headphones

On the issue of amplifying the HD800

noreply@blogger.com (jams) — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 01:10:00 +0000

Much has been made about the inductance of the HD800, and the need for certain types of amps. Some people swear they sound great on tube amps, and some insist that due to the inductance, any amp with a high-ish output impedance will not sound as good as they should, and that this includes many OTL tube amps. It's a complex issue, and that doesn't mean the HD800’s *won't* sound good on any given OTL amp. But on the SinglePower Extreme, the treble emphasis was slightly worse that it is on the SS Audio C2C, which I would not have expected. I have never considered the Extreme to be at all rolled off, and of course I cannot measure its output impedance, although SP claims it to be 20 ohms, which isn’t very high, so it's likely IMO that the amp isn't contributing to the treble emphasis I hear, and that the slightly laid-back C-2-C might be masking the HD800’s treble list slightly.

I also tried the HD800 with the Darkvoice 337 ( Tung-Sol mesh-plate 6SJ7GT + GEC 6AS7G) and the 336SE (Shuguang Treasure CV181 + Sylvania 6AS7G). In both cases the treble emphasis was just a tiny bit more obvious, and just slightly more pronounced, than with the SS Audio-GD C2C. I tried the Graham Slee SRG+PSU1, and the treble was between the Extreme and the C-2-C, but on all of these amps, the feeling of a bit too much treble energy never went away. On the other hand, I felt the treble performance on the Decware CSP-2 was basically identical to the C-2-C. So in the end, I think too much was made of this issue of amp type (as is almost always the case).

The HD800 do not, IMO, change their own character radically from amp to amp. Being as revealing as they are, the HD800 certainly will let you know the difference in the sound of different amps, or different tubes. And of course it is difficult to generalize about tube amps, since you can often get the exact sound you're looking for by tube rolling. For example, if I took the 5998's out of the Extreme, and put in RCA grey-plate 6AS7G's, the sound would be very different, and I probably wouldn't notice any treble elevation in the HD800, since the RCA is a soft-sounding tube.

So the point is that with OTL designs there is a potential issue that should be noted - nothing more than that. And since one can alter the sound by using different tubes, tube amps still offer nice flexibility in this regard, and a great tube amp can still sound great with the HD800. My favorite combo ended up being the Decware CSP-2 and the HD800. The Decware, with Amperex 6DJ8’s and a Sophia Princess mesh-plate 274b, when combined with the HD800, provided enough lushness that the sound was just beguiling, and I didn’t worry much about the tipped-up response – the music was enthralling.

Build Quality and Fit

I found the HD800’s very comfortable to wear for long periods of time. They are big, and they were right at the limit of earcup size for my head, but they were within the limit. I of course heard the “pinging” of the spring that people have commented on, but I wasn’t bothered by this. The cable isn’t at all microphonic, which sure is nice.

The Bass

noreply@blogger.com (jams) — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 01:10:00 +0000

I find the bass quantity to be slightly on the light side. The QUALITY of the bass is stupendous – very well defined, tight, and with great definition and attack. But the DX1000 manage this trick at least as well as the HD800, and manage to have bass weight as well. I find the bass weight of the HD800 to be similar to that of the DT880, which I personally always wish had more bass. I am willing to accept that this is may be just a preference for me, but it nonetheless is something to be aware of – if you like a punchy sound, the HD800 are not always going to please you.

Again let’s look at en example. Listen to “A Secret Place” from Megadeth’s “Cryptic Writings” – the kick drum simply lacks impact. Listen to this track on even $500 speakers – it will sound more like at least I think a kick-drum should. It isn’t imactful on the HD800 – it’s overdamped, and subdued, versus what it sounds like through the N800’s, and the DX1000. It only sounds similar on the DT880. Yes, the impact of the striking of the drum is VERY clean, and very tight, but the drum itself seems to lack body.

The bass is also definitely less than the HD650, and based on my brief comparison, also less than the HD600. Some people may prefer the HD800’s bass performance. It may be "better" bass on the HD800 than the 650, but it is less for sure.

I think it’s very possible that the overdamped bass is what actually makes the treble stand out a little. Or maybe it’s the other way around. But there is a well known trade off there. The famous loudspeaker designer Henry Kloss once did a demonstration where he took a speaker that people thought had too little bass, and he padded the tweeter down by 2db, and all of the sudden – WOW – bass. No change was made to the woofer or the woofer level.

The HD800 have a very tight-fisted punch in the bass – but they punch at something like bantam-weight or junior welter-weight at most.

The Treble

noreply@blogger.com (jams) — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 01:09:00 +0000

So we have established that the midrange is terrific, and the soundstaging is amazing. But the treble...ummmm...well...this is more problematic. IMHO, the HD800 has a slightly hot treble. Hundreds of hours of break-in has not changed this. I hear it on some vocals as a pronounced sibilance that I don't think should be there, and I hear it on cymbals that have a slightly over-exaggerated splashiness.

I want to make clear that the treble is extraordinarily clean. There is no grain, spit, grit, or (god forbid) “veil” of any kind here. The treble is very pure in nature, and it has no texture that detracts from transparency. In fact, I would classify the treble as being astonishingly transparent (which is different from being neutral).

