The difference between analog and digital audio, basic explanation of sample rate, audio compression and DAC's (digital to analog converters)

People who are new to the realm of expensive audiophile grade headphones are often presented with many terms that they do not understand. The most common example is DAC or digital to analog converter.  In this article I will attempt to clarify and explain exactly what a DAC is and what it does, and additionally explain the difference between analog and digital audio, and the factors that attribute to sound degradation in digital audio files such as sampling rate and audio compression.

Before the "electronic age" that we live in today, all audio was presented via an analog signal.  Today most of us listen to music via a digital signal whether it's from our smartphones, portable MP3 players, or computers.  In order to understand what a DAC does, you must first understand the difference between digital and analog audio.  An analog audio signal is recorded from a microphone and directly laid onto a tape or record player.  The sound waves taken from the microphone are analog, and because these sound waves are laid directly onto the tape or record, the signal remains analog.

Analog (top) vs. Digital Analog (bottom)

 With digital audio the audio signal is recored by microphones just like with analog.  However instead of the recording being directly laid onto a tape or record, the audio is sampled at a certain rate (usually a 44,000 sample rate on most audio CD's and MP3 files) and then converted into numbers, or binary to then be stored on some form of electronic storage medium, whether its a CD, DVD, spinning hard disk,  solid state drive or flash memory.  The sample rate of digital audio files corresponds to the number of samples stored per second of audio.  For example, a sample rate of 44,000 means that 44,000 sample numbers are stored per second of music.  Obviously, the higher the sample rate the higher the audio quality of a digital file.  The idea of sample rates can also be presented through a bandwidth perspective.  Lower sample rates reduce the bandwidth of the audio file resulting in reduced file size and the amount of work the processor of the device has to carry out.  This is good for portable devices where battery life can be an issue, as obviously more CPU usage requires more power.  However lowered bandwidth translates to reduced audio quality.

FiiO E7 Amp/ DAC

I sometimes find it interesting how many people think digital age has brought us better technology.  For the most part, yes we have far more advanced and powerful computers and electronics than we had just ten years ago.  However, one thing that has not improved is audio quality.  Contrary to many peoples popular beliefs, digital audio DOES NOT sound better than analog audio. As human beings, we are designed to hear things via an analog signal.  Digital audio is kind of an interesting way in which we trick our bodies into thinking we are listening to an analog signal.  The iTunes music file on your iPhone or iPod? Its really just a compilation of ones and zeros.  Its quite an interesting concept when you think about it.  Of course in order to listen to this audio file it needs to be converted into an analog signal (which I will get into when I talk about DAC's later on).  Another factor that causes audio quality degradation is compression. Audio  compression is when file sizes are reduced so that they can better fit on our portable devices.  Files that are not compressed (usually called FLAC or Lossless files) take up massive amounts of digital storage space, which simply makes uncompressed files far too large to fit on our portable devices and laptops.  Many audio purists like myself do have FLAC and Lossless files stored on our computers, although I will admit I listen to compressed audio files more often than lossless ones.  So how are uncompressed audio files made smaller in order to fit on our portable devices? Mathematical algorithms are implemented that remove and eliminate less audible sounds, or sounds that humans are incapable of hearing.  These mathematical algorithms dictate which sounds are removed.  Audio compression is essentially the removal of less critical data to reduce file sizes.  There are variants to how much an audio file has been compressed.  This is designated by a bit-rate.  A bit-rate is the number of transferred bits per second of computer data.  For example, an audio file with a bit-rate of 356Kbps (kilobytes per second) is transferring a larger number of bits, thus the fidelity and sound quality of a 356Kbps compressed file is much higher than a 128Kbps bit-rate track.  Because more bits are being transferred in a 356Kbps track, the file size is larger than a 128Kbps track.  As file compression increases, the mathematical algorithm is forced to remove more and more sounds to trim down the size of the file.  This means that sounds humans can hear begin getting removed, subsequently resulting in decreased audio quality.  With analog audio, sampling rate and compression are not a factor at all and the listener is hearing audio the way he or she should, completely uncompressed with no sound degradation whatsoever.  Thus, a record on a good record player will sound better than any digital audio file.

