[HN Gopher] Sennheiser HD 555 to HD 595 Mod
___________________________________________________________________
Sennheiser HD 555 to HD 595 Mod
Author : edent
Score : 564 points
Date : 2023-06-18 06:35 UTC (16 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (mikebeauchamp.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (mikebeauchamp.com)
| patchtopic wrote:
| has anyone actually done the science and done measurements? with
| the web awash in measurement nerd hifi addicts you'd think this
| would have been established. though a moot point as this is an
| old article, referencing a model no longer available.
| Toutouxc wrote:
| I have those and have done that immediately when I go them, more
| than ten years ago. There's even a Level 2 hack: the honeycomb
| mesh that the black piece is attached to? That can all go, you
| can literally cut it out with nail clippers or a similar tool,
| which gives the headphones even more space to breathe and makes
| the sound a bit more behaved.
| random_upvoter wrote:
| That's an old canard. I tried that about 10 years ago it degraded
| the quality of the 555. The foam is there for a reason. Ended up
| buying the 650 which I love to this day.
| timrichard wrote:
| Another vote for the HD650 here.
|
| I bought a pair nearly 20 years ago, and they have had plenty
| of use. About two years ago, I picked up Sennheiser-branded
| replacement padding for the headband and earcups. Feels like
| new. You can also get a replacement cable, as it plugs in to
| the earcups rather than being soldered.
|
| It's a nice change from planned obsolescence.
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| Unless someone has actually measured the frequency response, I
| wouldn't assume this mod covered 100% of the differences
| anyway.
|
| Sennheiser has several models where the only difference appears
| to be a trivial piece of damping material, but the measured
| difference between the two is substantial. You also can't get
| the exact foam piece yourself so mods aren't possible.
| barbariangrunge wrote:
| Agreed: removing the foam gave me headaches
| paxys wrote:
| At the onset I thought this would involve something to the effect
| of flashing the firmware or baking the circuit board, but:
|
| > How to do the mod
|
| > The foam cushions are removed simply by pulling on them.
|
| Lol.
| ttctciyf wrote:
| 2011 discussion here:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2214158
| laserlight wrote:
| Drivers seem different to me. Other components don't matter as
| much. What am I missing?
| jlg23 wrote:
| > Quite a few people speculated in my Original thread that the
| more expensive HD595 headphones must also be using a more
| expensive driver. However, Head-fi member MCC posted the
| smoking gun; a picture of the original Sennheiser replacement
| driver labelled "HD 555 / HD 595".
|
| The picture mentioned is in the article, just below what I
| quoted.
| avianlyric wrote:
| Drivers are the same, this is covered at the end of the
| article.
|
| > However, Head-fi member MCC posted the smoking gun; a picture
| of the original Sennheiser replacement driver labelled "HD 555
| / HD 595".
| mmmBacon wrote:
| HW engineer here. So it's generally not true that you're getting
| the same product at half the cost. Firstly, while all the HW may
| actually be the "same" it's probably been binned for different
| specs. This means that the yield is lower for higher performing
| parts. 2nd is that for the same HW there may be additional FW and
| test time associated with that HW. Both of those items equate to
| higher cost.
| crote wrote:
| They are often intentionally mis-binned, though: it is quite
| common for there to be more high-specced parts than there is
| demand for, so they'd rather downgrade it to a cheaper variant
| than have it rot on a shelf. So if you're lucky, you end up
| with a product which significantly outperforms its official
| label.
| activitypea wrote:
| I believe anybody who's shopped for a desktop CPU in the past
| decade knows this. The difference is that a Ryzen 5600X costs
| 10-15% more than a regular 5600, not twice as much and then
| some.
| chayesfss wrote:
| [dead]
| globular-toast wrote:
| Really surprised to see no objective comparison (frequency
| response curves etc). Are people really happy with a guy pulling
| out foam from his headphones and saying they sound a bit
| different (no shit) And he doesn't even own the other model?
| urbandw311er wrote:
| This post ticks multiple boxes for me -- taking things apart
| _and_ love of a bargain.
| accrual wrote:
| Pretty fascinating find and a great insight into manufacturing
| different SKUs. I thought it was neat the lower end product
| actually had one extra part compared to the higher model - in
| this case a small piece of foam to slightly tweak the output to a
| slightly less desirable shape.
| fy20 wrote:
| It's similar to how motorcycles are derated.
|
| In Europe there is limit to the kW output of motorcycles
| someone with a learners permit can drive, so in a lot of cases
| the output of a more powerful bike is limited so they can learn
| on the same bike to what they will be driving.
|
| To achieve this on some bikes you can restrict the air flow
| through the carburettor, which can be as simple as adding a
| piece of cardboard in the right place...
| Lev1a wrote:
| A few years ago the EU introduced a change/addendum to the A2
| class restriction barring holders of that license class from
| driving bikes that were _too_ limited in order to get their
| vehicle certification:
|
| Motorcycles of a power not exceeding 35 kilowatts (47 hp) and
| with a power/weight ratio not exceeding 0.2 kilowatts per
| kilogram (0.12 hp/lb) and not derived from a
| vehicle of more than double its power.
| simonjgreen wrote:
| My very first bike, and those of all my friends who rode, was
| the same. The process (called derestricting) usually involved
| removing a cross feed pipe between the exhaust and the
| intake.
| MrBuddyCasino wrote:
| Reminder that in hifi, price and performance are only very
| loosely correlated, if at all. This is even more so the case for
| headphones.
| cyberpunk wrote:
| I can agree that dac+amps make almost no difference, and there
| is a metric fsckton of snake oil.
|
| I do find that the difference between a pair of 100 euro
| headphones and 400 euro headphones is quite obvious, though.
| Can you elaborate a bit?
|
| I think over about 800, the difference is pretty much gone --
| with the caveat that might not hold if you're buying a set with
| a specific freq response in mind (e.g Beyer Dynamics cans tend
| to boost low and treble a bit, which is good for mixing, or
| Grados which make acoustic music sound absolutely massive
| etc)..
| numpad0 wrote:
| I agree that there is a metric ton of snake oil but make _no_
| difference? That's not true at all. Power consumption and
| capacitor sizes make tons of difference. Well warmed up Class
| A amps are great. Sad I don't own one.
| cyberpunk wrote:
| _almost_ no difference. Maybe I just have crap ears, but
| I've tried blind comparing headphone amps and honestly
| can't tell any difference between my chord mojo, my schiit
| Valhalla and my ifi or dragonfly...
|
| They're all fairly low end though I guess.
| hug wrote:
| DACs? Beyond a very _very_ cheap entry point they make no
| difference. Anyone telling you that DAC A is warmer
| sounding than DAC B is almost certainly a cork sniffer.
|
| Amps, however, obviously have an impact on the sound
| delivered -- especially for high impedance headphones, or
| those that are otherwise difficult to drive (think some
| planar magnetically, etc). Again, though, anyone who thinks
| that relatively powerful amp A is significantly different
| to equivalently powerful amp B is almost certainly more
| interested in impressing other people with too much money
| than how kit actually sounds.
| etempleton wrote:
| I generally agree, but to counter that I have worked in audio
| studios with full stack audio setups with some of the best
| professional gear available at the time and the audio that
| came through even a cheap pair of monitors was better than
| anything I have heard before or since.
| jlg23 wrote:
| I'd speculate that in audio studios a lot of thoughts/work
| go into acoustics of the rooms themselves. And it is done
| by professionals who have to work in that environment every
| day for several hours.
| cyberpunk wrote:
| Yep this. A studio engineer mate of mine recons room
| treatment is maybe 80% of the difference you can hear.
|
| Not many people are willing to install that much foam
| panelling, though.
| Toutouxc wrote:
| True, but I'd argue that the effect only starts to kick in at
| some point around $400 or so for a pair of headphones. Above
| that point the curve of performance/price flattens fast and
| soon you're getting into the esoteric territory of directional
| cables. But go below that point and the sound quality enters a
| steady decline noticeable to most experienced listeners- HD 595
| were great and inexpensive, but objectively not as good as HD
| 600. The Momentums sound nice but they're far from perfect.
| AirPods Pro 2 are amazing, and have solid, respectable sound,
| but they're far from what really high-end in-ears can get you.
| etempleton wrote:
| I have a pair of $20 202 IIs that sound very good. Easily
| comparable to much more expensive headphones. I stopped using
| them about a year ago as I switched to wireless headphones, but
| if all you want are simple wired cans you can get great
| sounding audio cheap.
| mnd999 wrote:
| Except at the very low end. The PS2 earbuds from Flying Tiger
| are going to be very bad.
| martyvis wrote:
| I have some $50 Soundpeats Air3 Deluxe HS earbuds. They have
| the high end LDAC codec with 14mm drivers (far bigger than
| your ear canal / drum). Absolutely amazing and pass all the
| Sonus Faber tests [1] to these 59 year old ears.
|
| [1] https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLnSJ7ZX2HMpsNMKj
| 8IH...
| mhitza wrote:
| I think it depends how much of a hobby hifi is for a person. I
| like headphones that have a flatter frequency response, and
| then just boost up what I like for the songs I listen to. On
| the other hand I also very much enjoy open backs as the bass
| has room to evacuate and the music is a bit more spatial, which
| in some stereo mixes makes the songs you are already accustomed
| to sound fresh again.
| malermeister wrote:
| This reminds me of when I flashed the bios of my AMD gpu to make
| it into a more expensive model.
| formerly_proven wrote:
| Back then not even GPU-Z could tell them apart... "6850? 6870?
| Ehhh let's say 'a 6800 series GPU"
| weevil wrote:
| This mod has been going around for years. I bought a pair of HD
| 558s in 2012 -- phenomenal headphones, still going strong -- and
| I found a number of posts suggesting I do the same thing.
| KptMarchewa wrote:
| I appreciate the article, but if you really want to buy
| headphones, HD6xx are a better choice.
| mickael-kerjean wrote:
| Yep, the hd600 is amazing, I was introduced to it by an old
| friend in my teenage year and immediately got hypnotized by its
| sound, the most amazing piece of hardware I've ever tried but
| was only able to afford it after my first engineer pay check a
| bit more than 10 years ago and have never found anything better
| to this day. I've tried a lot of them since that time but in my
| ears it put everything else to shame, if HN got some
| suggestions to find what could be an upgrade from the hd600,
| I'm all ears!
