Headphones required!

Fed up talking videogames? Why?
User avatar
Chestnut Snowleaves
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Leicestershire

PostHeadphones required!
by Chestnut Snowleaves » Mon Oct 05, 2009 5:49 pm

For an iPod, something not in-ear but still portable, sub £30 with decent sound quality. How's that for a challenge! :o

jawafour wrote:You definitely have the biggest one, mhtl - it's strawberry-floatin' massive!
User avatar
Johnny Ryall
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Macraig
Location: Box Elder, MO

PostRe: Headphones required!
by Johnny Ryall » Mon Oct 05, 2009 6:47 pm

What's wrong with in ear? Was going to recommend these as they have amazing sound quality and are mega cheap but your rule ruined everything. :(

User avatar
Chestnut Snowleaves
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Leicestershire

PostRe: Headphones required!
by Chestnut Snowleaves » Mon Oct 05, 2009 6:59 pm

They're for my dad, and he has, um, dodgy ears. In-ear are a definite no. :(

jawafour wrote:You definitely have the biggest one, mhtl - it's strawberry-floatin' massive!
User avatar
PCCD
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Headphones required!
by PCCD » Tue Oct 06, 2009 8:27 pm


The Holly and Delusi wrote:PENALTY: Blatant lies. Five minutes in the Sin Bin.
User avatar
Chestnut Snowleaves
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Leicestershire

PostRe: Headphones required!
by Chestnut Snowleaves » Wed Oct 07, 2009 8:43 am

Thanks fella. I went with the 200's instead as they were only a few quid more at Amazon. Nice one. :D

jawafour wrote:You definitely have the biggest one, mhtl - it's strawberry-floatin' massive!
User avatar
Pez
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Bristol
Contact:

PostRe: Headphones required!
by Pez » Wed Oct 07, 2009 12:47 pm

more heat than light wrote:Thanks fella. I went with the 200's instead as they were only a few quid more at Amazon. Nice one. :D


It might be a bit late but the PX100s are better than the PX200s. The 200s have sound isolation which helps block out outside noise but this compromises on sound quality.

Overall the PX100 are a better a choice IMO.

User avatar
Chestnut Snowleaves
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Leicestershire

PostRe: Headphones required!
by Chestnut Snowleaves » Wed Oct 07, 2009 12:53 pm

:fp:

I thought the 200's would be better seeing as they're a later model. Bugger, they're on their way now. Maybe I'll try for an exchange.

jawafour wrote:You definitely have the biggest one, mhtl - it's strawberry-floatin' massive!
User avatar
Pez
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Bristol
Contact:

PostRe: Headphones required!
by Pez » Wed Oct 07, 2009 1:06 pm

more heat than light wrote::fp:

I thought the 200's would be better seeing as they're a later model. Bugger, they're on their way now. Maybe I'll try for an exchange.


The 200s are still good headphones.

I'm sure your Dad will be more than happy with them.

User avatar
Chestnut Snowleaves
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Leicestershire

PostRe: Headphones required!
by Chestnut Snowleaves » Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:24 pm

Pez wrote:
more heat than light wrote::fp:

I thought the 200's would be better seeing as they're a later model. Bugger, they're on their way now. Maybe I'll try for an exchange.


The 200s are still good headphones.

I'm sure your Dad will be more than happy with them.


Ah fair do's. He's pretty old anyway, his hearing probably isn't what it used to be. :wink:

I just feel pretty silly for paying three quid more for an inferior set.

jawafour wrote:You definitely have the biggest one, mhtl - it's strawberry-floatin' massive!

Return to “Stuff”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Parkreiner and 56 guests