Well, you’re not broke......are you?

/thread

>Souljapods
If Airpods are nigger trash, then what are those...?

I immediately think less of anyone I see wearing these in public and looking like a complete retard.

Reminder that:

- Rich people show off their wealth with their private jet.
- Normal people show off their "wealth" with their sports car.
- Niggers show off their "wealth" with their shoes
- Scum below niggers show off their "wealth" with their bluetooth headset.

>mfw i've had the best available wireless headphones since 2013
i for one am happy that wireless audio has gone mainstream. as for analog audio ports disappearing from smartphones though, it's a pleb filter

Attached: .jfif.jpg (615x446, 68K)

Doublenigger trash.

Sorry I'm too poor to buy cheap things like these, they don't last. I bought entry level BA IEMs for $300 in 2015, they still work(thanks to swappable cable) and sound infinitely better than any bluetooth headphones.

>$300
>entry level
do you know what entry level means?

It is entry level, user, only dual driver. Top models easily go well beyond $1000.

entry level is $30 and I'm being conservative

This

Everything below $200 is a personal insult to music.

t. SEETHING ITODDLER who just can't afford the wire

Attached: BTFO.gif (540x304, 1.52M)

you better go tell all musicians, producers and technicians that use k240s, hd280s, 7506, m50s.....

I can only imagine what kind of "music" they create.

If you have those you apparently cant spell properly.

I'm not dumb either.

The thumbnail looks like a face.

The kind you then need bazillion dollars to appreciate. Really shows their talent, right?
;^)

NOT BASED
BAD

Basic and redheaded.

Nope, I've got Sennheiser HD600.
Fuck Apple and fuck Applecucks.

Attached: 1518588771910.jpg (429x410, 37K)

>literally cheaper than most true wireless headphones

Attached: 1522418333415.jpg (439x545, 30K)

*yeets*
*flosses on you*

Attached: 07D17263-CDB7-44AB-B1A7-D114B5610899.jpg (610x1085, 251K)

First, I started typing something in a response. Then I thought for a bit: what kind of person would surf through pictures, to find that one and think: "wow, Jow Forums might like it and we'll have a productive discussion"? Does one really hope for insight answers when posting something like this? No. That's when I realized: it's a SHITPOST. It's a dead thread make by a dead man inside. Don't answer to it, save your time.

I'm Sn**d (formerly Ch*ck)

really reaching, there.

>I'm Snapd (formerly Check)
?

Are AirPods actually any good? In terms of ear buds, I've only ever had good ones if they were in-ear.

They are just cheap Chink shit.

Terrible isolation and an absolutely yikes FR, don't bother.

Attached: 1546506529182.png (900x520, 56K)

no, I'm not broke, but I still don't have them crappy things, and I can't be arsed to take a pic of some other perceived symbol of wealth just to "prove" something to some random troll.
God, those threads are getting so boring…

Reminder that:

- You're yelly as fuck

Seeing those things hang out of your ears, is the equivalent of drawing a big fat "sucker" on your forehead.

Apple. Innovative as ever.

based and grammarpilled

Cringe and can't afford a ferraripilled

I worked for a multi-billionaire once. He didn't own a jet only a jet share. Buying a private jet is idiotic.

"Normal" people don't own sports cars, at least no /real/ sports cars. Sorry dude, that front wheel drive Civic Type R isn't a real sports car.

Everyone has shoes, even people in abject poverty, and you can buy bluetooth earbuds out of 99 cents store. This isn't real wealth.

>thinking you're rich if you waste money on low quality garbage

Attached: 1549073714940.jpg (1024x576, 274K)

>SóyPods
how fitting

>buying a 170$ piece of technology makes you rich
>implying 170$ is a lot of money
Who's broke now?

Yeah but if you don't own airpods your poor.

i saw a documentary on the sound design of 'the phantom menace'. the dude who was mastering the sound effects was using 75 dollar akg headphones.

100 dollar sony mdr's are worth it solely because they just don't break somehow and even if they do, they come with a schematic and parts numbers and sony will just send you a part, they're meant to be repaired.

anything more expensive than that is snake oil. and you really must be deaf or delusional to think that your 1600 dollar headphones sound 'good'. they actually sound intensely horrible. i've auditioned these kinds of things. complete garbage. what do people think make these special? there's nothing, it's no magic to making a decent set of headphones. you can produce and sell just about the best headphones in the world for 100 dollars a piece. there's not any room for improvement. it's an incredibly simple device doing a simple thing.

oh well a fool and his money are easily parted.