|
| One of the issue of the hd600 is it makes you picky about
| sound, in the same way like pluging an old gibson onto a
| marshall amp, it's hard to get back to a cheaper alternative
| once you try the magic. Also the same friend that introduce me
| to the hd600 bought a hd650 as he lost the hd600 on tour but I
| was very disappointed by the sound of the hd650 which in my ear
| is nowhere as good as the hd600
| snvzz wrote:
| As an HD600 owner, I can confirm: This is the headphone to
| get. Comfortable, Neutral, Accurate and Durable.
|
| And I do not like the HD650 either; it's just a worse
| headphone to my ear. Clearly colored to sound a certain way.
| agluszak wrote:
| Designing things that way (especially firmware crippling) should
| be illegal
| paxys wrote:
| Why? Are you not getting what you paid for? Why should it be
| your concern to dictate a company's manufacturing process,
| supply chain and other internal business decisions?
| 2muchcoffeeman wrote:
| Maybe? I mean a whole bunch of people got the more expensive
| version of something for a bargain. So ...
| pizza234 wrote:
| The alternatives are:
|
| - merge the two products in one: the higher-end users would pay
| less (for the same quality), but the lower-end ones would pay
| more (for a slightly increased quality); lower-end clients
| (which make up the majority of the client base) would likely
| end up buying other products instead, since the product
| wouldn't meet the price point anymore
|
| - make the products physically different: both higher-end and
| lower-end users would pay more, for the same quality
|
| Artificial product differentiation is ugly, but it does have a
| purpose.
| slim wrote:
| they could just _add_ a design detail (like not having
| sennheiser logo, or having it in a different color) to signal
| the costly model and that would be fair for everybody
| chii wrote:
| > it does have a purpose.
|
| yes, the purpose is to maximally profit off the product line.
|
| Consumers hate it. Companies that do it are costing them
| reputation, if consumers get the hint that they're being
| price discriminated against.
| womitt wrote:
| Ridiculous lol
| dopa42365 wrote:
| Superlux HD681 Evo (offbrand AKG) + cheap USB DAC (FiiO E10K or
| so) + Equalizer APO
| (https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq/tree/master/results) =
| basically as good as it gets, without breaking the bank.
| Krasnol wrote:
| Equalizer APO doesn't list the E10k.
|
| Could you recommend a different one? I'd like to go and test
| that since my headphones broke last week and I've been too lazy
| to dive into the audiophile depths.
| Croftengea wrote:
| The parent comment probably referred to the headphone eq
| settings that can be exported from AutoEq into Equaliser APO.
| AutoEq deals with headphones, not amplifiers.
| Waterluvian wrote:
| Welp. I tried this and can't hear a difference. I guess I might
| not have the proper audiophile training. Or maybe excessive
| levels of skepticism made the placebo effect not work.
|
| Luckily I didn't damage them so no loss. I wish there was some
| more objective way I could measure. Though that's difficult for
| obvious reasons. In fact, after getting covid I had tinnitus and
| everything felt muffled. An audiogram showed that I have above
| average hearing. But good luck telling my brain that. It's
| constantly convinced that everything is muffled and there's a
| ringing.
| yadingus wrote:
| FWIW in my experience these changes are not immediately
| noticeable, but once you do get used to better gear, if you
| were to go back to the old one, _then_ you 'd notice the
| difference. Perhaps not a very viable experiment with this mod,
| but worth taking into account in general.
| throwanem wrote:
| For almost a decade I've had a modded HD555, and another one
| that's not modded. I have never been able to tell a
| difference in audio output between the two. By contrast,
| moving to strictly better gear (as when I got the first
| HD555, or when I got the HD6XX that's replaced them both for
| music listening) is an immediately perceptible step change.
|
| Basically, the foam mod is nonsense. I get why it was
| popular, especially in audiophile circles where snake oil is
| always at least on the menu and often just _is_ the menu.
| (Green marker around the rim of a CD, anyone? It makes the
| bits sound warmer!) At least in the case of the foam mod
| there 's a physically plausible mechanism, which puts it head
| and shoulders above most audiophile nonsense. But it still
| does not make a perceptible difference in practice.
| erulabs wrote:
| That's how so much of life is. Moving up is somewhat "meh"
| and disappointing, but moving back down feels like a huge
| downgrade. It's sort of a bummer!
| aqfamnzc wrote:
| That's why I've tried to stick with my cheaper stuff like
| Monoprice earbuds, haha.
| ip26 wrote:
| I don't think it's "meh", but I _was_ surprised by the
| scale factors. High end product might cost 10x more, but it
| often feels like it's only 50% better. It was disorienting
| given my misinformed understanding of wealth & the
| wealthy.
|
| See refrigerators. The units in the homes of the wealthy
| are _way_ better than a $300 special at the big box store.
| But they are also still pretty much ordinary refrigerators.
| 2muchcoffeeman wrote:
| I have the 555s. Can confirm this works.
| throwanem wrote:
| I did this years ago to one of my two HD 555s. As with comparing
| an unmodded 555 to a 595, I've never really been able to hear a
| difference.
| farco12 wrote:
| I paid $148 USD for the HD595s in 2011. They still work just as
| well today, but I'm disappointed to find out 14 years later I was
| conned into paying more for a false premium.
| pcurve wrote:
| Not the same, but there was a Blu Tack mod for another model.
|
| http://musicalmusings.themindofgame.com/2010/02/hd280-pro-bl...
|
| This one DID noticeably improve the quality of sound / bass
| response.
| mtts wrote:
| There's also the mod for the HD-439 where you cut away some
| tape that covers up some holes and you get markedly more bass.
| UberFly wrote:
| "the only physical difference was an additional piece of foam
| inside the cheaper HD555 headphones, blocking about 50% of the
| outside-facing vents"
|
| They are likely still making a good profit on the $200.00
| "cheaper" pair - just goes to show what a rip-off the
| $350.00"premium" level of equipment is. Sennheiser should be
| embarrassed. I hope buyers take notice and send their money
| elsewhere.
| atoav wrote:
| As a circuit designer and audio tech person I'd highly caution
| against simply equating "visually the same" with "technically
| the same" without measurements and thorough checking.
|
| E.g. I could easily build exactly the same circuit multiple
| times, once for x Euros once for 10x Euros and once for 100x
| Euros just by picking the best components out of a heap and
| having them go to the 10x or 100x models.
|
| Visually this would look exactly the same, but in terms of
| tolerances there would be a huge difference. Same can be true
| for mechanical parts.
|
| I am not saying corporations are not greedy, I'd just say
| without measurement we can just assume it is the same without
| knowing.
| Toutouxc wrote:
| Both the HD555 and 595 were very competitively priced (!), were
| popular and sold well. How exactly do you think that companies
| price their products other than "what enough people are willing
| to pay"?
| ricardobeat wrote:
| There is a significant gap between charging high prices for a
| quality product that people want to buy, and charging even
| higher prices by _deceiving_ your customers about quality.
| 5tefan wrote:
| I remember the times these cans were priced way cheaper. This
| is a fantastic rip off across all brands.
| Tildey wrote:
| I'm curious if the chi-fi market will take over headphones
| in the coming years.
|
| IEMs are a bit easier to be competitive at, not having to
| worry about acoustic effects of ear/head shape,
| ergonomics/comfort is much simpler with IEMs, etc.
|
| But clearly good headphones are still working on a massive
| margin.
| coffeebeqn wrote:
| It's already getting there because the margins on things
| like planar headphones and anything else novel has been
| completely bonkers
| csdvrx wrote:
| > I'm curious if the chi-fi market will take over
| headphones in the coming years.
|
| For me, it already has: more choice, better quality,
| unmatched comfort - and that's fully leaving aside the
| costs.
|
| My favorite brands are SIVGA and LINSOUL.
| jorvi wrote:
| Going by Crinacle the current king of chi-fi is Moondrop.
|
| Personally I own Moondrop Aria IEMs for on the road, and
| for home Shure 840a cans with 1540 pads to kill the
| extreme treble. My cans before that were Audio Technica
| M40x with felt mod + new pads.
|
| I'm excited to see if chi-fi will be able to dethrone
| either of those bang-for-buck kings.
| csdvrx wrote:
| > 540 pads to kill the extreme treble.
|
| I did a similar surgery on a pair of Sony over the ears I
| mostly used when travelling, the older 900N.
|
| It helped, but it's still no match for my SIVGAs :)
|
| > Going by Crinacle the current king of chi-fi is
| Moondrop.
|
| Agreed, I have their USB-C DAC, it's wonderful when used
| with the very comfortable SIVGA :)
|
| It's hard to express what I like about the Linsoul: they
| are extremely versatile (custom cable etc) while also
| being very affordable (about $40) while offering an audio
| quality way above far pricier IEM.
|
| So I purchased a few and keep a pair everywhere I may
| need them (car, office...) to have a consistent music
| experience without having to bother carrying them.
|
| That's still possible with $200+ IEM, but not something
| I'd naturally do.
| criddell wrote:
| How's the battery life and noise cancelling?
| csdvrx wrote:
| For music, I prefer something fully passive with a
| balanced TRRS cable, so both features are N/A on the
| models I use :)
|
| When I need ANC, I have a pair of Sony XM and while they
| are great for these 2 parameters (ANC and good battery
| life), the SIVGA and LINSOUL offer me a better musical
| experience which is something I care about a whole lot
| more!
| flushit wrote:
| > rip-off
|
| This term demonstrates a lack of understanding of market
| dynamics.
|
| As a company you aim for a certain profit when developing and
| later manufacturing and selling a product. The market has
| multiple segments and ideally you re-use design and
| manufacturing processes for multiple segments. Simply speaking,
| you can basically sell a single tier for $250 or differentiate
| by different means into a $150 tier and a $350 premium tier. In
| the end, people with higher quality demands will pay a
| significant, dis-proportionate premium. So, you can tap into
| that, which means the premium tier essentially cross-subsidizes
| the cheap tier. Everybody angry at this practice needs to
| understand that they couldn't just sell the premium tier for
| $150. They'd need to sell it for $250, or whatever the weighted
| mean is. Worse, they'd likely sell fewer items in total, so
| $280 or some such is more likely to reach the same total
| profit.
|
| Really, it's not about being evil, it's about economy.
| dylan604 wrote:
| Maybe you'd be interested in reading about Guitar Center's
| concept of "jip". Unfortunately, no quick links.
|
| How many times have I heard, "you know, since you're a cool
| dude, I can knock off X% for you"? Every. Single. Time.
| taylorfinley wrote:
| "Jip" is phonetically identical to a slur that refers to
| ripping someone off, so I was curious about what you meant
| and found this forum post that goes into detail. Kind of
| fascinating to think of the incentives and how they play
| out.
