Headsets for Gaming and Music

Right now, I currently run with AKG K240s(both the original and the MKII's), and Q701. I run it through a Ray Samuel's Intruder.

I use a V-Moda BoomPro Mic for speaking because that mic is fucking fantastic, the quality is top-notch if you provide the microphone foam guard as a breath guard. It literally sounds like the person is standing right there talking. I bought this mic a while back after I bought the headsets which are pretty good, and virtually indestructible.

I usually just play through my V-Modas, but when I get really immersed, I'll wear the V-Modas aound my neck and my Q701's on my ears.

I should probably just get a real gaming headset and stop playing everything through an amp/DAC.

Not to bash the OP, but a lot of what was written either doesn't apply to the average consumer--especially the lazy ones--is misleading, or just plain wrong.

Frequency Response
20kHz is more than high enough for most modern music, let alone games. To put into perspective, most consumers (sadly) cannot distinguish between a 320kbps MP3 rip and an original CD track. The thing is, CD players can only output to 22 kHz. Furthermore, instruments' fundamentals never reach 10kHz (a grand piano only barely breaks 4kHz), so it's not often they need the full 20kHz bandwidth, let alone anything beyond.

As for the low end, a grand piano only goes as low as 27.5kHz where most people already have trouble hearing the difference between the lower notes--it sounds like rumbling. To reach that 20Hz, you'd have to move down another fourth, which rarely any instruments (I can only recall two in the world--neither of which are used in modern music) go.

Driver Units
Typical misconception of bigger = better. That's only (half) true when there is nothing between the source (speaker) and destination (ear). The larger the driver, the harder it is to reproduce the higher frequencies that you wanted so much in the previous section. Furthermore, if one is using headphones that cover around the ear or earphones that go into the ear, all of that is thrown out the window. But I'll just leave it at this: there are the headphones with no drivers whatsoever that provide a fuller response than any headphone with any size neodymium drivers.

Impedance
This doesn't matter as the devices they're using can provide more than enough power for their headphones. I hope no one is "gaming" on an iPod with circumaural headphones.

I/O Plugs
This section was wrong in so many ways. Firstly, there is *only* one size larger--6.3mm or 1/4 inch. Secondly, the smaller plug using an adapter makes for an overall shorter and lighter plug--unless you prefer breaking the jacks of your device. That said, I'd recommend getting the headphone that has the right plug (PROTIP: every adapter is two more connections and this is where most losses occur) for the device you're using which is typically 3.5mm or 1/8 inch for the majority of consumer devices anyway. Gold provides better conductivity? I think you need to head back to 4th grade science.

Comfort
While I agree it's an important aspect, your knowledge of materials needs work. I'm not going to bother with this as everyone has their own preferences on the tightness and texture of the headband/earpads--which is just as important as the sound.

Build Material
If you're seriously claiming plastic headphones are as durable as wood or metal headphones...

Wireless vs Wired
Wireless has come a long way in the past 10 years alone. Modern Bluetooth is now able to perfectly transmit SACD quality audio, never mind standard CD audio. RF is susceptible to outside interference and noise, especially from the very device you're gaming from, but its range is much larger than Bluetooth--though no one games from beyond Bluetooth distances anyway. If you must have wireless, Bluetooth is the safer medium, but nothing beats a direct connection.

External USB Cards
Not necessary by any means, but a lot have features for VOIP. If you find yourself in need of these extra features, these devices were created for that sole purpose. Again, this is preference.

P.S. "Studio monitor headphones" do not use external sound cards, let alone benefit from them.

Closed vs Open
Again preference. Open air will feel more natural as air moves freely between your ears and the speaker. Not to mention this keeps your ears cooler. The tradeoff is that you will hear everything in background and people will hear everything you hear. Closed-back headphones on the other hand will increase bass response (remember the driver units section?) and attenuate outside noise. Its tradeoff? Sweaty ears.

Fluff
...Do I have to?

Firstly, you're the idiot. Never have I seen a post so ignorant. The web is loaded with information and yet you seem to get everything wrong.

20Hz-20kHz has been a widely-accepted estimated standard for years--some people can't even hear that range.

Active Noise Cancellation may not be for you, but it has its uses.

Just so you know aptX is the name of the new standard allowing Bluetooth to transmit SACD quality audio.

Dolby is *NOT* the only company that can virtualize sound.

NFC may not be for you, but some people prefer it. Guess why it's being included on many new wireless systems.

You're looking at a PS4 headset and complaining about PC integration? Really?

You have software equalizers in your hand?

Sorry, just playing devil's advocate.

