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

Why can’t companies make headphones without significant drawbacks? (alien.top)

submitted 11 months 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

[–] roladyzator@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago

generic set of headphones with “normal” everything

That would be K371 for me and they're my favorite closed back.

Personally I don't find K371 to have any significant drawbacks and it sounds "normal". Not too bassy, not lean, not dark in the treble but not over-emphasizing treble detail at the same time.

Soundstage is good if that's how the track was mixed with soundstage in mind (my favorite Solar Fields tracks sound wide and almost "holographic", while poorly mastered music sounds narrow).

I feel that my Samsung Galaxy Buds2 also don't have significant drawbacks. They're not shouty in the upper treble and on my head, I don't get the 8 kHz peak that measurements show, bass is not overblown etc. They're a little too treble-happy to be considered neutral, so it's not a reference headphone like the K371. But not bad in any way for me.