Sennheiser PC37X randomly goes bad after disconnecting the cable ?
Greetings, Yesterday I was using my headset like normal with my macbook, just listening to music and on a call with people like usual, and the headset was perfectly fine. The stock wire that came with the headset is extremely long and yesterday it annoyed me very much that it kept getting tangled with itself, so I decided to see if the cable is replaceable. I pulled out the cable from the headset and saw the adapter, and looked online for a replacement. Upon plugging it back in, the audio sounded extremely muffled and washed out. Im not sure what I did wrong to make it mess up like that as I've always taken good care of it, ive had it for about 2 years and its always just been chilling on my desk, but anywho I thought the cable just went bad and ordered a replacement. The replacement came, and the issue is still persistant, so I am not sure what the issue is I've tried multiple different headsets and the issue is not with the port, and I also tried it with my windows laptop and...
Apr 23, 2024
- Buy the CD (often referred to as "Redbook" or "lossless") and rip it losslessly to FLAC files using a free program called Exact Audio Copy. CD-quality is done at 16-bit depth and sampled at 44,100 Hz; 16-bits * 44,100 samples/second * 2 channels (left and right) = 1411.2 kbps for uncompressed CDs.
- Buy the lossless CD-quality direct from websites like 7Digital.
- Buy HiRez FLAC files from sources like 7Digital or HDTracks. HiRez is defined as being stored at 24-bit depth and sampled at frequencies of at least 44,100 hz (96,000 hz is common).
I often made the decision between CD-quality (either via disc or digital download) vs. HiRez by first checking "the dynamic range database" (http://dr.loudness-war.info/). If users/posters had data supporting that the HiRez version had gotten a better recorded version (less-brickwalled, more dynamic range), that would often drive me to splurge for the HiRez version rather than Redbook. For modern/synthetic music (stuff that was "played" through a digital system before it was recorded) I generally find their to be minimal benefit to anything beyond "high-bitrate-lossy" (256 kbps or 320 kbps), but for anything with strings that are plucked (piano's, acoustic guitars, violin/cello/etc), and for very complex or nuanced vocals, I think the difference between 320 kbps and CD-quality is pretty significant. If the CD and the HiRez are of the same mastering, I think the difference between 16-bit "CD quality" and 24-bit "HiRez" is usually pretty minimal, but not necessarily "always zero" the way some will claim. I stream my local FLAC files and cast to my whole-home-audio of Google Chromecast Audios by way of the Plex Media Server that I run within my home. I recently signed up for a 30-day-free-trial of a streaming service called Qobuz, and I think I"m going to keep it. I really like it. I tried Tidal and liked it, but Qobuz works better for me. Tidal sounded great; it was clearly a step up, sound-quality-wise, from lossy streaming services, but I often felt like it didn't sound IDENTICAL to my own CD rips. Sometimes I thought it was as benign as maybe Tidal bumped the gain up, even just a little bit, to make Tidal sound louder than the CD? Sometimes I could hear the "watermark" some refer to with Tidal. Sometimes I couldn't. With Qobuz, so far, my experience has been that Qobuz streaming, at CD quality and at HiRez, sounds (to my ears) IDENTICAL to my own FLAC library of CD rips and HiRez purchases. The fact that it supposedly integrates well with Roon will probably be the final straw/tipping point that causes me to give Roon a go sometime in 2019 too. - "Can I truly get the most out of HiFi music with standard equipment?" In short: no. I generally can't hear much difference between CD quality and compressed "streaming" music on what I consider "standard equipment," but on my best speakers-and-headphones, the difference is real. In my opinion and experience, the last component to upgrade in the chain is the DAC. It's not unimportant. That's not what I'm suggesting at all. What I'm suggesting is that upgrading the DAC will make the least benefit/improvement to sound quality UNTIL your source material (files) are in good shape and you have quality transducers (speakers or headphones) to play them out of (and obviously, whatever speakers/headphones you end up with need to be properly powered, so make sure you don't buy high-impedence low-sensitivity headphones if you don't also have or plan to buy a proper AMP to drive them with). Get your files right, and get a quality pair of speakers or headphones (and whatever power you need to properly drive them) first, then look into different DACs, is my general recommendation. Hope this helps.- I'm very confident that getting a "better" (more dynamic) recording can result in a better listening experience. And *sometimes* a better recording is available via "Hi-Rez Master" compared to what was released via "redbook" CD.
- If the Hi-Rez version isn't a "better recording" than the CD (CD rips have the same dynamic range as the Hi-Rez Master), I personally don't usually buy them; however, I am *open to the idea* that 24-bit bit-depth can add audible value over 16-bit (CD-quality) bit-depth. I see people make the argument that it only increases the minimum and maximum dynamic range of the sample (to below-inaudible on the low-end and above-pain-threshold on the high end), and I don't question that; but I've never understood why people are so confident that all the different (smaller) steps between 0 and 2^24 (compared to 2^16) are inaudible to the human ear; I'm not 100% convinced it is, but I do think it's, at-best, minimal-and-law-of-diminishing-returns-y.
- I'm personally not much of a believer of sampling rates beyond 44.1 khz (or 48 khz). I think they're probably just taking up extra disc space without any audible benefits (at least none that I've personally ever heard when A-B comparing a 96 kHz FLAC purchase against a 24-bit 48 kHz downsampling of the exact same file using Audacity or similar).
But if someone tells me they can hear a difference with their equipment between 24/48 and 24/192, I don't have much appetite to argue the point; it's enough for me to just say that I can't (yet) with my (current) gear. I've certainly experienced PLENTY of situations in which someone on the internet insisted to me that I couldn't hear the difference between 320 kbps MP3 and CD, which I know to be incorrect. When CD quality (16 bit/44.1 khz) is "done right" (well-recorded, with lots of dynamic range retained), it sounds GREAT to my ears...http://www.2l.no/hires/ Same gear, same master, same source, different bit rates/sampling frequencies and formats.