Standard DAC internals and motherboard

So now that you know the difference between analog and digital audio and the effects of sampling rate and audio compression on digital audio files, what exact does a DAC or digital to analog converter do? Well it does exactly what it says it does, it converts a digital signal into an analog one! In a world that has gone completely digital and the fact that records and record players aren't exactly portable nor cheap, the only solution to the down-falls of digital audio is the DAC. Basically what a DAC does is convert the digital numbers from the digital audio signal into am electrical analog signal.  This signal is then sent to an amplifier that amplifies the signal and subsequently sends it to your headphones or speakers.   How a DAC achieves this is relatively confusing and too difficult and lengthy to explain here.  However, as with anything there are better DAC's than others.  How good or bad a DAC's ability to perform the conversion is based on the quality of the processor or "DAC chip" that actually performs the conversion.  Obviously the more expensive DAC's have the better conversion processors, thus higher audio quality is achieved from these more expensive DAC's.

FiiO E17 Amp/ DAC

There are two different types of headphone DAC's, desktop DAC's and portable DAC's.  Sometimes DACS are paired with a headphone amplifier by the manufacturer, meaning the DAC and amplification are all done inside one unified enclosure.  An example of a portable DAC/ amp combo is the FiiO E7 and FiiO E17.  However, many DAC's are standalone, which means that a separate enclosure is dedicated to the conversion processor and internals that comprise a DAC.  The converted signal then travels through an output and then into the input of an amplifier in a separate enclosure.

Example of standalone DAC,
the Schiit Audio Bifrost
(and yes the name is Schiit audio
but to be honest they are an awesome
company and they make good humor about
their name on their website)

This rather lengthy explanation has only scratched the surface of the principles of audio sample rates, audio compression, the difference between digital and analog audio, and the conversion of a digital audio signal into an analog signal.  Be sure to comment on anything I may have forgotten, or if you need clarification on any of the principles stated above, just leave a question in the comments section.

*Please note the FiiO is a Chinese brand so their website
is translated from Chinese to English.  It's far from perfect
so bare that in mind.  I have confirmed the quality of FiiO's
products, and they are great! Don't be let down by the
website!

CLICK HERE for FiiO E7 product page
CLICK HERE for FiiO E17 product page
CLICK HERE for Schiit Audio's website            
                               

Overwerk, an electronic music artist

This is the first of an occasional off- topic post that I will be doing once in a while on this blog, and it has to do with a not very well known but very talented electronic artist by the name of Overwerk.  I listen to many different genres of music (jazz, rock, soundtrack, classical, dubstep, electronic, trance, you name it! I dislike country however) and I thoroughly enjoy this music.  As of this writing, Overwerks new album is slated to come out tomorrow (the 29th of November), he currently has one full album and one single on iTunes right now.  On top of the fact that I love the music, I love that most of the songs are free!  Many of Overwerk's singles and collaboration tracks cannot be found on iTunes but can found as a free listen and download on Soundcloud.  I will be sure to link the iTunes, Soundcloud and a song that has been posted and is apparently the "official" Overwerk channel on YouTube below.                                                                                                  
CLICK HERE for Overwerk iTunes link
CLICK HERE for Overwerk on Soundcloud
CLICK HERE for Overwerk's Facebook page
CLICK HERE for Overwerk's website

Buzzin', part of Overwerk's first EP "the Nth Degree" which can be found on iTunes.

Sony MDR-V6 and MDR-7506 ear pad mod

The Sony MDR-V6 and 7506 studio monitor headphones are extremely well built professionally styled headphones.  However, if you have done any research into these headphones you will soon discover that the only main issue people have with these headphones is the quality and comfort of the included ear pads.  I can confirm that this is a true issue, as my Sony MDR-7506 ear pads wore out very quickly, about two years.  How fast your ear pads degrade varies, but one thing is for sure: If you use them often they will wear out at an alarming rate.

Sony MDR-7506 with ear pad mod

Fortunately there is a solution to this problem, and the solution lies in the Beyerdynamic EDT 250 Velour pads.  These replacement pads can be found on Amazon (I will provide a link below), and are actually replacement pads for the Beyerdynamic headphones.  Fortunately, the dimensions of these Beyerdynamic headphones are EXACTLY the same as the Sony MDR-V6 and 7506.  The velour pads fit my Sony's as if they were designed for them, I even think they fit better than the stock pads.  The velour pad mod will significantly increase the comfort and longevity of your headphones.  My ears no longer get hot and sweaty after long listening sessions, and the velour material is much more soft and comfortable than the stock "pleather" Sony pads.  Although the velour pads are relatively expensive for simply being ear pads (rough $25 dollars), they offer a substantial increase in comfort and longevity and honestly get rid of the only significant negative associated with the Sony MDR-V6 and 7506.  These headphones are already great, and these pads make them even better.