|
| Message #33 in this thread: https://www.strat-
| talk.com/threads/why-guitar-center-salesme...
| ip26 wrote:
| I'm pretty sure it's "gyp", as in "gypsy". (Yes, exactly
| what you are thinking)
| CapsAdmin wrote:
| To counter, not caring about anything you've just written and
| looking purely at the end result is also part of the economy.
|
| Consumers generally don't want to sympathize with companies
| and I don't think it's healthy if too many people did either.
| It's a tug of war to find a balance.
|
| The core of this issue to me is about feeling lied to through
| vague implications. The product number is higher, the
| physical appearance of the headphones look better, it cost
| more, so therefore they must have put more effort into it to
| justify the price so the sound quality must also be better.
| nickpeterson wrote:
| I agree. I don't mind something being more expensive, but I
| feel like companies should have to 'show their work' to
| some degree. That way customers can gauge if the additional
| effort was worth the price difference.
|
| I'm sure most customers in this case would not feel like
| this was worth the price difference.
| activitypea wrote:
| Unless Sennheiser can prove that the 555s are being sold at a
| loss, there is no "cross-subsidizing" happening here. You
| talk as if "the markets" and "the economy" are some naturally
| occuring phenomena that are matter of fact and non-
| negotiable.
| ip26 wrote:
| The cross-subsidy means that while they have gross margin
| on the 555, it would not be enough to cover R&D & make net
| profit without the additional sales of the higher margin
| 595. In other words, they could not afford to develop &
| bring the 555 to retail by itself, even if the sale price
| is higher than the simple cost of manufacturing.
| flushit wrote:
| > Unless Sennheiser can prove that the 555s are being sold
| at a loss, there is no "cross-subsidizing" happening here.
|
| Nope. That's part of the misconception here. It suffices
| that they are being sold for less profit than the target
| profit margins of the company. And that's very likely the
| case, given the situation with the premium-tier offering.
| Every reasonable company cancels projects not bringing in
| _enough_ profits, since shareholders want to see a return
| on investment. Non-zero profit is not enough.
|
| > You talk as if "the markets" and "the economy" are some
| naturally occuring phenomena that are matter of fact and
| non-negotiable.
|
| I'd indeed claim that market mechanisms can be treated like
| natural laws, just like gravity or natural selection. You
| can steer them with taxes or other incentives, just like
| you can steer how gravity or natural selection impact you.
| But the mechanisms themselves work no matter if you like
| them or not, or if you find them "evil" or not.
|
| And I say this as a lefty who is in favor of radical
| inheritance tax and such. It's important to understand the
| thing you try to regulate.
| activitypea wrote:
| > Every reasonable company cancels projects not bringing
| in enough profits, since shareholders want to see a
| return on investment. Non-zero profit is not enough.
|
| I see very little reason in cancelling profitable
| projects. Also, framing my comment as a "misconception"
| is kinda indisgenious. This is a philosophical
| disagreement, hard to frame my point of view as
| objectively wrong.
| jrflowers wrote:
| That's a really long way of explaining what a ripoff is.
| ImPostingOnHN wrote:
| _> Everybody angry at this practice needs to understand that
| they couldn 't just sell the premium tier for $150. They'd
| need to sell it for $250, or whatever the weighted mean is._
|
| it should be stressed that this is only true if we add the
| assumption that they must make the same amount of money,
| which isn't part of the thought exercise
|
| thus, "need to" should be "want to, because they want more
| money"
| kleiba wrote:
| > In the end, people with higher quality demands will pay a
| significant, dis-proportionate premium.
|
| Also known as "rip-off".
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| >In the end, people with higher quality demands will pay a
| significant, dis-proportionate premium. So, you can tap
| into that, which means the premium tier essentially cross-
| subsidizes the cheap tier. Everybody angry at this practice
| needs to understand that they couldn't just sell the
| premium tier for $150. They'd need to sell it for $250, or
| whatever the weighted mean is. Worse, they'd likely sell
| fewer items in total, so $280 or some such is more likely
| to reach the same total profit.
|
| See:
|
| https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/marketsegmentation.asp
|
| Another example is selling books for cheaper in countries
| with lower incomes. Yet another example is countries
| charging more for access to national parks to people from
| richer countries than poorer countries. And another example
| is using coupons to get discounts, or student discounts,
| etc.
|
| It is not a perfect mechanism, and sometimes the subsidies
| are not from and to the populations that would make it
| "fair", but on a population wide level, it works pretty
| well.
| mohaine wrote:
| The consumer is paying for slight sound improvement and the
| prestige of owning the nicer pair. You may not think it is
| worth the extra money but apparently it is for some.
|
| This is no different then offering coupons to more 'cost
| sensitive' buyers
| comprev wrote:
| In the same way people prefer to drive an Audi instead of
| Skoda.
| gmac wrote:
| Yes, this particular example I always find really stark.
|
| Large numbers of people look at a VW and think to
| themselves: "this is a nice car, but what I really want
| is to pay a whole lot more for it".
|
| (I have a SEAT, which is for people who think the
| reverse. VAG, so same engine, transmission, gearbox,
| software, etc. as VW, Audi, Skoda).
| newaccount74 wrote:
| If you follow that logic, then the Dacia Sandero is the
| only car you can buy. Every other car just comes with
| pointless overpriced extras that nobody needs.
|
| In reality, the brand of a car is extremely important to
| most people who buy cars.
|
| (But speaking of VW transmissions, I don't know why
| anyone would buy a VW. Their manuals always seem to be
| having issues with the clutch, and DSG is the worst
| driving experience I've ever had. Maybe their EVs work
| better)
| rasz wrote:
| DQ250/DQ350/DQ500 are absolute beasts, what exactly is it
| that you dont like about them?
| gmac wrote:
| Not really. The point is that all these VAG brands share
| technology and key parts.
|
| A Dacia is an old Renault, built cheaply. A VW Golf, a
| Skoda Octavia, a SEAT Leon and an Audi A3 are mostly the
| same car.
| Ccecil wrote:
| A Audi/VW mechanic I know put it best "They all mostly
| use the same parts so maintenance and repairs cost the
| same...might as well buy the one that sells for more
| used"
|
| It depends on what you want. If you are planning to
| resell the car after a certain length of time the best
| bet is the Audi. If you are buying used and want "close"
| to the same performance buy VW (Audi has higher power,
| often different suspension, better sound deadening and
| way more options).
|
| In my case...I bought a used VW. So I didn't take the
| advice...but I don't ever plan on reselling. I repair
| cars myself and run them far longer than a typical person
| does. By the time I am done with my car it will probably
| be sold for scrap due to miles...even though everything
| will likely be replaced at least once.
| gmac wrote:
| > "might as well buy the one that sells for more used
|
| Not sure I follow this logic. Seems unlikely the higher
| resale value is going to fully cover the higher price you
| buy it for (whether you buy new or used)?
| Ccecil wrote:
| I guess "hold their value longer" is a better
| wording...but that is the point.
|
| Easier to sell used? More desirable/rare? He bought/fixed
| and resold mostly Audi/VW but specialized in European
| cars.
|
| I have owned 2 VW and 1 Audi. They all had very similar
| intervals on things breaking. I will say though I much
| preferred to drive the Audi...but unfortunately a 2001
| allroad only lasts so long :)
| lost_tourist wrote:
| Exactly, some people will do anything to defend pure greed
| lol.
| coffeebeqn wrote:
| $350 is hardly the high end market for headphones. That's
| the general consumer market top end, barely getting into
| real Hifi money spenders (who drop hundreds of dollars on
| extremely dubious products like "balanced" cables etc)
| snitty wrote:
| Remarkably few people whine about the use of VW branded parts
| that are used in VWs, that also show up in Audis, Porsches,
| Lamborghinis, and Ducatis. (Mostly because it lets them buy
| replacement parts at a fraction of the price than if they'd
| only ever made a few hundred of those parts just for the
| Porsche GT3.
| kcatskcolbdi wrote:
| But they are selling the premium tier for $150. It's the same
| set of headphones.
|
| It would be as if Apple sold you one computer for $1,000, but
| the exact same computer in a different case for $2,000, with
| the only difference being they put a bunch of malware on the
| first one so it runs slower.
|
| That's not "re-use design and manufacturing processes for
| multiple segments", it's intentionally breaking half the
| product line to sell at a lower price.
| adolph wrote:
| That was Quadra and Centris iirc
| ac29 wrote:
| The Centris -> Quadra transition was a similar computer,
| but not the same. For example, the Centris 610 was a 20
| MHz 68LC040 and the Quadra 610 released shortly
| thereafter was a 25MHz 68040 (some shipped with a 25MHz
| 68LC040, though).
| flushit wrote:
| > That's not "re-use design and manufacturing processes for
| multiple segments", it's intentionally breaking half the
| product line to sell at a lower price.
|
| Sure, you can call it like that if you will. You are free
| not to buy any products from a company doing this if you
| don't like it.
|
| As I explained above, they could stop doing that, but then
| the product would cost more. That may be nice for somebody
| who wants the premium product version for $280 instead of
| $350. But I'm sure there are people around who are fine
| with the simpler ("broken") one if that means they only
| need to pay $150. And since there are, there is obviously a
| demand, so it's obviously not all bad what the company is
| doing.
|
| Again, if you don't like it, don't buy it. (Oh, and in this
| particular case, you can just buy the cheap one and do the
| mod. Be happy that you saved $200 instead of ranting that
| this is wrong in the first place. The more you rant, the
| harder they will make it for next time.)
| jansommer wrote:
| That checks out for consumer vs business pc's/laptops
| shipping Windows
| optymizer wrote:
| > it's not about being evil, it's about economy
|
| Instead of justifying the status quo, I think we would all
| benefit if we retired the concept of an economy that
| incentivizes companies to act evil in order to succeed in it.
|
| Edit: 'evil' is a loaded word. I'm generally referring to
| profit being the only measure of success. I for one would
| like to see other KPIs enforced by government institutions,
| such as 'environmental impact' or 'human benefit'.
| andix wrote:
| I don't get what's evil about it. If you want the expensive
| headphones and can afford them, get them. If you think they
| are too expensive, get other ones.
|
| Edit: want I wanted to say is, that prices are arbitrary.
| They are a number on a label. As a customer you pick what
| suits you best. If you think Sennheiser or Apple is
| overpriced, buy something else. It is their decision to set
| a price, as it is your decision what to buy. You are also
| not an "evil" customer, if you don't buy their headphones.
| optymizer wrote:
| I said companies are acting 'evil', not that customers
| are evil for not spending money.
