Best headphones around $100

[Tradition]

I think the Ultrasone HFI-450s should be added to this list. I was planning on buying the 7506s, but there were only demos left and the guy recommended the Ultrasones, which were the same price. Excellent headphones IMO.

I had the 280s but they were way too tight on my head, I also was not too impressed with the sound. The 450s sound great to me and are much more comfortable.

[Steven mc.]

For tracking I always go with 7506. CLosed back, And always easy to hear whats going on. Great for traveling and listening too, They stop outside Noise pretty well, I think the specs say by -20 db.

[MrArochet]

Which of these headphones are best in terms of ear fatigue? I don't want to spend money on some headphones that make my ears hurt after 15 minutes of wearing them! I've tried the Sony's and I think they feel nice and good be worn for a long time, but I'm not sure on the others. Anyone have any opinions?

[_controlfreak]

Hehe, well I guess that is "ear fatigue" too - no one has a head shaped like yours, so we really can't answer that for you. The HD280's are known for being tight. I like them, but others think they're too tight.

[vortico]

I want to buy a headphone, basically I have to use it to talk on computer. So can any one suggest me the better product.

go to the Noobie Forum, and repost your question. you'll get answers there.

hold on, "to talk on computer??" isn't a microphone what you're looking for?

and what's with your sig?

[JDR]

I want to buy a headphone, basically I have to use it to talk on computer. So can any one suggest me the better product.

go to the Noobie Forum, and repost your question. you'll get answers there.

hold on, "to talk on computer??" isn't a microphone what you're looking for?

and what's with your sig?

I'm kinda leaning toward this guy being a spammer...

[vortico]

agreed.

[vortico]

I've tried out all 4 except the Sony. The AKG and Sennheiser tie for best sound IMO, though the Sennheiser has slightly more bass. I voted for it because it's lighter, more comfortable, and stays on my head the longest.

[pocketdrummer]

I own the AKG 240s and I can vouch for their sound quality. I haven't had enough chances to compare them to others, but they really do sound great. From what I've heard, they are also supposed to the flattest of the bunch.

NOTE: These are absolutely terrible for tracking. They bleed a LOT due to the semi-open design. For this reason alone, I would not recommend them to anyone that needs headphones for tracking. They do make a good second pair though.

[Avantgurle]

I am returning my Audio Technica ATHM40fs because they keep slipping off my head! It's the most annoying thing -- a five degree tilt of my head can send them to floor. Of all the other ones in this price range, which one has a headband that "locks" the sizing and stays put? (Also has minimal sound leakage for recording vocals.) I haven't tried any others and don't want to be stuck with another stinker. Thanks!

[Blue Bear Sound]

I am returning my Audio Technica ATHM40fs because they keep slipping off my head! It's the most annoying thing -- a five degree tilt of my head can send them to floor. Of all the other ones in this price range, which one has a headband that "locks" the sizing and stays put? (Also has minimal sound leakage for recording vocals.) I haven't tried any others and don't want to be stuck with another stinker. Thanks!

I have 4 pairs of those and they get used all the time in the studio by clients.... never had that issue once in 10 years. Those are EXCELLENT headphones.

[tminusyou]

what's the deal with skullcandy? they had sale and their stuff was dirt cheap but is the audio quality even that great?

[Blue Bear Sound]

what's the deal with skullcandy? they had sale and their stuff was dirt cheap but is the audio quality even that great?

Never heard of them - but looking at their website - they have no use in the studio......

[timboalogo]

... I like them, but others think they're too tight.

With a haircut like yours, I can't see why they wouldn't be too tight on you.

[Wong]

what's the deal with skullcandy? they had sale and their stuff was dirt cheap but is the audio quality even that great?

It's marketed rubbish. It has no place in recording.

[Nanashi]

skull candy is the bose of head phones. They have no place in the studio. they sound nice when your running on the road because they're close to your head and have decent bass response and scooped mids.

[Ranuu]

I can't believe so few chose the AKGs... after testing out countless headphones (as in my early days I was confined and could not use reference monitors, but could not afford reference headphones), I finally found ones that I think recreate the most acurate sound from whatever source you're using (I even use them to watch movies on my computer sometimes!)