As you can see the Beyerdynamic cans
have exactly the same dimensions and
looks as the Sony MDR-V6 cans (to the right)

The velour pads on the Beyerdynamic
head set (left) fit the MDR-V6 and 7506
perfectly due to extremely similar designs

*This mod reportedly works with the Audio Technica ATH-M50's, although I have not tried this mod myself with the M50's.

CLICK HERE for the Beyerdynamic EDT 250 velour pads Amazon product page

Audio Technica ATH-M50 review and comparison to Sony MDR-7506 and MDR-V6

Standard Audio Technica ATH-M50

The Audio Technica ATH-M50 over ear headphones are an extremely popular headphone used by budget audiophiles and professionals alike.  The ATH-M50's sport large 45mm Neodymium driver units, a frequency response of 15- 28,000Hz, 99 dB sensitivity rating and an extremely reasonable 38 Ohm impedance. The ATH-M50's are also available in a regular coiled cord configuration, a straight cabled configuration (ATH-M50S) and as of this writing, white and silver limited edition models.  The result of Audio Techicas legendary audio engineering is a headphone that sounds great even when played from all different types of equipment, even from a modest and low powered source.  I personally love the way the M50's look, and I believe that Audio Technica has successfully merged studio quality sound and premium aesthetic appearance to create a headphone that is arguably one of the best in its respective category.

limited edition white and silver models

The Audio Technica ATH-M50 is no slacker where build quality is concerned.  Similar to the Sony MDR-7506 and Sony MDR-V6, the Audio Technica ATH-M50s were designed in part to be used in demanding studio and professional audio applications.  Due to the rigorous usage of headphones in these types of applications, the headset needs to be built to a high quality standard.  Audio Technica has obviously taken a page from the Sony MDR-V6 and 7506, and has built a sturdy and reliable headphone.  Some cool build features of the Audio Technica ATH-M50 is that the ear cups can fold completely flat and swivel, and that customers have a choice between a straight and coiled cabled version.  Where comfort is concerned the Audio Technicas perform better than the Sony MDR-7506.  The ear pads are made from high quality fake leather (or as I like to call it "pleather") that appears to withstand constant usage longer than the 7506's.  The only comfort issue I have is with the pads. After listening for quite some time, my ears do begin to sweat due to lack ventilation and airflow to the ears.  The ATH-M50's are comprised of a mostly plastic construction, however this is quality plastic designed to withstand constant daily usage.  As you can see from the photos, the ATH-M50s ear cups are sleekly and attractively styled with the engraved Audio Technica logo.

Sony MDR-V6 and 7506

Sound quality is another area where the ATH-M50's shine. The ATH-M50's do not have the unforgiving flat frequency response and tonality like many other studio headphones.  They do in fact, have a certain degree of noticable sound coloration.  Through a listening test in which I compared the ATH-M50's and Sony MDR-7506's side by side, I noticed that the ATH-M50's have a lot more bass punch than the Sonys and other similar studio headphones.  They also didn't have the upper frequency range spike that the Sonys have, resulting a much darker sounding headphone in comparison to the Sonys bright tonality.  Many regular every day listeners  love the sound quality of the ATH-M50's as do many studio professionals.  However, some people have commented that having much more neutral and analytical cans make for a better studio headphone.  I personally love the un-equalized sound characteristic of the ATH-M50's.  They are very good for all genres of music, although they especially shine with rock, pop and electronic music, and many bass heavy tracks.  However, I can achieve a relatively similar sound characteristic from my Sony MDR-7506's by playing with an equalizer.