|
| You don't get what's evil because you're reacting to the
| environment you know, but you don't have to. Imagine a
| better environment where your options are not limited to
| "expensive headphones" or "less expensive headphones".
| flushit wrote:
| The alternative to the "'expensive headphones' vs 'less
| expensive headphones'" choice is not "less expensive
| headphones". Best case scenario, it's "slightly less
| expensive headphones but still more expensive than the
| originally less expensive ones". Or perhaps "they stop
| manufacturing headphones".
|
| We're not living in a dream world. The conditions you set
| have consequences in how people behave. Not just
| individuals, but also companies.
| flushit wrote:
| Everybody arguing like this in the thread seems to be
| missing that the company is offering cross-subsidized
| headphones for $150. If you actually make them stop the
| two-tier system, then they would stop offering those for
| $150 and would need to sell the single-tier product for
| over $200. There will be some people who can't afford that.
| So your activism would prevent them from getting nice
| headphones for $150. Who's evil now?
| erulabs wrote:
| Very correct, but you're missing their point. What's
| "evil" is that the folks who've spent their life
| designing, optimizing, investing in, and producing these
| products aren't doing it purely out of the goodness of
| their hearts, but selfishly in the pursuit of a better
| life.
|
| What is "evil" to these posters is always "profit above
| the value of goods provided". It doesn't matter
| whatsoever that the (subjective) material and emotional
| situation of every happy sennheiser buyer, employee, and
| investor is better than before.
| flushit wrote:
| > What's "evil" is that the folks who've spent their life
| designing, optimizing, investing in, and producing these
| products aren't doing it purely out of the goodness of
| their hearts, but selfishly in the pursuit of a better
| life.
|
| Sure. That's true though to different degrees for
| everybody participating in a market-based economy. You
| can call all of us "evil", but then the term loses most
| of its meaning.
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| Sounds like a "bullshit job". Note that I did not say: it
| should be illegal, or that it's not maximizing profits for
| ownership, so please go away if that's what you want to say
| to me.
| flushit wrote:
| No, sounds like "maximizing profits". Nobody is suffering
| here, so I don't really see how this should be illegal.
| voytec wrote:
| > I hope buyers take notice and send their money elsewhere.
|
| I'm currently in the market for both in-ears and over-ears. Was
| looking into HD 25 model for over-ears. What other brands are
| worth looking into? KEF? Focal? Meze?
| ornornor wrote:
| I had the HD 25 and found them super uncomfortable. Sold them
| and got a pair of Sony MDR-7506 for 100$ years ago. Haven't
| looked back. The ear pillows (not sure how they're called)
| are made of pleather which eventually delaminates.
| Replacements are 30-45$ which is a bit much. But with some
| patience you can rub it all off and expose the velvet
| underneath which makes them perfectly useable again. The
| pillows sometimes split at the seams but again nothing you
| can't fix with a bit of thread.
|
| Compatible replacement pillows exist but I've sampled some of
| them and they made the sound more muffled and bassy with less
| trebles in my opinion so I went back to the original pillows.
| Im not audiophile at all but could hear a difference when
| comparing them side to side (I have two identical pairs)
|
| They also come with an exploded diagram on the box so you can
| take them apart if you wish.
|
| And they're extremely comfortable. I'm not a pro but I
| understand they're made for sound engineers to be worn all
| day.
| asimovfan wrote:
| I thought the only problem with MDR-7506's were that they
| were not comfortable enough for wearing for long periods?
| All reviews I read online said this.
| ornornor wrote:
| I find them super comfortable. They don't feel like
| they're squeezing my head unlike others that are too
| tight, they're not very heavy, they cushions are wide and
| spread the pressure well without folding my ears
| uncomfortably... I personally find them very comfortable.
| hinkley wrote:
| I don't know about their cans but I do know that in the
| early days of ear buds I played a Cat and Mouse game with
| Sony where about every second new model they produced had
| really good bass response, often in a fairly reasonably
| priced model. I ended up buying backups to carry me through
| to the next next model. Looking back, I wonder if Sony had
| two teams with alternating release cycles, and the
| engineers on one team were better than the other. If it was
| some sort of marketing strategy it's over my head.
| ornornor wrote:
| AFAIK the 7506 have been around since the 80s or 90s, and
| they're still making them today.
| zetsurin wrote:
| I think Sundara HifiMan might be over your price range, but
| these are my current favourite headphones, some internet
| person who knows more about audio than me [recommended them](
| https://old.reddit.com/r/bapcsalescanada/comments/vn53cw/hea.
| ..)
| stefantalpalaru wrote:
| [dead]
| speed_spread wrote:
| AudioTechnica have been consistent in quality over the years.
| They have a number of models to choose from for every
| purpose, at fair prices. The models don't change every year
| and are supported and field repairable. I still use the
| ATH-M40fs I bought 20+ years ago. The newer ATH-M50 would be
| my choice if I had to pick a new pair today.
| inconceivable wrote:
| i've had two pairs of ATH-M50s (one black, one white) and
| they both turn into a giant mess once the painted vinyl (or
| whatever it is) starts flaking off after a few years.
| bleepblop wrote:
| Just bought a pair of ATHM50x. Well worth the cost. Been
| out in the field recording with them and mixing in studio
| as well. Loving them so far.
| abruzzi wrote:
| interesting. Mine are both in great condition ~10 years
| later. You can buy replacemnt ear pads, but only in black
| AFAICT.
| inconceivable wrote:
| it was the headband that got flakey. maybe mine were
| exposed to more light or something.
| siquick wrote:
| I wouldn't get HD25 unless you're planning to DJ or play live
| in clubs. They're not the most comfortable and sound is ok
| but not really enjoyable.
|
| I picked up a pair of Phonon SMB-02 a few weeks back and
| they're the best studio headphones I've had in 20 years of
| DJing and producing. The space they reveal is amazing and
| feel close to studio monitors.
| snapetom wrote:
| I got the Bower Wilkins PX8 about 6 months ago and love it. I
| originally went with the PX8 over the Focal Bathys due to it
| being $100 cheaper than the Focal Bathys, more compact form
| factor, and the reportedly better noise cancellation. MDs
| have widely-reported problems with their Bluetooth
| connectivity.
|
| However, I am Focal-curious. Some reviews have the FB
| noticeably better sound. And, right now, B&H is offering the
| FB at a $150 discount, dropping it below the BW.
| bloopernova wrote:
| I'm very happy with my Meze 99 Classics.
| 4ggr0 wrote:
| I personally like Beyerdynamic.
|
| MX 150/100 if you want to have a mic, DT990 Pro if you want
| open-back and DT770 Pro for closed-back.
|
| Worth mentioning that they're studio headphones, so if you
| like headphones with a lot of bass you might have to consider
| other models.
|
| At home I use Sennheiser Game One, before they were rebranded
| to EPOS. I really, really love them so if you can find them
| second-hand, go for them. They're hooked up to a Sennheiser
| GSX 1000. I use this setup for almost three years now and I'm
| really happy.
|
| For in-ears I use Marshall Mode EQs, I'm on the third pair
| now and am also really happy. They've got a lot of bass but
| when I'm commuting I actually prefer it over "true" sound :)
|
| As always with headphones, YMMV. I care about good sound but
| I'm not that much of an audiophile to care about exact
| frequency curves etc.
| mhitza wrote:
| I wonder why you're on your third pair of Marshall Mode EQs
| :)
|
| I'm partly having a go at them because I have a pair lying
| around that broke in less than a year. I usually go through
| a pair in a year (a year and a half) as I'm not very
| careful with the way I take care of my heaphones/in-ears.
| However, having said that, I think the EQs have a pretty
| mediocre build quality. For example, with the way I handled
| them, the cover of one in ear piece, fell of after a couple
| of months, and 6-8 months in the jack connector wires got a
| bit too much wear and tear and no longer connect properly.
| Also their EQ toggle made the treble (for the
| Electronic/DnB/Metal music I listen to) a bit too harsh.
|
| Personally for earbuds/earphones I'd recommend anything
| which is as flat as possible and then you can boost up your
| preferred range. Alternatively you can go with a pair that
| has a measured profile
| (https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq), which you can
| use to normalizes the frequency response and tweak it
| after.
|
| For example I went with the cheap AKG Type-C earbuds, which
| have very harsh mids towards treble
| (https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/samsung/akg-
| type-c), but because their sound profile is within the
| database linked above, I could use Wavelet on Android to
| compensate for it (and EasyEffects on the desktop) to have
| them be as neutral as possible, and then boost on top of
| that. For a ~$10'ish pair of earbuds I am quite impressed.
| I also had to chose them because I have a "modern" phone
| that decided that a Jack is so 20th century.
| 4ggr0 wrote:
| > I wonder why you're on your third pair of Marshall Mode
| EQs :)
|
| I guess it's a mix between nostalgia and me just liking
| how the songs I like sound on them. They're the first
| pair of in-ears I bought myself.
|
| > I think the EQs have a pretty mediocre build quality
|
| I'll agree with you on that. The first pair lasted a year
| and the second not much longer. Then I just went with
| whatever. Two years ago I wanted to try out "good" in-
| ears and bought a pair of Moondrop Starfields. They were
| okay, but a bit flat, the cable broke, bought a different
| cable, which I've stepped on. Then I remembered that I
| was a fan of the Mode EQs like 6 years ago and bought a
| pair out of curiosity, which was end of 2022. And I just
| really like how they sound, and that they're light, and
| that they fit well, and that they look good. I don't
| know...I just like them :D
|
| Your explanation about measured profiles and
| Wavelet/EasyEffects sounds intriguing. I think I will try
| this approach with a different pair of headphones, I
| really wonder what you can get out of cheap in-ears. I
| tried to use EQs from time to time but I always end up
| tuning things for 30m without especially satisfying
| results. AutoEQ would help because it's automated :D
| Thanks!
| csdvrx wrote:
| Beyerdynamics are wonderful. I'd add SIVGA, far better than
| the Sennheiser I had!
|
| I'd suggest the SV021 if you want bass, or the SV003 if you
| prefer the flatness of studio headphones like the Beyers.
|
| I use them with a Sony Walkman DAP: best money I've ever
| spent!
|
| Good bass matters for some styles: the SV021 is better when
| I listen to say Morgenshtern
| 4ggr0 wrote:
| > I'd suggest the SV021 if you want bass
|
| Hmm, I actually am considering buying bassy over-ears,
| because all the over-ears I have are pretty
| neutral/studio sounding. I game a lot of singleplayer
| story-games and sometimes I feel that a bit more bass
| would be enjoyable for explosions, gunshots etc.
