# Good Over-the-Head headphones?



## Captain Howdy (Jun 30, 2009)

I have a price cap of 100$, but is there any set of headphones that are over-the-head-style (the kind that covers your ear, not just rests against it) that are any good? I've only owned two pair, one was Bose', and the other was like...JVC, or something. 

So, is there any suggestions for what I should get? Randomly shopping at stores without studying beforehand doesn't seem to work very well, surprisingly.


----------



## Xaevo (Jun 30, 2009)

Sennheiser HD202

Awesome! for just 30 euros in the netherlands!!

and it's the best quality you can get!


----------



## ToeClaws (Jun 30, 2009)

TechieWolf said:


> Sennheiser HD202
> 
> Awesome! for just 30 euros in the netherlands!!
> 
> and it's the best quality you can get!



Aye - or the HD218s.  Here's the listing of their regular line of headphones (most are under $100 US):

http://www.sennheiserusa.com/private_headphones_wired-headphones


----------



## Carenath (Jun 30, 2009)

Bose are not half bad, at the same time... just like Sony.... overpriced.


----------



## Shino (Jun 30, 2009)

How 'bout what I'm using now? I've got a pair of Sony Wireless (IR) Headphones. (MDR-IF240R). Got them at Sears (yeah, I know) on clearance for like $30, and they're the best set of over-the-head headphones I've ever owned. 'Course, the transmitter needs partial line-of-sight, but that's usually not a problem, since the signal's strong and my walls are gloss white.

Other than that, Logitech makes some of the best stuff around. And it's usually in the $40-$60 range.


----------



## X (Jun 30, 2009)

skullcrushers are pretty good from what i hear.


----------



## ZentratheFox (Jun 30, 2009)

Sennheiser HD555


----------



## Captain Howdy (Jun 30, 2009)

Skullcrushers look like a no-go, the uber-ultra bass feature doesn't really intrigue me, because I listen to death and black metal mostly. I only read the CNET review, but they said hip-hop, techno, and the like - are about the only benefitters of that type of headphones. 

Sony is what I usually fall back on, I have an amazing around-the-back headphones that I've had for like 5 years now, and they still sound amazing, but don't block the noise like you find in the over-the-ear style.

Boses are too expensive and over-hyped, I have a pair, and they were like 130$ - They weren't better then the 30$ JVC of the same style, but neither were that great.

I've never tried Sennheiser, but the 218's look like they sit on your ear. The 202's look better, but they look too small for my head. 

I'll check out Sennheiser at least, never even heard of them until now, but it's worth a shot at least, for the right price.


----------



## ZentratheFox (Jul 1, 2009)

Lastdirewolf said:


> I've never tried Sennheiser, but the 218's look like they sit on your ear. The 202's look better, but they look too small for my head.
> 
> I'll check out Sennheiser at least, never even heard of them until now, but it's worth a shot at least, for the right price.



Sennheisers are the best for the price, seriously. Sadly, newegg stopped selling the HD555's, but Amazon still has 'em!
http://www.amazon.com/Sennheiser-HD...1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1246506986&sr=8-1


----------



## Jelly (Jul 2, 2009)

X said:


> skullcrushers are pretty good from what i hear.



I hear nothing but bad things, honestly.


----------



## Captain Howdy (Jul 2, 2009)

ZentratheFox said:


> Sennheisers are the best for the price, seriously. Sadly, newegg stopped selling the HD555's, but Amazon still has 'em!
> http://www.amazon.com/Sennheiser-HD...1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1246506986&sr=8-1



What's the plug jack like? From that picture on top of the iPod there, it looks fucking huge - Is it regular sized? 

(Something you'd see on smaller headphones, for example)


----------



## wolf with earrings (Jul 2, 2009)

just get behind-the-neck headphones.
just as long as they have some good quality, you should be fine.
i don't see the point in $100+ headphones.
<.<


----------



## Captain Howdy (Jul 2, 2009)

Behind-the-neck headphones hurt my ears big time, they tend up not sitting well or not having a big enough band and pull my ears back, plus the sound quality with noise reduction doesn't stand up to over-the-head/ear-covered ones.


