Sennheiser PX100 Review

Finally, a positive review!

Fig. 1 Sennheiser PX 100

The Sennheiser PX100 has nearly everything you would want from an open air headphone under $50.

Comfort: These cans are a pleasure to wear, they do not hurt your ears after prolonged use if properly adjusted. The headband has ample padding, so it does not dig into your scalp. Each side ( left and ride) slide up and down, they are fully adjustable for different head sizes.

Perhaps my one complaint is that the foam earpads on each driver wear out over time. They can still be used as they lose their "fluffiness", but that will affect comfort.

The foam earpads will easily withstand 9 months to one year of moderate use, plus they can be replaced for less than $10, not a big issue.

Portability & Design: The PX100s fold up nicely for travel, I usually don't use the included case. Two well-constructed hinges on the headband allow these headphones to fold up into a nice flat profile, each earpad also swivels to achieve the flat profile.

Fig. 2 PX100s folded up

This design is surprisingly durable, I have carried these in my pockets folded up over the years. There was no damage.

The Sennheisers look sharp too, unlike bulky Grado models, great for the style conscious consumer. The wiring is fairly robust. I have put these wires through a great deal of wear and tear. My pair did not see any noticeable wear until three years of use.

Sound:

The PX100s have a 32 ohm impedance rating (see my post on impedance). They are easily driven by iPods and other portable players without an amplifier.

Highs: The highs are detailed, although not quite at the level of higher models costing more than a $100! The PX100s can handle highs well without distortion, and that is a big sticking point.

Mids: The PX100 has a smooth midrange presentation. Vocals are rather warm in my opinion, which is fine. The mids are almost laid-back, not too aggressive in detail.

Lows: Bass is definitely present, but it is controlled and tight most of the time. The PX100s can handle bass heavy music with almost no distortion at very high volume. Low frequency response is punchy, and will be sure to please.

An amp is not required, unless you want to create some extra depth in the soundstage and some more definition all around. For most users, the PX100s will be good to go without an amp. Burn in time was minimal. For use with a desktop PC, consider purchasing a headphone extension cord to make life easier.

If you are somebody who wants a very neutral presentation flushing out all the details of the music, then this is not the right pair of headphones. In my experience, I've found that most listeners in general prefer the warm sound the PX100 produces over a highly analytical flat response.

Caveat: These headphones do not block outside noise, and your music will leak into the surrounding environment to some extent. Others will be able to hear your headset if your volume is high enough. If you need to listen to music in loud environments, this is not for you; however, open air designs have positives too.

The open design allows you to hear things like cars on the road, and helps with awareness of surroundings when necessary. It also provides a more "natural" timbral presentation than closed earphones at this price range.

My Recommendation: Buy this for either your portable or computer use for rich sound, when noise isolation is not required. Lowest prices start around $35, be wary of fakes on Ebay.

*Feel free to ask any questions*

The Ads?

Someone asked me why there are ads here. Blogspot does not require them, I put them up to make some $$$, simple as that. There is also a custom search box tailored to the topics on this site.

Thank you Google AdSense

iPod Touch first & second generations: Falls short where it counts

Fig. 1 iPod touch 1st generation

The iPod touch has many features the iPhone does. Both the iPhone and iPod sport musical capabilities, a video player, and applications. Both the first and second generation do audio, video, apps, and web access with Wi-Fi.

I could go on about all the terrific features and applications the iPod touch has to offer, but that would distract from the main theme of this blog, which is audio performance of the product.

The first generation ipod is slim, and the form factor is minimal. It lacks external volume controls, you need to touch the screen a certain number of times just to adjust the volume, a difficult task if the device has the hold button on while you're jogging! The bezel around the glass front screen is another problem. It is sharp and awkward to hold. The back of the unit is "scratch me silly" chrome, which looks like it will get marks if you breathe on it.

Fig 2. iPod touch 2nd generation

Many of the basic design problems I mentioned with the 1st gen iPod Touch have been fixed for the second generation. This model features external volume controls, a basic necessity. I don't care how much touch technology evolves, some buttons are absolutely essential for smooth operation. The second gen also has a smooth rounded bezel which is easy to hold, with a smooth curved back. The iPod is very easy to hold, like a smooth pebble which fits in the palm of your hand.

Another new physical feature is the addition of a speaker, similar to the iPhone. The sound quality is not great, but it is sufficient for games, sampling music, and watching short videos. Unfortunately, the delicate chrome backing is still present.

The touch interface is pretty much the same as the iPhone for both the 1st and 2nd generation touch iPods, sans the phone features obviously. Navigating the music library is simple, intuitive, and the touch interface is brilliantly responsive.

Finally, the AUDIO review.