To be honest, though, I usually feel buyers remorse after about *every* purchase, but after seeing a picture in the cover booklet of John Lennon's 2nd to last album (double fantasy) of him sitting on the floor with an acoustic guitar playing and wearing K240s (or something that looked *strikingly* similar) I was sold. If they were good enough for John, they're good enough for me!

[Slimchance24]

I was using Audio Technica M40fs for a long time.

Just recently purchased a pair of Sony 7506's and Audio Technica ATH M50's.. ($100 bucks each) they are like night and day.
I'm convinced that you could mix with just headphones if you had enough different models!

The Sony's are very colored, lots of top and heavy bass, M50's nice but sound dull after the Sony but more accurate (flat) for mixing. M40's OK for monitoring during tracking.

I'm going to get some more pairs from different manufacturers, it's like having a bunch of different monitors to listen through.

[Blue Bear Sound]

I'm convinced that you could mix with just headphones if you had enough different models!

Not a chance........ Headphone Mixing Article >>>> Whad'ya Mean I Can't Mix With Headphones????

I'm going to get some more pairs from different manufacturers, it's like having a bunch of different monitors to listen through.

It really isn't...... not by a longshot....

[timboalogo]

Bruce,

1 more til 10000! Woulda thought your 9999th post would have been about mixing with headphones?

Karma.

[Blue Bear Sound]

Bruce,

1 more til 10000! Woulda thought your 9999th post would have been about mixing with headphones?

Karma.

[Slimchance24]

well, it was said kinda tongue in cheek and I agreed with your reply until I thought about it for a SECOND....

....if you listen to most of the highly compressed poor quality crap that we hear on the radio and most CD's these days you could mix most of that with headphones or even a couple of old tin bean cans stuck to your ears. Considering the lengths that were gone to by audiophile manufacturers in the 80's and 90's it's sad.

Do you think some kid with one earbud stuck in his ear listening to rap from an iPOD could tell if it was mixed by someone with headphones or not?

I will continue to experiment. Recording music is all about experimentation and fooling the brain. Just as we learn to make a 'safe' product from our monitors we could do so from phones too or even go outside the envelope a little. We react to sound on many levels, psychologically, physiologically and sociologically. A lot of enthusiasts actually listen to high quality music (e.g. a classical symphony) through a pair of phones connected to a high end system, in a dark room, with their eyes tight shut.

Anyone stuck in the 'flat' commercial world of stereo recording might well read your article and be impressed but lets explore concepts like dummy head recording or natural environment twin micing techniques (see Opus 3 records philosophy).

Well done on your 10,000+ posts.

[acidwarp]

by Slimchance24 on Wed Feb 17, 2010 2:07 am

well, it was said kinda tongue in cheek and I agreed with your reply until I thought about it for a SECOND....

....if you listen to most of the highly compressed poor quality crap that we hear on the radio and most CD's these days you could mix most of that with headphones or even a couple of old tin bean cans stuck to your ears. Considering the lengths that were gone to by audiophile manufacturers in the 80's and 90's it's sad.

Do you think some kid with one earbud stuck in his ear listening to rap from an iPOD could tell if it was mixed by someone with headphones or not?

I will continue to experiment. Recording music is all about experimentation and fooling the brain. Just as we learn to make a 'safe' product from our monitors we could do so from phones too or even go outside the envelope a little. We react to sound on many levels, psychologically, physiologically and sociologically. A lot of enthusiasts actually listen to high quality music (e.g. a classical symphony) through a pair of phones connected to a high end system, in a dark room, with their eyes tight shut.

Anyone stuck in the 'flat' commercial world of stereo recording might well read your article and be impressed but lets explore concepts like dummy head recording or natural environment twin micing techniques (see Opus 3 records philosophy).

Well done on your 10,000+ posts.

