Good feedback, I think, all around. Timecop and Wayne love their iem's. Charlie and I think closed back over ears can do similar things.

I guess the message is that there are many ways to block out background noise, (including turning off the AC when listening to your amazing Ref;s .)

I guess my input would be to listen to and audition the headphones you are considering if you can, especially with the AC running, and compare SQ you hear vs. what the Ref's do for you. If the PSB headphones do it for you, that's great. There ARE other iem and closed back options if not. But you have set a high standard wanting to "replace" T Ref sound with headphones when AC is on. Me, I'd maybe just play on without AC for a bit. Duplicating T Ref SQ is a tall order!!!

Whatever works for you, but try it first.

Rick

Thank you so much everyone. I have a lot to digest/consider.

Note that I'm not expecting to equal the sound of the T Refs by using headphones. I'm just looking for something that is "basic" and yet audiophile quality.

As to trying different pairs, of course this is preferred but would be difficult. At the relatively low price point I'm considering spending (a few hundred) and the small amount of usage they would get, I'm simply looking for the greatest external noise reduction possible, even at the expense of some sound quality. I would consider it listening in "monitor mode". Besides, I'd only be using my Oppo's headphone amp.

GDHAL wrote:

Timecop wrote: I use passive noise-canceling in ears. Basically, the seal is such that I can clearly hear audiobooks and/or music on every airplane flight. I have no interest in active noise canceling after finding in-ears do the same, with better sound quality.

Just about any closed-back will work well-enough to block noise. Every Autumn Colorado hosts the Rocky Mountain audio-fest, where - along with GEt you can also listen to just about any in-ear, over-ear, open and closed back headphones you like. Plus, you’d get to say hi to Sandy.

I haven't had much experience listening with headphones, let alone in ear. Whenever seldom I would use an in ear device, I found it uncomfortable compared to over the ear. I have heard/read that quality in ear can deliver good quality, but I think I'd prefer something that completely surrounds the outer ear. I'm trying to cancel external noise from an air conditioner.

I used to hate in-ears the same reasons, which is why you need to try a few pair. There are tips that will be comfortable for any ear canal and effectively block noise. Trust me, your A/C isn’t as loud as an airplane during flight

That said, over ears can work. I’d always prefer passive noise cancellation vs. active, for nothing more than pure audio quality. The issue I see is good audio quality for cheap. That said, try this list:

www.lifewire.com/best-closed-back-headphones-4165267

charliehatch wrote: .... they say, "Carefully developed to produce ‘Room Gain’ – the energy and clarity that a room adds when listening to high-quality loudspeakers." Huh?

Really? Why would you want "room gain"? To boost low frequencies? Why not just get a good quality pair and listen to what's really there? Accurately? The good ones can go down very very low.

Just to add some tech info here, "room gain" actually relates to what audio (any, reproduced or natural) sounds like in a room (a room being a thing with walls and a ceiling) - you wouldn't like the sound if a speaker took out the room gain in its in-room repsonse. The correct target response in room will always have a room gain component. All headphones have to add that, either in the tailoring of the response of the elements and crossover, or digitally if an active device.

Moderator Dude,

I get where you're coming from, but the amount of gain depends on the size of the room and the speaker positions in it, no? And, speakers are -- ideally, at least -- tested under anechoic conditions. So how can one "room gain" size fit all?

Seems to me that the amount of gain will depend on your room, and, if you include room modes, the speaker and listener positions in that room. To wit, John Atkinson's measurements in his review of the TRefs in Stereophile. His chart clearly shows a response hump in the bass, but when I measure the TRefs in my own room, no such hump is visible. Again, probably room modes at play here, but the TRef bass amp settings may also be a factor.

For people trying to duplicate the sound (in headphones) of good speakers in your real world room, different people will be looking for different things, right?

Charlie

One more comment. I thought about this some more...

Say I have a good high end system, and by dint of a lot of experimentation with speaker position, listener position, bass control setting, and maybe just dumb luck, I end up with a system that measures flat across the audio band. This is the ideal goal, right?

So if I get a pair of headphones, I want them to also measure flat across the audio band, which means just plain flat. The music was recorded that way, and that's what I want to hear.

Room gain seems to be irrelevant to this problem. I can see how room gain can extend the bass response in a real room, but if we achieve flat response, fine.

If this makes sense, why would I want headphones with (some arbitrary) room gain added? Why wouldn't I want a flat response to as low a frequency as possible? With clever design, maybe the headphone designers can achieve flat to an even lower frequency than my measured in room speaker response. So much the better, and maybe you can call that "room gain." I just prefer to call it flat.

That's why my red flag went up when I read the "room gain" in the description of the headphones.

Hope this makes more sense than my last reply!

Charlie