Sony MDR-7506

Interesting picture of
Dr. Dre using ATH-M50's

Through and through the ATH-M50's are a wonderful choice for any entry level audiophile, audio enthusiast, studio professional or even someone who just wants some higher quality sound. However, I would not discount the Sony MDR-V6's or MDR-7506's as a viable choice.  Both Sony models costs less than the M50's, however  the ATH-M50's do have a few things going for them that the Sony's don't. Stock ear pads that of higher quality, last longer and are more comfortable than the included Sony pads may be a factor for some people.  Additionally, the M50's have a generally more pleasurable colored sound for those not looking for super analytical cans.  Furthermore, the ATH-M50's come with a straight cabled version for increased portability, and have a lower impedance allowing them to be sufficiently powered by lesser sources. Both the Sony MDR-V6's, MDR-7506's and Audio Technica ATH-M50's are all great choices, and I cannot simply name one or two as the winner.  All have positive and negative characteristics (as does any headphone), and all perform admirably for the price.

Accessories that come included with the Audio Technica ATH-M50's are the headphones themselves, a carrying bag and a 1/4 headphone jack adapter.

Sony MDR-V6 vs Sony MDR-7506 vs Audio Technica ATH-M50 technical specification comparison:

Sony MDR-V6:                                 Sony MDR-7506:                             Audio Technica ATH-M50:                               

Driver size: 40mm                              Driver size: 40mm                            Driver size: 45mm
Driver type: Dynamic, dome type      Driver type: Dynamic, dome type     Driver type: Dynamic, dome
                                                                                                                     type
Magnet type: Samarium Cobalt          Magnet type: Neodymium                Magnet type: Neodymium

Frequency response: 5- 30,000Hz      Frequency response: 10- 20,000Hz  Frequency response: 15-
                                                                                                                     28,000Hz
Nominal impedance: 63Ohm             Nominal impedance: 63Ohm            Nominal impedance: 38Ohm            
Sensitivity: 106 dB/mW                     Sensitivity: 106 dB/mW                    Sensitivity: 99 dB/mW
Max power rating: 1,000 kW             Max power rating: 1,000 kW            Max power rating: 1,600 kW
at 1 kHz                                             at 1 kHz                                             at 1 kHz

CLICK HERE for Sony MDR-V6 product page

CLICK HERE for Sony MDR-7506 product page

CLICK HERE for Audio Technica ATH-M50 product page

Apple's Ear Pods Review

Apple ear pods with remote and mic

I must say, Apples new "ear-pods" impressed me quite a lot when I took my first listen from a pair my friend received with his iPhone 5 purchase.  In fact I was so impressed, I actually went out and bought a stand alone pair for $30 dollars.  Now you may be wondering at this point, why would a hi-fi audio enthusiast want anything to do with Apple's ear pods? I will get into my reasons in a little bit, but first lets just go over a few specifications, changes from the previous models and my thoughts in regards to the new ear pods.

Apples newest iteration of the iconic and widespread white ear bud (or "ear pod" rather) has the standard 20-20,000Hz frequency response.  This is a common frequency response for headphones in the ear pods price tier.  The ear pod model supplied with the iPhone 5 and the stand alone or separate purchase ear pod model come with a plastic travel case (that looks really cool but is generally a pain to use) a play/ pause, volume up and down and mic assembly located on the right ear bud wire.  The size of the button assembly has been increased from the previous generation and has also gained a new Siri mic symbol on the back.  However, the ear pods supplied with all of Apple's iPod models lack the travel case and button assembly.  I find this a little disappointing, nonetheless sound quality is the same on both models.

The Apple ear pods have been completely re-worked and re-enginereed by the folks down in Cupertino, and I must say that they are a massive improvement over the notoriously bad previous generation.  The ear pods are unique in that they sit deeper in the ear canal of the listener as apposed to similar cheap ear buds.  Just this method alone substantially increases sound quality, especially bass response and the listeners ability to listen at lower volume levels without a significant loss of being able to hear all facets of the track.  In addition to this major improvement,  ports were added to increase bass and midrange response and clarity.  The affect of these ports on the sound can be demonstrated by covering up the ports with a finger when listening.  When I covered up the bass port, the sound became significantly less full and significantly more tinny and hollow.  In terms of sound quality, there is no doubt that the ear pods perform significantly better than the horrible tinny sound signature produced by Apple's previous generation ear buds.

Ear pod travel case (supplied with iPhone 5 and stand alone ear pods)

The design improvement is another significant factor that makes the new ear pods better than the older ear buds.  More attention to the fit of the headphones was taken by Apple's engineers.  The ear pods shape was actually created by taking a random selection of peoples ear canals, geometrically analyzing these ear canals, finding a similarity between all of these ear canals and subsequently shaping the ear pods to be a universal fit to all of us who call ourselves part of the human race (not quite sure if the ear pods would fit a Klingon).  My experience with the fit has been superb.  I often have issues with ear buds falling out or not sitting properly on one or both of my ears.  However, some people have complained that the the ear pods do not fit their respective ears properly.