|
| Thanks for the recommendation, never heard of SIVGA :)
| csdvrx wrote:
| It's the most comfortable over-the-ears I've ever had -
| far better than anything several times the price!
|
| If you only have USB-C, pair them with a Moondrop DAC
| 4ggr0 wrote:
| Luckily all my devices have a 3.5mm :)
|
| Didn't know that Moondrop made DACs, I know them because
| I had a pair of Starfields.
| csdvrx wrote:
| > Didn't know that Moondrop made DACs, I know them
| because I had a pair of Starfields.
|
| Moondrop Dawn, quite good
| cleerline wrote:
| >the SV021 is better when I listen to say Morgenshtern
|
| when you listen to what now?
| csdvrx wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgenshtern
|
| It's Russian rap - though for the last few years he's
| been moving more into RnB, which I don't like as much
| adzm wrote:
| Beyerdynamic makes great headphones. Personally though I
| love my Audio Technica cans. I find I want different ones
| for different reasons - a flat frequency response isn't
| always the most pleasant
| kimburgess wrote:
| Beyer also recently release the DT 700/900 Pro X are
| someone of a spiritual successor to the classics.
| Importantly they now feature a detachable cables, includes
| a USB-C one with internal DAC and mic.
| 4ggr0 wrote:
| You're right! I didn't want to recommend the X versions
| because I never tried them myself, but I think judging by
| the feedback they get online they would be a good choice
| as well.
|
| The only downside is the cost. The non-X versions cost
| $140, the X-versions $220. Not sure if the $80 are worth
| it for me.
| kimburgess wrote:
| I picked up a pair of the 700 X's a couple of weeks ago -
| no complaints so far. The replaceable cable removes the
| only weak point in an otherwise completely repairable
| product. That lets me amortise any difference across a
| decade or so.
| 4ggr0 wrote:
| > That lets me amortise any difference across a decade or
| so
|
| Good point, hadn't considered this! Well, I bought the DT
| 990Pro in the beginning of 2023 and the MMX150s like
| three weeks ago, so I'll see for how long I'll use them
| :D
|
| MMX150 are for the office because they're closed-back and
| the microphone is actually astonishingly good. At least
| people noticed in MS Teams calls.
| coffeebeqn wrote:
| I would try a few different ones if you can. I tried Meze,
| Sennheiser, Audio Technical, Bose wireless, and many others
| over the years and some just didn't fit my head or ears right
| or sounded off in some way. Everyone has different head and
| ears and personal preference for different sound and it's
| very hard to know if it will click with you by reading
| reviews or marketing materials. It also depends on what it is
| you listen to the most. If you're all about big orchestral
| pieces or chip tunes then your choice will be very different.
|
| Personally I found wireless and active noise cancellation
| worthwhile tradeoffs to some audio quality because I end up
| wearing them when doing chores and on the plane and on calls
| when my kids are being loud.
| barbariangrunge wrote:
| All the audiophile in-ear headphones I've ever bought broke
| in less than a year; but none of my "cheap" headphones ever
| broke. Except my apple ear buds: those wore out pretty fast
| too. The cables are really low quality
|
| I use AirPods atm: you don't have to fiddle with getting a
| proper seal, you can still hear what's around you, the open
| back sound stage feels great in all headphones, there's less
| pressure buildup, and it has good software integration. I'm
| never going back to cords again if I can help it
| tuzemec wrote:
| For over-ears is good to decide if you want open or closed
| cans. That can make a huge difference, especially if you are
| going to use them even in slightly noisy environment.
|
| I'm very happy with DT-1770 pro by Bayerdynamic for closed.
| And *extremely* happy with Focal Clear for open back.
|
| I occasionally also mix on them.
| TylerE wrote:
| Be warned, this is an addictive and pricey hobby, although
| not nearly as spendy as speakers.
|
| My current rig is a Schitt Jotenheim DAC/Amp driving
| Hickman Ananda's. (Roughly $600 amp driving $900
| headphones).
| bloopernova wrote:
| I'm currently using a Schiit Modi for my DAC and a Schiit
| Vali 2 for my headphone amp. They seem to work pretty
| well to my ears, whether they're driving my Meze 99
| Classics headphones, or the PreSonus Eris E4.5 powered
| speakers.
|
| You're right, it's definitely an expensive hobby and you
| can spend a lot of money chasing that dragon so to speak.
| I was lucky in that I got something that sounded very
| good to me with my first set of purchases, but I was
| obsessed for a while with reading every detail about
| potential purchases.
| Loveaway wrote:
| Air Pods Max. Totally worth it. Automatically turns on/off,
| automatically pairs with the device you're using. Active
| Noise Cancellation is a godsend, i.e. if you have people with
| lawnmowers around you, this will improve your life more than
| anything else you can buy. Effortless to clean. Ear cushions
| come off and you can just put them into the washing machine.
| Great build quality, has a nice volume dial with click
| sounds. Build-in microphones. Sound is top notch too.
| Oreb wrote:
| I love my AirPods Max, but the automatic pairing never
| worked very well for me. I ended up disabling it.
| Reason077 wrote:
| Annoying and soon-to-be-obsolete Lightning charging port,
| though. I plan to buy the AirPods Max once they come out
| with a USB-C version.
| throwanem wrote:
| There are lots of magnetic charging adaptors on Amazon
| and eBay which come with USB-C, Micro-USB, and Lightning
| tips, all of which share a common interface with their
| cables. Most of them seem to come from the same
| manufacturers; there are about three styles, and while no
| two are interchangeable, it's usually not hard to find a
| variety of sellers for whichever style you want.
|
| Don't expect much in data support even from versions that
| claim to offer it, but they all deliver power just fine,
| and it's been getting on for a decade since I've had to
| screw around with finding the right cable to charge
| anything. Saves insertion cycles on the device connector
| socket, too.
| ayemel wrote:
| Hard no on yet another adapter.
| throwanem wrote:
| It's the last one. Your loss, though.
| [deleted]
| samstave wrote:
| Recall that after Apple bought BEATS headsets it was revealed
| that BEATS was putting dummy-metal into the headsets to make
| them heavier, thus resulting in the purchaser to think that
| they had better-than headsets based on the perceived weight of
| the headset - but the weight was not in higher-powered magnets
| in the drivers...
| londons_explore wrote:
| For many consumer products, the R&D cost is most of the cost.
| The actual parts and raw materials are normally only a small
| fraction of the cost.
|
| Therefore, the $350.00 'rip off' may not in fact be a rip-off.
| In fact, with the quantity of them they sell, they may barely
| cover the R&D costs.
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| IP shouldn't exist
| ilyt wrote:
| Not if you're Sennheiser. Can certainly be true for smaller
| brands
| londons_explore wrote:
| It isn't a given - we have no idea how much R&D went into
| those... maybe to design the shape of that plastic entire
| research teams invented new methods of acoustic
| modelling...
| throwanem wrote:
| I don't believe Sennheiser still make or sell either of the
| mentioned models. I might be wrong, but I recall them both
| being superseded some years ago.
|
| In any case, for less than the 595's original MSRP, these days
| you can get an HD 6XX that very perceptibly outdoes both
| 5-series models in frequency response. Yours is more of a 2013
| complaint than a 2023 one, I think.
| Reason077 wrote:
| Yes, the post should really have a [2008] tag. These are not
| current models.
| hinkley wrote:
| Amazon still has some 555s but the top hits for the 595s list
| them as discontinued. I was trying to determine the price
| difference since I didn't spot it in the article.
| throwanem wrote:
| It was somewhere around a hundred bucks, as I recall. The
| argument you're making wouldn't necessarily have been a bad
| one in its day, but its day is long past; the current
| successors of these models, the HD 569 and HD 599, differ
| in price by $20.
| hinkley wrote:
| Yeah I don't think I'd be too keen to disassemble my
| headphones and potentially break or chip them to save
| myself the price of lunch. If it was a difference of half
| the price? Maybe. But not 15%.
| shrimp_emoji wrote:
| > _Sennheiser should be embarrassed. I hope buyers take notice
| and send their money elsewhere._
|
| Hell to the nah.
|
| Sennheiser is the last decent manufacturer of headphones.
| Everything else is literal garbage (especially head _sets_ ,
| which prove that there's some law of physics by which if you
| add a microphone to a pair of headphones the entire thing will
| fall apart in around a year).
|
| I just hope they stay in business. Logitech's gotten way more
| of my money over the years as I've bought replacement after
| replacement headset once they invariably break down, as well as
| proprietary lithium batteries that literally last a fraction as
| long as the rechargeable AAAs in my Sennheisers (which haven't
| even ran out once in over a year of using them ~15 hours per
| day)!
| bobsomers wrote:
| > Sennheiser is the last decent manufacturer of headphones.
|
| Are you just not familiar with many headphone manufacturers?
| I had Sennheisers years ago and they were _fine_ , but since
| then I've had headphones from Sony, AudioTechnica, and Shure
| (just to name a few) which I've much preferred to the
| Sennheisers I had.
| jen20 wrote:
| I'm not sure I'd call them the _last_ decent manufacturer of
| headphones - perhaps if you only include brands that target
| the consumer/prosumer space. Beyerdynamic, for example, still
| make excellent products, including headsets and supply spare
| parts for headphones manufactured decades ago.
| H8crilA wrote:
| Lol, why embarrassed. Sennheiser was happy and still is happy,
| this tutorial will not reach nearly enough people to make a
| difference in their sales. It is a very cool tutorial, though.
| COGlory wrote:
| You're looking at this all wrong.
|
| The 595s were competitive at their price point. They reviewed
| extremely well. They are considered good value.
|
| The 555s were excellent value, using the same driver.
|
| Neither is a ripoff. They're both good to excellent value
| when looking at the market.
| squarefoot wrote:
| Yes, they probably don't care. In some circles, quite often
| the ones where the most money is, a hacked pair of headphones
| will always sound worse than an untouched one, no matter if
| lab instrumentation would say otherwise.
| recursive wrote:
| I still like Sennheiser. What makes you think elsewhere is any
| different?
| tzmudzin wrote:
| Does this make the practice any better?
| szundi wrote:
| Why don't you give 1$ to everyone, they would be happy. Not
| doing it is not that nice.
|
| Same logic after reading and accepting the comments above.
| recursive wrote:
| No. But I didn't think it was that bad in the first place.
| They offer a product for a price. As a customer, I'm free
| to take it or leave it based on merits. I'm not familiar
| with this model, but at least one thing must be true.