Final Words
Again, not to bash the OP, but as an audio engineer and audiophile (can I also throw in retired gamer?), I couldn't let people be falsely misled. I wonder if OP works as a headphone retailer. If so, oops. Sorry for the loss of sales. I work with high-end AV equipment on a daily basis, but my engineer side prevents me from being a successful salesman.

yup you hit the right track~
for me external sound card/ DAC not needed if you dont use HI-Res Audio.
for Driver Units i agree all of it depend on the tuning not the size.
and for wireless i just know 2 brand that release good wireless headphones parrot zik and pendulumic
Active Noise Cancellation it was for deplete noise if the noise was static, if noise because of project from build house or fixing the road you better pick Noise Isolation.
and don't believe if a headphone have 7.1 because headphones doesn't have 7.1 driver only speaker have it, headphones only have 2 driver no more. headphones already have a long time ago have a sound "sound like 7.1 (audiophile always say this was imaging, and positioning)" it was depend on your source (lossless audio more better), DAC (external or internal Sound Card), Amplifier, your Headphones, cable of your Headphone, and last was interconnect.

I haven't heard those headphones personally, but I'll check them out when/if I can. I typically recommend Sennheiser's RS-220 to customers, but I've heard good things about Sony's MDR-1RBT (haven't tried this one yet).
Regarding noise cancellation, they actually work best against the noises you described--lower frequencies.
As for multiple drivers in headphones, there are the Shure SE846 and Ultimate Ears 11 among many others which fit four (4) drivers into *each* earphone--the ones that go *in* your ears. Surround sound on the other hand, there are headphones that can reproduce it with specifically tuned chambers/driver locations or algorithms from the source itself.

You seem to have completely missed the point of the subtitle. This is a guide for those who don't want to go around and collect all of the necessary information they need to learn about headphones, not for some couch potato who's content with a pair of $5 throwaways.



Just because 20kHz is a standard cut-off doesn't mean it's a bad idea to widen the response range. For those of us that can hear 20kHz the cut off can not only cause distortion but reduce the richness of sounds that use high frequencies. More importantly, frequency response range is a good indicator of the quality of the unit, wider responses generally mean that the unit is going to be more capable of producing frequencies in the ranges that most people can can hear without a loss in audial clarity.



Clearly you've never analyzed to the frequencies used in most electronic tracks. Using frequencies above 16kHz is commonplace and many producers purposely use sub-bass to their advantage (especially in dubstep) to provide distortion.

Saw and square waves are the basic forms used to produce a good majority of the sounds someone is going to hear in an electronic track and they both use frequencies above 16kHz nearly all of the time. When you start layering onto or augmenting the original wave form these higher frequencies are necessary to provide a rich sound, filtering them out leads to a noticeable effect and causes the sound to become muffled.

But instead of just words, why don't I prove it to you by showing you what a saw and square wave form look like at C3:

Saw Wave



Square Wave




As you can clearly see both wave forms produced by Ableton's operator synthesizer use frequencies well above 10kHz to produce their sound.



The point of the post is for education, to explain the specifications one will see in most headphone listings. Impedance is important and essential to understanding the capabilities of a pair of headphones, so yeah, it does matter.



Gold doesn't provide better conductivity? Really?

http://chemistry.about.com/od/moleculescompounds/a/Table-Of-Electrical-Resistivity-And-Conductivity.htm

Everything else is unrelated, you're taking my words out of context and attacking things I haven't said.



>Your knowledge of materials needs a little work.

Yeah, I could write three or four more paragraphs about the materials that can be used for padding, but I've already covered the most common. Also, don't tell someone else their knowledge needs more work and not actually provide a better example or alternative yourself. You just end up looking like an idiot.

Build Material


I don't believe I did. Maybe you should go back and read the section again.



>Wireless has come a long way in the past 10 years alone

RF audio transmitters have seen very little advancement in the past six years when it comes to wireless headphones. Further, you can't just say "wireless has come a long way", that's far too general and doesn't even touch on the amount of wireless technologies in use today. To me, a software engineer and technology enthusiast, it just makes you sound like an idiot.

RF is only susceptible to interference if you're using the same frequency range as another device, unless your transmitting at 2.4GHz (most models use 4.7GHZ) you shouldn't have a problem. Bluetooth is a poor transport medium for audio and always has been; it's current susceptibility to bit loss and short range does not justify the price of the technology.



Are you fucking retarded? External USB sound cards are used for processing audio separately from the internal sound card. You don't need a USB sound card for VOIP and most of them do not have those features unless it's required for the device they're interfacing with (a gaming console, maybe?).

At their most basic form they're just used for processing and include basic 3.5mm interfaces. Higher-end USB cards include more interfaces, advanced processors, a much higher maximum output volume, 24-bit resolution and more.