I'm sure someone else will chim in here, but the reason behind using studio moniters in a treated room, and not headphones has nothing to do with staying inside a safe box. It has to do with providing a mix that will transfer well to various systems( ie. headphones, large home cinema's and consumer based stereo systems, small ipod systems, etc.) If your not taking advantage mixing with real moniters in a treated room, and mixing with headphones your basically taking everyone that doesnt listen to music on headphones and saying, you can listen to this mix, but it wont sound as good as on headphones. Where the mixes generated from mostly flat speakers, in a mostly flat room will sound good on every system, not just the one you mixed on. Mixing, like recording, is an art. There is really no wrong or right way to do it as long as the you and your clients are happy with the end results. Acoustics on the other hand, are physics. You can't experiment with physics. Its just there. I'm all for experimenting, but during the appropriate process.

Mario

[Blue Bear Sound]

well, it was said kinda tongue in cheek and I agreed with your reply until I thought about it for a SECOND....

....if you listen to most of the highly compressed poor quality crap that we hear on the radio and most CD's these days you could mix most of that with headphones or even a couple of old tin bean cans stuck to your ears. Considering the lengths that were gone to by audiophile manufacturers in the 80's and 90's it's sad.

Do you think some kid with one earbud stuck in his ear listening to rap from an iPOD could tell if it was mixed by someone with headphones or not?

I will continue to experiment. Recording music is all about experimentation and fooling the brain. Just as we learn to make a 'safe' product from our monitors we could do so from phones too or even go outside the envelope a little. We react to sound on many levels, psychologically, physiologically and sociologically. A lot of enthusiasts actually listen to high quality music (e.g. a classical symphony) through a pair of phones connected to a high end system, in a dark room, with their eyes tight shut.

Anyone stuck in the 'flat' commercial world of stereo recording might well read your article and be impressed but lets explore concepts like dummy head recording or natural environment twin micing techniques (see Opus 3 records philosophy).

Yeah... yeah... experimentation, blah-blah... all fine and good.....

In the end, the bottom line is that headphones lie to you about the way something sounds. Period. During ANY part of the production process, you DON'T want to be making decisions with a monitoring chain that is lying to you. Period. So it doesn't matter what the end-user listens with, the production needs to occur using the right tools for the job.
Period.

[Slimchance24]

Two people can listen to exactly the same thing and hear totally different things. It happens all the time.
There is no 'truth in audio'. Our ears, eyes (brain) etc. lie to us all the time. I guess if someone does this for a living then they have to follow the norm, like photography for example.

A wedding photographer is stuck in a rut, he/she cannot produce an album of abstract pictures of an event even if he wanted to, although, I know of one very famous photographer who was hired to cover a wedding who did just that. The bride and groom saw nothing of their wedding, but had a very creative photo collection worth thousands of dollars by a famous artist.

Acidwarp: Humans say that sound is a science because they have to explain everything around them in terms of science (math and numbers) to understand it, it's the only way our brains can really make sense of it all. It's the only way we can place ourselves in the universe, although some folks use faith (mostly because they don't understand math or science) - the folks that try to juggle both these explanations are usually really messed up

Perhaps a discussion like this would be more interesting with a guy like Brian Eno. I'll bet he has employed much more wacky processes in the studio than to have mixed with headphones, all of which would, I'm sure, send you screaming for the 'manual'.

Blue's logo 'the first is understanding signal flow... the second is all about what you hear...' is totally wrong. It's actually ALL about what we hear, you said that yourself didn't you? that's why you use monitors (and so, by the way do I....most of the time).

I really think that someone with 10,000 posts that says to people that music must be recorded and mixed in this way or that is really not being a very good role model or ambassador for the art. However, I'm sure that, were you to mix an album for me, that it would sound great; in my car going down a noisy highway, on a iPod in the subway, through a consumer grade stereo system in a 'dead' living room, even on an old transistor radio in the bathroom, it would sound the same in all these places right? WRONG! It would sound very different, even my mood/health would make a difference.
..... I may be able to understand the vocals, the kick of the bass drum might come through and I may get a sense of the guitar, of course I will get a feel for the basic rhythm and I will feel some emotion based on my tastes, is this all what you wanted me to hear? well then, you really were trying to fool me weren't you?

Should we never smear Vaseline on the lens? How does the cameras rendering of depth of field relate to that of our eyes/brains interpretation? do we need a stereo camera to 'see the truth'? is 5.1 audio the truth? why was quadraphonic no good? It's all smoke and mirrors.

Anyway, I'm wasting my time here obviously.