AUDIO (tested using Grado SR-60s, and Sennheiser PX100s)
The Grado SR-60s may be considered near reference headphones in the $100 under category, and the PX100s are an extremely brilliant pair as well. Both reproduce audio beautifully, they're driven easily by portable, so the variable of audio quality is largely on the iPod.

1st generation & 2nd generation: With Apple's equalizer "presets" off, the output sounded fairly flat. The soundstage was shallow, I could hear the music but it lacked detail around the separate instruments and the vocals. I used various genres of music encoded at 320 kbps, and some lossless files, so the source files were not an issue.

The mids were mediocre, the highs were mostly crip with some harsh distortion on a few tracks, and with the eq off the bass was hardly there. Vocals, especially at the midrange did not convey enough of the detail in the singer's voice. Some of these characteristics may be more nuanced, like some of the minor intentional distortion heard in a singer's voice. My Sony NWZ-A729 digital Walkman can reproduce some of that natural distortion, but this doesn't sound natural on the iPod.

Even without the eq (equalizer), I expected to hear bass guitars, drums, and other instruments in the low end as distinct elements of the entire musical composition. Instead the bass was largely ignored by the devices. Whatever I managed to hear was merely a muddy blob of "thumpy" low end sound. To be fair, I turned on the bass booster in the eq to see if that would help provide some "umph" to the music.

BIG MISTAKE! The eq's bass boost just ruined the low end by mushing up all the lows, until too much of it was distorted. There was very little detail in the bass, and the low end distortion was distracting. Apple does not allow a user to customize the equalizer, so presets are all you have to use. These presets are all you have to work with.

I had expected that the second generation touch to sound better due to a redesign, but the audio quality was on par with the first generation. Perhaps the 2nd gen seemed it played a bit louder, but the signal was still muddy. The audio review applies to both generations, unfortunately both sounded similar.

The lack of defined bass, inability to discern "low" details, and the overall shallow soundstage left me wanting more. Many users will buy this simply because it is an iPod, but it lacks the "umph" or kick which gives music the right flavor. Just like a good recipe for food, missing ingredients can bring down the whole meal.

At this price point, Apple should have spent time developing better sonic performance.*

MY RECOMMENDATION: If you value audio quality, look elsewhere for an mp3/audio player. The iPod touch does a lot, but cannot hold a tune well. I suggest the Sony NWZ-A729, review coming shortly.


*FYI: I don't have anything against Apple. I was satisfied with the 5th generation iPod video.

What is burn in? Patience is a virtue

Fig.1 The part in the center with the silver colored ring around it is the diaphragm. It basically acts like a speaker, moving and pushing air to create sound.

The other day one of my friends asked me what "burn-in" is after reading the last post. In the world of headphones burn-in is a controversial issue, so let me first state that I believe it exists.

Imagine you buy a new baseball glove, it is rather stiff. The glove is not at the optimal condition for peak performance on the field, after using it for a while the player while see the leather soften up and become nice and flexible. Another example is a brand new car. The dealers, and common knowledge dictate that one should not push the engine too hard until the engine essentially had time break in.

Burn-in is another term for breaking in headphones. Perhaps one of the most important parts of the headphone to change in the burn-in process is the diaphragm. Wikipedia defines a diaphragm as: a thin, semi-rigid membrane that vibrates to produce or transmit sound waves. Bringing back the baseball glove analogy, this membrane hasn't had time to stretch out yet because sound hasn't been played long enough for it to move around and adjust, with enough use it becomes more flexible.

The debate in the audio community centers around burn-in as a myth. Many claim headphones don't burn in, that it's a psychological issue. Skeptics say people simply get used to the unique sound of a different model of headphones. There is a mountain of anecdotal evidence to suggest otherwise, too many people find an improvement in audio quality as a pair of headphones are used longer.

Burning-in is a simple procedure, one pairs the headphone with a sound source and lets it play continuously for several hours at a time. It can be music, or even white noise. The object is to move the drivers and the diaphragm so it will stretch out and be able to produce more dynamic sound than a new membrane which is initially too tight to move well enough. Burning in does not go on forever, there is likely some plateau point where the peak level of fidelity is reached.

I've tested the validity of burn-in before. Another friend of mine's bought 2 pairs of headphones a while ago, both pairs were the same model. He burned in one pair from each set respectively for two weeks while I waited patiently! So I went into the test blind and rated all the pairs from the same audio source. The results showed the burned in headphones had higher level audio quailty. The music was smoother, and less harsh than the brand new pairs.

New headphones may sound like they are underwater, after enough playing time this opens up and mellows out.

So if you buy some headphones, and find the sound is lacking when you bring it home, just hook it up to something and let it play for a few days. You might be pleasantly surprised by the improvement. This requires a little patience of course :)


Caveat: Don't expect burn-in on every headphone. I've noticed the cheap apple stock earbuds don't seem to benefit from time.