When I began to listen to the HD800, and I began to examine the transparency, versus the linearity, and I spent a lot of time trying to determine what was going on, because this is very difficult to accurately assess. How is one to know if the HD800 is just being accurate about the recording, or over-emphasizing it? So I had to listen very carefully to a LOT of music, and do a lot of comparison, to nail it down. Some examples:

> “Burn Down This Town", by Roseanne Cash, from Black Cadillac. The HD800 are over-emphasizing the sibilants on this recording, IMO. An over-emphasis on sibilance, it is very important to understand, is the symptom, but not the "problem".
>“Out of the Woods” by Nickel Creek, from their eponymous album, there are some additional emphasis on Sara Watkins’ sibilants that I do not believe to be an accurate reflection of what is on the recording – this is a very smooth SACD, and it should not have sharp sibilants on it when played back, but they are there with the HD800.
>“So Far Away” by Dire Straits from Brothers in Arms - there is a crispness to the attack of the snare that I think is artificially crisp, and the song in general has an aggressiveness that I don’t think is an intrinsic part of the recording, based on how it sounds on other transducers.

These are just a few examples. It's easy to say "well it's just on the recording" if one does not have any other high resolution transducers with which to determine whether that is the case. But in direct comparisons I have done with the ultra-high resolution B&W N800's, I come to the same conclusion that there is some extra treble energy on the HD800's. This might be something people like – heck maybe even the majority of people, and that is fine, but in the context of a very expensive headphone, I would be happier if the treble were more neutral even than it is.

I don't want to make too big of an issue with this, but it is a real phenomenon that multiple people have noticed. At a minimum, it points to the need for very careful system matching to get the most of out the HD800's, although anyone buying $1,400 headphones should be carefully considering system matching anyway. But if you have a bright source and/or amp, you could be in trouble.

I definitely prefer the treble of the JVC DX1000, which I find to be smoother. The DX1000 are very slightly rolled off in the extreme upper treble - they have a roll-off above 10kHz. That is the VERY upper end of the treble range, and does not affect the area where the HD800 is hot to me, which is more in the lower-to-mid treble. The DX1000 are not rolled off there, but they are flatter versus the reference 1kHz level in the mid-treble than the HD800. If the HD800 were only tipped up where the DX1000 are rolled off, this would just lead to a little more "air". But that is not what I hear going on.

The HD800 has even a little hotter sounding mid-treble versus the DT880, which are *far* from rolled off in the treble - in fact they are sometimes criticized for having too much treble themselves. But the DT880 does not have quite the same problem that the HD800 has with treble (although the DT880 is a little hot in the treble for sure). Their treble flavor is different. This can be seen in the HR Frequency response graphs:

The DT880 actually has less of a treble peak, versus the level at 2 or 3kHz than the HD800 does, and the DT880’s peak is above 8kHz, versus the HD800’s being at 6. So not surprising that they sound different in the treble. Interesting that the HD800 frequency response, in the Headroom graph, certainly doers correlate very strongly with what I seem to be hearing. That is a very noticeable peak of almost 8db at 6 kHz versus 3kHz. I cannot see how anyone can argue that such a peak won't have SOME audible consequence. Of course headphones like the Grados have even peakier treble, but there is no argument that Grados have a hot treble.

It’s important to note that measure headphones is tricky, and while Headroom knows this and does a lot to minimize the issues, one cannot make judgments about a headphone’s sound based on looking just at frequency response charts. In this case, though, there does seem to be a correlation.

So on this issue, I have concluded that, at least as I hear it (but also seemingly supported by the frequency response and by the experience of some others), there is a treble coloration with the HD800, in that more than being just "very revealing”, the HD800 has an elevated treble response that is a departure from neutral . Yes, this may periodically enhance sibilance, but it has other effects, like a little extra sizzle on cymbals (which I have also noticed), and generally delivers a slightly “tipped-up” sound. For many, this will come across as just a “revealing” nature, but for others, it will be bothersome. I found it to be enough of an issue that it has dissuaded me from buying them, given the asking price.

And again, to try to minimize the ruffled feathers - this is all in the context of a $1,400 headphone, which I believe deserves microscopic scrutiny given the asking price. I'm already willing to state that the midrange and soundstaging are the best I have ever heard in a dynamic headphone. But the treble performance is still a slight disappointment for me given this is an expensive, "statement" headphone.’

None of what I am hearing will mean that there won't be LOTS of people who will LOVE what the HD800 does in the treble. Heck, there are some headphones that are KNOWN to be terrifically bright (the AT W5000 come to mind), and yet they have a lot of fans. Given that what we are discussing is such a small thing, relatively, there will be some people who won't be at all bothered by it, and some who will indeed LIKE it. But from what I can hear, it's there, and it should be known.

Soundstaging

noreply@blogger.com (jams) — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 01:09:00 +0000

There is also no doubt in my mind that the HD800 are the imaging champs of the dynamic headphone world. I have owned or heard almost every significant dynamic headphone there is – Sony R10, At W5000 and L3000, Senn HD650/600, Grado RS1 and GS1000, all the ones I currently own, and many, many more I have owned and sold. And I have never heard a headphone image like the HD800. Depth is phenomenal, and somehow width is even better. I really feel like the sound is IN FRONT of me, not stuck “inside my head” like with so many headphones. The soundstaging is better with the HD800 than with the DX1000, and that is saying something – I think the DX1000 image sensationally. But the HD800 is terrific in this regard.

With the HD800, it is easy, not “work”, to imagine real performers in real space. It’s very tempting to keep closing my eyes when listening to them, because the imaging is so convincing. For anyone who has avoided headphones because they don’t image like speakers, spend some time with the HD800. No, they don’t image like speakers – but I can’t imagine anyone who would CARE, because the way they do image is just spectacularly enjoyable.