----------



## CerbrusNL (Jul 2, 2009)

My sennheiser has an small jack-plug that fits my iPhone, mp3-player and PC, ADN an screw-on adapter so you have an large jack-plug (I believe those are used in professional CD players?)


----------



## Xaevo (Jul 2, 2009)

Sennheiser HD202 may look small but is rather big,
But if your tend to wear them for the first time, your ears are starting to get hurt if you keep them on for more than an hour, eventually you get used to it and he pain fades away 

*Pro / Con list:*
+ Good bass
+ Good Treble
+ Perfect Sound Quality
+ No cracking at high volumes
+ No distortion at high volumes
+ Long Cable incl. Cable holder!!

-----------

- May hurt for the first hours of wearing


----------



## CerbrusNL (Jul 2, 2009)

That's indeed a little bit of a negative point on those headphones, they can hurt a little bit the first few times you wear them, but that's just because you have to get used to the headphones. The Sennheiser HD280 that I've got used to hurt also, but now, I barely notice I have it on...

P.S: this post was not to make you think you'll be in excruciating pain every time you wear those headphones, cause you wont


----------



## Xaevo (Jul 2, 2009)

+1 to that 

get the HD202!!!


----------



## Runefox (Jul 2, 2009)

Just to throw a wrench into the wheel, I'm going to suggest the Audio Technica ATH-M50. After doing a lot of research, I settled on that one and it gives great sound. It's closed-back and circum-aural (meaning that it sits around the ear), has a high-quality cable and is pretty comfortable to wear. You can't really hear much of the outside world, nor can the outside world hear what you're listening to. They also have low impedance, so you can drive them directly by your MP3 player or anything else without a headphone amp, like some other high-end headphones require. They collapse into a smaller form for carrying, and come with a nice carrying pouch as well as a 6.5mm screw-on stereo adaptor for the bigger slot types (normally found on stereos and mixing boards). Also, 45mm neodymium drivers. Mmm, oomph. Take that, Skullcrushers.

These guys get great reviews, placing them above a lot of other headphones in their class, and I personally agree. I haven't had a pair of headphones that sounded so good - It's not just the bass or anything like that, but the sheer resolution of the sound. You can hear things that you couldn't before, subtleties in drums and cymbals, in vocals, everywhere. They aren't miracle workers, and if the music you're listening to is compressed to hell, it'll still be compressed to hell, but the sound they produce is a lot more accurate than anything else below them, and not much above them that won't cost twice as much is a huge improvement. There's a reason they're called Studio Monitors.

The MSRP is $199, but there's a store on eBay called "nationwideproaudio" that sells them for $99~$119. They're an authorized retailer, and the product they sell is brand new. Amazon has them for a little more if you'd rather go there, but that's going a little far over the price cap. They _are_ quite worth it, though.



> i don't see the point in $100+ headphones.


You've never listened to anything through $100+ headphones, then, or your music library consists of 64kbps WMA/AAC.

I can assure you, the crap that you buy for $20-30 that has "iPod" and "MP3 Player" plastered all over the box doesn't hold a candle to these, and not only that, you'll be replacing those a hell of a lot more often. By comparison, the ATH-M50 (which I can speak for) is very sturdy, with a thick cable and sturdy metal connector with spring instead of the usual plastic crap that rots away after so long. The frame consists of an aluminum band covered with high-grade plastic and foam and notched aluminum for adjustment, where most lower-end headphones would be all plastic with no reinforcement. Many cheaper headphones also have a Y-shaped pair of cables going from the main line to each speaker, which can and will easily get caught up on things, while this has a single cable running into the left cup.

Just the structural differences alone nearly justify the cost when you consider that. I don't know how many pairs of cheap ($20-$40) headphones I've lost due to breakage in that manner, whereas I still have a pair of Realistic PRO-60 headphones from a bygone age (my dad owned these) that still work and are still in prime condition (aside from the fact that the bare foam ear pads tend to rot and need replacing).

