 |
Sennheiser MX 680 Adidas
by DanB7290
So, like the other reviewer, I bought these for the gym, as the Apple Headphones simply kept falling out of my ears, and I didn't fancy wrecking my Bose or AKG headphones with sweat.
These are supposedly waterproof to the point that they will survive a cycle through the washing machine. I'm not brave enough to test the theory, but ... in the grand scheme of things, it's nice to know that they won't be bothered by me sweating during exercise.
The fitting I can only describe as OK. It's better than the woeful fit of the old Apple headphones, and there are all sorts of different bits to adjust the fitting to your ears. They have the rubber fins on them which are meant to stop them falling out during running, and yes they do work; however they are very uncomfortable to wear, no matter what you do with the rubber bits. To ease the pain slightly, I'd definitely recommend using the foam covers, as it's far better than simply sticking some plastic in your ear.
Now the sound quality. If you read a lot of my reviews, you will know that this is my most important factor when it comes to headphones. A pair of sports headphones like these will generally sacrifice some of the sound quality, but for good reason. They are designed to be semi open, so you can still be aware of what's going on around you. This is very handy when, for example, running outside, as you can hear traffic and people much more clearly, but when indoors at the gym, it's not so good. I prefer to listen to my own music while exercising and shouldn't be able to hear the generic rubbish that they put on over the speaker system at the gym over my iPod. I believe there is an in ear canal version of these headphones available, and at an educated guess, I'd say for indoor use they would be better.
Sound quality in general isn't too bad, but as most people like to listen to dance music while working out, I would have expected a tad more bass. They seem to focus more on the treble, and the bass seems somewhat lacking.
Still, they're not too bad, certainly an improvement over the bundled Apple 'buds, and at £25 they're pretty good. But personally, I'd like to see more bass, and would rather spend a little more to get this. Sennheiser have released a new version (MX685 I believe) and I'll review them when I get hold of a pair, but for now, these will do for the gym.
Read the complete review |
 |
Monster Beats by Dr. Dre Beats Pro Studio High-Definition Headphones
by DanB7290
Many of you know I'm not a fan of the Beats Solo HD. The listening experience doesn't match the price in my opinion. I'd heard better things about the higher end of the Beats range, so tried these out.
First up, the size. They are at least twice the size of the Solo HD, which is fine if you're at home, or at a desk with a computer. ... But on the move, with your iPhone? Not so great; they're simply too bulky. A huge positive is they do feel extremely well built, which is more than I can say for some rival headphones of similar price.
The design is better than the Solo HD, more metal and less plastic can only be a good thing, but these are still distinctively Beats, so they'll look good with your Hollister gilet and sweat pants, which seems to be the standard uniform for posh students round here.
Now it all falls apart. The sound quality, whilst a much better improvement over the Solo HD, which I thought had a muddy, jumbled up sound caused by way too much bass, still suffers from being too bass heavy. The treble and mids are clearer than the Solos, but nowhere near the clarity you'd get from, say, the Bowers & Wilkins P5, which I would say offer the best sound quality for headphones designed to be used with mobile devices. However, these are over £100 more expensive than the P5, so I'd expect them to be better. They do offer active noise cancellation, which the P5 doesn't, so realistically the nearest rival is the Bose QuietComfort 15, which I happen to own and believe are the best noise cancelling headphones on the market.
The Beats noise cancellation is poor at best. You cannot use the headphones without it activated, and when the battery dies, so does the music. However I will not deduct marks here, as many similar products, including Bose QC15s, also do this. Where they fall behind the QC15s is that they don't cancel out half as much ambient background noise as the Bose ones do. Whilst no Active Noise Cancelling headphones offer 100% noise reduction, the Beats system is particularly bad. It wouldn't even drown out the noise of the fridge in the work staff room, which many cheaper headphones do no problem. Furthermore, the Beats Noise Cancellation means that when no music is playing, there is a distinct audible hiss, which is bad if you wish to use them purely to block out noise. The Bose QC15s have no audible hiss, and so can be used simply to block out unwanted noise.
So overall, a poor showing from Monster/Beats. While better than the Solos, they still have too much bass, which destroys the listening experience, the noise cancelling is inadequate and produces an irritating hissing noise. At £350 they are far too expensive, and for £50 less, you are far better off with Bose QC15s, which have better overall sound quality, and the best active noise cancellation on the market today.
Read the complete review |