ASUS Xonar Essence One



Thanks for regurgitating what I said in the opening post.



Already dealt with in the first quote; you're the idiot here who thinks modern music only entails frequencies that a piano can reach. Educate yourself before you wreck yourself.



No shit, I noted that companies like Microsoft use their own virtualization algorithms; Dolby's algorithm is the most common and is much more complex than Microsoft's is. I'm not even going to touch on the rest of this section, as you clearly either didn't read what I wrote or aren't comprehending it.



>Not to bash OP
>Calls me an idiot
>Denies scientific fact
>Doesn't know what he's talking about
>Regurgitates most of my post in an effort to seem smart
>Thinks external USB sound cards are used for VOIP
>Takes my words out of context and attacks points I haven't made

You're no audio engineer, don't even kid yourself; I'd be surprised if you were even through the basics of a 101 class. You don't even know the basic wave forms that are used in the vast majority of software and hardware synthesizers, your musing on what frequencies are used in modern music clearly shows this. I bet if I shoved a DAW in your face you'd sit there with a dumbfounded expression not understanding what half of it does.

Stop acting like you know more than you do.

False information isn't necessary information.



Except that speakers' frequency response are never truly flat and roll off towards both ends. Tons of headphones have a claimed frequency response of 20Hz - 20kHz which is rarely the case when actually measured. The range has more to do with tuning than the drivers themselves--I won't list the names of makers that used good components but ended up with a failed product. Of course it wouldn't hurt to have a larger range, but how many are actually honest about their speakers' abilities?



Again, the reason is because these frequencies are rolled off once they leave the speakers so one must compensate.



Except that consumer headphones are generally in the same range--hence consumer market. Why not mention sensitivity, THD, or most importantly maximum input power?



Except that list doesn't include every conductor. Not to mention that silver and copper are listed *above* gold, which most cables are already made of anyway. And how is the plug size unrelated? You clearly wrote that the larger they come, the better. I'm still waiting to hear the reasons why the smaller plug using an adapter is worse.



"Velvet cups are the best"

Better example? I wouldn't say any are better than another as it really determines on the overall build and the users' preferences. As for examples, there's cotton, the many types of velour, foam, silicone, etc.



"any pair that prices over $150 is likely to be just as durable as pairs that price up to $300 or even $400."



Far too general? I thought that was the point of your "informative" post, but sure, let's suddenly get into specifics. Guess how many household electronic devices fall under the 2.4GHz band? It's why nearly every device has that "This equipment complies with the requirements..." sticker.



I'm not sure if it's just ignorance, but what you just linked to is called a DAC. TigerDirect is partly to blame if you are only reading its description. That said, DACs are not used to process audio separately, but instead take over entirely the conversion of digital to analogue signals and thus bypassing the devices' (usually inferior) own process. The devices that use the 3.5mm plugs however are called headphone amps as in they amplify the signal from your device to your headphones. As for VOIP, those are indeed handled by "external sound cards" to which I will link to as soon as I remember which brands make them.



I won't go into the "real music is played with real instruments" debate as I'm an avid electronics junky, but as I've already mentioned, it's tailored frequencies to compensate for consumer-grade speakers. The actual fundamentals aren't actually that high and/or low.



"The only time this ever makes a difference is if a headset is labelled "Dolby 7.1 Surround Sound"



Explain. All I did was point out what I thought was wrong according to what I know.
"Congratulations! If this was you, you're an idiot." But fine, only OP can call others so. I apologize.
Please point me to the scientific fact(s) that I denied--I'm always up for learning.
Actually, I know what I know very well.
That would either mean I agreed with you or wanted to elaborate, but if you believe I am boasting my intelligence or lack thereof, you've missed the point entirely
Actually, you just have your terminology mixed up, but that's no biggie
Please point me to the "attacked" points

Now where did I leave my degree? I'll find it sometime later and post it if that's what you're after. As for not knowing my waveforms, can you prove that's true or is that another assumption on your part? And would you really like to make this wager about the DAW? I've been eying that Thunderbolt UAD-2 recently...

I don't act. Period. What I know is what I have learned and nothing more.

It isn't false information, that's your own subjective understanding.



