Your favorite headphones?

[Shawn]

For the budget conscious I cannot recommend the Audio Technica ATH-M30X highly enough.  A lot of bang for your buck. 

 

[Scott Dolan]

if they sound half as nice as they look, then they're worth every penny. 

[ArtSalt]

I'm using a pair of Ultrasone 900's at present with a Musical Fidelity M1 HPAP, but I am looking to upgrade to the Grado Woody Allens. Alas, they're near enough €800 in these parts. The Ultrasone's are reasonable, but the professional tag seems a bit much in my opinion.

[Stefan Wood]

After years of using Grados, I decided to change.  Going too cheap wasn't going to make my ears happy, but I was not willing to spend over $100 for a pair either.  I have a long commute to and from work, so comfort was equally important.  Settled on the Creative Aurvana Live! headphones for about $52. They are great; I can play them at a low volume and still get all the clarity and spatial depth that I hear on my regular stereo system.

[Carl Baugher]

I love headphones and have a fair amount of money tied up in them. I own a number different headphone amps. For various types of music with differing amplification, etc., I prefer Seenheiser HD800, Beyerdynamic T-1 or Audeze LCD3. I probably listen to the Audeze's most of the time.

[Scott Dolan]

After years of using Grados, I decided to change.  Going too cheap wasn't going to make my ears happy, but I was not willing to spend over $100 for a pair either.  I have a long commute to and from work, so comfort was equally important.  Settled on the Creative Aurvana Live! headphones for about $52. They are great; I can play them at a low volume and still get all the clarity and spatial depth that I hear on my regular stereo system.

There are a few hidden gems out there, you just have to diligently search for them. 

Reminds me now of the headphones I got my son for Christmas last year. Think I paid less than $40 for them, but they really sound amazing for being in that price range. I heard cans for four or five times as much that couldn't beat them. I forget the name, but I'll post it once I get home. 

I think it's awesome to come across things like that in the audio world! I'd love to hear what you're sound like.

[Jim Alfredson]

The Audio Technica ATH-M30x are indeed great phones for the money. They are far superior to the model they replaced, the ATH-M30 (no 'X'). I have both. I gave the older models to my kids for laptop / iPod gaming. I use the newer model in the studio.

But I also own three pair of ATH-M50 phones and they are great. I'd love to try the new AT open back headphones.

http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/headphones/996daf096c12ea16/

[Scott Dolan]

Damn, those ATH-M50's are really nice looking cans as well. Audio Technica certainly doesn't scrimp when it comes to aesthetics. 

BTW, those headphones I got for my son are Superlux HD681. They are rather cheap and flimsy looking and feeling. But once you put some music through them they sound far more expensive than they actually are. 

http://www.head-fi.org/products/superlux-hd-68

[Kevin Bresnahan]

If I were in the market right now, I would definitely look at the Audeze line, particularly the new EL-8. They make some beautiful-sounding headphones and this new model is significantly less than their previous ones. Worth checking out.

[CJ Shearn]

I have been using the Audio Technica M40's for years, on my second pair now, they sound wonderful, every detail is intact.  I had the infamous Grado SR60's a while which sounded nice, but actually the driver blew in the left phone. The SR60's had a high frequency treble bump I didn't like.  I like the Audio Technica's because of the flat response, they balance things nicely, and I would like to upgrade to the M50's at some point.

[Scott Dolan]

Not to mention that Grados tend to be uncomfortable as hell. I've never been a fan of on ear headphones. The entire concept seems wacky. 

[CJ Shearn]

Yeah Scott, I agree. It was a tiny hair that punctured the driver, which a friend tried to repair but they also seemed too fragile to me.  The Audio Technica's are very durable, plus I like the uncolored flat frequency response sound they present. I no longer use EQ's of any sort, and the cans even balance out a few of the early RVG's like "Somethin' Else" which had too much treble.

[Scott Dolan]

Glad to hear that, CJ. You know you've moved into a high quality realm of audio when an EQ is no longer necessary to get the sound you're looking for, but also no longer wanted, period. I still have an old ten band Optimus EQ in my closet that I purchased  a quarter of a century ago. Was my best audio friend for so long that I simply cannot part with him. 

And while I am thoroughly happy with my PSB Speakers cans, I have to admit I'm REALLY intrigued by all the positive things you cats have been saying about your Audio Technica's. I hope I get a chance to hear some myself one of these days. 