|
| 1. A competitor offers an alternative product at a better
| price. 2. Sennheiser produces these more efficiently than
| anyone. 3. All alternatives have similar margins. 4. No
| other manufacturer has a similar product.
|
| Whatever the case may be, it will inform the rational
| comparison shopping process. This is a discretionary item.
| There's probably some economics name for this, but it's not
| insulin. Sennheiser isn't coercing anyone.
| yread wrote:
| Note that the customer headphones Sennheiser brand was sold
| to Sonova in 2021. Sennheiser company only makes professional
| equipment.
| lrem wrote:
| How do I know which is which?
| yread wrote:
| If it would be easy to find out who actually makes the
| stuff no one would buy the brand.
|
| Seriously, EU should make some legislation against this
| kind of shady shit. It's confusing the consumer. If you
| don't want to make headphones anymore stop making them.
| Or license the "technology" but make them say "Sonova
| headphones with Sennheiser technology"
| whalesalad wrote:
| I've never been able to get the hype on Sennheiser. My Sony noise
| cancelling Bluetooth headphones blow everything else away I've
| ever tried. Even with a DAC (tried two). Sold all my audio gear,
| no more spider web of Schitt or Focusright gear.
| grumpyprole wrote:
| There is absolutely no contest between an open-back audiophile
| Sennheiser like HD600 or HD800 and _any_ ANC headphone. I own
| both these headphones and formerly a Sony MX3. The MX3 is also
| beaten in sound quality by a Sennheiser Momentum 4. The default
| sound of the Sony was frankly awful, bloated bass (+5db) that
| bleeds into the midrange, almost certainly not what most
| artists intended. They were better with EQ, although still
| muddy and the built-in EQ didn 't work with LDAC. So I never
| bought another.
|
| The HD800 are the best pair of headphones I have ever owned.
| Incredible soundstage and imaging. They are probably the best
| anyone could ever do with dynamic drivers. I have a lot of
| music that I save for these headphones, never wanting to play
| on the go via Bluetooth. My HD600 are still going strong
| (having been purchased in the early 90s), thanks to a quality
| product and availability of spare parts. Sennheiser are a
| fantastic company and I hope they keep making headphones.
| skrebbel wrote:
| I'll never understand that people get angry about this stuff but
| not about luxury bags or iPhones.
|
| You're not paying for the bill of material. You're paying for the
| research, the engineering, the design and the brand.
| dehrmann wrote:
| Are headphones still getting better?
| ilyt wrote:
| > I'll never understand that people get angry about this stuff
| but not about luxury bags or iPhones.
|
| What makes you think same people do not get angry about those ?
|
| > You're not paying for the bill of material. You're paying for
| the research, the engineering, the design and the brand.
|
| The annoyance is having to navigate what you pay for. I don't
| want to pay for the design and the brand, I want to pay for
| engineering and research
| smat wrote:
| You also pay for quality control. Cheaper brands often have
| decent audio quality on average but high variation in between
| individual pairs of headphones. They also tend to fall apart
| after 1-2 years of use in my experience.
| bayindirh wrote:
| I'm angry at neither Sennheiser nor Apple. First Sennheiser
| does its research and uses engineering to differentiate a
| product, and that's fine for me.
|
| In Apple's case, more money generally gives more hardware.
| LIDARs, GPS modules in GSM iPads, more cores or more co-
| processors, etc.
|
| I'm very aware that I generally don't pay for the bill of
| materials, and it doesn't bother me, because I get a far
| superior experience for a longer time.
|
| My newest toy is 3rd generation AirPods my wife got me for my
| birthday. Do they sound better than my highest end headphones,
| no. Are they "monitor-flat", again no. But, they are practical,
| sound enjoyable and useful. Also they do a great job at
| projecting voice (podcasts, calls, audiobooks) at my ears with
| utmost clarity even in noisy environments without being loud,
| fatiguing and uncomfortable, and you know what? This is
| _great_.
|
| Also, it renders Atmos audio beautifully. I _enjoy_ listening
| to them, and this is what matters for me on the go.
|
| And, they're paired to an iPhone X, and it's going out of
| support this year. I'll again get the latest and the greatest
| in shortest time possible and forget about phones for ~8 years.
| activitypea wrote:
| Any tips for Atmos? I've tried turning on "spatial audio" for
| albums that support it on apple music, but it just sounds
| more distant and echo-ey. It sounds so bad that I can't
| imagine anyone liking it, so I must be doing something wrong
| porkbeer wrote:
| Atmos is a scam to sell more speakers. The spacial audio is
| the same lame fake surround sound trick that never sounded
| good. Either listen to Atmos mixed music, famously hated by
| artists and producers alike, or just listen in stereo and
| enjoy the music.
| activitypea wrote:
| Oh yeah I'm fully aware, I just want to give it an honest
| shot, but everytime I did it sounds the same as or worse
| than stereo, even watching/listening DolbyTM AtmosTM
| Certified ContentTM on DolbyTM AtmosTM Certified
| DevicesTM
| saiya-jin wrote:
| Yeah, my boss has latest and greatest iphones and airpods
| pro, and everytime he uses them compared to dirt cheap Jabra
| headset company gave us, I _know_. How? He sounds like crap,
| voice dropping, volume jumping up and down, sometimes audio
| disconnections, while literally everybody else on the call is
| fine. Pairing issues half of the time.
|
| But he refuses to use what company gives to him. He ain't
| complaining, because he hears rest of us perfectly fine.
|
| Btw all that hardware you listed, its in other phones too,
| for much less. My phone from last year has ie Lidar, that's
| not something fancy these days, and its pretty accurate for
| common stuff. I won't build shelves just by using it but
| otherwise measures OK.
| somehnguy wrote:
| I use AirPods Pro for hours every single weekday in
| meetings and have never had a single complaint about
| quality. Never any pairing issues, and I frequently move
| between my work MBP, personal iPhone, and personal MBP.
| They switch flawlessly.
|
| I do notice that the cheapo company supplied headsets sound
| scratchy when others use them over personal AirPods.
|
| Funny how we have exact opposite experiences.
| erhaetherth wrote:
| I don't mind paying for the research, engineering and maybe
| design but I won't pay for "brand". Same as I don't buy luxury
| bags or iPhones or clothes.
| drogus wrote:
| You missed the point entirely. "The research, the engineering,
| the design and the brand" is almost exactly the same for both
| models. The problem is that Sennheiser charges you $150 more
| for pretty much the same headset.
| skrebbel wrote:
| So if Louis Vuitton made a version of their bags that's the
| same but a different logo, at only a 50% margin instead of
| 98% or whatever their current margins are, you'd be angry at
| them too?
|
| But because they _only_ sell the version with the super high
| margin and not the "crippled" cheaper kind, it's somehow just
| fine?
|
| Same with iPhones, those margins are huge, they could totally
| sell you a crippled cheaper version of the same hardware and
| still make money. They just choose to only sell things at the
| highest margins, because their UX and brand are so strong.
| How is "pricing everything super high" fine and "also sell a
| few cheaper options with lower end-user value" terrible
| greed? That's totally upside down to me.
| ilyt wrote:
| > So if Louis Vuitton made a version of their bags that's
| the same but a different logo, at only a 50% margin instead
| of 98% or whatever their current margins are, you'd be
| angry at them too?
|
| Useless comparison, bag here is only fashion statement, not
| something you use for technology.
|
| And it's weird assumption they made any of them "first",
| they most likely designed both in parallel (design time !=
| start of production time) and just put worse sounding
| version in cheaper one to not cannibalize the market.
| krab wrote:
| If LV did that, it would damage their brand. People justify
| paying for premium brands by convincing themselves they get
| something exclusive. If LV showed you can get the same
| product, just with a different brand, then it's no longer
| exclusive. Those who previously believed in the brand would
| be angry.
| brtkdotse wrote:
| It's known as "market segmentation" and it's been around
| forever. Look at CPUs, car engines, smart phones - same
| hardware with different feature bits enabled allows you to
| sell the same widget cheaper to a different demographic
| without destroying the value proposition of the more
| expensive variant.
| em500 wrote:
| Yeah, this sounds like textbook price discrimination via
| market segmentation to me. Producers do this to capture
| more of the consumer surplus value (willingness of some
| consumers to pay more than others). The alternative is to
| offer a single model for a price somewhere in between.
| Without the segmentation the richer / more willing to spend
| consumers save some money, but some of the poorer / less
| willing to pay consumers get priced out of the market. With
| effective price discrimination, the supplier gets higher
| profits, but there's also some cross-subsidy from bigger
| spenders to the more thrifty ones, so there's also some
| progressive redistribution.
| ilyt wrote:
| Well, if there was a proper competition the "cheaper but
| better performing model" would capture some of the
| competition market, but headphones are bit too subjective
| market for that.
| brtkdotse wrote:
| > proper competition
|
| Are you suggesting the headphone market is rigged?
| ilyt wrote:
| I explained what I suggested in my previous sentence,
| read it to the end
| formerly_proven wrote:
| And the difference between the different products sold by
| software people is frequently just a few bits here and there.
| The "Pro" version might allow bigger files or higher
| resolutions or whatever, the "Lite" only does 20 projects at
| a time, whatever. The cost for these differentiated products
| is exactly identical, the underlying product is precisely the
| same, yet they have the audacity to charge (often a
| significant) price differential. And you even already did all
| the work for the Pro Ultra version! How dare you artificially
| cripple it to sell it at a lower price! Disgusting and
| reprehensible. Software developers should be ashamed of
| themselves.
| ProZsolt wrote:
| You can look at it from a different angle, that you pay $150
| less for pretty much the same headset, as the more expensive
| one paid the research.
|
| I can argue that why do I have to pay 1000$ for a software,
| when the hobby tier is free, it is pretty much the same
| application.
| lostlogin wrote:
| > You're not paying for the bill of material.
|
| They've added more material (and cost) with the foam, and to
| make the product worse.
|
| A cheaper iPhone isn't usually a crippled high end model.
| madaxe_again wrote:
| I've got news for you about how flash memory and processors
| are manufactured, binned, and fed out to distinct product
| lines.
|
| The general strategy is to make everything with the same die,
| and then bin the output based on manufacturing quality,
| defects, etc.
|
| Quite often, the manufacturing is _too good_ , and therefore
| perfectly capable hardware is feature-limited in order to
| fill the lower end product lines.
| michaelt wrote:
| And plenty of people buying those processors feel it's
| their right to 'overclock' to get the performance of a more
| expensive product - In the early 2000s people would even
| bridge connections on the chips with pencil to reverse
| multiplier locking.