The only absolute minus of high-quality headphones like the Sennheiser HD200 series and the ATH-M50 is that you'll probably want to use higher bitrates for your compressed music (and use more FLAC/lossless) unless compression artefacts are something you like hearing. The extra fidelity reveals a lot of the hidden quality loss that lower-midrange bitrates normally cause that your old headphones probably didn't pick up.



> and it's the best quality you can get!


Nope. This is, and it'll set you back $1,700 USD. =D



> Other than that, Logitech makes some of the best stuff around. And it's usually in the $40-$60 range.


Speakers, yes. Headphones? No. Logitech doesn't even really contend in the headphone market so much as exist, much like Skullcandy and others, and usually they just make headsets (with rather good microphones but rather poor speakers). I guess the main exception would be the G35, but... Honestly, I'd have to hear them. They don't look so hot, anyway. Sort of like that Razer or Creative crap. It's kind of funny how people think they need 5.1 or 7.1 in their headsets, when in actuality since the speakers are right in/on your ears, you only need two to simulate surround sound. Sure, the newer ones are using HRTF instead of stuffing extra speakers in, but come on, what a silly concept. So they go out and buy those plastic rip-offs like the Razer Barracuda and the Creative Fatal1ty headsets and they just... die. Malfunction. Kaboom.


----------



## Mistral-chan (Jul 2, 2009)

X said:


> skullcrushers are pretty good from what i hear.



I have a pair and I actually like them better then the Bose headphones I had! 

Not to mention they look pretty cool, hehe. 

Sure, they aren't as great as my other pair of Bose-the Noise cancelling one, but Skull Candy headphones definitely fit the budget, and most are nicer then Sony. ^^


----------



## Xaevo (Jul 2, 2009)

Sennheiser is underpriced for it's quality!


----------



## CaptainCool (Jul 2, 2009)

indeed! i love my HD 212 PROs^^ they are very comfortable (the first headphones i had that dont hurt after very long usage), the sound is kick ass and because its actually a pair of DJ headphones the base is very powerful! i can recommend them^^


----------



## Captain Howdy (Jul 3, 2009)

The problem with the Sennheisers, I've read multiple complaints that they don't fit well on large heads. My head measures 25 1/2 inches around, that's about hat size 8, and about 3 more inches around then the average head - So while the Sennheisers might be amazing, but they are very likely to hurt my head and ears, I also read many complaints that some of them either have bad high's, or midrange, but excel in the lower end. 

So, I can't really say I'm about to drop money on the Senn's, because even though the complaints may be few, they seem to speak depth. :/ The  ATH-M35's I couldn't find any information on really, or reviews, and I don't like taking the manufacters word for it, and I'd like more then one person going "Oh yeah, they're the shit!", so...Really not 100% on any of the headphones listed here, not confident enough on any of them.


----------



## ZentratheFox (Jul 7, 2009)

Lastdirewolf said:


> The problem with the Sennheisers, I've read multiple complaints that they don't fit well on large heads. My head measures 25 1/2 inches around, that's about hat size 8, and about 3 more inches around then the average head - So while the Sennheisers might be amazing, but they are very likely to hurt my head and ears, I also read many complaints that some of them either have bad high's, or midrange, but excel in the lower end.



Mine fit on a very large man at Anthrocon...

The HD555's suffered from slight midrange distortion for the first few hours of listening, but after "broken in", there wasn't any issue at all.


----------



## Xaevo (Jul 7, 2009)

<--- he got sennheisers too!
that makes it an intant buy :O


----------



## KrystalsLover (Jul 7, 2009)

try teh sound cnceling head phones...f tested them and they work well...and for 50-80 dollars, thats kinda good...
they have soft on ear sound cancelers and around ear sound cancelers.


----------



## Runefox (Jul 7, 2009)

Well, since nobody's going to talk about the Audio Technicas, I guess you can't really take my word for it. Still, the Sennheisers are also quite well-regarded, and while I can't speak from experience, lots of others here (and many, many reviews all over the place) can. I think it's a safe bet that you can pick up a pair of the HD-200 series (or preferably the 500 series if you can get them on the cheap) and be quite happy with them.



> try teh sound cnceling head phones...