Simple Minds’ “See the Lights” presents the band in a perfect half-circle around you. I saw them live in their heyday, and hearing them on the HD800’s really brought me back to that show in a way that was almost startling.

The HD800’s have the LEAST amount of isolation of any headphone I own. I wonder if this is a factor in their great soundstaging? Not sure, but however they did it, this is quite an achievement, and here again, maybe worth the price of admission by itself seriously.

The Midrange

noreply@blogger.com (jams) — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 01:07:00 +0000

The midrange on the HD800 is fantastically good – the best I have ever heard from a headphone. It is just as full-bodied as the DX1000’s, and yet lacks the DX1000’s very slight coloration. The mids are incredibly open and transparent. They are, to me, the “rightest” mids I have ever heard in a headphone. They make the Beyer DT990’s slightly recessed mids sound just silly by direct comparison (and I like the DT990 overall – a lot).

Mary Fahl and Julie Flanders’ harmonizing in October Project’s “Ariel” (from their eponymous record) is just as engaging as can possibly be. The mids are just slightly forward, but not ever congested. Male vocals are very natural and not overly chesty, or dry. The midrange has great body, but it does not have any noticeable coloration that I can hear. Many cans with body in the midrange accomplish this with a coloration which benefits some music more than others. To an extent the JVC DX1000 are like this, although over time I have grown to love the DX1000’s mids. But the HD800’s are better. The midrange performance is just beguiling. For some, it may be worth the price of admission all by itself.

Just listen to Joan Osborne’s vocals on her cover of The Grateful Dead’s “Brokedown Palace” (from “Pretty Little Stranger”) – I have never heard her voice sound so natural – it’s effortless, unstrained, and has a presence to it – it sounds like a read voice coming from a living, breathing woman, not a 2-D facsimile.

Sennheiser HD 800

noreply@blogger.com (jams) — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 01:06:00 +0000

Reviewing a statement product is tough – especially one that was as highly anticipated as the HD800. There is already a huge buzz on head-fi about them, and many have already declared them the best dynamic headphone on the market. But most of these proclamations have been from owners, One potential difference between my listening to the HD800 and other people's so far is that I am fortunate to have been loaned a pair for a fairly lengthy period (1 month) - I did not buy them. So I do not have to deal with either buyer's euphoria, or worry about remorse, coloring my view on the headphone's performance. While I admit I *want* to like these, as I would like another pair of really great headphones, and I could afford to buy them if I liked them enough, my intent in listening to them is to analyze them with no pre-conceived notions, and since I have nothing to lose either way, it allows me a certain freedom to be scrutinize them very carefully, as I believe a "statement" product from a company like Sennheiser should be.

Please note that I am NOT saying that the views of the people who own them are not valid, or any less valid than my opinion. ALL opinions are equally valid. But mine does come from a slightly different point of view - not as an owner, but purely as an analyzer. I do want to add that initially I was considering buying them if I liked them enough. I'm not sure whether that has any bearing on my comments, but I am a big believer in full disclosure, so there it is.

Review Methodology

I spent a LOT of time with the HD800 in a wide variety of contexts. All my comparisons were done at my calibrated listening level of 80dBA (using the Rives Audio Test CD and my SPL meter for calibration).

And just so folks do not think that what I am hearing and have described below is either a factor of my amps, my cables, my sources, or my recordings, let me say this: I used 6 different sources (all with their own set of high-quality cables), 9 different amps, and lots and lots of the world's finest recordings . 3 of my sources are one-time Stereophile Class-A rated - two digital, one analog (the cartridge). I have amps from $400 - $1200 that I played them on, both tube and solid state. Sources included the Denon DVD-5900, Sony SCD-555ES, and my Vinyl rig of Benz-Micro Wood L2 on Denon DP-59L > Audio Electronics PH1 DJH. Amps used were SinglePower Extreme and MPX3, Decware CSP-2, Graham Slee SRG w/PSU1, and Audio-GD C-2-C.

Further, and unlike other headphone reviews, I also used my speakers for reference for this review. I also decided, in addition to other headphones, will that the very, very natural sounding but highly detailed B&W Nautilus 800 Signatures would be valuable in getting a good handle on the HD800’s performance. So I compared the sound of the HD 800 to the B&W N800’s as well as the JVC DX1000 and the Beyer DT880.

Also, I used truly excellent recordings in my evaluations, of wide variety. I've listened to my audiophile standards, which include a lot of jazz, some folk and bluegrass, and some extremely well recorded pop/rock records. I have developed a list of such recordings for evaluation use over the years, as many of you have.

I find Patricia Barber records, for example, excellent evaluation tools, as they are extremely well recorded, have both female vocals and piano, and have both quiet and explosive (for jazz) parts, and wide dynamics. Some of my initial concern about the HD800's treble was a result of listening to Patricia Barber's new record.

I believe this is more than sufficient to eliminate the other variables, and to decide what characteristics belong solely to the headphones themselves.

Rechargeable Battery

noreply@blogger.com (jams) — Tue, 01 Mar 2011 07:12:00 +0000

A new feature of these headphones is a rechargeable battery. All noise cancelling headphones need power to operate their electronics, and most seem to use a regular AAA battery, with a life of perhaps 30 - 40 hours per battery.

Bose chose to provide a Lithium-Ion rechargeable battery, with about a 20 hour maximum life. This battery life will reduce with each subsequent recharge cycle, and by the time you've recharged the battery perhaps 500 times, it will be down to something less than 10 hours between charges.