| berbec wrote:
| Slot 1 300A Celeron pencil trick was the best. I lived
| with that for a while, and then I got a dual socket 370
| 533 Celerons on the BP6. That was an absolutely insanely
| overpowered machine for years.
| teawrecks wrote:
| their options are to: * do novel research into making a sku
| that produces exactly $199 worth of sound quality, no more no
| less (more expensive) * sell everything cheaper, which is
| equivalent to making both skus sound identical (less profit)
| * not make a low end sku (pricing out potential customers) *
| create a low end sku for lower binned drivers (least bad
| option)
| paxys wrote:
| Take apart the phone and look at individual parts and you
| will find that this is absolutely the case. Every large scale
| electronics manufacturer uses this strategy.
|
| And specifically in Apple's case they do spend more money
| doing stuff like soldering ram to the motherboard so
| customers can't upgrade them.
| tzs wrote:
| > And specifically in Apple's case they do spend more money
| doing stuff like soldering ram to the motherboard so
| customers can't upgrade them.
|
| Doesn't soldering RAM to the motherboard cost less?
| crote wrote:
| 100%. Soldering RAM makes the engineering quite a lot
| easier, prevents a RAM module vendor from making profit,
| and gets rid of an entire assembly step because now you
| no longer need to install the RAM module.
|
| The downside is a lack of flexibility, because you are
| now committed to a _very specific_ RAM chip and you need
| to spend effort if you ever need to change that - rather
| than just plugging in one of a dozen modules.
| miniBill wrote:
| As much as I dislike Apple policies on general, the RAM is
| not soldered, it's integrated in the SoC, and it makes a
| HUGE difference in terms of SPEED.
|
| The soldered disk on the other hand... fuck that
| chedabob wrote:
| They started soldering the RAM to the logic board on the
| mid-2012 MBP.
| lostlogin wrote:
| Initially this was discussing the iPhone.
|
| It's one of those happy times when everyone is right.
| ofalkaed wrote:
| The actual difference between the two models could be that the
| HD595 had selected and matched drivers, the HD555 getting all the
| rejects from the 595. This is a fairly common practice.
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| This mod was done many years ago, before it was common to be
| able to find someone who could do proper frequency response
| measurement. Unless someone measured them in the thread, I
| wouldn't assume the visual difference check identified 100% of
| the differences, including material differences.
|
| Sennheiser likes to reuse parts across their headphones lineup.
| They have several current models that look similar despite tiny
| internal differences but have substantially difference
| frequency response due to those tiny changes.
|
| This is always going to anger the people who think the cost of
| objects should be based solely on the cost of materials. I find
| that especially ironic for a a website where most of us work on
| software products where the cost of running and distributing
| the software is vanishingly small and produces margins these
| hardware companies could only dream of.
| atVelocet wrote:
| But you realize that the drivers (can be seen on the
| replacement driver from Sennheiser which states it's for both
| models) and even the construction is the same?
|
| So it is not about looking the same with different internals
| .. it basically is the same just without the dampening.
| dagmx wrote:
| I think the larger point is that they could be drivers that
| don't meet the same quality standard. Just like how
| processors get binned.
|
| It's hard to make electronics that are identical. It's
| easier to make them such that they fit within buckets of
| tolerances.
|
| Without proper testing, it's hard to know for certain
| samstave wrote:
| Recall that after Apple bought BEATS headsets it was revealed
| that BEATS was putting dummy-metal into the headsets to make
| them heavier, thus resulting in the purchaser to think that
| they had better-than headsets based on the perceived weight of
| the headset - but the weight was not in higher-powered magnets
| in the drivers...
| luto wrote:
| Unlikely, since the replacement part is the same for both
| models. From the link:
|
| > Quite a few people speculated in my Original thread that the
| more expensive HD595 headphones must also be using a more
| expensive driver. However, Head-fi member MCC posted the
| smoking gun; a picture of the original Sennheiser replacement
| driver labelled "HD 555 / HD 595".
| ofalkaed wrote:
| If you buy a single they are not going to break up a matched
| pair and they will not refuse to sell you a single. The only
| way to really know is to sit down with a nice fresh and new
| pair of both headphones and compare the stereo image across
| the spectrum, but it is too late to do that for these unless
| someone happens upon some NOS examples.
| weinzierl wrote:
| Sorry, what is a NOS example? I'm not familiar with the
| abbreviation and it is hard to search for such short terms.
| radiowave wrote:
| New Old Stock
| kristofferR wrote:
| BTW, a pro-tip, ChatGPT is quite good at abbreviations:
|
| https://imgur.com/a/SB42IVR
|
| I use it for abbreviations all the time.
| fzzzy wrote:
| New old stock, sealed unsold new product from the past.
| ilyt wrote:
| And now you're adding more random assumptions to baseless
| statement
| ofalkaed wrote:
| No I am relaying my experience. I never said this was the
| case for HD595/555, I said it could be the case and it is
| common practice. The only way to know for sure is a
| direct comparison on new examples, unless you have
| insider information at Sennheiser.
| [deleted]
| bleepblop wrote:
| Got some bad news for you. "Matched pairs" is a marketing
| term. They are all tested within the same tolerances.
| porkbeer wrote:
| Depends. Some hifi headphones and speakrs are actually
| matched. Rare now, but used to be very common when driver
| designs and production tolerances were looser. I have
| some 1930's brandes headphines that were matched, but are
| basically a magneto driver and sound awful (but clear) by
| any modern standard.
| barbariangrunge wrote:
| I tried this years ago and without the foam, the headphones
| gave me a headache every time I listened. The headaches went
| away as soon as I replaced the foam
|
| What's with the downvotes? Sorry for being one of the only
| commentators in this thread to have actually tried it, and for
| saying what happened. There is one other actually, who also
| says the sound got worse
| otherme123 wrote:
| I didn't downvote you, but your message is a bit useless: I
| know lots of people that feels the most bizarre things when
| they know about it. Starting with people that believe in
| magic (like in if you burn a black candle, you get free from
| bad luck), to a girl that got the ear pierced in at least a
| dozen points to relieve pain on random points of the body.
| According to her, it worked. A woman who claims that every
| single chemical puts her in agonizing pain, but sure enough
| the pain only starts when he _knows_ the chemical is there.
|
| My point is you should try randomly at least couple of
| headphones that _some other person_ removed the foam on one
| of them without you even knowing. Then you could apply some
| simple test like the binomial, and claim /reject one of them
| gives you headaches.
|
| Quality of sound has a abjective part (a speaker too loud
| would sound broken to every one), and a heavy subjective part
| (a speaker with too much bass would sound great to some, bad
| to others). If someone say "this headphones sound bad" it
| means almost nothing.
|
| I hate the sound of every guitar with single coil pickups,
| even the most expensive Fender Tele/Strato, but a lot of
| guitarist love their sound. I cannot claim "the single coil
| _sounds worse_ " as if it was an objective thing that
| everyone should agree to, because what I really mean is "I
| don't like single coils".
| tyingq wrote:
| Called "product binning".
|
| Though it's also common to segment products that don't have
| defects/differences by intentionally hobbling them, or even
| just using different labels when there's no actual difference.
| patchtopic wrote:
| though then shouldn't the correct replacement part for the
| HD595 be a matched pair of drivers?
| ofalkaed wrote:
| If you want a matched stereo image across the spectrum,
| yes. I have little experience with Sennheiser but most
| makers of the high end (studio grade at least) will offer
| both singles and matched pairs and leave it up to the
| buyer.
| cesaref wrote:
| I had a problem with a bass driver on a pair of PMC
| studio speakers. I asked PMC directly whether I should
| replace one or both drivers in the pair, and they said to
| only replace one, that there would be no issues.
|
| So, in response to replacing drivers, 'it depends' is
| probably closer to the truth. It may well be that bass
| drivers are less problematic than say midrange when
| pairing.
| ofalkaed wrote:
| Speakers are different than headphones. With speakers you
| have a sweet spot, if your head is not in that sweet spot
| than the stereo image is blurred in someway and that
| image is affected by room reflections, the stuff in the
| room, volume setting, etc. This is why headphones are
| common for mixing, when you lean over to adjust that
| preamp you take the stereo image with you instead of
| moving out of it. We are more tolerant of speakers in
| this regard (from the studio standpoint) since the stereo
| image with speakers changes with your position and is
| rarely accurate compared to headphones. Midrange is the
| most important part and it is where the bulk of the
| information is for most of our music and our hearing, we
| get a lot more wiggle room in the bass and the highs.
|
| It does depend, we don't always need or want that perfect
| stereo image but it makes mixing easier to have it
| available.
| dylan604 wrote:
| I've bought matched pairs of DJ stylus. The product
| descriptions waxed poetically about the reasons this was
| important, and if I cared, it might have even made sense.
| The sole reason I bought them paired was the simple fact
| that the pair was cheaper than buying two individuals.
| The exact same logic was applied when I bought a pair of
| monitors, and the fact that the seller offered a $50 item
| for free.
|
| If you're into matched pair speakers, what about for
| surround systems? Do you have to have a matched 4 set or
| a matched 6 set?
| toast0 wrote:
| From what I can tell, hardcore audiphiles tend to stop at
| stereo, so there's that. But if you're going to match
| speakers, I would think you'd want to at least match by
| type: match your fronts to each other, match your
| surrounds to each other, match your heights to each
| other, match your subs to each other. Just having all of
| one type be the same model is probably good enough
| though.
| ofalkaed wrote:
| If you are into it, sure. This is a good question and I
| can not quite answer it too my satisfaction despite
| repeated attempts, but here is my best go at. Surround
| sound gives a larger sweet spot than stereo (that area in
| the room where you can hear sounds from speakers move
| about the room as if they were there with you) which will
| compensate for less than optimal speaker matching and we
| also get more information to process from those extra
| channels so our brain can make more sense of what it is
| supposed to be. This along with surround sound generally
| being used with film where our attention is divided makes
| surround sound more tolerant of speaker selection.
|
| Hopefully someone more knowledgeable in 3d sound will
| happen along.
|
| Edit: Should also mention that we get a lot more leeway
| in general when it comes to film sound since we also have
| visual cues regarding the sound's location and movement.
| KennyBlanken wrote:
| The correct replacement part not only isn't matched....it's
| the same part for the 595 and 555.
|
| > Quite a few people speculated in my Original thread that
| the more expensive HD595 headphones must also be using a
| more expensive driver. However, Head-fi member MCC posted
| the smoking gun; a picture of the original Sennheiser
| replacement driver labelled "HD 555 / HD 595".
