Help
Sign In
audiophile
February 2009 
Ultimate Ears UE11 Pro Earphones
Posted on Dec 20th, 2007
by 
Scott
Scott
I just read this review. They're supposed to be the best earphones on earth. And they're only $1,150.
Sound crazy to spend that much on earphones? Well, like the review says... many of you already have spent more than that on an HDTV to get what you look at to look better. Why not spend the money to get what you listen to to sound better? It'll mean that you have to stop downloading those crappy 96kbps iTunes files -- you may as well use $20 headphones for those.
I'm an audiophile, so they actually seem worth it to me. And let's define "audiophile", just to be clear. Merriam-Webster defines it as "a person who is enthusiastic about high-fidelity sound reproduction." But the reason for that enthusiasm has to do with having a developed and refined ability to perceive coloration and variation in sound that most people just can't. Just like top chefs have an extremely refined palate, and can taste minute differences that most of us can't, or top cinematographers can perceive tiny differences in lighting and mood and take advantage of that to deliver perfect visual representations for a director, and frequently make it even better than the director imagined. That's why I'm an audiophile... I can hear differences in sound that most people around me just can't. The good news is that it enhances my life in so many ways. I love music, and I love being around music. The bad news is that it gets expensive to continue to refine my sense of hearing. :-)
I already own Grado RS-1's (yes, they're made of wood), which are off-the-charts kick-ass amazingly good, so I probably won't be going for the UE 11's right now, but, one day... passive noise reduction by being an exact fit for your own ear canal, with four drivers in the tiny earbud? Damn, that's sweet.
Sound crazy to spend that much on earphones? Well, like the review says... many of you already have spent more than that on an HDTV to get what you look at to look better. Why not spend the money to get what you listen to to sound better? It'll mean that you have to stop downloading those crappy 96kbps iTunes files -- you may as well use $20 headphones for those.
I'm an audiophile, so they actually seem worth it to me. And let's define "audiophile", just to be clear. Merriam-Webster defines it as "a person who is enthusiastic about high-fidelity sound reproduction." But the reason for that enthusiasm has to do with having a developed and refined ability to perceive coloration and variation in sound that most people just can't. Just like top chefs have an extremely refined palate, and can taste minute differences that most of us can't, or top cinematographers can perceive tiny differences in lighting and mood and take advantage of that to deliver perfect visual representations for a director, and frequently make it even better than the director imagined. That's why I'm an audiophile... I can hear differences in sound that most people around me just can't. The good news is that it enhances my life in so many ways. I love music, and I love being around music. The bad news is that it gets expensive to continue to refine my sense of hearing. :-)
I already own Grado RS-1's (yes, they're made of wood), which are off-the-charts kick-ass amazingly good, so I probably won't be going for the UE 11's right now, but, one day... passive noise reduction by being an exact fit for your own ear canal, with four drivers in the tiny earbud? Damn, that's sweet.
Access: Public
