Recommend me some headphones.(Buds)

2008-07-13 15:29:13

#26

**LiLp-DeFiNeD: Banned; +54|6423|Vancouver, BC, Canada

Yeah, I was avoiding Smokin Buds cuz reviews were split between 'Crap" and "meh", but that was a year ago a month before they made 3 different revisions to the phones, and when they still cost $25

So yeah, guess I'll look into those again.

P.S. How long you had yours? And did you break em in? I find that Skullcandy needs a fair bit of breaking in to have good sound, i ran my FMJ's for 10 hours, and a pair of ink'D for 6, and it helped.

Last edited by **LiLp-DeFiNeD (2008-07-13 15:32:25)

2008-07-13 16:11:26

#27

N00bkilla55404: Voices are calling...; +136|6200|Somewhere out in Space

Lets see, id say 2-3 months, and most of the time they are sitting in my pocket, squeezed about with stuff. Longest i had them on was about 4 hours.

2008-07-13 16:24:53

#28

hiberNative: 7.62x54R; +21|6063|sweden

if you can afford them: shure

2008-07-13 22:23:54

#29

**LiLp-DeFiNeD: Banned; +54|6423|Vancouver, BC, Canada

N00bkilla55404 wrote:
Lets see, id say 2-3 months, and most of the time they are sitting in my pocket, squeezed about with stuff. Longest i had them on was about 4 hours.

Breaking in means playing static or music slightly louder than normal listening level for a period of time.

The concept is that the sound causes the speaker element loosen up and it produces better sound.

"Experts" don't agree on the exact time, but the low average seems to be about 24 hours, some run em for upto a week.

2008-07-13 22:33:26

#30

N00bkilla55404: Voices are calling...; +136|6200|Somewhere out in Space

I doubt that actually does anything but wear out the driver.

2008-07-13 22:52:16

#31

**LiLp-DeFiNeD: Banned; +54|6423|Vancouver, BC, Canada

That's not what 1,630,000 results frum Google have to say.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en& … gle+Search

It actually does help noticeably, 10 hours isn't gonna put that much wear on them.

To each their own, personally, I do break em in and it works for me, if you feel that is does more damage than help, then don't.

To each their own.

2008-07-13 23:45:35

#32

Defiance: Member; +438|6939

N00bkilla55404 wrote:
I doubt that actually does anything but wear out the driver.

Just like using them does, so you may as well not do that either.

I recently got a new pair of buds (Shure E2c) and for the first time tried a burn in process. They were left on straight for 54-58 hours or so, turned off whenever the player's battery died. Out of the box the treble was tinny and they were far loud then the previous pair of them I've had (you could hear them when they weren't in your ear at the same volume level I usually use). After the burn in, the treble was very balanced and the volume toned down.

Whether you do a burn in process or not, they'll get to the same point through regular use either way. It's just if you care to leave them on overnight for the first few days you have them. I recommend doing it, it does no harm and they sound better faster.

2008-07-21 10:00:35

#33

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6739

Zimmer wrote:
Uzique wrote:
Shure E2C's are what I use.

Love them.
They were good when they came out, but now anything above that in the Shure range is much better and most expensive Sennheiser sets are better.

Compare these two buds by Shure:

Shure SE210's

Shure E2C's

Both are priced around the same, and I'm quite sure the SE210's are considered "above" the E2C's in range.

What is truly best in terms of audio quality?

I'm wondering because I have a lot of excess spending cash this month and I'm considering investing in some new buds myself...

Last edited by Uzique (2008-07-21 10:00:55)

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2008-07-21 12:07:25

#34

**LiLp-DeFiNeD: Banned; +54|6423|Vancouver, BC, Canada

LOL,

Uzique, I took your amazon.co.uk link and just changed it to .com, and it converted perfectly.

The EC2's seem a little out of range for me

2008-07-21 12:54:33

#35

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6739

They are solid buds Lilp, shame you can't stretch your budget to accomodate that 'level' of gadgetry . With $50-60 I doubt you can afford the Shure range-- is it not possible at all to extend your budget a little? Quality costs money, especially in audio technology...

Anyway, sorry for the mini-hijack, I just wanted to know if Zimmer (or any other audiophile) knew which was better out of the two similarly-priced buds!

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2008-07-21 13:31:10

#36

mrblonde666: Lykes The Mudkipz; +12|6256

SKULL CANDIES FTW!

https://images.buzzillions.com/images_products/05/55/skullcandy_smokin_buds_headphones_reviews_99064_300.jpg

2008-07-21 13:36:20

#37

**LiLp-DeFiNeD: Banned; +54|6423|Vancouver, BC, Canada

mrblonde666 wrote:
SKULL CANDIES FTW! http://images.buzzillions.com/images_pr … 64_300.jpg

Yeah, looks like that's where I'm gonna end up going in the end.

Shame that they discontinued the Full Metal Jackets(Well not really, they updated them, but pretty much all stores out here got rid of em)

2008-07-21 13:49:51

#38

FFLink: There is.; +1,380|6959|Devon, England

I just bought these babies:

https://www.milosport.com/CustFiles/22/ity/45066_md.jpg

Waiting eagerly for them to come

And I agree about the "Breaking in" of headphones. I had a pair exactly the same as another pair I'd had. When I first tried them, they hurt my ears at a normally acceptable volume (As of the static). After about a week, they were back to normal again.

BF2S Forums Recommend me some headphones.(Buds)

N00bkilla55404 wrote:

N00bkilla55404 wrote:

Zimmer wrote:

Uzique wrote:

mrblonde666 wrote:

Board footer