There are reasons why a hi-fi guy like me would run out to an Apple store to get the new ear pods.  First of all, they are the best fitting ear buds I have ever used.  I always have issues with ear buds (even expensive universal fit in- ear monitors) not fitting in my ears properly.  The ear pods are the first ear buds in which this is no longer a problem.  Secondly, I only use them when I want to listen to music in public and not look like a 80's throwback kid with my Sony MDR-7506 over ear headphones with their long coiled cable (although I do wear those cans sometimes in public, but not very often).  I only ever use the ear pods for a short while.  I also don't have to worry about them being so expensive.  With universal fit in- ear monitors I am always afraid of how fragile they are.  If I snag IEM's  on something (which I do quite often) that could be anywhere from $150 to $400 dollars down the drain.  When I buy expensive things I want them to last.  With these I don't have to worry at all, and they have held up pretty well so far.  Thirdly, they don't sound half bad, and I don't need a headphone amp or DAC for them to sound good.  This is obviously due to the fact that he ear pods are designed to be driven directly from your iDevices line out.  When I say that they don't sound half bad, what I really mean is that they don't sound half bad for headphones that come free with your device.  They are far from being great, but it's just impressive how far Apple has come.  Another reason why I was so impressed by the ear pods was because of how bad the previous generation was. I wasn't expecting much was was happily rewarded with much improved fidelity and bass response. Of course the ear pods aren't going to sound nearly as good as a pair of IEM's or over ear headphones, but I truly was pleasantly surprised by the increased importance of sound quality that Apple seems to have embodied with the headphones.

Old Apple ear bud internals (left) as apposed to the new ear pods (right)

The overall sound quality of the ear pods can be described as "going along with the times".  They tend to be very bass heavy, but I am pleased to see that they mid range hasn't become to far recessed.  Upper  ranges are maybe not as present as I would like, but all together not a bad sound signature.  Of course, the ear pods have very little in the way of sound stage, but that is to be expected with a pair of supplied or $30 dollar ear buds.  If I was to review the older generation Apple ear buds, I would given them a horrible review, because they truly were terrible. However,  the ear pods offer up a substantial improvement over the previous generation, and I hope that they will give the non audio enthusiast regular listener a much improved and rewarding audio experience.

CLICK HERE for Apple ear pod product page

Sennheiser HD 448 vs. Sennheiser HD 449. Which one is better? Are they the same?

Sennheiser HD 448

Sennheiser HD 449

This is rather a product choice announcement rather than an in depth headphone review or analysis, however I have received many questions from folks on the internet asking me whether or not there is a major difference between the Senneheiser HD 448 and HD 449.

In terms of sound quality, there really isn't.  I have listened to both headphones, especially the HD 449 and can confirm to everyone in the utmost confidence that there is absolutely no perceivable sound quality difference between the two.  They are both constructed from the same plastic, and both have similar ear cups and driver housings.  I can guarantee with almost 100% certainty that both units are using the exact same driver (which I believe is a 40mm).  The cords are the same, the headband is similar, the ear cups are similar and the ear pads are similar and both are manufactured from the same "pleather" material.  Both headphones even have the same 32Ohm impedance and 40mm driver units.  They are both nearly identical hence the small number jump: 448 to 449.  The only major difference is really from the aesthetics stand point.  I personally think the HD 449's look a little bit sleeker than the HD 448's.  Essentially my recommendation is this: If you can find both for around the same price, get the one that looks better to you.  Otherwise, I wouldn't suggest shelling out an extra $20 to $30 dollars on the 449's as the sound quality is identical!