The "roll off"is exactly why a wider frequency response is better and not just because some people can hear above those frequencies. The wider the range, generally the higher guarantee that you won't experience a roll off around the frequencies that matter (which are subjectively 62.5Hz to 18.3kHz). Again, frequency response is often an indicator of the quality of the unit itself; not all the time, but enough of the time that it's definitely worth taking into consideration. And the roll-off is primarily a loss in velocity, so even with standard frequency responses you can still hear the higher frequencies output by a saw or square wave form, which again provide richness. To further prove my point, lets listen to a saw wave without a filter applied and with a filter applied that cuts off frequencies around what you claim the "fundamentals never reach above" (10 kHz). I'll even post screenshots of Ableton so you can see the levels yourself:

Audio
DAW

And again, there are people that can hear above the standard response range; I'm one of them. Just because something is a standard doesn't mean it's a good idea in every scenario to follow it.



>They're listed "above gold"

Hah, you're right, they are; I didn't look at the chart and I'm just going on what I've been told by a good friend.

Still though, when it comes down to it Gold will always make for a better plug because it's inert, not susceptible to the same environmental deficiencies copper and silver are.



The reason I said a larger plug is better is because:

A) Finer mechanical connections and larger surface areas which tolerate corrosion for longer

B) Around 4x stronger as cross-section area is proportional to the square of diameter

So having this as the primary plug without a converter is more desired because it's less likely to see issues arise compared to a 3.5mm. You could just throw a new plug on there, sure, but that's still added hassle. Having the larger plug is just an added bonus.



Subjectivity is a given, do you read articles expecting them to be free of bias?

Also, it's great that you're now listing more materials and you're more than welcome to propose changes to the OP if you want but you'll need to list the pros and cons for each material to make it worth adding.



See that likely there? That means more often than not, not always. From my own experience, most $300 - $400 headphones aren't metal or wood. Again, subjectivity is a given.



Most wireless phone systems use 1.9GHz, 2.4GHz or 5.8GHz, wireless networking frequencies are most often 5GHz or 2.4GHz and rarely other frequencies. Most wireless audio devices I've used transmit at 4.7Ghz.

We have standards in place so interference isn't commonplace. The chances of receiving interference from another device is very low and in the vast majority of cases you'll only get interference if there's another RF audio transmitter in the room.



Lol, that's not just a DAC/ADC buddy, it's a sound card and it includes a DSP; look at the data sheet. Hell it even lists the audio processor in the specifications.



Much drool.

I'm going to emphasize that I didn't say "external sound cards" can't handle VOIP, I said that it isn't required for it which you seem to be implying with "As for VOIP, those are indeed handled by 'external sound cards'", at least you aren't referencing that they aren't needed. What you're likely referring to sounds like a phone system DAC with an RJ-11 output and an RJ-45 input.



I certainly hope not because that's not even a debate, "real music is played with real instruments" is an appeal to nature fallacy, completely illogical.



See saw wave comparisons of the "fundamentals" you're referring to, frequencies above 10KHz are common and required to provide richness to sound, or to put it in other words, not to sound like shit.



>Removed context

Good job.



You can call me an idiot, I never said or implied otherwise. I was pointing out your contradiction, saying that you weren't posting to bash the OP and then calling me an idiot. I didn't say I wasn't going to call the reader an idiot, hence no contradiction on my part.



It's an inference based on the way you've responded and yes, is subjective (everything is), the reader can decide whether or not to agree with me.



Other things aside I commend this part of your reply.

So you're denying that I was correct?



My point is that the wider frequency response is often exaggerated or misleading due to incomplete information. For example, a certain "high-end" speaker had a claimed frequency response of 5Hz - 50kHz. That should be more than acceptable according to your specifications, right? But that's not including the rolloff or accuracy. What's the point of having a claimed range to 50kHz when at 18kHz we're already getting -3dB? Here's just one snippet that mentions the frequency boosts from a reputable headphone maker.

Regarding the ability to still hear/see the notes, that's because besides the fundamentals there are the overtones that go along with it--all going off the same time for each individual note. A middle C note played on a piano will have every C above sound as well as multiple (I'm in the infinite camp) notes in between. I won't go into this because it's a topic that is still being researched--hence the synths and algorithms are getting more and more accurate.

To which range are you referring to hearing above: your 10Hz - 30kHz or the general 20Hz - 20kHz? The thing about hearing is everyone is different but people on average usually fall between the 20Hz - 20kHz range. As for following standards, I agree completely--I've always said that progress never comes from conforming.



So you're just going off what you heard from a friend and yet I'm the one who doesn't know what I'm talking about. Also, there are ways to counter the "environmental deficiencies copper and silver are" susceptible to, but that's something for another time.



A) What happened to using gold to counter the corrosion? Explain what you mean by "finer mechanical connections".

B) I'm not sure if you've noticed (or ever had the misfortune), but the jacks fail much more often than the plugs hence the insertion/withdrawal cycles rating on jacks. If a plug fails first, more often than not, it was due to human error on the user's end whether moving away from the device, exerting perpendicular forces against the plug, etc. Not to mention as the plug increases with size, so does its weight--you should understand this with respects to its diameter. The larger jack has to bear this much larger load, never mind that the plug's grip/handle is much larger as well.

