Bill, how much are you willing to spend for really good sound?

Dave

Under $30 is going to be tough. I use the Shure E3c for my iPod, but the E2cs sound pretty darn good (the E2C-n is the exact same thing) and can be had for about $70 on Amazon. I think you'll find them well worth the investment. They sound better and will last longer (and if they don't, Shure has a really great repair/replacement service, in my experience). I'm sure this applies to other higher end earphones, but I've been happy enough with mine that I haven't tried anything else.

Hi Bill. Not sure how helpful this will be, but I'll try.

The best headphone sound I've heard near the $30 price point (though it's well above) is the Sennheiser PX100 foldable 'phones. Works well with portable devices. Sound is well balanced if a little murkey compared to really good sound. It's a solid step up from Apple earbuds. Then again, they cost $50. Available at Circuit City and many other places.

A relevant aside: Over time I've grown disenchanted with in-ear phones, like the ones I reviewed for Stereophile (e3c, e4c), though I haven't tried the very best models. I've come to think they have a distinct high-frequency distortion signature that I don't care for. I find them artificially resolving of detail and lacking in richness--a little strident and flat, in other words, even with custom ear molds and an excellent fit. Still, we're talking far better sound than Apple's earbuds.

e4c review

HeadRoom has an "under $40" recommendations page--but you'll do far better shpping in the $40-$100 section. I've found their opinions on headphones to be sound, generally.

Jim

I asked Wes Phillips about this, too, and here is what he said:

Quote:
I have been very impressed with the $80 Yuin PK2 earbuds. They come with three sets of mesh "covers," so there's a pretty good chance of a comfortable fit. They're much better than nearly any other earbud I've heard, but not super expensive.

HeadRoom has 'em.

IEMs can sound really, really good. Bill isn't planning to spend this much, but I'd put the Ultimate Ears Triple.fi 10 Pros up against ANY cans. They've got fantastic highs and clear, unbloated siesmic bass.

That said, buds have their place, as in exercising, as Bill plans. IEMs can work for this environment, but I think they're at their best for air travelers that want really high quality sonics and isolation from outside noise.

Dave

I agree about the high-end of mid-level IEMs, but I think it is a little nit-picky when we're talking about stepping up from apple earbuds.

I also second the Sennheiser PX100 recommendation if you don't mind some over-the-head phones. They sound pretty good, especially for the price.

As dcstep said, IEMs are probably best for at work and commuter (not in a car! but train/plane) listening. I use them on my way to work and they are freaking awesome at blocking out noise. Of course, I have missed announcements of service change and a train went express on me. I'm not exaggerating when I say they changed my life while traveling - no screaming kids or loud obnoxious people!

You can do IEMs when exercising, but they would get on my nerves. I don't listen to music while I work out, but if I did I'd probably go with earbuds (I wouldn't care too much about the fidelity when running anyway). Or maybe around-the-back type headphones.

AKG makes a bunch of earbuds. I've never heard them, but since you plan on exercising, I believe IEMs will just get sweaty and fall out, but little earbuds will do the job great.

AKG Buds

I feel the same way about the Bose producs for the iPod. Of course, they're trying to play to the iPod market mentality, which seems to think the more bass the better. Don't get me wrong, you gotta have bass - but there is so much more to it. Even the entry-level shures are way better in my opinion. If you can find them used, it may be a good way to go. You can sanitize them with a q-tip and a little alcohol (carefully), and buy some replacement sleeves (they're cheap). Given your comments about Bose, I'm sure you'd appreciate Shures or UEs.

If you get the right sleeves (or get custom sleeves) with some IEMs, some people swear by them even while exercising. I know musicians who use them on stage - they say that sweat is not an issue (I can personally say that sweat is an issue with foam sleeves, though). For me, I like to be able to hear other things while I work out (aside from my footsteps pounding in my ear), so IEMs don't do it for me. Nice IEMs with custom sleeves would blow your budget several times over, but think about it if you win the lottery.

You really may be able to get some over(or behind)-the-head phones to work wile exercising. If so, they sound much better at a given price point than buds, IMO. They're also more comfortable for my ears.

