just listening on your ipod an expensive earbud isn't going to make that much if any difference. Now comfort that is what I might pay more for.

If people want to know more about headphones

check out http://www.headphone.com/ they have lots of info

Try the DAC from HeadRoom. They're an outstanding company. I first purchased from them probably 10+ years ago and have used them 4 or 5 times since. They're good folks and make outstanding products.

Victorinox in general, actually! It took me a while to notice, but everyone who actively uses a laptop in my research group has a Victorinox case/bag of some sort. None of us have the same model, and we all swear by them.

Mine is the Web Messenger - works well for a laptop up to ~15.5" (the GP's hammock comment is dead on), as well as some file folders, laptop accessories (charger, wireless mouse, etc.), headphones, and so on and so forth. I've had it for over 2.5 years and have yet to see any wear. The ballistic nylon is invincible.

Regarding overstuffing - being that it's a messenger bag, the outer flap folds over and locks to two adjustable straps. I've filled it way too full on many occasions, and neither the bag nor the contents suffered at all. Additionally, the padded strap is amazing; it has never cut into my shoulder like backpacks or other messenger bags tend to do. It's overengineered, without a doubt.

have you considered a mobile amp?

If you have $100 to spend on headphones, you should spend $150 and get a pair of Sennheiser HD-580s. They are the cheapest high-quality headphones you'll find, period. They sound *excellent* on a PC audio card, and they scale up to $1000 headphone amps just as well if you swing that way. Bass is by no means lacking; by the time you manage to overdrive them, your head will be hurting.

Oh yeah, and they're the most cushy, comfy headphones on the planet. I wear them 8 hours a day with no complaint at all.

If you care about headphones enough to have read this, go browse around http://www.headphone.com/ and http://www.head-fi.org/. Never listen to advertisements when it comes to audio. (Never trust what you read on the internet, either. Listen before you buy.)

I've had my px100s for close to 2 years now, and they're still fine. I use them both at home with a small head-amp, and when I'm out and about, with various portable audio sources. They've survived roadtrips, econnomy airtravel and generally rough treatment.

I think you'd be hard pressed to find a more comfortable, well-sounding set in the same price-range. They're really light, and can be comfortably worn for 20 hours at a time (gaming anyone ? ;-).

If you're *really* worried about durability, get a pair of Koss porta-pros. They don't sound as neutral (bit too much bass IMNHO), but they come with a lifetime warranty. I think you're more likely to develop hearing dammage with the Portapros, though, due to the slight bass emphasis. Still, listen to both at a hi-fi store, and decide for yourself.

Both are reasonably priced, has decent sound and are open, so you can hear what's happening around you. I personally prefer my px100 over Koss, but listen to both. Depending on audio source, and amplifier I would have to change to head-phones 10 times the price to hear any real difference. They're miles ahead of regular cheap headphones though. I've also listened to the Grado SR 80, and I'd take my px100s over SR 80 any day.

I recommend getting a headphone amplifier for use at work, especially if you're getting the px100s or a pair "hi-fi" headphones with similarily high impendance. You have to hear the difference to believe it.

On a side note, I sadly had to give up using my px100s when I got my new mp3 playing phone; the cheap amplifier in the Sony Ericsson w800 is unable to drive them, resulting in the sound breaking up (I got similar noise every time the battery in my portable cd player was about to give out).

Check out the buyers guide at http://headphone.com/ -- I think it's very good, especially considering it's a webshop. Also stop by the forums at http://head-fi.org/ for some good reviews.

And, finally, if you've become a unlimited budget hi-fi maniac, stop by http://headamp.com/ and get a serious amp for your phones... I'd like one, but for now I'm stuck with a cheap amplifier. It's still *way* better than just plugging into line out in the back of your pc.

Not to flame, but if the submitter is seriously considering Sennheiser cans, he subjectively won't like they reproduction of the $10 set from Best Buy. Sennheiser makes some of the best headphones in the business

Of course, this begs the question, "If quality reproduction is what you want, why are you sourceing from an MP3 Player?"

