Printable View
ipods,,,,
when i was ill in bed last week, i started listening to my wife's ipod, playing the carpenters,[of all things] and i must say, it wasnt bad, yes, it may have lacked a bit of oomph at the lower extreemes,but it was clean, crisp, and quite listenable, i even thought how much better it might be with a decent pair of headphones...:)
Yep, those in-ear things just don't do it mate, do they? I remember the funny looks I used to get on the rare occasions when I travelled on public transport with my Walkman and full-sized Beyer Dynamic (now AKG) headphones strapped onto my big nut!
F*ck it, I like some semblance of bass and scale with my music no matter where I am! :lol:
Marco.
Damn straight! I have some big fat Sennheisers for casual iPod use and some lighter but still over-ear Sennheisers for running. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
Quite right, baby! :smoking:
I guess we just have certain sonic standards we will not go below with any equipment.
Marco
I can't even use them, my ear holes are too small!:lolsign:Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
Now I say, Wrong!Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
Ok, if you use the throw ins that come with an iPod then they don't have the bass you might be looking for. The argument I'm going to make is the same, logically, that use for detracters of the SL1200 & SL1210. You just haven't heard the right in ear 'phones.
What's critical for bass response with in ear phones is the seal you get between, let me call them buds, the buds and the ear channel. I use Shure E2C's in a custom ear moulding, there's no lack of bass, and these are a long way from being top of the line models. Ok you can't feel your intenstines being pummelled. I have some Sony MDR-7's. They're better than the Shure E2C's but the difference is not huge.
For me the great advantage of the Custom Ear mould/ In ear phone is that you get -25dB of external noise reduction for free, and you can listen at lower absolute volume levels for an equivalent relative volume level. That is, you don't have to turn it up so much to cover the external noise.
Most people don't know that they can go to any hearing specialist and have moulds made for earbuds. Imo, it's the most practical solution for listening to music in hostile conditions, i.e. public transport, trains, planes and what have you!
cheers
Peter,
I bow to your greater experience in this area :)
I just would've thought that, as with external speakers, the bigger the 'cone radiating area' the bigger the sound and the deeper the bass. I know earphones don't have cones in the conventional sense, but you get my point. I simply can't imagine those tiny little in-ear things, no matter how high quality, having the same bass response as the likes of my full-size AKG 701s, but hey ho...
Marco.
I've got a decent pair of headphone, Sennheiser HD600, but I've never really enjoyed the headphone experience. For me it's there when it's too late to laisten to music at a decent volume very late on. I always prefer the impact and scale that you get from speakers, I've yet to hear any headphones that give me the same sort of enjoyment from listening.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
Even quite late I would much rather listen to my system via the spakers very quiet than put headphones on. One of the benefits of having an active system is the detail still floods out even at whisper quiet volume.
I have an mp3 player, refuse to buy apple, but the music on there is at a high bit rate, 320kbps, used with 'proper' headphones and nearly always on random and only used on long train journeys. The biggest benefit is being reminded of albums you haven't played for ages when a track comes up. It's amazing how often I return home and hunt the album out and put it on the system.
Too many people I know simply use the ipod ALL the time, bring them to work to listen to while working and then go home and hook it up to one of the piss awful boomboxes 'especially made for the ipod'.
I have a lil Denon mini system, wonderful little things, with a cd,amp and tuner in one small well made box with Mission sourced speakers. It cost less than some of these boomboxes my friends own, the cdp replay is far superior to the ipod and the speakers actually produce a decent soundstage and imaging, if not stonking bass. I can hook my mps player up via a £20 mini jack to RCA cable via it's AUX sockets. Job done.
I just can't understand why people put up with listening to something like music in such a poor manner.
I view this differently to computer audio, via a quality streaming device, flacs and a quality amp. For me this is the future of digital replay and is a completely different kettle of fish to an ipod and docking stattion/boombox.
Griffo,Quote:
Originally Posted by griffo104
All good points. Yes I prefer the in room speaker experience, but I still believe that the ehadphone experience is closer to the result intended by the recording artist/sound engineer.
I like the od recordings made new again by the random feature of an iPod, it's even lead me to complete the catalogue!
cheers
Peter
Griffo,
Nice one, mate. Let me know what it's like because I'm very interested! Btw, as far as headshells go, get an Audio Technica LH-18, which is also on the Audiocubes website. I've tried virtually every decent headshell on the market and the LH-18 is head and shoulders better than any of them, especially with Denons - there's a synergy that's 'just right', and it looks the dog's bollocks! :)Quote:
Marco, yep that's the cart I plan to get, I may even treat myself to a nice new headshell as well when I order it.
Please do as soon as you can. I'd love to see pics of the Sony you're buying!Quote:
I'll try and hunt out the pics when I get a chance to
I can't comment on Spacedecks as I've never heard one. It looks like a nice deck, but I've given up now on belt-drives and won't be going back. Richard (Gromit) is no longer using his (although he's still got it I think) after hearing a 1210, which made him buy the Pioneer PL-71 D/D deck he's using now.Quote:
I have to say I've been slightly disappointed in quite a few Spacedecks I've heard, sounding a little soft and too laid back. In all cases these have been at bake off and have always had a uni-pivot of some sort on them but in each case they have lacked the drive and impact that so many go on about with that particular deck.
In my experience, D/D is unquestionably more accurate in terms of speed stability, and let's face it, getting the platter to turn round at constantly the right speed with no 'wavering' is pretty much fundamental in getting good sound from a turntable! The rest after that is down to personal taste in terms of presentational issues, but IME, good D/Ds impose very little of their character on the music and simply allow the arm and cartridge to do their job as intended. That's why I much prefer them. I don't want to hear what the T/T is doing - I just want to hear the music on the record as unsullied as possible.
Yep, you're right. I think it's a luxury issue, but that doesn't excuse the rank poor quality of so many of today's pressings, even 'audiophile' ones. Why the f*ck with all the technology available nowadays can't they produce consistently perfectly flat records which aren't full of mold-release stains? And the recording quality on some of them is diabolical. There just doesn't seem to be the same care taken over the whole process as there was in the 50s.Quote:
I agree totally with you on mono records. Considering some of mine are over 50 years old, there's no sign of warping, they are thick and the sleeves and inners have a quality we seem to have given up on in this day. I suppose records were more of a luxury back then.
I can't say that I've noticed any of the distortion you mention with the 103. It's just the feeling that I'm not getting the most out of the mono recordings in a musical sense.Quote:
I currently use them with stereo carts but there is still distortion coming through. The Linn amp has a mono button which helps eliminate some of the distortion but not all, which is what has triggered my wanting to go full on mono.
Marco.