Twenty hours might seem like a long time, but on an international trip, it is barely enough for the flights one way, plus waiting time at airports, etc. In other words, you'll always need to travel with the battery charger and/or spare batteries.

Furthermore, these batteries slowly lose their charge - they lose perhaps 5% - 10% of their charge every month even if not being used. This means that if you're storing your headset between trips, you'll probably want to recharge the battery before leaving home; and if you forget, you might find yourself with only a half (or less) charged battery, meaning the headphones stop working in the middle of a flight.

While this isn't a problem with a regular AAA battery powered device (simply put in a new battery) you're completely stuck, if on a plane, with the Bose rechargeable battery powered QC3.

Perhaps you might think a good solution is to always travel with a spare battery. They are light (0.4 oz) and don't take up much space, indeed there's even a helpful space for one in the carry case, so this seems a practical idea and partial solution.

If you feel that way, you've walked right into a financial trap. Bose will be delighted to sell you another battery (although at time of writing they are on 3 - 4 week backorder), and they'll charge you an outrageous $50 for the privilege.

And, wait - how about the charger. The regular charger comes with a standard US plug on it. But if you're traveling internationally, Bose will be happy to sell you an international charger with a series of replaceable plugs for most other counties and their different power supplies. But they'll charge you another ridiculous $50 for this unit.

Bose seem to have a simple rule of thumb when pricing their products - take their cost price and multiply it ten fold. The QC3 probably costs them less than $35 a set (they are made in China), and the batteries and chargers probably cost them less than $5 each. With such huge margins, it is fair and reasonable to expect Bose to include an international type charger as part of their standard kit, and to enclose a spare second battery as well.

Instead, Bose hope you'll spend another $100 - in addition to the $350 it costs to buy the headphones to start with. In total, $450 for headphones and a decent set of accessories.

In contrast, the QC2 headphones seem better in all respects and have no need for another $100 in accessories. Their purchase price - $300 - is accordingly their true complete price. And the Solitude headphones, at $200, are, as always, by far the value leader, offering something almost indistinguishable to the QC2, but at $100 less.

Noise Cancelling

noreply@blogger.com (jams) — Tue, 01 Mar 2011 07:12:00 +0000

In terms of noise cancelling, the QC2 appears to offer slightly better performance, both in terms of passive blocking (ie with the noise cancelling turned off - simply the reduction in sound by wearing the headphones) and active blocking (ie with the noise cancelling turned on).

The effectiveness of the QC3 to cancel noise - particularly passively - probably depends a bit on the size and shape of your ears. The chances are that some ears offer a better fit and seal than others, which might explain why there have been a wide range of reader comments about how well the QC3 headphones do (or, more notably, don't) work for them.

When listened to in a moderately quiet environment, the QC3 headphones have a similar low level of electronic hiss as do the QC2 headphones, and less than the Solitude or Plane Quiet headphones. But in a noisier environment, it is hard to hear any difference in hiss at all - the hiss is drowned out by the remaining noise that isn't cancelled out, and so this is not a very important issue if you're planning to use the headphones primarily in noisy places such as airplanes, rather than in comparatively quieter places (such as offices).

Comfort

noreply@blogger.com (jams) — Tue, 01 Mar 2011 07:11:00 +0000

Perhaps my ears are more sensitive than many people's. I don't like sticking ear-plugs into them, and similarly I don't like using a set of 'on the ear' headphones, I prefer to use 'around the ear' headphones.

The around the ear style press onto your skull and form a seal against the skin on your skull. The on your ear style press onto your ear and form a seal against the outside of your ear. It seems the seal is better around the more evenly shaped skull, and there's less sensation of pressure on the skin/skull then on the cartilage of your ear.

Comfort is a very important issue, particularly if you're going to be using the headphones for a long flight, maybe as long as ten or fifteen hours.

My personal preference, from the comfort issue, is for the around the ear style of headphones, either the Bose Quiet Comfort 2 or the Plane Quiet Solitude headphones. On the ear headphones are definitely smaller, but in our opinion are not as comfortable to wear for extended periods of many hours at a time while on a long flight.

You probably know your own thoughts about this issue, and so can guess which style is more likely to be your choice.

The ear pieces have very soft padding on them to make them as comfortable as possible and to mould to the shape of your ear as closely as possible. This helps to passively block out sound.

Unlike the QC2, the QC3 doesn't have a level selector switch built into its connector cable. This is actually a relief - the level selector switch on the QC2 was in a very inconvenient place (you had to unplug the cable to access it), and with improved electronics and no need for a level selector switch the headphones are more convenient in use.

But, and like the QC2, the QC3 is gratuitously designed to force you to buy only Bose connecting cables. Sooner or later, the connecting cable is sure to wear out (or simply to be lost) and Bose seem to have deliberately designed the connecting cable to be of non-standard size and type at the end that plugs into the headphones, preventing you from simply buying a replacement cable for $5 from Radio Shack. Instead, you must pay $15 plus shipping from Bose, and if you lose/break a cable while you're traveling, you're pretty much stuck without a replacement until you can get one shipped to wherever you are. This is a bad example of Bose choosing to put their greed ahead of our convenience.

Description

noreply@blogger.com (jams) — Tue, 01 Mar 2011 07:11:00 +0000

The QC3 headphones are very different to the earlier model QC1 and QC2. The obvious difference is the QC3 headphones are much smaller, as this picture showing the QC3 headphones alongside the QC2 clearly shows.

