(Original post by jasperstory)
Oh, you're so smart Profesh - or, maybe sophomoric is more the word.
Oh, come now; you
that my rebuke, sarcasm notwithstanding, was perfectly warranted.
No-one in their right mind would consider wearing the HD650s out in public; most notably, because they are 'open'-type: the world's many noises would invade, rendering music you are listening to likely inaudible.
Really; and not because listening to music on the move is 'anti-social'? Anyway, facetiousness aside; my
Super.fi 5 Pro
earbuds may not embody the apogee for home-listening, but I'd opt for an exemplary domestic (and superlative itinerant) listening-experience over audiophile-standard headphones that, short of reverting to offensively tinny and bass-deficient expendable 'buds, will be to the wholesale exclusion of the latter: HD650s are damned expensive, after all, although I am
somewhat au fait with their peerless reputation within the audiophile-community. Moreover my home, unlike the highways and byways of Bristol/Cheltenham, decidedly is
environment; whereas I couldn't give two shakes about whether perfect strangers must suffer the inconvenience of having to tap me on the shoulder in order to garner my attention: suffice it to say that the sort of person apt to solicit me from a street-corner, thus, is not one that I am typically inclined to oblige, in any event.
You've described to me a rather non-social world in which you inhabit; on this basis, I suppose my point about in-ear headphones being 'anti-social' isn't entirely relevant.
Well, quite. The potential advantage of 'sealing' earbuds does, I would contend, outweigh any speculated social inconvenience; which having, in my experience, amounted to nothing more than the momentary obfuscation of chance, infrequent encounters with sometime acquaintances (for which I'd have to cease my music anyway, 'sealing' earbuds or no).
I do, as many others, sometimes share in the pleasure of listening to in-ear headphones while wandering the streets on foot. However, there is something distinctly non-social about everyone being completely 'plugged in'.
Well, I don't share the (dis)pleasure of inhabiting a small hamlet or suburban utopia/dystopia of the kind where everyone knows everybody else, strangers are just "friends you haven't met yet", and one has a vested interest in hearing (and responding) to Mr. Smith's jovial salutations from across the picket-fence.
Incidentally, Shure and Senn both have traditionally-recognised pedigree. Super-Fi, I believe, do not. My point is that different people have different needs, and that, for some, the SuperFi and Shure E4c may suffice. For others, the non-in-ear models will be better (for example, they reduce "microphonics", are easier to take in and out, and, in certain environments, do make listening to music more 'social').
do enjoy a somewhat extensive pedigree; it just hasn't been, until recently, a particularly accessible
one. Furthermore, I'd contend that a key advantage of UE's 'super.fi' series is that, although 'sealing', they aren't true 'inner
-ear' monitors of the sort that tend to require a laborious, ten-step insertion and extraction process: which is to say, they tend to be effectively no less 'social' than conventional earbuds.
However, and I do think it's an important point, top-quality headphones from Senn, Grado, Beyerdynamic and so on are probably the best way to go for sound-quality alone.
right; although professional musicians and sound-engineers (whose needs diverge somewhat from those of even the most discerning audiophile from among the casual-listening demographic) might aver otherwise.