You mean Bose? I've heard decent things about them, but they look flimsy to me and I've often heard bad things about Bose as a company. I was looking at those, too, when I was in the market for some good headphones, but unless you really need the active noise-cancelling, you'd probably do better with the Sennheisers, which are of a higher grade. Still, some people swear by the Bose noise-cancelling headphones... Might be worth looking into all the same. You might even be able to find a place like a music supply shop somewhere where you can listen to them for yourself.


----------



## Captain Howdy (Jul 7, 2009)

I couldn't find any info on Audio Technicas except like, it's own website, so that's why I'm not particularly interested in them, because I prefer having a good amount of reviews


----------



## ZentratheFox (Jul 8, 2009)

I wish I had experience with the Audio Technicas, but alas, I do not.

Bose are quite expensive for what you get. They don't have (generally) as high impedance as a similarly priced Sennheiser set.

Keep in mind, higher quality headphones will NOT be as loud as crappier headphones. This is due to having a higher impedence (which is essentially, the speed at which the speaker cone returns to the center, as I understand it. Also, it's resistance, measured in ohms) which means it needs more power to push the speaker.

Noteworthy: many people try their Sennheisers on their iPods. The problem with that setup is that the Sennheisers allow you to hear how terrible the iPod's sound quality is. This is especially noticable after having the same headset plugged into something like an X-Fi soundcard.


----------



## Runefox (Jul 8, 2009)

Honestly, I can't find anything on the M35's either, though the M50's have quite a bit of feedback out around and quite a few good reviews on Amazon, HeadRoom, and lots of different audiophile/studio forums. You can find more forum-oriented stuff by typing _(model) vs (model)_ into a Google search. Lots of stuff to be found that way. By all accounts I've read, the ATH-M50's beat out the HD280's (one example; 2-page thread), but I haven't compared them personally and can only go by what people are saying and my own experience with the M50's.

That said, from what I've been reading, the ATH-M50's have much more accurate and powerful bass than the Sennheiser HD280's, and have a much less clamp-happy and less damage-prone headband. The former is a shocker, because these fit pretty snugly on my head - I can't imagine how the HD280's could be tighter. I should also say that the ATH-M50 has a lower impedance than some others at its level, so it can still be driven by MP3 players and other portables. Its impedance is 38 Ohms, versus the HD280's 64 Ohms.


----------



## bluewulf1 (Jul 8, 2009)

if your looking for headphones that have good base but aren't incredably pricy, id go with skullcandy.

and honestly, ive treated mine like crap and they've held up to me somehow.


----------



## ZentratheFox (Jul 8, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Honestly, I can't find anything on the M35's either, though the M50's have quite a bit of feedback out around and quite a few good reviews on Amazon, HeadRoom, and lots of different audiophile/studio forums. You can find more forum-oriented stuff by typing _(model) vs (model)_ into a Google search. Lots of stuff to be found that way. By all accounts I've read, the ATH-M50's beat out the HD280's (one example; 2-page thread), but I haven't compared them personally and can only go by what people are saying and my own experience with the M50's.
> 
> That said, from what I've been reading, the ATH-M50's have much more accurate and powerful bass than the Sennheiser HD280's, and have a much less clamp-happy and less damage-prone headband. The former is a shocker, because these fit pretty snugly on my head - I can't imagine how the HD280's could be tighter.



From what was said here, I'm tempted to buy some of these for testing.

The _only_ reason I'm personally hesitant is the lower ohm rating. My 555's are 50ohms, which is fairly high, meaning they arent exactly loud, but not quiet like the 280's, which really do need an external amp. The M50's are 32? ohms, which is still higher than most Bose, and virtually ALL cheapy headphones. I dunno if they're better than the 555's, but I'm thinking I may really try em out.


----------



## Runefox (Jul 8, 2009)

Well, they're 38 Ohms, I amended my earlier post to mention that. I can tell you that they aren't noisy - You won't get much interference, but if I plug them directly into my front panel ports on my case, I can still hear the EMI from the fans as I could with my Sony MDR-EX85LP earbuds and their measly 16 Ohms impedance, but couldn't with those Realistic PRO-60's with their 90 Ohms impedance. I'm not, however, able to hear the hiss from my speakers if I plug them into the headphone jack there, except at maximum volume (what am I doing at maximum volume with 38 Ohm headphones?). From what I've read, as well, they also benefit from using a headphone amp, but that's outside the scope here.


