Something In The Ear
Sydney Morning Herald
Monday March 31, 2003
In-ear headphones combine the tiny size of ear buds with the comfort and quality sound of light headphones. Rod Easdown likes what he hears.
Ear buds sure seem to have become popular lately. Everywhere you look, you see people with these tiny sound pods in their ears. But I wonder if their popularity has been forced on us by their manufacturers. I've never used a pair that I've liked - the sound quality is not as good as lightweight headphones, and I've always found that after 20 minutes or so they start getting uncomfortable. For all of that, I've talked to plenty of users who think they're just fine.
Manufacturers like ear buds because they're cheaper to make than conventional headphones and occupy significantly less space. By providing ear buds with their portables rather than headphones, they can use far smaller packages, with lower production costs and cheaper shipping.
Size is also their chief appeal to consumers. At the end of a journey a pair of ear buds can be wound up into almost nothing at all and placed in a pocket or a purse without fuss. But headphones, with that long, curved headband, need a lot more space than ear buds, and when you try to fish them out of your bag they tend to snag everything in there.
Ear buds have two problems. They don't always want to stay put, and to get the best sound quality you frequently have to apply light pressure to them so they snuggle into the entrance of the ear canal tight enough to form a seal. Take the pressure off and you immediately lose bass.
A number of manufacturers have addressed the first problem by putting buds on small frames that fit around the ear and hold the bud securely, even when you're running. Now some are addressing the second problem. Just recently I've noticed a few brands offering buds on headbands that not only hold them securely in place but also apply the light pressure they need to form a seal around the ear canal. Of course the problem is that the headband is back, and even though it's light and narrow it is nevertheless there to snag stuff in your bag.
So the question is, are ear buds a viable alternative to light headphones that occupy only fractionally more space? Well, there's only one way to find out.
I was highly surprised after trying out three pairs of these new devices, which some manufacturers call in-earphones and some others call in-ear headphones. The sound quality is a big improvement on conventional ear buds and the comfort is well up too. I'd be happy to pay for two of them and one of them has such an ingenious solution to the storage problem that it will doubtless be copied by everyone in no time flat.
Infofile
Koss
9647 2009
www.koss.com
Nike by Philips
1300 363 391
www.philips.com.au
Sony
1300 137 669
www.sony.com.au
Three contenders
None of these three headphones comes with particularly good instructions, and illustrations for fitting, where provided at all, are poor.
Koss P5
$29.95
They look good and have a separate under-chin volume control, and are the easiest to put on. The comfort isn't great - they need to be teased into the ear canal a little - but once there, they stay put. The sound is very much bass oriented and the highs can get very brittle and sharp, and quite hard work at high volumes.
Sony MDRA35G
$49.95
It takes a little while to figure out how they fit but once done these sit very comfortably. The sound quality is surprisingly good. The bass is only reasonable but they handle mid and high frequencies very successfully, with just a little harshness high up. Best of all, they're triple-hinged, and fold up to about the size of a compact mobile phone.
Nike by Philips SBCHJ020
$59.95
It takes a long time to work out the fit (over the top of the ears and back around the neck, above the collar line), but once in place these are also very comfortable. The sound quality is the best here with excellent definition across the full audible range and no sign of harshness. These are also sweat resistant.
The verdict
The Nike by Philips has the best sound quality and they and the Sonys are level-pegging on comfort. But I'll give it to the Sonys because the sound quality is quite acceptable and their easy folding makes them brilliantly convenient. And they're $10 cheaper.
Next week: We compare 34 cm portable televisions.
© 2003 Sydney Morning Herald