I also agree with you concerning a "flat response". That's the one thing that makes my PSB's such superstars to my ears. I can take every last set of headphones and earbuds that I own, or have owned, and tell you what their weakness is. Boosted bass, cut treble, flat/lifeless midrange... But with these, I can find no weakness. 

[niels]

Well, favorite is a big word as I never compared my AKG K701 with another quality headphone. But truth is, I bought mine some five years ago ( my first "serious" piece of quality audio stuff), and never felt any need for upgrading or looking any further for what's out there because I'm 100% satisfied with them. They are open headphones, extremely comfortable (listening for four hours straight is no problem at all) and have great detail and separation of instruments. Depending on what I listen, I use them directly connected to my Accuphase amp (most of the time) or through a Heed Canamp (most of the RvG remastered Blue Note albums).

 

 

Edited July 8, 2015 by niels

[CJ Shearn]

Glad to hear that, CJ. You know you've moved into a high quality realm of audio when an EQ is no longer necessary to get the sound you're looking for, but also no longer wanted, period. I still have an old ten band Optimus EQ in my closet that I purchased  a quarter of a century ago. Was my best audio friend for so long that I simply cannot part with him. 

And while I am thoroughly happy with my PSB Speakers cans, I have to admit I'm REALLY intrigued by all the positive things you cats have been saying about your Audio Technica's. I hope I get a chance to hear some myself one of these days. 

I also agree with you concerning a "flat response". That's the one thing that makes my PSB's such superstars to my ears. I can take every last set of headphones and earbuds that I own, or have owned, and tell you what their weakness is. Boosted bass, cut treble, flat/lifeless midrange... But with these, I can find no weakness. 

I enjoy good sound but I never considered myself an "audiophile" per se because when I find something I like, I use it forever until it's dead, my set up otherwise is anything but, an Onkyo TXSR304 receiver, Technics SBA-36 speakers.  The music is the #1 thing, and you'd be surprised from reading things here the past decade, plus lurking  at the SH forums I've really eased off on wanting to buy 20 different versions of a Blue Note title, and the headphones for me, do help certain masterings.  I have a set of Polk bookshelf speakers, R10's I think, but I really need the subwoofer to make them sound good.  I do 95% of my listening on headphones, and as I'll be moving to my own apt in White Plains soon and that'll be necessary.  I also use the "direct" setting on the Onkyo amp which has minimal signal processing.  I have a friend who is going to drop $3200 on Martin Logan speakers and I think a Marantz amp, but he really loves extended bass and treble so that's the sound he's going for.  He loves a lot of jazz funk, disco, Afrobeat, and highlife so that's the sound good for him,

Glad to hear that, CJ. You know you've moved into a high quality realm of audio when an EQ is no longer necessary to get the sound you're looking for, but also no longer wanted, period. I still have an old ten band Optimus EQ in my closet that I purchased  a quarter of a century ago. Was my best audio friend for so long that I simply cannot part with him. 

And while I am thoroughly happy with my PSB Speakers cans, I have to admit I'm REALLY intrigued by all the positive things you cats have been saying about your Audio Technica's. I hope I get a chance to hear some myself one of these days. 

I also agree with you concerning a "flat response". That's the one thing that makes my PSB's such superstars to my ears. I can take every last set of headphones and earbuds that I own, or have owned, and tell you what their weakness is. Boosted bass, cut treble, flat/lifeless midrange... But with these, I can find no weakness. 

Right, though my system is anything but audiophile, but the headphones. I would say I am a headphone audiophile more than anything, it's the bulk of my listening.  The Audio Technica's do great with jazz, classical, electronic music, prog rock, pop.  On my Onkyo TX SR304 receiver I use the "direct" setting which is minimally processed.

[Scott Dolan]

CJ, Polk Audio makes some of the most underrated speakers on the market. I still have my RT25i as the surrounds on my main system, and my R50 mains with R10 surrounds on our game room system. I'm not sure there is a better bang for the buck speaker than the under $500pr Polk Audio line. They fall behind the market leaders above $500, but their budget-minded speakers are heads and shoulders above most of their competitors, IMO. 

As for the R10's, they're no different than pretty much every bookshelf speaker out there: if you want decent bass response, you're going to need to mate them to a sub. Unless you're usng them in a near field setup. I used to use my RT25i's to monitor near field. And I thought they sounded superb! Haven't tried that with the R10's, though. 