----------



## ZentratheFox (Jul 8, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Realistic PRO-60's with their 90 Ohms impedance.


<3



Runefox said:


> Well, they're 38 Ohms, I amended my earlier post to mention that. I can tell you that they aren't noisy - You won't get much interference, but if I plug them directly into my front panel ports on my case, I can still hear the EMI from the fans as I could with my Sony MDR-EX85LP earbuds, but couldn't with those Realistic PRO-60's with their 90 Ohms impedance. I'm not, however, able to hear the hiss from my speakers if I plug them into the headphone jack there, except at maximum volume (what am I doing at maximum volume with 38 Ohm headphones?).


Pretty much, it's all about two things:
What the main use for the headphones are going to be, and
How big of a check to write.


----------



## Runefox (Jul 8, 2009)

There is one very interesting (well, maybe interesting isn't the right word) quality about the ATH-M50's, and that's that they like to be driven hard, and they also need to be broken in. I guess this is one reason why a headphone amp is a good idea, because when they're given some juice to work with, they really flesh out their tone and you can start to hear a lot of subtleties in music and sound that you just can't on lesser heaphones. And once they've had so many hours of churning out sound, they'll start to sound much fuller and richer, too. Like I said earlier, I've thrown quite a bit at them, from old and new video games (Far Cry 2 sounds _awesome_) to classical music to rock and metal, and they perform extremely well.

I typically listen to them with the volume set to about 3/4 on the speakers and 80% on my sound card (Auzentech X-Fi Prelude 7.1)'s control panel. I could probably get slightly better quality out of them if I plugged right into the sound card's rear panel, but the convenience factor is, well, a factor.


----------



## Captain Howdy (Jul 8, 2009)

Well, the bass is not the most important part for me, because I mostly listen to death metal, which uses the moderate-to-lower end (read as: downtuned, but not necessarily great or deep bass), but not the bass like you'd find in rap or techno musics. The middle section is probably about THE most important thing, and good high end wouldn't be bad either, because of cymbals, triggers, and the snare.


----------



## Runefox (Jul 8, 2009)

Lastdirewolf said:


> Well, the bass is not the most important part for me, because I mostly listen to death metal, which uses the moderate-to-lower end (read as: downtuned, but not necessarily great or deep bass), but not the bass like you'd find in rap or techno musics. The middle section is probably about THE most important thing, and good high end wouldn't be bad either, because of cymbals, triggers, and the snare.



The mids and highs are _exceptional_. The major reason for mentioning the bass is because it's _accurate_, which is something that makes a big difference in pretty much anything you're listening to. While not exactly death metal, but Machinae Supremacy, Edguy, Kamelot, Nightwish, the Guilty Gear XX soundtrack, Dragonforce (pattern forming here?), the Star Fox Assault Orchestra  Soundtrack (pattern broken!), Jonathan Coulton, the Ace Combat soundtracks (all of them), multiple different SegaRock collections (including the Sonic Adventure soundtracks), and pretty much everything else I can throw at them sound incredible. Well, as incredible as the source material can be (the Sonic Adventure soundtracks are compressed to hell in terms of dynamic range and are a muddy mess on any speaker. Guess you gotta have it sound good on a TV, too).

EDIT: Who in their right mind has square brackets in a URL?!

http://www.headphone.com/technical/product-measurements/build-a-graph.php

Choose both the headphones there, and compare the various test results. Frequency response is sort of even (closer to zero = better), harmonic distortion is slightly better for the ATH-M50's, impedance versus frequency (evenness = better) is an interesting one, since it shows the HD280's with a nice spike denoting a big dropoff in sensitivity in that range, while the ATH-M50's are virtually flat. Of course, that's geektastic stuff.


