 |
|
The HFI-2200 headphones didn't have the best audio quality. You can tell as soon as you put them on that they're a bit boomy. Our graphs showed this wasn't just our ears playing tricks on us: not only did the bass receive a lot of emphasis, it also had a fair chunk of distortion. Anything that falls in the 7-10 kHz range will have erratic emphasis, ranging from slightly loud to very muted. These headphones are also not ones to bring on a plane or public transportation, because they have poor isolation and leakage. You'd have to turn up your volume quite a bit to overpower the ambient noise, and at those levels, people sitting near you will be privy to your playback.
|
|
 |
About our testing:
Our audio tests use a head and torso simulator (HATS) and an electroacoustics analysis program called SoundCheck (developed by Listen, Inc.). If you'd like to find out more info about our testing procedure, you should check out this article. For more info on a specific test you can click the orange info icon after each section's title.
Frequency Response (3.81) 
How the test works:
First we put the headphones on HATS, then we tell SoundCheck to play a frequency sweep through the headphones from 100 and 20,000 kHz. HATS listens to the sweep and reports the decibel level of each frequency back to SoundCheck. SoundCheck is then so cordial as to provide us with the graph below and to the right. Green is the left channel (ear cup), red is the right one, and the dotted lines represent the limits both lines should fall between. We don't score the extreme low and high end, but we show the frequency response anyway to give you, the viewer, and idea of the general trend. To learn more about this test, click the orange "i" above.
What we found:
The HFI-2200 headphones had a pretty good frequency response for the most part, but the high end is dramatically under-emphasized. Things to look out far are long, sharp slopes, either up or down. Such features indicate a large gain or drop in decibel level over a small frequency range. That means an instrument could sound muted at times and normal at others, depending on what note its playing. In this case, as a sound approaches the high end, it will quickly decrease in volume for a bit, then spring back to normal.
Aside from the odd behavior towards the right side of the graph, however, the HFI-2200 performed rather well. The bass receives a bit of a boost, which anyone would notice the second they put these headphones on. We were surprised to see the mid-tones so evenly emphasized, since the bass seemed so boomy. The fallibility of our human ears is exactly why we use HATS and its robot ears.
How the Ultrasone HFI-2200 compares:
The HFI-2200's response curve looked a lot like the Grado SR60s. In both, the bass is slightly emphasized, the mid-section is a bit choppy, and there's a bit of a drop off towards the high end. Unfortunately for the HFI-2200s, however, the drop off occurs within our scoring limits. The Pioneer SE-A1000 headphones also had a bit of a downward slope at the high end, but again, the valley came in the really high end. The Sennheiser HD 555s have a weaker bass (probably due to their open-backed design) and also have some under-emphasized frequencies towards the higher end, but they response never strays quite as far away as it does on the HFI-2200s. The same goes for the iGrados. The QC2s' graph looks like it has the flu. It's under-emphasized, erratic, and the HFI-2200 looks great in comparison.
In terms of all headphones, the HFI-2200s are just slightly below the current average score of 4.08. Not bad, but certainly not great.
Distortion (3.97)
How the test works:
We play back a frequency sweep through the headphones, have HATS listen, then have SoundCheck find any differences between the original wave form and what HATS records. SoundCheck then graphs the results as the percentage of distortion found at each frequency. Again, for more info on this test, click the orange info icon above.
What we found:
Overall, there wasn't much distortion on the HFI-2200s. Towards the lower end, there were some issues, with the right channel almost hitting 2% distortion. Once the frequency climbed out of the realm of bass, however, distortion leveled off. There was a small bump towards the high-middle frequencies, but other than that the HFI-2200s did all right.
How the Ultrasone HFI-2200 compares:
Other than the Sennheisers, which had virtually no distortion (towards the extreme low end the graph gets choppy, but we've since stopped scoring below 100 Hz), most headphones tend to score around what the HFI-2200s did. While a picky audiophile might demand better performance, the HFI-2200s should be fine for most consumers.