Normal people do own a 370z or a Cayman, and those clearly are sports cars.

>t. earlet
Try Sennheiser HD600 sometime.

Attached: 1532556606868.png (1000x1000, 631K)

i can buy one everyday and smash them in front of apple using poor people

It's like a time traveler from 80s who isn't aware of any headphone technologies except dynamic ones.

Attached: 1539211557123.jpg (669x696, 78K)

i have these

Attached: andersson-tew-5000(1005041)_1_Normal_Extra.jpg (1412x936, 118K)

i have. there's no reason to own them. they offer no improvement over a decent pair of headphones between 75-125 dollars. you think they're 'better', they're just loud and sound a little odd, you decide to enjoy it because it's expensive (to you).

a fool and his money are easily parted, sound reproduction is not magic.

Crapchat was a mistake.

>307z

What normal person owns a cayman? That clearly is a person with more money than sense.

>no soundstage
>*fills your ears with mud*
>*snaps*

>a decent pair of headphones between 75-125 dollars
Like what?

They do. Both measured (frequency response closer to harman target, distortion) and perceived. And it's not a small difference.
They're also made of parts which can be ordered individually should anything break. Furthermore, it's possible to take them apart and put them together without tools.

>actually lower sensitivity (more voltage needed for same volume)
>"fust loud"
Spotted the LARPer.

Both a 370z or a Cayman are like 20-25k second hand, what are you talking about?

True

RTINGS has a stupid target curve though. It's a mashup of the Harman target response and the DF-neutral response. Picking and choosing bits from both.

It's fine for comparing two pieces of gear because they'd be on the same scale, but for anything else it's dumb.

Attached: ac3961b.jpg (742x676, 86K)

My man, dude was talking about showing out, not about buying 2nd had cars.

>sound reproduction is not magic.
Yes, and dynamic drivers are simply incapable of accurately reproducing sound, as any impulse response chart shows. And with multi-driver setups you have to very accurately tune the crossover and phase You can only thank your ears for making sense of the mess of overtones and nonlinear distortions that they produce.

>"Normal" people don't own sports cars, at least no /real/ sports cars
If you mean second hand sports cars aren't real sports cars, you're right.

niggertrash^2

IDK about american prices but beyerdynamics DT series in EU are about 100.

mdr 7506, some akg's. probably more.

measuring a set of headphones in any way that correlates to human hearing is functionally impossible. especially since everyones ears have different sensitivity at different frequencies.

yeah, the expensive headphones are 'different', they're not 'better'. the stuff used to prove that for some reason their kind of different is not only better, but actually worth so much money, is the snake oil. a fool and his money are easily parted.

anyone who tells you that there's any such thing as 'accurate' reproduction is trying to sell you something for more than its worth.

reminder Apple is forcing this dumb meme.

Kinda true though. If youve had them before but not anymore its probably not the first time youve lost them, bankruptcy imminent

Accuracy is measurable and objective. And frequency response is only one metric of many.

Soul
Soulless

omg yeah bro, any1 who doesn'tl own airpods is poor? like i lov emy airpods and anyone i see not using apple i say "lol are you poor?" and they say "uhh sorry?" like hahahah fucking POOR idiots, i just turn my music on in my airpods and walk away. fucking poors

Nah bro, I'm good.
Could use a phone with a better camera tho.

Attached: photo_2019-02-02_16-08-36.jpg (1280x962, 86K)

sure, it's measurable. but the people whose opinion on whats accurate and whats no actually matters are using regular old headphones in production work, IRL.

the super expensive stuff actually isn't accurate, because there's no need for any product at that price point except pure profit given that there are people who will buy it. and the people that will buy it are not intelligent people who have a good reason to buy it, they're fools who don't know what they're buying.

>opinion on whats accurate
Are you baiting me or something.
>the super expensive stuff actually isn't accurate
Sure, price alone isn't an indicator, that's why measurements exist.

basic and redflagged

>measuring wealth by consumerism
how to spot a true poorfag lmao

Me Too Bro! >:) AIRPOD RULE XD

Souljaless*
you had one job

measurements done by an instrument don't translate to the actual perception of hearing.

there is actually no way to measure what is accurate except through a professionals judgment. because your ears are not reference microphones. so a reference microphones perceptions is only related to a human ears perception through a process of inference and approximation based largely on experience and rule of thumb amongst engineering houses. there's NOT a science to it. nobody is hooking wires into the audio cortex of the human brain and converting neuron impulses to an EQ graph. which is what would be necessary to make it a science.

the fact that you haven't considered this shows how little you actually know about sound and how taken you are by the marketing... although i suspect you wanted to be taken, because 'the sound' is sure not the reason anyone wants a super expensive set of headphones.

its like they say, a fool and his money soon part ways.