----------



## Captain Howdy (Jul 8, 2009)

Bleh, even looked it up, and the M50's are well over 100$, far too much money to spend, especially with tax-shipping-handling throwing on nearly another 20$. Cheapest I found was a refurb for 110$, which makes it like 130-something by the time it reaches my hands. 

The m35's are a much more reasonable price, but unable to find information, so leaves me to say "no" to them, as it's fairly apparent they aren't popular; if like no reviews exist.


----------



## Arcadium (Jul 8, 2009)

I'm gonna be the guy that recommends Skull-candy if you have a small budget. I've owned many pairs. Low-riders, Gi's, and my newest, Skull-Crushers.


Skull-Crushers are really my favorite set i've ever used. It's literally a sub-woofer in each ear. It's one that still hasn't busted on me. The Bass is so crazy, they literally vibrate on your head when the Bass is so tuned up. Now, don't buy this set if you listen to things like Country, Pop, etc. You buy these to listen to loud-ass Punk Rock, Speed-Core, and Drum & Bass.


Stay away from the Gi's. There head-bands has always snapped on me, so stay away. I don't know about the Ti's or the Hesh, but they have the same design.



Now, Skull-Crushers post the best quality that i've used, since i listen to the Drum & Bass and such. Another pair are the Agents, and the Double Agents, but the Agent is just the Double Agent, Minus the MP3 Player built in.



Don't just assume they suck. They have there good products, and there majority of there bad. Also, there Warranty is fucking awesome. I've busted the Gi's a lot from Biking, and they just get sent in, and sent back. Fantastic Life-time Warranty.


----------



## Captain Howdy (Jul 8, 2009)

Okay, Skullcandy...I don't particularly care about the bass. The music I'm listening to - death and black metal - uses more lower-middle end and high end, so just powerful bass and weak everything else is the wrong choice.


----------



## Xaevo (Jul 8, 2009)

just go for the Sennheiser HD202's i listen to hardcore and shit, and the bass mids and treble are just AWESOME!


----------



## Krevan (Jul 8, 2009)

I'm a big fan of Skullcandy. I have never owned one of their over the head type models, just the earbuds which are absolutely amazing. So if those are great, I can only imagine their over the head type are even better.

http://www.skullcandy.com/


----------



## Runefox (Jul 8, 2009)

I can tell you this: Skullcandy is in a completely different class than the Sennheiser HD200 series and the Audio Technicas. Where the HD200 series and ATH-M50 are studio monitors designed for high-end reproduction, the Skullcandies are... Well... Just headphones.

As for the ATH-M50's price, I pointed out that there's a reseller on eBay by the name of nationwideproaudio who sells them new for around $99-$119. It cost me about $140 USD to get it delivered to Canada; They do free shipping in the 'States.


----------



## Captain Howdy (Jul 8, 2009)

I'm sure the M50's are amazing, and I figger you love them to death, but they are far too much money for me to care. I can afford it, but I wouldn't want to, they'd pitch over like 120$ by the time they were in my hands - Even through the Ebay guy, they are 98.99, which means like 9.50$ in tax, and 7+$ in shipping/handling. 

I guess I will restate my cap as about 80$ online, if I'm buying online, that means roughly 10-15$ minimum for Tax/shipping/handling. And 100$ max in store, even if tax brings it to like 105 or something.


----------



## ElizabethAlexandraMary (Jul 9, 2009)

I've been using the Sennheiser px100 for a while now, and I am perfectly fine with them. Of course, they may be something better for a hundred dollars, but at thirty I'm quite sure it's worth it. They do some sound cancelling, too.

(ignore this poor man's advice)


----------



## Arcadium (Jul 9, 2009)

Runefox said:


> I can tell you this: Skullcandy is in a completely different class than the Sennheiser HD200 series and the Audio Technicas. Where the HD200 series and ATH-M50 are studio monitors designed for high-end reproduction, the Skullcandies are... Well... Just headphones.




This is True. Honestly, if your into quality, and by what you listen to, the metal and such, I can't really recommend anything, since I don't listen to ANYTHING like that :3. Just Drum & Bass, ranges of Rock, but no Metal.





