Bose's new beat
cnet.com
cnet.com
Bose simply doesn't target audiophiles. They don't make audiophile products. However, they've carved out a niche for themselves that makes them billions every year. That niche is basically one step removed from snake-oil. Bose has somehow managed their image so that people think Bose really can cram audiophile-grade performance into precisely the kind of tiny, plastic boxes no other audio company can get halfway decent sound out of. Bose fails as hard as anyone else at that, but somehow people believe they've succeeded and line up to buy their products. Whatever Bose is doing for advertising, it's elite. This article is probably an example of what they're doing.
Their sports in-ears are great also - I've never found any in-ear headphone that beats the MIE2 in comfort and not falling out, and the sound isn't bad either.
I've heard, in many places, that Bose's noise-cancelling over-ear cans are decent though.
Little disapointment: the new in hear truesound ones do not sound as good as the MIE2 (personally bought them in hope to replace my aging MIE2 pair). I recommend buying the old ones on ebay if you're looking for that kind of product.
>Audiophiles rag on Bose pretty hard.
>Bose simply doesn't target audiophiles. They don't make audiophile products.
That would paint the the audiophiles as ignorant.
> Bose has somehow managed their image so that people think Bose really can cram audiophile-grade performance into precisely the kind of tiny, plastic boxes no other audio company can get halfway decent sound out of.
I don't think anyone who buys Bose products even knows what audiophile-grade means, let alone expect it. People try them on, stuff sounds good, and they buy them. The average person does not have any interest in learning the intricacies of what makes stuff sound good.
>Bose fails as hard as anyone else at that, but somehow people believe they've succeeded and line up to buy their products.
Maybe people believe it because Bose headphones actually sound better to THEM? Yes, sure maybe SOME people get swayed by the marketing (like any other product in the world), but I don't think a large segment of the population will spend hundreds of dollars unless they can get some tangible benefit. Sure, maybe its sad that they spent all their hard earned money on something that they could have gotten for a fraction of the price from some other vendor - but this applies to TONS of products out there.
And interestingly enough, even the so called audiophile-grade manufacturers are not really going to tell you, for e.g. that you're better off upgrading your source (the most important link in that chain), than your gear. All of the several thousand dollar headphones and amps and dacs, IMHO, are also one step removed from snake-oil. It reminds me of all the wine drinkers who buy all these expensive wines, and going off of memory, they have them do a double-blind trial and they pick out the cheap wines as tasting just as good.
(FWIW I don't own any Bose products, but I have invested/wasted about $5000 in audio gear over the years :))
The amount of money you should spend on your source as compared to the rest of your gear has just kept going steadily downwards. Back in the vinyl days you really had to spend a mint to get a good record player, and it didn't hurt to keep buying copies of records that got a lot of play. Spending even more would net you concrete reductions in noise, less wear on your records, etc.. These days S/PDIF out from an the on-board audio chipset of a motherboard and a decent receiver/pre-amp or DAC are overkill for 99.9% of the sound systems out there. High end CD transports are pure snake-oil.
But I agree with you about the audiophiles. I would never buy Bose speakers for anything other than a desktop PC.
I'm looking for a budget pair of cans, I usually spend about 20 bucks because I'm both cheap and poor. I was considering the HD202's, I usually get by with HD201's but the cords short out and fray after a year or so of everyday use.
I only have two requirements: over-ear headphones with a comically oversized cord
appreciate any recommendations in advance.
They leak sound like crazy and look like they came out of a time machine from the 1980's. But they're cheap and they sound great.
I wonder if they use the same speaker/driver as the porta pros?
The great thing about headphone audio nowadays (as opposed to just 10 years ago) is there are quite a few low cost options that sound great. Unfortunately they're not well known unless you do some research.
That said, if you want top-tier audio out of something extremely portable that isolates to a degree, I cannot recommend Sennheiser's IE800 highly enough. I've spent many a kilobuck over the past 15 years and these are some of my favs. Not cheap at $800 retail (used in the $500-600 area), but totally worth it if you listen often while working. I have other IEMs that cost 2-3x as much and prefer these.
Most of time I use these in conjunction w/ Roon audio player and a Tidal sub straight out of the headphone port of my 13 rMBP - total audiophile bliss.
All of mine died really fast though! The cable is so thin and the connector tail bit so short and inflexible, that plugging them into a phone and putting the phone in a trouser pocket daily is a 6-month death sentence tops.
And it has you totally covered in your wish for an oversized cord.
I've had mine for twenty years, no issues, no frays, and I'd replace them with other Sony studio headphones if something were to happen.
The cord is a beast. I'm not worried about it failing.
My only gripe is the material they use for the padding degrades after 5 or 6 years. Its super easy to replace however. I like the coiled cord too. I think the "Pro"MDR-7507 which have the same form factor cost the same as the V-6s now.