Quote:

Quote:
But the ONLY ones hooked up to iPods there are Bose - and they sounded really bad! Bloated bass, obscuring detail. I'm not a Bose "hater" and I love bass but boy those things sounded terrible. And half the people in the store have them on while they try out the iPods. Too bad...

The consumer reviews of Bose headphones on Amazon.com show there's an overwhelmingly large segment of the population that loves them. Aren't they just people who have a preference for a particular sound that's different from ours? There's nothing really bad about it? Is there?

I think those people just haven't heard the potential of good sound. I hadn't. I owned Bose speakers. Now, they're in my closet. I'd rather listen through my Grados.

Quote:
I owned Bose speakers. Now, they're in my closet. I'd rather listen through my Grados.

Are you saying that you're a closeted Bose lover?

Would you prefer your equipment to be an interpretation rather than a faithful reproduction?

Natal, I do not disagree with you that people look for different "coloration" in their music. This is why so many hi-fi companies exist, and why people always read the reviews. They want to see what equipment would best match their tastes and possibly enhance their system.

But! The result of the coloration is enjoyment of the music. With hi-fi systems, we get an 'aural stimulation,' and the more defined and revealing the music is, the greater our senses are tintillated.

Imagine looking at a painting (a song/composition/piece of music) in an artbook (the recording), a location of reproduced expression. If the artbook has poor quality paper, bad coloring and tints, and weak line definition, the less you will enjoy the painting. You may get the bigger picture, but you won't get the full effect. Thus, people buy nice, big, beautiful, high quality artbooks so that they can get as close to the experience as possible. People buy high-definition TVs so that they can see those blades of grass being tickled by the rain at a soccer game or to see the small cracks in the ground in the wonderful world of Shrek. These provide a greater stimulation of the senses as well, thus greater enjoyment.

The same can be said about high fidelity audio. If a trumpet feels brassy, if an orchestra is recorded with depth and width, or simply with the vocal sweetness of a singer. All provide a provokation of the senses.

Most people who buy the Bose products are unaware of their other options, like I was 3 years ago. The coloration provided by Bose products is a heavily emphasized midrange with no highs or lows (cue DUP: "must be Blose"). They sound great with heavily compressed music, powerful and big. But they started to warble when play "New World Symphony" through them, unable to handle the low bass in parts. There is also an overall lack of definition, with an emphasis on size and space instead. Finally, due to their funky speaker designs, don't even try finding the sweet spot. Its somewhere in the middle of the wall.

But this isn't about Bose, this is about people looking for different coloration in their music, and whether or not Bose provides a preferable coloration. I'd say for those who listen to a lot of heavily compressed music from the mid-90s or late 90s and millenial hip-hop, then the coloration is preferable. But if you're going to put on some Zeppelin, some Dvorak, some T-Monk, some Tito Puente, or any thing with real sonic character outside of 500Hz

Quote:

Quote:
But the ONLY ones hooked up to iPods there are Bose - and they sounded really bad! Bloated bass, obscuring detail. I'm not a Bose "hater" and I love bass but boy those things sounded terrible. And half the people in the store have them on while they try out the iPods. Too bad...

The consumer reviews of Bose headphones on Amazon.com show there's an overwhelmingly large segment of the population that loves them. Aren't they just people who have a preference for a particular sound that's different from ours? There's nothing really bad about it? Is there?

I took my own iPod with Apple lossless and AIFF files and listened to the BLOSE (as DUP would call them) there is no two ways about it they were truly awful. No question about it. The much cheaper Senneheisers kicked their A$$ for A LOT less money.

I've listened to the Sennheiser in ears and most of the Shure earbuds and they vary from sucking to being extremely underwhelming for the price. The iGrados would have been my suggestion. As I'm sure you know the iGrados sound good and are pretty light weight. Are you worried about the foam degrading? Sennheiser makes these:

http://www.sennheiserusa.com/newsite/productdetail.asp?transid=500504

To me they still sound like earbuds, but you might want to see if can listen to them.