The QC2 headphones are designed to fit around your ear, the QC3 headphones are designed to fit on your ear, and so have much smaller earcups. They also have a smaller headband.

Because the QC3 are smaller, their 'on the head' weight, without cord, but with battery, is less than the QC2. They weigh 5.2 oz compared to 6.2 oz for the QC2.

But in their carry case and complete with the recharger, the total weight of the QC3 kit is 15.7 oz compared to 13.7 oz for the QC2. The QC3 carry case is smaller, but it does have a greater weight, and while none of us will obsess over an ounce or two here or there, the surprising fact is that Bose's smaller newer headphones end up being heavier than their earlier bigger model.

The QC3s don't have a volume control, just a single on-off switch and power indicator that lights up when the headphones are switched on.

The switch is on the right ear piece and the rechargeable battery also fits into the top of this ear piece.

What Includes

noreply@blogger.com (jams) — Tue, 01 Mar 2011 07:10:00 +0000

The $349 headphones are packed into an attractive outer cardboard box. Inside is a packet of information, a carry box inside which are the headphones, and a separate plastic box with accessories. Lastly, there's a pack of dessicant to keep everything de-humidified.

The information packet contains a quick reference card that purports to tell you all you need to know in a series of illustrations with no words, a warranty card, and an owner's guide.

The owners guide has ten pages of information in English, and then repeats the information in Spanish, French, and something like Japanese or Chinese. The instructions are well written and easy to understand.

The warranty is for a one year period, not nearly as generous as the lifetime warranty on the competing Solitude headphones.

Inside the accessory box is a carry strap for the headphone case, a gold plated 1/4" adapter plug for using the headphones with, eg, a home stereo system, and a gold plated 63" extension cord.

The headphone carrying case is similar to the QC2 case, but slightly smaller - about 3/4 of an inch less wide and less tall, and 1/2" less thick. Frequent travelers who already have a way too full carry on bag of road warrior gadgets will appreciate this slight reduction in size.

Inside the headphone carrying case are the headphones themselves, plus the detachable connector cord that goes between the headphones and any music source, the battery recharger, and a gold plated adapter to convert between the two prong plugs required by some airline seats and the regular plug on the connecting cord. There is also a business card holder with ten business card sized advertisements for the QC3 - Bose hope you'll choose to pass these on to admiring fellow passengers.

The headphone carrying case has one surprising omission compared to the case for the QC2. It has no zipper pouch to store the connecting cable in; instead you're apparently expected to just squash it in and leave it loose. This slightly increases the chances of losing the cable and is a puzzling omission. Perhaps if they left out the business card holder and the advertising cards for their product, they'd have space for the cable holder like they offer in the QC2 carry case.

Bose Headphones

noreply@blogger.com (jams) — Tue, 01 Mar 2011 07:09:00 +0000

The Bose Quiet Comfort 3 headphones represent a shift in design philosophy, moving from Bose's earlier 'around the ear' design to an 'on the ear' design; perhaps in a desire to make the headphones even smaller and lighter.

This brings with it a different series of trade-offs, and most people seem to have a clear preference for either on the ear or around the ear type designs.

Inexplicably, Bose has weakened a potentially good product by using a rechargeable battery rather than a regular disposable AAA battery. The inconvenience of the battery's short life and the need to travel with yet another charger are major negatives.

Noise cancelling performance is slightly inferior to that offered by the QC2.

Bose has set an incredibly high price on these headphones. And if you buy a second battery and an international charger, your total cost rises to a ridiculous $450. Shame on Bose for such rapacious pricing on both their headphones and the accessories that go with them.

Lastly, if you're seeking a better value but almost identical headset, consider the Phiaton PS300.

The Bose QuietComfort 3 Main Features Include:

High-performing noise reduction headphones for travel, work and home
Enjoy your music and movies even more, with clear and lifelike sound
Comfortable and lightweight on-ear fit
Rechargeable lithium-ion battery and charger included
Fold-flat earcups for easy storage in slim carrying case
Overall headphone dimensions: 7.38"H x 5.25"W ( 19 cm x 13.5 cm )
Ear cushion outside dimensions: 2.88"H x 2.25"W ( 7.5 cm x 6 cm )
Weight with cable: 5.1 oz (145 g)
Includes: Battery Charge, Airline Adapter, Rechargeable Lithium-ion Battery, Detachable Cable and Carrying Case