[1] http://www.head-fi.org/t/606937/sony-mdr-v6-detachable-cable...
http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/the-best-150-over-ear-headp...
It's a classic model, used a lot in the TV/studio industry too.
And here's (offbeat but interesting and knowledgable photo gear reviewer) Ken Rockwell's review:
http://kenrockwell.com/audio/sony/mdr-7506.htm
AT M50x, M40x is another solid choice for around $150.
Only $35 refurbished. $42 new, Amazon Prime. I think you might have to find your own cord, depending on what you mean by comically oversized.
http://www.cnet.com/products/audio-technica-ath-m50x/
http://www.amazon.com/Audio-Technica-ATH-M50x-Professional-M...
I also used to also buy new headphones (with about the same budget) every 6 to 12 months, usually with the cable breaking somewhere near the connector. I had similar buying criteria as you, but just to test a hypothesis, I spent a weekend researching what to buy and arrived at the MDR7506 http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000AJIF4E for many times my usual budget. However, they've lasted for 2 years of being shoved in a bag or pocket many times a day and running to lectures, and still show no signs of wear, so they've almost paid for themselves in dollars per day even if they didn't sound better than a $20 pair which, of course, they also do. Highly recommended.
Edit: I see other comments also praising these. Yep, we're clearly a knowledgeable lot. :)
Haven't seen that before either.
Sound quality on all of them is pretty indistinguishable however on-head comfort ironically is an easy win for the 201's, the 202's are very tight, the 205's not quite as bad but still not great.
I ended up giving the 202's away to a female friend who really likes them (she has a smaller head than me).
If the cords are fraying there isn't much to replacing them, the other option is to cut the cord about a meter from the headphone and put a female connector on, then you can use arbitrary length patch's to extend the range.
One of my next projects is to drill through my desk and surface mount another female connection so I can sit down and plugin (otherwise the damn cable manages to get wrapped around the chair, the desk or usually a cup of coffee on the desk).
If I have any complaints it's that they're too big, and the cord is too long but those might be a plus for you.
Headphone guide: https://www.reddit.com/r/Zeos/comments/3ttvhy/guide_headphon...
Gaming headphone guide: https://www.reddit.com/r/Zeos/comments/3tu9gl/guide_headphon...
The video you linked to is a repair video, but your comment implies that a new set taken off the shelf don't work unless you install paper, two different things entirely.
I haven't yet had an issue with the QC25s except that they do seem to cause noise fatigue a lot quicker than non-noise cancelling headphones. I cannot explain that; just my experience. But the noise cancelling is very good.
I was one of the group which said Bose are overpriced but my work has open office layout and it gets really loud. Manager agreed to expense the noise canceling headphone and I must say QC25 are great noise canceling/dampening and VERY comfortable and light. Earlier I could not keep headphones on for longer hours but I have no issues with QC. Also they work great on the planes.
I have Superlux hd668b - I think they were like $40 USD, and they sound definitely better than QC25. But... they are not noise cancelling, they look derp and press on my ears. Actually majority of quality headphones appear to have awful designs with curled cables and thick bands that makes people look at you.
I wonder why they don't integrate it into ambulances. In that application cost or weight shouldn't matter as much.
Yes it is. It is also an example of journalism where the writer gets paid by the word, hence the tedium of the 'vignette'.
In the UK we don't have 'paid by the word' in quite the same way, so you rarely have to wade through rubbish to get to the gist of the article on a UK website. It is a U.S. phenomenon having the fluff-bloat at the start of the article, and, to be honest, it puts me off reading anything linked here from the likes of the New York Times. I just cannot stand this writing style with the extra 'vignette' or whatever padding out the article into some narrative that I cannot be bothered with.
That's a factual claim, which you should not make unless you know it to be true.
However, what is the cultural difference between US and UK journalism where UK stuff is to the point (i.e. with a summary of the story, then the story told properly) and US articles always have to have some meandering nonsense that is as tangential as possible to the story? The format makes sense for a book but is a bit silly in New York Times style articles.
The marketing team has the piece written glorifying the CEO, which in turn leads to more budget and promotions for the marketing team. The PR firm places the piece everywhere, which leads to more PR briefs. And the "reporters" are starving in a dying industry, so they'll do anything for a crust of bread and the odd review item they can keep.
---
p.s. Don't tell me that hackers can't play the same game:
This became the Bose Ride seat for commercial trucks.
It has a linear actuator that is run by a computer monitoring a set of accelerometers.
I bought MEElectronics A151[0] (1st gen) in 2012, they were at half the price of Bose earphones, and to me, sounds so much better than them. I treat them so badly - throwing them anywhere after coming back home, still going strong.
http://www.meeaudio.com/a151p-balanced-armature-in-ear-headp...
I think one should not make any compromises with earphone and eyeglasses. It was a significant purchase as I was a student then and I feel it was worth it.
Thanks for sharing it!