CLICK HERE for the Sennheiser HD 448 Product Page

CLICK HERE for the Sennheiser HD 449 Product Page

Difference between passive and active noise cancellation in headphones

Bose QC 15 Cross Section and Noise Cancellation technology

For those of you out there not versed in the ways of headphones, the difference between passive and active noise cancellation is very simple.  Passive noise cancellation simply means that the headphone has been designed by the manufacturer to block sound without the use of internal electronics, thus it is blocking sound "passively".  Active noise cancellation is when technology has been built into the headphone itself to cancel out noise.  For example, my Sony MDR-7506 headphones are passive noise canceling, they are a tightly sealed closed construction and that is how they block outside noise.  on the other hand we have the Bose Quiet Comfort 15, which has active noise cancellation.  The Quiet Comfort 15 actively blocks outside ambient noise by using microphones on the headset that effectively "listens" for outside ambient noise to block.  The Quiet Comfort 15 then creates its own sound waves that effectively blocks the noise by mimicking the ambient noise coming in.  The only difference is that the mimicked sound is 180 degrees out of phase with the intruding ambient noise.  Typically, passive noise cancellation headphones are far less complicated, they lack microphones and electronics inside that actively block noise, thus they generally cost less.  Active noise cancellation headphones generally always require batteries to power to noise cancellation feature.

Sony MDR-ZX700 driver (example of a passive noise cancellation headphone)

There are some issues with active noise cancellation headphones however.  The first of these issues is the batteries required to power active noise cancellation headsets.  These batteries add weight, and limit the amount of time you are able to use your headphones.  Additionally, many active noise cancellation headphones will not work once the batteries have died, or the sound quality decreases significantly once the batteries do die (unless you are using the Logitech UE 6000's or 9000's which are the only active noise cancellation headphones I have used that still sound great when out of battery power).  Also, from experience and the dominating opinion among audio enthusiasts, active noise cancellation technology tends to degrade sound quality.  In the case of Beats by Dre and Bose headphones, I find the active noise cancellation to degrade sound quality and fidelity a substantial amount.  With headphones like the Logitech UE 6000 and 9000, there is not as much of a sound quality impact.  However I can still perceive a difference with every single active noise cancellation headset I have every used.  I will admit that the Bose QC15's perform admirably on a plane or a similar noisy environment, but for pure and pristine headphone audio quality, over ear passive noise cancellation headphones are the way to go for someone simply looking for the most rewarding headphone audio experience.

A comprehensive list of Beats by Dre Studio, Pro and Executive headphone alternatives

This is my comprehensive list of headphones that I think combine portability, style and superior build quality and sound quality when compared to Beats.  This list will be updated on a semi regular basis with new additions.

Sennheiser Momentum

Beats by Dre Studio, Executive and Pro alternatives:


Sennheiser HD 439 (Passive noise cancellation)



Sennheiser HD 448 (Passive noise cancellation)



Sennheiser HD 449 (Passive noise cancellation)

Sennheiser HD 439

Sennheiser Momentum (Passive noise cancellation)



V-Moda Crossfade LP



V-Moda Crossfade LP2 (Passive noise cancellation)



Phillips CitiScape Uptown (Passive noise cancellation)

Polk Audio UltraFocus 8000

Pioneer HDJ-2000 (Passive noise cancellation)



Logitech UE 6000 (Active noise cancellation)



Logitech UE 9000 (Active noise cancellation)



Sony MDR-XB500 (Passive noise cancellation)

V-Moda Crossfade LP2

Sony MDR-XB700 (Passive noise cancellation)



Sony MDR-XB1000 (Passive noise cancellation)



Sony MDR-X10 (Passive noise cancellation)



Sony MDR- 1R (Passive noise cancellation)

Sony MDR-X10

Shure SRH-440 (Passive noise cancellation)



Shure SRH-840 (Passive noise cancellation)



Shure SRH-940 (Passive noise cancellation)



Shure SRH-750DJ (Passive noise cancellation)

Logitech UE 9000

Audio Technica ATH-M50S (S for straight cabled version) (Passive noise cancellation)



Audio Technica ATH-WS70 (Passive noise cancellation)

Audio Technica ATH-PRO700MK2 (Passive noise cancellation)



AKG K181 DJ (Passive noise cancellation)



AKG K550 (Passive noise cancellation)



Ultrasone HFI-580 (Passive noise cancellation)

Ultrasone Pro 750 (Passive noise cancellation)



Polk Audio Ultrafocus 8000 (Active noise cancellation)



*For an explanation of the differences between passive and active noise cancellation refer to the blog post link below in which I explain the difference:  CLICK HERE for the difference between passive and active noise cancellation in headphones

*This list is still currently in the works.  Expect Pro Beats alternatives and also alternatives to Beats Solo HD's and Mixrs in the near future.