Regardless, my main point was to get the right size plug that matches the device's jack.



Cotton - possibly the most comfortable of materials but susceptible to wear and odors
Foam - will have the best fit and isolation but some do not like the texture
Silicone - will not wear out but it's the least comfortable



Off the top of my head, Grado, Sennheiser, Audio-Technica, KEF, and V-MODA all make (or made) sub-$400 wooden and/or metal headphones.



Except that one doesn't need to have wireless capabilities to transmit signals in these frequencies. There are loads of articles regarding this topic, not to mention the fact that the standard itself is ever-changing due to the sheer number of devices causing interference. That in itself should be a clue.



Oh, but it *is* a DAC. Take it from the official website, which is at least more accurate than TigerDirect. That said, it's full of "fluff" too. "World's first"? It *is* really cheap though, so it has that going for it. I'll have to check this out myself--consider my interest piqued. I'm always interested in what budget options are available as it shows progress especially in efficiency.



Not illogical--archaic. Turntables weren't instruments until the '90s.



Again, those aren't the fundamentals, but simply overtones. Furthermore, as these frequencies are boosted (as explained earlier) it's understandable that the overtones will exhibit a similar pattern to the fundamentals, but anyone with knowledge of acoustics will tell you what the actual notes are.



Only as much as you did. *pats self on back*



"Not to bash the OP, but a lot of what was written either doesn't apply to the average consumer--especially the lazy ones--is misleading, or just plain wrong."

was written in the very beginning whereas the

"Firstly, you're the idiot. Never have I seen a post so ignorant. The web is loaded with information and yet you seem to get everything wrong."

was in the final section regarding your Fluff section. So either you're reading my post completely out of order or *you're* the one taking things out of context.



You seem to derive quite a lot without knowing much.

"Clearly you've never analyzed to the frequencies used in most electronic tracks"
"Everything else is unrelated, you're taking my words out of context and attacking things I haven't said."
"Are you fucking retarded?"
"To me, a software engineer and technology enthusiast, it just makes you sound like an idiot."
"...you're the idiot here who thinks modern music only entails frequencies that a piano can reach. Educate yourself before you wreck yourself."
"You're no audio engineer, don't even kid yourself; I'd be surprised if you were even through the basics of a 101 class. You don't even know the basic wave forms that are used in the vast majority of software and hardware synthesizers, your musing on what frequencies are used in modern music clearly shows this. I bet if I shoved a DAW in your face you'd sit there with a dumbfounded expression not understanding what half of it does."
"Stop acting like you know more than you do."

...But yeah, I'm totally the one attacking.



*bows*

P.S. Don't bail out on the DAW bet now. I could use help building my mobile rig.
P.P.S. That's funny right there
P.P.P.S You still haven't pointed out where I denied scientific fact, didn't know what I'm talking about, or attacked your points

mmm the best conductor was silver i agree.
but the best Audio Out conductor was Gold because it give less coloration
i got that info when at USF on indonesia the Speaker was representative from Crystal Cable corp.



mmm arent shure 846 and UE11 was IEM not headphones, because it was on In Ear Canal to use it

5.1, 6.1 7.1 was total of driver or speaker being used, some brand that produce some headphones always write that on their product was 5.1, 6.1 or 7.1 but the fact they use only 2.0 (2 driver) and the right one was "the sound produce like a 5.1 or 7.1" if this one i agree example at the Logitech they say the truth for their product.

Either you heard wrong or he was giving you false information. Gold will always add color because it's another material different from the cable itself. As I've mentioned previously, this will also cause more loss because the signal has to transfer from the cable through the gold plating to the post/jack. And as you know gold is less conductive than the common copper wire, never mind silver, you've essentially bottle-necked your cable with gold contacts.



I hope you're kidding because earphones *are* headphones--circumaural and supra-aural are just more common to consumers.

As for speaker count, you're telling this to the guy who works with audiophile-grade AV equipment? No 7.1 headphone?

Copper and silver degrades over time. Copper goes statue of liberty green and silver turns black. Gold is a very stable element (non-reactive) which is probably why it is used quite often in electronic components and is more valued as jewelry.

I believe you're referring to corrosion, in which case, you're absolutely right. However, the degradation of the signal through oxidized silver or copper is much less than that of going through gold.

I was considering getting a pair of Astro A50's or Steelseries H wireless, but decided to go with Audio Technica ATH-AG1 and a Fiio Andes DAC.