Phiatons

noreply@blogger.com (jams) — Mon, 28 Feb 2011 15:00:00 +0000

Low-level resolution was also greater with the Phiatons. Valet's "Rainbow" opens with a whispered vocal from Honey Owens that the Phiatons zoomed in on and embraced; in fact, Owens' voice throughout the track was clearer, more human, more present—unambiguous pluses.
Looking back . . .
. . . at the listening habits I fell into with the Beats, I clearly gravitated toward music that offered aggressive imaging, an area in which the Monsters excelled. I therefore decided to do a few more listening tests, using songs in different genres of music.
I began this time with the Phiatons. "Shhh/Peaceful," from Miles Davis's transcendent In a Silent Way (lossless file; CD, Columbia/Legacy 712765), sounded just about as intoxicating and comforting as ever. I could hear the vibrant guitar, the brassy hi-hat, the locked-in bass, the gentle washes of organ, and rising above it all Davis's breathy, painfully gorgeous trumpet. I could easily follow the bass line, and no part of the musical presentation was confused or obscured. The Phiatons' right earcup was uncomfortable, however, requiring constant adjustment, which obviously detracted from my enjoyment of the music.
Through the Beats, Davis's horn was a little less brass, and a little more spitty. I was more aware of Dave Holland's trilling runs, but his acoustic bass didn't seem quite as tight, and instruments weren't as clearly delineated as through the Phiatons. There was more sizzle to the hi-hat, less clean bite. Imaging was slightly more forceful, sounds showing up suddenly and startlingly.
Paul Galbraith's performance of his arrangement of the Adagio of Bach's Sonata for Solo Violin No.1 in G Minor, from The Six Sonatas and Partitas (lossless file; CD, Delos DE 3232), opens with a bang—the solo-guitar equivalent of pounding a piano's keys. Through the Phiatons it was an awakening experience, Galbraith's breaths easily audible and in sync with the music as he wrings passionate, heavy music from his classical guitar. I had no complaints. I found myself pulled into a tranquil state, my head swaying with the music. My reverie was slightly interrupted by the pressure of the headphones around my head.
Everything sounded slightly cleaner and clearer through the Phiatons, and with that clarity came a relaxation that enveloped me as I listened, and let me revel in the music. I just wish the Phiatons were as comfortable on my head as the Beats were.
Because, through the Beats, Paul Galbraith didn't arrive with as much impact. There was a different sort of weight here, a weight that lacked the Phiatons' clarity; Galbraith's rapid hammer-ons and pull-offs weren't as easily discerned or followed, some of the notes becoming lost in the fire. His breaths sounded less like breaths—they could have been tape hiss, or sheets of paper blown in the wind—and because of this they distracted me more from the music-making. However, the music was still beautiful. The imaging, as with other recordings, was more intense than that of the Phiatons, but also less precise, which detracted from rather than added to my overall experience. Moving on to the Fuga of Sonata 1, the Beats' lack of clarity resulted in sloppier-sounding technique, and lacks of impact and momentum. By comparison, the Phiatons' sound was tighter, resulting in what seemed a more dramatic and enticing performance.
Final thoughts
Many years ago, when I was just beginning work on this review, I had both sets of headphones here in the office. Several of my colleagues gave them a listen. Everyone—everyone—liked both, and came to pretty much the conclusions I've come to. With minor differences in perspective, of course. Some preferred the Beats' generous bass over the Phiatons' solid bottom-end grip. Some felt that the Phiatons were extremely comfortable, while the Beats were too bulky.
While I was greatly impressed by the Beats' design, packaging, and aggressive imaging, I ultimately preferred the Phiatons' more musical performance. What I couldn't get over was how tightly they gripped my head. Had the Phiatons been as comfortable as the Beats, I might have purchased them.
I'm not convinced that noise cancellation is the way to go. For one thing, there's the battery requirement. I don't want to deal with batteries. And for all the Beats' invulnerability to outside noise, the Phiatons, without noise cancellation, proved just as impervious. Perhaps the money invested in the noise-cancellation technology could be better spent elsewhere.
The arrival of Jim Austin's review text of Grado's updated SR60, the SR60i ($79), overlapped with my audition of the Beats and Phiaton headphones, so I had the opportunity to compare those two premium sets with an entry-level classic. While I don't want to preempt Jim's findings—his review will appear in our May issue—I will say that the Grados' overall sound has more in common with the Beats' than with the Phiatons'. Not a bad thing. I tossed a check in the mail for the Grados.
In other news, our digital sales rep, Jon Banner, walked into the office this morning with a bigger-than-usual bounce in his step. As he stopped at my door, he looked especially chuffed. "Look what I've got!" he hollered.

On his head was a brand-new set of Phiaton Moderna MS 400s. I was a little envious. Ow!
Charley-horsed again.

Packaging

noreply@blogger.com (jams) — Mon, 28 Feb 2011 14:58:00 +0000

Finally, I played a lossless file of Espers' "That Which Darkly Thrives," from last year's III (CD, Drag City DC416). Here, interestingly, voices were rendered appropriately: They sounded lovely and ethereal, and seemed to float above everything in a way that even my stereo can't manage. In my review of this album, I highlighted the "groaning bass and cello runs that lift the listener from the ground." Compared to my memory of that sensation as conveyed through my hi-fi, the Beats came up short, however, sounding slightly diffuse and not nearly as impactful. Bass, overall, had a distinctly loose and fat quality that hindered the music's momentum and impact. Guitar leads, on the other hand, were bright and strong, and imaging was, again, stellar.

Familial interlude
At my mom's house, I showed the headphones to my younger sisters. One is 15 years old, the other 27. Both very much liked the style of the Beats and found them comfortable. Neither thought them too bulky or awkward.
We ate lots of good food, teased each other, and sat around on the couch for hours. Then I went home.

Against the Phiatons
On the train ride back to Jersey City, I briefly reacquainted myself with the sound of the Beats headphones before comparing them with the Phiaton Moderna MS 400 ($249), reviewed by Wes Phillips in our January 2009 issue. In this price range, a difference of $100 is significant, but I'd had some experience with the Phiatons and, with Wes's review handy, figured those familiar 'phones would make a fine reference. Plus, the Beats and Phiatons have a similar fashion sense—both sets are red, black, and sleek—though the Beats bob to Raekwan, while the Phiatons slack along Bedford Avenue. It's the ever-blurring difference between hip-hop and hipster.

