this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)

Headphones

17 readers
1 users here now

A community for discussion around all topics related to headphones and personal audio.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
communick@hi-fi.community
1
Why can’t companies make headphones without significant drawbacks? (alien.top)
submitted 1 year ago by PetrichorAndNapalm@alien.top to c/headphones@hi-fi.community
27 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I get that different headphones are geared toward different types of music or tastes. But I don’t understand why there isn’t a generic set of headphones with “normal” everything that is just all around realistic, has enough base, has sound stage. I feel every headphone I read about is good but has significant drawbacks that you have to look past? Like why can’t the HD 800s have a version that isn’t cripplingly low on bass? That’s just one example but it seems every time I get excited about a pair of headphones there is some massive red flag whether it’s wierd trebel, bass, tone, being unrealistic, etc.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] GZoST@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago

Tuning headphones is hard, and changes from the "natural" frequency response of a driver have trade-offs in other areas (e.g. distortion). So headphones without their own DSP+amp are a compromise.

Having said that, there are headphones and, even more so, IEMs without significant drawbacks. I recently got a Philips Fidelio X2HR and that is comfortable, easy enough to drive, has a frequency response that allows use without any EQ, and has good technical chops for the price. With IEMs my current "goldilocks" pair are the Moondrop Jiu. Sound good enough even for the occasional listening to a symphony and are dirt cheap.