Now, to get back on topic, I have to wonder if submitter's little player really does have the juice to run a really good set of cans. I'd highly recommend that the submitter check out http://www.headphone.com/ and read up. Lots of great info there on headphones, a bit of the physics, and a *huge* selection of headphones and headphone amps.

The PX100's are a great choice for small, inexpensive, open cans. Also consider the Grado SR60s if you're willing to spend a bit more money.

Try here for more choices.

I bought HD-580's for my iPod and had to buy an amp shortly aftererwards. I needed to crank up the iPod so high that the sound really suffered. Things have been great since the amp arrived. In short, once you replace the weak link of the headphones, the next weakest link, the amp, becomes annoyingly obvious.

or without a headphone amp, odds are you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between an ipod mini (supposedly the worst sounding ipod) and any of the other offerings, or any iriver/archos alternatives.

iPods are mainly for portable music, most of the time music on the move doesn't need audiophile reproduction, and even the cheapest MP3 players offer very decent music quality.

If you are mulling over splashing out so you can get GREAT sound quality from an iPod, just concentrate on the parts that count, the headphones. A pair of sennheiser or etymotics will set you back just half the price of an iPod and will make a stunning difference to sound quality.

http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/all-h eadphones/sennheiser-hd-555.php
http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/all-h eadphones/sennheiser-hd-595.php
http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/in-ea r-monitor/etymotic-er-6i.php
http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/in-ea r-monitor/etymotic-er-4p.php

or without a headphone amp, odds are you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between an ipod mini (supposedly the worst sounding ipod) and any of the other offerings, or any iriver/archos alternatives.

iPods are mainly for portable music, most of the time music on the move doesn't need audiophile reproduction, and even the cheapest MP3 players offer very decent music quality.

If you are mulling over splashing out so you can get GREAT sound quality from an iPod, just concentrate on the parts that count, the headphones. A pair of sennheiser or etymotics will set you back just half the price of an iPod and will make a stunning difference to sound quality.

http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/all-h eadphones/sennheiser-hd-555.php
http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/all-h eadphones/sennheiser-hd-595.php
http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/in-ea r-monitor/etymotic-er-6i.php
http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/in-ea r-monitor/etymotic-er-4p.php

or without a headphone amp, odds are you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between an ipod mini (supposedly the worst sounding ipod) and any of the other offerings, or any iriver/archos alternatives.

iPods are mainly for portable music, most of the time music on the move doesn't need audiophile reproduction, and even the cheapest MP3 players offer very decent music quality.

If you are mulling over splashing out so you can get GREAT sound quality from an iPod, just concentrate on the parts that count, the headphones. A pair of sennheiser or etymotics will set you back just half the price of an iPod and will make a stunning difference to sound quality.

http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/all-h eadphones/sennheiser-hd-555.php
http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/all-h eadphones/sennheiser-hd-595.php
http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/in-ea r-monitor/etymotic-er-6i.php
http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/in-ea r-monitor/etymotic-er-4p.php

or without a headphone amp, odds are you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between an ipod mini (supposedly the worst sounding ipod) and any of the other offerings, or any iriver/archos alternatives.

iPods are mainly for portable music, most of the time music on the move doesn't need audiophile reproduction, and even the cheapest MP3 players offer very decent music quality.

If you are mulling over splashing out so you can get GREAT sound quality from an iPod, just concentrate on the parts that count, the headphones. A pair of sennheiser or etymotics will set you back just half the price of an iPod and will make a stunning difference to sound quality.

http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/all-h eadphones/sennheiser-hd-555.php
http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/all-h eadphones/sennheiser-hd-595.php
http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/in-ea r-monitor/etymotic-er-6i.php
http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/in-ea r-monitor/etymotic-er-4p.php

I bought Etymotic ER-4P headphones several years ago. Headphones like that is GREAT for noisy environments.