Though, I do find it curious that your friend prefers a lot of bass in his music, yet decided to go with electrostats. Martin Logan builds wondrful speakers, some of the best on the market, bar none, but bass isn't really their strongest suit. But, he will certainly get a nice, clean, and clear representation of his music across the frequency spectrum. I came vey close to buying a pair of Martin Logans when I did my rebuild last year (though nothing as expensive as what your buddy is looking at), but concluded that the size and dynamics (setup) of my living room just wasn't conducive for that type of speaker. They are incredible, though. 

Well, favorite is a big word as I never compared my AKG K701 with another quality headphone. But truth is, I bought mine some five years ago ( my first "serious" piece of quality audio stuff), and never felt any need for upgrading or looking any further for what's out there because I'm 100% satisfied with them. They are open headphones, extremely comfortable (listening for four hours straight is no problem at all) and have great detail and separation of instruments. Depending on what I listen, I use them directly connected to my Accuphase amp (most of the time) or through a Heed Canamp (most of the RvG remastered Blue Note albums).

 

 

AKG just builds such rock solid equipment. I've never heard those, but from mics to headphones, AKG quality is almost without peer. 

[CJ Shearn]

Oh, interesting Scott.  My two responses merged, didn't see it posted.  Well, my friend is just at the beginning of the audiophile market.  What do you mean by near field?

[Scott Dolan]

Oh, interesting Scott.  My two responses merged, didn't see it posted.  Well, my friend is just at the beginning of the audiophile market.  What do you mean by near field?

Yeah, I completely missed that second post. A little new software trickery...

Near field monitoring is just like what you see them doing in recording studios. It just means that you're close to the source, and making an equilateral triangle with your head and the two speakers. It's perfect for small rooms, apartments, that kind of thing. I used to have mine set up in front of my computer desk in a 9'x10' room. That's where I did my serious listening. 

And $3200 for a set of speakers is anything but "at the beginning" of the audiophile market. That's pretty close to right in the heart of it. 

I'm also like you, I use zero processing for my music. Stereo direct only, no tone controls, no EQ. Unless you have a really cheap and crappy amp/receiver, there's really no need for signal processing. The only downside is when it comes to headphones, since most of the less expensive amps/receivers have really garbage headphone jacks. My old Harman Kardon was a beautiful sounding receiver, but the headphone output was absolutely abysmal. That's why I still use a dedicated headphone amp to this day. 

I firmly believe that a headphone amp and a DAC (if your amp/receiver is more than 7-10 years old) are the two most vital components to any rig outside of speakers. 

[CJ Shearn]

Ahh I see, thank you for the explanation, Scott.  Well, my friend, he wants to have the best everything, he goes for a lot the marketing hype too, like he was surprised when I told him SHM CD's and Blu Spec-- the latter I have no experience with were no different technologically than regular CD's.  He was also surprised when I told him b/c SACD and HDTracks downloads at 24/96 will sound similar, although like Jim said in your signature maybe hi res audio is pointless, b/c when done well (take Terence Blanchard's new one "Breathless") the differences to my ears between that and a well mastered CD is minimal at best.  And as you say, a 320 MP3 sounds just as good as a .wav from now on I will rip my discs to 320 MP3 to save hard drive space.

[Scott Dolan]

For ripping to your computer I highly suggest FLAC/ALAC. Codecs have improved dramatically over the last decade, so who knows what the future holds? Might as well hedge your bet and have the lossless file, then you can make a copy in any format you wish. They'll be a little bigger than 320kbps files, but much smaller than a .wav file. 

Edited July 9, 2015 by Scott Dolan

[CJ Shearn]

Thanks, Scott. I have a few .flac's, I use Windows Media's Player's library, on an HP pavillion laptop with an 1TB HDD and strangely for FLAC the timings for tracks don't show, and you can't use the seek bar, very strange.

[Scott Dolan]

That is very bizarre. I wonder if it's some kind of glitch in the media player? 

 

I don't have either problem n iTunes...

[CJ Shearn]

Not sure.  The reason I don't use iTunes as a library is because with the HDTracks purchases I have of several 24/96 files, they aren't recognized.  Windows Media Player plays everything in the 1,000 odd  albums or so in my collection.

[Scott Dolan]

iTunes won't recognize FLAC. I have Out To Lunch from HDTracks in ALAC and it plays just fine. 

Either way, iTunes is such a mess I would never recommend it. It's just odd how WMP handles FLAC. 

[CJ Shearn]

Actually my HDTracks files are in WAV, but yes iTunes is a mess.