It's time for another headphone roundup and considering we've already covered the bulkier over-ear and on-ear models, it was inevitable that in-ears would follow. After all, not everyone likes walking the streets, turning heads with a pair of oversized Mickey Mousers on. The market is inundated with hundreds of in-ear monitors …
Re: Pretty poor selection
"doesn't make you sad when the cable frays and you have to replace them (as has happened to many of my Shure owning friends)."
Your friends need to learn to solder!
I've gone through a couple pairs of those Sony in-ear headphones in my life and I found the biggest problem is that they tended to die within a year or two for me. So, while they were cheap and the sound was decent, they never lasted long. So, lately I've taken to buying midrange stuff ($50-$100) and I've found that the sound is better. I've also found that they last a lot longer--about 4-5 years for me. So replacing a pair of $100 headphones every 5 years is just as cheap as replacing a pair of $20 headphones once a year.
I too would love to try a pair of £500 headphones--and the author does only includes one pair for us to drool at--but I'm glad most of the headphones were in the £50-£150 range since this seems to be about the point where the manufacturers start producing quality work. And to be fair, there were a pair of £30 and £35 included in the article.
Note: So far my Shure SE115s have lasted about 2 years and they cost about $100. I'll keep them until the cable does fray, which it will eventually--or until I get rich and can afford the £500 headphones.
Wot no SkullCandy?
I'm not a number cruncher, nor audiophiliac. I wedge 'em in my ear and if they sound good I use 'em. I tried Sony and two different sennheiser sets (one pair packed up after 3 days) but neither sounded as good as the SKs - alot cheaper too. Yes They were only about £20 (sennheisers were more than double that) but the bottom line for me is the sound, comfort and quality of build - and I don't mean because it has gold plated, angel dust coated *&%!£! super woofer/ driver/ tachyon driven/quantum doobries.
...er, mine's the one with the buckles up the back.
I've seen a lot of SkullCandy headphones around the last couple years and was wondering if they were actually any good or if they were just painted to appeal to the modern counter-culture groups. So, I too would've liked to have seen at least one of them in there.
Re: You missed a big one...
Yes, the Westone 4 sounds fantastic. However, I completely disagree with the statement about the cable being "crappy". On the contrary, it is probably the best cable on the market. Thin, light and flexible, but at the same time very sturdy.
As one of the winners of the RHA 'phones I can confirm the sound quality is excellent for the price-point. Definitely better than the Sennheisers I was using (CX400s)
But one thing I'm always a bit curious about his how a model ranks against its predecessor (when there is one). Like the IE8s vs IE7s? Is it worth the price to get the latest etc etc?
erm what now?
oh my god, there are a whole heap of mistakes in the article. for starters erm how old is the IE8?
oh and Comply is a particular brand of foam ear tips not some generic term for all foam tips.
no skullcandy offerings?
bought the Skullcandy Asyms last year for fitting under a motorcycle helmet during a 14 hour (one way) ride. Still use 'em as my primary listening set for the mp3 player. Plenty of clear bass and under $40.
Dr Dre Beats brah.. what the fuck?
Seriously, handy article as I have just trashed my in ear Ultimate Ears tonight. I was looking into the Shure 215's. Anyone have any comments on those? Especially the cable which I have a tendency to break around the jack and the actual phones.
"which makes listening to gritty dubstep and raw hiphop an absolute pleasure"
This has got to be the most magical pair of headphones ever if it can make that shite sound good.
RHA Winner here too
I was chuffed to bits when I found out I'd won these. They've replaced a pair of similar-priced Sony in-ear phones, and they are a smidge better than the Sonys There's not much in it - bass is a bit tighter, there's more space around the sound (it's the best way I can describe it), and the cord is much less prone to tangling than any other phones I've used. So a neat cost-effective upgrade, esp when someone just gives them to you. Nice.
I'm more interested in the higher-spec ones tbh. I wouldn't mind a pair of the £500 jobbies for a prize. How about it El Reg?
denon ah-c710 excellent sound
Shure cables crack
I have had three replacements for my Shures. The cables crack over about a year of normal use. That said, they have amazing sound but the def needs toget the cables sorted.
Have also had cables go. My first set, and then the warranty replacement. Seems a very common problem. Untill the design changes I am avoiding shure
what would be nice
A summary table of them all would be good !
I have a cheap pair of sony buds... (20 quid from asda)
I use them for watching movies on my laptop at night so I don't wake the missus us...
they do an awesome job at cutting out background noise and they don't leak sound out all over the place (waking the missus up)...the cable rub noise is non existent and the frequency response is plenty good enough.
there is no way I would pay several hundred quid, or even 100 quid for a set of ear buds or even 50 quid.. I hit the limit at the £20 i paid for the sony ones I got !!
- IT bloke publishes comprehensive maps of CALL CENTRE menu HELL
- Analysis Who is the mystery sixth member of LulzSec?
- Comment Congress: It's not the Glass that's scary - It's the GOOGLE
- Analysis Hey, Teflon Ballmer. Look, isn't it time? You know, time to quit?
- Murdoch Facebook gloat: You're like my $580m, 'CRAPPY' MySpace