It have saved my day so many times. Everything is stress around me, but I am in my own listening universe. No server noise, no office noise, no talking around me. Only me, my music and my task.

  Another great thing: This is high end Hifi.
http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/in-ea r-monitor/

HeadRoom might be the best headphone store in the world. They have a lot of realy good headphones and give you information about the differences.

http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/seale d-and-noise-canceling/
"There are three types of headphones that can provide isolation from outside sound: IEMs, full-size sealed headphones, and noise canceling headphones. Noise-canceling cans use a microphone in the earpiece to pick up and the produce an acoustic canceling signal at the ear. These cans typically provide about 10dB of isolation over a limited frequency response range. Full-size, sealed headphones also provide about 10db of isolation, but over a wider frequency range (better high frequency isolation) giving a better feeling of isolation overall. In-Ear-Monitors (IEMs) completely seal the ear canal which delivers far better isolation than either headphone above. IEMs commonly achieve better than 20dB isolation over most frequencies."

I am living in Norway and have bought several headphones from them trought the years. It is a american online store, but they sell globaly.

http://www.headphone.com/support/ordering-with-hea droom/ordering-internationally/

HeadRoom might be the best headphone store in the world. They have a lot of realy good headphones and give you information about the differences.

http://www.headphone.com/products/headphones/seale d-and-noise-canceling/
"There are three types of headphones that can provide isolation from outside sound: IEMs, full-size sealed headphones, and noise canceling headphones. Noise-canceling cans use a microphone in the earpiece to pick up and the produce an acoustic canceling signal at the ear. These cans typically provide about 10dB of isolation over a limited frequency response range. Full-size, sealed headphones also provide about 10db of isolation, but over a wider frequency range (better high frequency isolation) giving a better feeling of isolation overall. In-Ear-Monitors (IEMs) completely seal the ear canal which delivers far better isolation than either headphone above. IEMs commonly achieve better than 20dB isolation over most frequencies."

I am living in Norway and have bought several headphones from them trought the years. It is a american online store, but they sell globaly.

http://www.headphone.com/support/ordering-with-hea droom/ordering-internationally/

There's a huge range of available op-amp chips to do the amplification in these devices. Some chips, like the ones Sony uses in their radio walkman things, drive headphones well on about 1 volt. But the sound can get much better if you string in an op-amp that requires four times that voltage, and is built to benefit from 12 volts or more -- like the little airhead amp.

You are right that given the choice the audio designer would not choose to share the op-amp's power with a disk drive, which could raise interference issues. But the big ipods and the mini use 3.7 volt batteries, and I'm guessing that the nano uses less. That means it either uses a much more expensive op-amp, or one that doesn't perform as well.

Sennheiser's higher-end cans are also really, REALLY good. The specific models that I know are good (because I have owned them) are the HD580s and HD600s. The 650s are also reputed to be great, but I haven't heard them myself.

Personally, I think the 580s are one of the better buys in headphones. You can usually pick them up at around $150 on Ebay, and they sound AMAZING. They are extremely comfortable. You can literally put them on in the morning and wear them all day, to the point that you'll forget they're on. Part of that comfort comes from the fact that they are "open" headphones, meaning they don't close you off from the outside world. Closed headphones seal the world out and your music in, but they're usually less comfortable to wear for long periods.

The 600s and 650s are better, but they're enormously more expensive for a much lower quality jump. Bang per buck on the 580s is really extraordinary. All of these cans are built with modular parts, so you can order any piece you need a replacement for. With reasonable care, they'll literally last a lifetime.

The only real downside to all three of these is that they are 'high impedance' headphones, meaning you need a strong output to drive them well. They'll still sound good from a normal output, like an iPod's, but on an amplifier they will sit up and truly sing. I have a Total Airhead (heh) from HeadRoom. A better choice (which didn't exist when I bought mine) might be a Bithead or a Total Bithead, because they come with a USB connection and onboard, high-quality DACs. This gives you both the amplification of the Airhead and the ability to function as a good soundcard, which will let you get really high-quality sound off your PC. (All Creative cards, except possibly the X-Fi, do an internal resample to 48khz, which just butchers the treble. Most motherboard soundcards use such horrible DACs that they sound even worse. PC sound, in general, is terrible).