|
| So, unless they're fucking over their 595 customers who
| need a repair: the drivers aren't binned.
| tyingq wrote:
| Supposedly, our left and right ears aren't even equal at
| birth...each having different pathways to the brain. Then,
| of course, unequal damage over time. Makes me wonder how
| much tediously matched drivers matter.
| ofalkaed wrote:
| Our brains are pretty good at compensating for the
| failings of our bodies. For general recreational
| listening matched pairs are not all that useful since the
| majority of music is mixed with the knowledge that 99% of
| people are not going to listen to it on something with an
| accurate stereo image or even flat frequency response.
| coffeebeqn wrote:
| I had a sad realization after finally buying the very
| nice 6XX with a small tube amp - that while it sounds
| incredible, it also makes my hearing loss/tinnitus more
| prominent. Probably since I was focusing much more on the
| intricacies of the sound. Ended up selling them because
| it just wasn't an enjoyable experience
| nanidin wrote:
| Apple and JBL measure your ear and adjust according to
| the measurements. Apple calls it personalized spatial
| audio.
| thejosh wrote:
| AMD's Phenom II let you unlock the locked fourth core, if you
| so dared.. allowing you to save like ~$50 on the higher chip.
| But it could be unstable.
| sf_rob wrote:
| Yes, allegedly demand outstripped supply for the lower core
| count chips so it was a mix of disabled rejected cores and
| disabled working cores.
| sireat wrote:
| I still have a computer running Athlon x3 unlocked to
| Phenom x4 - circa 2010 this was the most cost efficient way
| to get a 4 core with 32GB of RAM.
| accrual wrote:
| Two other older AMD CPUs could be similarly unlocked:
|
| - AMD K6-2+ with 128K of L2 cache can be converted to a
| K6-3+ with 512K. The CPU has a heatspreader that can be
| carefully removed revealing a series of zero-ohm resistors,
| moving it to the right location unlocks the cache. The CPU
| is still bound by binning as to whether or not it can be
| overclocked well.
|
| - AMD Athlon XP could be overclocked with the "pencil mod",
| using a pencil to draw a conductive trace between two pads
| on top of the CPU, no delidding required.
| craigmcnamara wrote:
| Isn't a zero ohm resistor just a jumper?
| tialaramex wrote:
| In a sense that's correct, but "jumper" suggests these
| are deliberately components you can change whereas "Zero
| ohm resistor" is likely intended to be permanent.
| cwillu wrote:
| In PCB manufacturing, a jumper wire is just a wire
| soldered between two points. A designer might or might
| not install jumper pins like those you refer to.
|
| Regarding the use of a 0-ohm resistor instead of a jumper
| wire: wires are rather annoying to deal with in pick-and-
| place machines, while a 0-ohm jumper can be reel-loaded
| like any other part.
| joezydeco wrote:
| It is, but pick-and-place robots like to work with zero
| ohm resistors compared to small pieces of wire. Also
| makes it easier to change later, you just swap reels.
| [deleted]
| JonathonW wrote:
| Or it might not work at all (as was the case for mine when
| I tried it).
|
| There definitely was a period where AMD was shipping three-
| core Phenom IIs with a functional fourth core (demand was
| higher for the three-core SKUs than their actual defect
| rate appeared to allow), but I don't know how plentiful
| fully-functional one's actually were. And it was never
| guaranteed.
| nailer wrote:
| There was also the original Athlon, where there was an
| unjoined connection on top of the die. You could fill in
| the connection with a pencil and overclock the chip.
| 404mm wrote:
| You don't even need to look for extra cores. Just CPUs
| being locked on different frequencies is similar enough to
| this concept.
| manmal wrote:
| And certain GeForces could be turned into Quadros (for use
| with CAD software):
| https://archive.techarp.com/showarticleefc1.html?pgno=0
|
| This was a soft mod, but I think there was also a hardware
| mod involving only a pencil.
| metamet wrote:
| Learning about how they product bin CPUs blew my mind years
| ago.
|
| iirc, the CPUs come off the same manufacturing line--but the
| ones they sold as 3.2ghz vs 3.4ghz were based on stability
| tests. It was the same chip, just that some came out the oven
| better than others. So they would cap it and slap a label on
| it, which is why overclocking is feasible but inconsistent.
| rasz wrote:
| Intel/AMD do not test every single die. Once you get stable
| output from the foundry you learn a max clock/wafer
| location distribution.
| quesera wrote:
| This is also common a common practice with garments, bakery
| items, fruit, racehorses, and children.
| Vanclief wrote:
| Wait, children?
| james_in_the_uk wrote:
| Should be an XKCD comic
| dmos62 wrote:
| Makes sense, no?
| bdowling wrote:
| Some children are just smarter, more athletic, or better
| looking than their siblings.
| hervature wrote:
| I think they are referring to this part:
|
| > It was the same chip, just that some came out the oven
| better than others.
|
| Not the part about selling.
| varispeed wrote:
| There are shops that buy CPUs in bulk and bin them
| themselves for suitability for overclocking and then sell
| the top performing ones at a premium.
|
| I got my i9-9900k this way, they binned it for 5.1GHz and
| it had been working 24h non stop for a few years (it is
| still working fine, but I no longer have a need for it to
| run).
| ip26 wrote:
| Silicon Lottery shut down two years back. It isn't clear
| to me whether manufacturer binning got tighter,
| overclocking just doesn't work anymore, or auto-boosting
| are their lunch.
| retrac wrote:
| These days chips with different amounts of cores or cache
| may derive from the same mask. If one or more of the cores
| or banks of cache are defective, they're disabled.
| xenodium wrote:
| There's a recent buy-it-for-life thread with moderate advocacy
| for cheaper models. I'm waiting for my PS20 ones from Amazon.
| Let's see...
|
| "Any recommendations on Bluetooth earbuds that are
| sweat/waterproof, reliable, and well designed?"
|
| https://www.reddit.com/r/BuyItForLife/comments/14a2hry/any_r...
| thepostman0 wrote:
| Hd201,about PS20 when I bought them ten or more years back. Worth
| the money. Anything more than this and you're into diminished
| returns, it just doesn't make sense to step outside the lower
| part of PS30.
| RamRodification wrote:
| Highly subjective of course. And you are way into diminishing
| returns even at PS20.
|
| These days I have dialed in my sweet spot to around PS100 for
| headphones
| thepostman0 wrote:
| We are like 11 and 1 o'clock, so close yet so far.
|
| I can't see 100 quid getting five times the headphone
| experience. Given these have lasted a decade, I don't see
| myself needing to replace the five times over during the rest
| of my life. I don't think my ears would be able to
| distinguish the difference, especially not from pc sound
| output.
| RamRodification wrote:
| _> I can 't see 100 quid getting five times the headphone
| experience._
|
| Just to be clear, this is not what I'm claiming either,
| when I choose the PS100 headphones. I don't think anyone
| would make that claim. I find them to be "better", and
| worth the premium, but absolutely not five times "better".
|
| _> I don 't think my ears would be able to distinguish the
| difference, especially not from pc sound output._
|
| That's all that really matters I guess.
|
| You could try to find a way to test a "better" setup
| (source device + headphones) to see if you are missing out.
| But you could also absolutely just avoid doing that and
| just stay happy.
| alpaca128 wrote:
| It's absolutely worth to go up to the $100-150 range, the
| difference is very noticeable. The returns don't diminish as
| fast as you suggest.
| Xen9 wrote:
| Idea: Scientific headphone studies
|
| Double-blind / blind headphone testing where price and
| manufacturer / model are not revealed. Possibly additional
| methods; multiple tests in a long timespan, multiple people
| testing, different locations (studio, sports etc.) and so on.
|
| The reviewers are allowed to use any and all digital measuring
| tools in addition to listening by ear.
|
| A rigorous version of this would integrate above in rtings.com
| headphone testing method.
| aemreunal wrote:
| People in Audio Science Review forums do scientific studies of
| headphones:
| https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?forums/he...
| kimburgess wrote:
| There's a great lecture by Floyd Toole on exactly that for
| speakers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrpUDuUtxPM.
| magicalhippo wrote:
| A problem with this is that our ears are very different in
| shape and size from one person to the next. This can have a
| non-trivial impact[1] on what a person hears, _especially_ for
| in-ears.
|
| Thus a pair that might measure great might not sound good with
| your ears.
|
| [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y41oQTfDWiI
| rowanG077 wrote:
| You don't need human test subjects. You can very accurately
| measure frequency response.
| znpy wrote:
| Linus Sebastian from Linus Tech Tips is doing just that, but
| better.
|
| He got some professional testing equipment and he's building a
| proper testing environment for headphones and other stuff.
|
| Additional details in this video:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwPLhyUgm-g
|
| disclaimer: i'm not affiliated with LTT in any way
| Reticularas wrote:
| Didn't expect to see this here.
|
| I heard this rumor a long while ago (15+ years) while still in
| school. I did it to my headphones but learned that it pretty
| dramatically increased sound leakage. I'm not sure if was the
| exact same models of senns, but the trick has been around awhile.
| nailer wrote:
| Same here. Did it and got complaints about sound leakage from
| my colleagues.
| devnullbrain wrote:
| Don't buy open-backed headphones to use in a place with
| colleagues.
| ilyt wrote:
| I did like using open-backed ones for cycling, can hear
| what's happening on the road. I was using Grado SR-80 and
| was kinda surprise how much abuse they handled (in rain/get
| sprayed by passing car etc.)
| smallstepforman wrote:
| Do buy open-backed headphones if you want your ears to
| breathe. I cannot wear closed headphones for more than 30
| mins, while open-backed can be used all day.
| nailer wrote:
| (thinking emoji) We need openable vents.
| eertami wrote:
| You can't just take open back headphones and close them
| up, it will sound terrible. And conversely you can't open
| up a pair of closed headphones without the same problem.
|
| If you could make a headphone that can do both and sound
| acceptable, it would probably much more expensive than
| just buying a two pairs, one open and one closed.
| erik_seaberg wrote:
| This. I'm on (maybe?) my third pair of HD 280 in the office
| so I can work without hearing everyone nearby, which
| apparently means they also can't hear my music.
| cuvinny wrote:
| Yep, I read about this and did the mod on a pair of 555s back
| in the late aughts. I didn't notice a difference.
| jug wrote:
| I did this to mine. I think the sound did get slightly more airy
| but also the sound leakage was through the roof. If you're single
| though, I can only recommend.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-06-18 23:02 UTC)