Tracking (8.93)
How the test works:
Like the previous two tests, this one begins by playing a frequency sweep through the headphones. Here, however, we measure the difference in decibel level between each channel/ear cup/ear bud. When the left channel is louder, the blue line rises above the zero mark; when the right is louder, the line dips below zero. What we look for on this test are big swings between the left and right channel. If something errs towards one channel or the other within a few decibels, that won't be noticeable. What will be noticeable is a sudden shift from left to right. Again, for more info on this test, click the orange badge to the right of the section's score.
What we found:
For the overwhelming majority of the graph, the HFI-2200 was just within a few decibels of even-handed playback. Once it got towards the high-end, however, the tracking gets a bit erratic. This is normal behavior, however. Really, we don't have any complaints. Unless our pair of HFI-2200s was a fluke, you should never get the sensation that your playback is weighted towards the left or right.
How the Ultrasone HFI-2200 compares:
It's easy to see why a few of the headphones performed worse than the HFI-2200 on this test: the left part of the graph curves upward or downward, indicating it isn't on an even kiel. The Pioneer SE-A1000s also have a flat line initially, but towards the end their spike is far more pronounced than anything the HFI-2200 shows.
Maximum Usable Volume (6.41)
How the test works
For this test we simply perform our distortion test over and over again, increasing the volume each time. Louder playback means more distortion. We simply keep bumping up the volume until the distortion hits 3%, which is a noticeable amount. Any louder than this threshold and playback would sound like garbage. For more info, click the orange button above.
What we found:
The Ultrasone HFI-2200 headphones were capable of outputting 104.94 decibels. A good score would fall between closer to 120 decibels. Still, 104.94 decibels isn't a terrible score. Mainstream users who don't have to drown out a noisy bus commute should find this level adequate. If you are seriously hell-bent on ruining your hearing, sorry, but the HFI-2200s aren't the best option.
Isolation (1.37)
How the test works:
We set up a speaker 18 inches from a headphones-wearing HATS, and use it to bombard HATS with pink noise (like white noise, but every frequency octave has the same power). We then see how much of this noise gets through the headphones and makes it into HATS's ears. We test both types of noise cancellation: active and passive. Active cancellation refers to the headphones themselves actually blasting inverted soundwaves at incoming sounds to neutralize them before they reach your ear. Passive cancellation is simply how well the headphones act like ear plugs and physically obstruct sound from reaching your ears.
What we found:
The HFI-2200 headphones did poorly on this test. We're guessing the main reason they weren't able to block out much noise was because cloth forms a very poor seal with skin. It leaves all sorts of nooks, crannies, and passageways that air and sound can pass through. Cloth-covered headphones are notoriously bad at keeping external sound out.
How the Ultrasone HFI-2200 compares:
Compare any of the headphones' scores and graphs below to the QuietComfort 2s' score and graph. Don't even look at the active cancellation curve. See how much better the QC2s are at passive cancellation? They have a faux-leather padding, whereas the others all have cloth or foam padding. Of course, a poor seal isn't the only culprit here. The SR60s, iGrados, and HD 555s all have open or semi-open backs, so sound can just waft right through your headphones and into your ears.
Compared to other cloth-padded headphones, the HFI-2200s actually didn't do half bad. If you want isolation, however, cloth is not the way to go.
Leakage (3.00)
How the test works:
For leakage, the headphones go on HATS, and a microphone is placed 6 inches away from HATS's ear. We then play back pink noise through the headphones. If any of the pink noise leaks out, the microphone picks it up.
What we found:
The HFI-2200 headphones tended to leak more sound that we'd like. We attribute this, again, to the cloth padding, and the poor seal cloth makes against skin. A weak seal means noise can easily escape from the miniature soundstage the cups create around your ears. If you're listening to music at a moderate level, someone next to you on the bus or train will be able to make it out. Forget about taking these to a library.
|