You could also use it as a laptop soundcard, but note that the Senns aren't particularly portable; they're very large, and you will look rather dorky wearing them in public. :) I'm just suggesting the Bithead because it's small, reasonably priced, and also solves the bad soundcard problem. Envy24 soundcards (like the Audiotrak Prodigy and M-Audio Revolution 7.1) usually have good DACs, so that'd be another way to solve the soundcard issue.

Sennheiser has a lot of different model numbers, and they're definitely not all the same. I know these are good. I've seen quite mixed reviews on many of the other (mostly lower-end) choices. If you don't like other Sennheisers, but haven't tried these specific ones, give them a shot.

These work. It's a bit shocking when you take them off mid-flight and hear the roar around you.

Actually it's noticeable enough even just around the office. I never realized that the building A/C was that loud.

http://www.headphone.com/layout.php?topicID=3&subT opicID=27

and Pair it with some Sennheiser headphones and simply play CD's through a discman. Screw that low res iPod baloney. I'd rather wait and listen to the real thing than the shadows of the handpuppets on the wall that is MP3's........

Likewise it drives my Sennheiser HD 555's just fine for accurate sound reproduction. Of course I specifically avoided another model of Sennheiser's because headphone.com mentioned that they were a bit murky without an amp and I didn't want the expense and bulk of carrying a seperate headphone amp.

While true, the bigger reason that loudspeakers sound better than headphones is that your brain is used to processing sound with both ears. In other words, sound from loudspeakers sounds more natural because your right hear hears sound from both the left and right speakers, only it hears the right speaker louder and slightly sooner. (And, obviously, the reverse is true for the left ear). That's what creates the "stereo" effect. This isn't true with headphones - your right ear only hears the right channel. So for the vast majority of recorded material, when you listen in headphones, your brain interprets the sound as slightly wrong somehow.

Some manufacturers of headphone amplifiers (http://headroom.headphone.com/) include a simple processor that feeds some of the left channel to the right headphone with the appropriate attenuation and delay, and vica versa. I use one of these and love it. The concious effect is subtle, but you find that you can listen to headphones for a much, much longer time before you get that "Aaaagh! Gotta take these off!" effect.

No you don't want the Sure e5cs unless you like bass music a lot. They're overpriced and basically crap. Just take a look at the frequency response for the e5cs for yourself. The low frequency is way high and there's a lot missing for the high frequencies. I've tried them out and it's not that great... not much better than the iPod earbuds at least. The iPod earbuds aren't that bad (as far as frequency response is concerned), but if you want good isolation, you should get the Etymotic ER-4P headphones instead. I've got a pair of ER-4S and I can't see headphones getting much better than that.

No you don't want the Sure e5cs unless you like bass music a lot. They're overpriced and basically crap. Just take a look at the frequency response for the e5cs for yourself. The low frequency is way high and there's a lot missing for the high frequencies. I've tried them out and it's not that great... not much better than the iPod earbuds at least. The iPod earbuds aren't that bad (as far as frequency response is concerned), but if you want good isolation, you should get the Etymotic ER-4P headphones instead. I've got a pair of ER-4S and I can't see headphones getting much better than that.

Buy some real headphones. I use Grado SR-80s, but the Etymotics range is supposed to be incredible.

I'm looking at getting some of these to replace the utterly average iPod phones.

Perhaps the story should have been when Apple released Apple Lossless Encoder. That's the recent iPod news that makes the iPod better for audiophiles.

The sentence in the article about ogg's battery life is very misleading. Yes, it is true that "you get about 25% less battery life" on ogg vs. mp3. However this comparison is done at the same bitrate -- that is to say, 128 kbps ogg will only have 75% the battery life of 128 kbps mp3.