I can't help but think that some of the difference in price is due to the difference in packaging. While the Beats' packaging is superb—admirable, even—the Modernas' is nothing special. You probably won't want to display your Phiaton box—it'll be going in the trash or a closet—but it does the job. My review sample was packed neatly and safely, and looked fine. Whereas opening a set of Beats was like rejoicing over a new pair of sneakers, opening a set of Phiatons was like struggling with a new G.I. Joe action figure: There were all these little pieces of tape and tricky bits of wire looping through the cardboard. After a while, I just wanted to tear the damn thing open. I didn't, though. I was very careful.

In Wes's review of the Phiatons, he mentions that they "don't sit as lightly on the head" as some other headphones, and that their earcup pads and closed back form a particularly "tight seal." Wes nonetheless found the Moderna MS 400s very comfortable. I had a tougher time with them. It was never something that made itself immediately noticeable, but often enough I found myself having to adjust and readjust the 'phones' placement on my head due to discomfort, especially around my right ear. I have a large head, large ears, and I wear glasses—all factors that may have added to the problem. Will the Phiatons fit comfortably on your head? I'm willing to bet they will, but that will be a matter for you and your head to decide.

As for the Phiatons' sound, Wes felt they lacked "a touch of sparkle," but that they offered a "superbly tight low end" and were "extremely musical" overall. I had no problem with the tonal quality of the Phiatons' top octaves, feeling instead that they conveyed a satisfying sense of truth and air and detail—but I lack Wes's experience of headphones, and he was comparing the Phiatons to the more expensive AKG K701 ($499). Where Wes and I completely agree is in regard to the Phiaton's bass performance. A "superbly tight low end" is right. In this respect, the Phiatons were at the opposite end of the spectrum from Monster's Beats. While the Beats' bass could sound loose and overripe, detracting from the music's overall impact and momentum, the Phiatons kept the low end very much under control, resulting in greater drama and drive. Which you prefer may very well come down to how you like your bottom end.

For instance, listening to Espers' "That Which Darkly Thrives" through the Phiatons was surprisingly instructive. Though their imaging wasn't quite as impressive or as thrilling as the Beats', the Phiatons' tighter low end meant that this song's deep bass and cello lines were more cleanly delineated and had greater impact. In addition, there were instrumental textures throughout the song that I hadn't appreciated through the Beats—electric guitars sounded more powerful and therefore appropriately triumphant, while acoustic guitars rang percussively in the background. This distinction is very similar to that between a band with a good rhythm section and one without: Get the foundation right, and everything else falls into place.

The Sounds

noreply@blogger.com (jams) — Mon, 28 Feb 2011 14:56:00 +0000

Everything is designed to be pleasing to the touch. Even the case's zipper handle is smooth and soft. To the left of the headphones, a second compartment contains the quick-start guide, warranty, and an effective antimicrobial cleaning cloth. The Beats' high-gloss finish smudges easily—you will get fingerprints on these headphones. However, the new, hot-looking white version may be less prone to smudging. Also included is a 1/8"-to-1/4" adapter and Monster iSoniTalk cable, compatible with iPhones, Blackberries, and other music-enabled cell phones. I didn't use the iSoniTalk, but I can see how it would be handy. The retail price for the Beats by Dr. Dre Studio headphones is $349.95, but you can probably find them for a lot less online. Listening
All of the listening I did on vacation in Puerto Rico was extremely casual. I listened while lying in bed, while lying on a hammock, while sitting by the pool drinking Medalla and rum. The Beats were portable, comfortable, and fairly musical, with a robust bottom end and impressive imaging.

A few weeks later, back in the States, I took the Beats with me on a New Jersey Transit train, headed for my mom's house. Again, the Beats' noise canceling worked fine. Train sounds were barely audible. Listening at moderate levels, I could only just discern the sound of the conductor's voice through the train's noisy PA system. Instead, my music became a soundtrack for what I could see through the train's dirty windows.
All listening was done using my 8GB iPod Nano; I began with a 320kbps MP3 of Pens' "Freddie." (I know: No matter the bit rate, low-quality MP3s sacrifice music for convenience, thus unambiguously contradicting the Stereophile ethos. But I wanted to try a range of material of varying quality, because that's what most users will probably do. Even John Atkinson admits that 320kbps is good enough—or sneaky enough—to fool some of the listeners some of the time.) "Freddie" sounded as it should: relentlessly driving and menacing, with an enormous amount of raw, head-banging, fist-pumping energy. An all-girl British trio of overdriven guitar, cheap synth, and broken drum kit, Pens creates a sort of punk rock that is at once ferocious and adorable—sort of like a puppy pit bull who obviously just wants to play, but scares the shit out of you as you make your way down a dark, winding road to the beach. Or something. For most of the song's 125 seconds, all I could do was stare out the window, the sun in my face, watching as the suburbs blurred by. Things were going well.
Next I turned to Valet's "Rainbow," from last year's intoxicating False Face Society (192kbps MP3; LP, Mexican Summer MEX011). This track includes whispered voices, electronic washes, wah guitar, bongos, percussive rolls and trills, the sound of skin against skin. Here, the Beats' overripe bass and thrilling imaging worked to heighten the song's intensity and allure. Honey Owens has always been seductive and mysterious, but never quite like this—not even when I listen through my hi-fi. The Beats' slightly slow, softened transients worked to tame the overcompressed electric guitar, while imparting to the bongos a wet, feline quality that I found captivating. Through the Beats, Honey Owens is everywhere. I like it when Honey Owens is everywhere.