CLICK HERE for the Beats by Dre Suck Facebook page

Sound stage as applied to headphones, and a little opinion paragraph on loudspeaker and headphone conjunction in a proper studio

A fellow on one of my audio related Facebook pages questioned me recently regarding what sound sound stage (in regards to headphones) truly is.  Thus, this question prompted me to type out this relatively long winded explanation on what I believe sound state is when represented by a headphone.  I do hope that my explanation is sufficient enough to please the audio enthusiasts, and that it is not to confusing or contradictory! Through my listening experiences with several varying types of headphones played from a vide range of headphone amplification equipment, I believe that my explanation of sound stage can be confirmed by those who have experienced it with headphones that are masterful at reproducing this sound phenomenon.

Polk Audio Monitor 60 Tower Speakers

In general terms, sound stage is how physical instruments, or electronic synths and sounds in the case of electronic music are represented by a headphone. Sound stage can be represented through the X, Y and Z axis's respectively. Think of headphones with poor sound stage as being very flat and having a more two dimensional or mono feel, as apposed to headphones with good sound stage that subsequently have a more open and three dimensional sound characteristic. In headphones it is often difficult to represent three dimensional sound because they are sitting directly on your ears. Headphones with poor sound stage are often described by audio enthusiasts as producing sound that seems to come from "inside" your head, or producing sound with very little direction. When listening to an orchestral ensemble on a pair of headphones with good soundstage, one should be able to discern each physical section of the ensemble, sometimes even the physical instruments. The sound is very spacious, and the instruments are all separated and easily picked out by the listener, while maintaining incredible clarity. Compare this to many Bose, Beats and lower end headphones and you can really tell the difference. On these types of poor sound stage headphones, the instruments tend to blend together as apposed to being separate, yet harmonious and spacious. When this principle is applied to electronic music, the bass is typically separate and distinct from the middle ranges and high ranges. Same goes throughout the frequency spectrum. High ranges are also separate and distinct from the bass. Its a very difficult headphone characteristic to explain. Its like the separation of the different aspects that make up a song, yet through this individual separation, the song is played at a higher fidelity as apposed to headphones that mold and muddy it all together. It is through this separation that the sound is reproduced better as a whole. There are other sub-aspects of sound stage if you will, like imaging. Imaging is whats placed within the sound stage. Here you should be able to pick up the individual characteristics of the said instrument, its size in relation to the others in the sound stage. ie a piano should sound much larger than a violin etc. Hope my explanation made sense instead of just confusing you all!

Sennheiser HD 280 Pros

Further more, I just wanted to add in a little bit more about sound stage except this time in regards to speakers.  It is true that speakers do produce sound stage more readily, and arguably better than headphones.  They are also able to do this even from mediocre or entry level speakers.  My current audio setup in my room consists of two Polk Audio Monitor 60 tower speakers, and a Polk Audio PSW-10 subwoofer (effectively a 2.1 setup).  Even through this admittedly entry level set up, sound stage is more readily apparent as apposed to my Sony MDR-XB700's, Sony MDR-7506's, and Sennheiser HD 280 Pro headphones.  However, the reason studio monitor headphones (like the 7506's and HD 280 Pro's) are used in studios is because they are able to reveal minute details that even the highest end speakers cannot.  A proper studio consists of studio monitor loud speakers in which to check and evaluate the sound stage of a given recording, and reveal any major and apparent flaws in the recording.  The recording is then combed over with the studio monitor headphones, revealing any small recording flaws.  The reason studio monitor headphones are used in conjunction with studio monitor loud speakers is because of the inherent flaws in any loudspeaker.  These flaws include speaker crossover issues, sound reflections and nulls.  Also the physical frequency range of the speaker driver itself is an inherent issue.  In higher end studio monitor loud speakers, these issues are subdued, but never eliminated completely.  Studio monitor speakers and headphones go hand in hand.  The idea that only one is needed without the other is truly blasphemous in my opinion.  Coming back to the sole original purpose of this now fairly long add-on, yes loud speakers are generally better at producing a more accurate representation of sound stage as apposed to headphones.  If you think about the different characteristics between headphones and loud speakers, it makes quite a bit of sense.  However each has its own redeeming qualities which in any case still forces me to use both, headphone and speaker.