But, what the quote doesn't take into account is that nobody uses oggs and mp3s at the same bitrate. I for one find that ogg can match mp3 in sound quality at about 60% of the bitrate. When you use a smaller bitrate, battery life goes up, because your hard drive activity is less. My firsthand experience is that you can get 15 hrs of continuous ogg playback on the karma, if you use a lower bitrate like 64 or 72 kbps. Also, you will note that even if we hypothetically penalized this real-world measurement of 15 hours by a theoretical 25%, it would still be better battery life than an iPod.

As to your dismissal of headphone sound quality, there are a great many headphones that are good enough to tell the difference. Even without good headphones, 72 kbps mp3 is so bad that anyone who is running out of disk space on their portable can easily justify the switch to vorbis.

The sentence in the article about ogg's battery life is very misleading. Yes, it is true that "you get about 25% less battery life" on ogg vs. mp3. However this comparison is done at the same bitrate -- that is to say, 128 kbps ogg will only have 75% the battery life of 128 kbps mp3.

But, what the quote doesn't take into account is that nobody uses oggs and mp3s at the same bitrate. I for one find that ogg can match mp3 in sound quality at about 60% of the bitrate. When you use a smaller bitrate, battery life goes up, because your hard drive activity is less. My firsthand experience is that you can get 15 hrs of continuous ogg playback on the karma, if you use a lower bitrate like 64 or 72 kbps. Also, you will note that even if we hypothetically penalized this real-world measurement of 15 hours by a theoretical 25%, it would still be better battery life than an iPod.

As to your dismissal of headphone sound quality, there are a great many headphones that are good enough to tell the difference. Even without good headphones, 72 kbps mp3 is so bad that anyone who is running out of disk space on their portable can easily justify the switch to vorbis.

The sentence in the article about ogg's battery life is very misleading. Yes, it is true that "you get about 25% less battery life" on ogg vs. mp3. However this comparison is done at the same bitrate -- that is to say, 128 kbps ogg will only have 75% the battery life of 128 kbps mp3.

But, what the quote doesn't take into account is that nobody uses oggs and mp3s at the same bitrate. I for one find that ogg can match mp3 in sound quality at about 60% of the bitrate. When you use a smaller bitrate, battery life goes up, because your hard drive activity is less. My firsthand experience is that you can get 15 hrs of continuous ogg playback on the karma, if you use a lower bitrate like 64 or 72 kbps. Also, you will note that even if we hypothetically penalized this real-world measurement of 15 hours by a theoretical 25%, it would still be better battery life than an iPod.

As to your dismissal of headphone sound quality, there are a great many headphones that are good enough to tell the difference. Even without good headphones, 72 kbps mp3 is so bad that anyone who is running out of disk space on their portable can easily justify the switch to vorbis.

Good headphones will give you exactly what you want and more...

Get a good set and you'll be amazed by the sound and your neighbors will be happy.

I recommend a high-end Sennheiser model, like the Sennheiser HD-580

After using them for a while, you won't go back to "computer speakers"

What's the point of greater than 128kbps if you are listening to most of your music in a noisy environment like city streets.

Then you need better headphones. For cheap you can get some very nice Sennheiser PX100. They fold up and have a case, they also sound really good. Since they're over the ear they seal out some external noise.

I needed to replace the headphones on my iPod (they're too big for me and don't fit properly in my ear, plus I don't like being a billboard), and I got the above Sennheiser, I'm really happy with them.

I tried some Etymotic Research ER-6, wow I wish I could afford them, they sound amazing and really block out external sound, 15 to 20db (it's basically an ear plug).

I actually went to class with them once and I was unpacking my bag, doing my business. Suddenly I look up and notice everyone is staring at me, I plug out one side to hear my name being shouted at me very loudly by the teacher.

She was trying to get my attention to ask me something, even though she was raising her voice I hadn't even noticed. If you can afford them they're worth every penny.