Valet led me to the Psychic Ills' "I Take You As My Wife Again," from the New York City band's early 2009 release, Mirror Eye (320kbps MP3; LP, The Social Registry TSR066). The Psychic Ills try to hypnotize you, to transport you; this song does it with warbling electronics and percussive elements that sizzle and sway across the soundstage, from left to right and back again. Heard through the Beats, these effects were startling and tangible. I could feel the sounds sweep across the stage with a physicality that was almost unnerving, as if someone were blowing into my ears as the music played. Soundstage depth was also conveyed with a strange sort of hyperrealism: Sounds seemed to emerge from outside of my head; tinkling noises emerged from the distance with compelling detail. Midway through this 10-minute journey, the song transitions from a series of ambient gulps to a trancelike rhythm with Balinese-sounding strings. The Beats portrayed this tonal and thematic shift with a good sense of momentum and fine musicality, allowing the melody to emerge nicely while preserving the song's rhythmic thrust.

Now thoroughly hypnotized, I found myself turning, almost involuntarily, to I.U.D.'s "Glow Balls," from their penetrating (ha) 2009 release, The Proper Sex (192kbps MP3; LP, The Social Registry TSR069). At times frightening and at times absurd, I.U.D. finds Lizzi Bougatsos (Gang Gang Dance) teaming with Sadie Laska (Growing, Extreme Violence) for a heavy, dubbed-out, playful concoction of industrial sound and sexual energy. With maniacal screams, a military beat, the sounds of scraping metal, and relentless electronic clamor, "Glow Balls" could easily serve as the soundtrack to a slasher flick. And while the Beats' knack for imaging again proved useful, their hefty bass made this track sound too slow. My feeling is that the Beats were struggling to sort through the ragged textures of this densely layered track, with voices, especially, lacking their usual ferocity.

The Beats

noreply@blogger.com (jams) — Mon, 28 Feb 2011 14:54:00 +0000

The Beats
The Beats by Dr. Dre (9.2oz) have a chunky, padded, shiny black headband that slopes down and expands almost seamlessly into circular earcup supports. The large, oblong earcups are extremely comfortable and can swivel gently, back and forth and from side to side. Thin accents of silver and red wrap round each earpiece—a subtle, handsome touch. On the outside of each earcup is a metallic disc that curves into a graceful red b, the now-familiar logo of the popular Beats brand. Moving back up the shiny headband, four tiny hex-head screws reveal the seam at which the headphones can be expanded along their internal metal bracing. This is followed by a small Monster Cable logo and, finally, at the very apex of the band, four words: beats by dr. dre.

All this, but no sign of a battery compartment. Defeated and desperate, I consulted the quick-start guide. First sentence: "Battery compartment is located in the left earcup." Oh. Second sentence: "Press down and turn earcup cover counterclockwise." I did so, et voilà. Clever. I installed the batteries.
The right earcup has a small power switch. With the batteries installed, moving the switch to the far left activates the headphones and ignites a red LED located below the b. When the batteries run low, the LED goes amber.
Batteries. I sort of hate them. I kept forgetting to turn off the headphones. I kept draining my batteries. If you buy a set of Beats headphones, remember to turn them off at the end of your listening session, or be prepared to buy lots of batteries.
To mute your music, press and hold the metallic disc on the Beats' right earcup. Release to resume listening. Clever. Learn the deft use of this, to avoid punches in the leg.
Earlier, I mentioned the Beats' impressive packaging. Opening a set of Beats headphones reminded me of unboxing a brand-new pair of sneakers. As a kid, I'd sit there in my bedroom, staring at my new sneakers, intoxicated by that scent of leather and rubber and thick cardboard. I wonder if Dr. Dre had this in mind. At the press conference for Lady Gaga's Heartbeats, Dre had mentioned that his lawyers had originally asked him to market sneakers. "Fuck sneakers," Interscope Records chairman Jimmy Iovine told Dre. "Let's sell speakers."
Anyway, the packaging is outstanding. Do you want pride of ownership? Image? Style? Convenience? The packaging and design of Monster Cable's Beats by Dr. Dre provide all of that. You'll want to display the hefty red box in your recording studio or your bedroom, as the case may be. Pull on the silky tabs and the box unfolds like a case of an expensive set of knives, revealing the padded carrying case, already containing the Beats headphones.

Monster Beats

noreply@blogger.com (jams) — Mon, 28 Feb 2011 14:53:00 +0000

I was looking out the window. I was waiting for the plane to take off. I was wearing Monster Cable's Beats by Dr. Dre Studio headphones ($349.95). I was listening to Pens' burning, fuzzed-out, 27-minute onslaught, Hey Friend, What You Doing? (320kbps MP3; LP, De Stijl IND071). I was shouting with sudden shock and pain.
"Ow! What?"
My brother-in-law had reached across the aisle and punched me in the leg. He'd been trying to get my attention for a while.
"How do the headphones sound?"
"They sound good, jerk. I couldn't hear a thing you were saying." Apparently, the Beats' noise-canceling feature was working as advertised.
I had just discovered it. Moments earlier, I'd settled into my seat and plugged the Beats' seductive red cable into my iPod Nano's mini-jack. I'd selected an album and pressed Play. Nothing.
Included in the Beats' impressive packaging are two Duracell AAA batteries. I hadn't installed them. I removed the headphones and searched all over for a battery compartment. Again: Nothing. I was perplexed. And charley-horsed.