Lastdirewolf said:


> Okay, Skullcandy...I don't particularly care about the bass. The music I'm listening to - death and black metal - uses more lower-middle end and high end, so just powerful bass and weak everything else is the wrong choice.




Yea, there output on Mid's are not great. It isn't quite weak everything else, but I see where your going.

Good Luck though. Headphone hunting can be a pain. Hope you get a pair you like though!


----------



## greg-the-fox (Jul 9, 2009)

Sennheiser HD 280 Pro headphones are absolutely amazing. And probably the best you can get for under $100.


----------



## Runefox (Jul 10, 2009)

I'll toss a vote in for the Sennheiser HD 280 Pro's just because this has been going on for a while now. You can definitely get those in your budget, and they'll be pretty good. They'll clamp your head from what I've been reading about them, and the low-range response isn't great, but you've already said many times that doesn't matter (it would if you heard what can come out of the low range) and it's already leaps and bounds better than something like what the Skullcandy stuff would put out down there.


----------



## CerbrusNL (Jul 10, 2009)

greg-the-fox said:


> Sennheiser HD 280 Pro headphones are absolutely amazing. And probably the best you can get for under $100.


I've got those, And I do, totally agree! The sound is awesome, The lenght of the (wire? Cord? what's it called?) is more than enough, and i don't th9nk it'll break any time soon


----------



## Captain Howdy (Jul 10, 2009)

Hrm, this is significantly harder then I thought:

Is there anything outside of the Senn's, and Audio Technica's that are worth while? We're going in circles with the same 2 or 3 headphones for like, two pages now, and I've more or less determined they will be too uncomfortable or too expensive. So...yeah, movin' on ;


----------



## Kivaari (Jul 15, 2009)

For cheaper headphones, Koss headphones with 60-ohm drivers sound pretty nice. Look up the Koss KSC75 and Koss Porta-pro, and you will find lots of positive reviews.(Even from audiophiles) I have a pair of KSC75s, and they sound great, but both mine and my sisters pair had the wires start crapping out after a year. KSC75s can go as low as $15, and the Porta-Pros go for around $40, and I'd imagine they are more durable.

I've been wanting to get a pair of better headphones since my KSC75s started to crap out, and have been mainly looking at the Porta-Pros, Sony MDR-v6 (Another pair you might want to look at), or Shure SE110. I'll have to take a look at those Audio Technica's. 

I really wish they made cheaper headphones more durable... I'd be fine listening to my KSC75s or even the earbuds that came with my Sandisk MP3 player if they lasted...


----------



## Captain Howdy (Jul 15, 2009)

Spent a good hour surfing through the neutral to negative comments on Koss, Sony, and Audio Techica headphones/studio monitors/whatever. It seems that companies have underestimated their client bases head size, almost every moderate-to-negative review lists "uncomfortable", "pinching", "painful to wear", or something along those lines. Not a single negative review about them being "too big". Sure, there is "too heavy" or "too bulky", but those also come with the same ones listing "painful to wear", or the like.

So i'm totally at a loss here, seems even from the cheapass headphones, to the expensive studio monitors suffer the same size problem :E This angers me.


----------



## Kivaari (Jul 16, 2009)

I've heard you need to wear the KSC75s awhile before they start becoming comfortable. (Might be the same with the Porta-Pros too.)

Or you could try looking at some nice earbuds, then you aren't likely to have problems with them being too small. Most in-ear ones come with multiple sizes of tips.


----------



## Captain Howdy (Jul 16, 2009)

Yeah, but in-ear I can't wear for too long, and has typically poor sound quality, plus I'm looking for isolation. I haven't had any good experiences with buds or in-ear :/


----------



## Kivaari (Jul 16, 2009)

I've been looking at the Shure SE110's, and it sounds like they have great sound quality and isolation. And I've heard the foam tips are pretty comfortable. I'm not sure I want in-ear either, but since it sounds like they are the only choice for earbuds that will actually last (Aside from the more expensive Shure models) I'm pretty tempted to try them.


----------



## Captain Howdy (Jul 16, 2009)

Well, I'm looking for over-the-ear, not earbuds...So that's cool, hope they work out for yah.


----------