>facts don't matter
>opinions do

Attached: 1548442533451.png (500x500, 460K)

Why do faggots on this board always care so much about how much money other people have?

>expensive
HD600 are affordable, if anything.
>different not better, not mapping human perception.
Look into the research done by harman, which the harman target FR reflects.
>different not better, FR is just one metric
FR can also be a smooth progression or full of peaks and dips. Distortion is another metric. Closed headphones such as the mentioned 7506 have excessive distortion.

you are woefully childish if you think that 'the fact' that so and so microphone measures so and so pressure at so and so frequency and then so and so driver does so and so pressure so on and so on, *actually* translates to some kind of 'authentic experience' that purchasers of these headphones must be expecting.

so does a 'fact' matter? a fact has to be relevant. does the fact that it's sunny outside mean that headphones are good? obviously not. does the 'fact' that the headphones have a certain amount of impedance matter to what you hear?

is it relevant? no, not really. will it make a 'difference'? yeah, sure. is that difference good? a matter of judgment.

that's IRL how things work.

harmann marketing

>literally doubling down on facts don't matter
Boy you sure are a gift that keeps on giving.

>*pairs it with my phone*
>YOOOUUUUUUUUUUU

- Sennheiser shill
- Sennheiser is an AKG by Harman competitor
>harmann marketing
How confused can you be.

facts only matter if they're relevant in a given context.

most decisions are based on judgment for the reason that 'facts that are relevant' are actually really scarce, facts are just things to consider, they don't turn into a conclusion on their own without interpretation, which, again, is interpretation.

Opinions without facts don't matter at all. And "well I listed to it" is just that - an opinion. I already said how our ears can make sense of the most awful of sources so I won't repeat myself.

nobody forms opinions without facts, their interpretations vary and some are worth more than others. experience makes for better opinions and judgments. and inversely facts do not add up to conclusions without judgment or as you call it 'opinion'. facts without opinion don't mean anything either.

i don't know who you think is making headphones without doing measurements and testing, but it's not sony and akg's studio division. there's a whoooooole lot more 'creative fact finding' and outright confabulation going into the production of a ridiculous 1500 dollar headphone. for that matter 500 dollars is a ridiculous cost for a headphone, there's no actual valid reasoning that justifies them having that price.

at best it's like the 10 dollar and 100 dollar wine bottles with their labels switched; the amateur connoisseurs always think the 100 dollar bottle is better. this is the market that these exorbitantly priced headphones go to.

Nah m8 I ain't sum poor fuk who would use nigger trash. Get sum real earnips m8.

Attached: pathetic.jpg (672x787, 34K)

"I tried those headphones" is forming opinion without facts and people do this all the time. If you have no numbers you have no facts, simple.

so you care more about what the salesman TELLS you about the headphones (facts being some charts and statements that you saw on a piece of paper) then what you HEAR?

so, the actual SENSORY INPUT from your organs to you is not a fact, but the claims put out by world masters of number-fudging, are, to you, absolute facts?

lmao! you've entered into really absurd territory here, kiddo. you're talking about headphones. 'no numbers no facts!' you don't hear numbers dude, unless its the salesperson whispering them into your ear and telling you they're 'facts'. except they aren't facts, because they aren't relevant. they're just numbers and you're not doing math!

i'll tell you one thing that will exclude you from ever getting a job at any respectable house of production or engineering audio media, and it's the inability to LISTEN!!!!

because what your ears tell you are the ACTUAL facts. not what you see in numbers on a piece of paper. when it comes to sound that's meant to be heard.

thank you for giving me a real insight into the might of the real life no kidding not joking AUDIOPHOOL! haha, i'm gonna show your post to some of my coworkers.

>so, the actual SENSORY INPUT from your organs to you is not a fact
Actually, yes, and you would know that if you were to do any research. Accuracy of the headphones doesn't depend on whether you like them or not AT ALL. In some cases less accurate headphones even sound "better" to people by masking the imperfections of the recording. Is that all the matters to you?