I need a decent headset!

[Groove]

Any suggestions ?

 

I have a X-Fi sound card so no USB headset.

 

Thanks for your input in advance :)

[EtherealN]

Personally I am quite happy with my newly purchased Razer Piranha headset. It is slightly weird when you put it on for the first times, but it has good audio playback and a solid microphone. The pricetag isn't too bad either (about 60 euro).

 

But I haven't done too much testing of it's competitors in that price class, but definitely something to look at.

 

One very nice thing is that they didn't skimp on the cable. If you get a computer setup where that cable is too short I'll buy you dinner. :P

[Peyoteros]

 

http://www.pocket-lint.com/review/2309/sennheiser-pc-161-gaming-headset

[159th_Viper]

Medusa 5.1 :)

 

http://uk.gear.ign.com/articles/793/793289p1.html

[KillaALF]

I use the Sennheiser PC160 (the previous model to the PC161 recommended in Peyoteros' post). Altogether an excellent headseat, especially coupled with a X-Fi card though I have to admit it gets a bit uncomfortable to wear (pressure on the ears) after prolonged (2+ hrs) gaming sessions. This may be due to the fact that I use it rather seldom though, only when playing with friends or when I play games/sims that make use of TrackIR. For everything else I rather use my Teufel CEM 5.1 setup. I'm pretty sure that if I were to use it more regularly my ears would get used to it and the uneasiness would pass.

 

@159th_Viper: Frankly, imo the Medusa 5.1 sucks compared to what you get with a X-Fi card plus a decent stereo headset. A friend of mine owns a couple of them so I know firsthand.

Edited January 18, 2010 by KillaALF

[Prophet4no1]

I really like my Steelseries 5Hv2. Good sound and very comfortable.

[Groove]

Thanks for your input guys. I will let you know which one i bought :)

[Boulund]

What a great topic, my (rather new) headset is just about to break down because of some bad design choices so I'm also on the prowl.

[Feuerfalke]

I personally can't recommend the Medusa. Apart from it's limited frequency-range, it's open design, so it's very loud to the outside. It has also very fragile connections, where the earpieces are attached to the overhead-bow. It also has no option to mute the mic.

 

If you are going for a 5.1 Headset I can recommend the Roccat "Kave" Headset. It has better accoustics than the Medusa and it has some nice features (like a mutable mic with a status LED that will tell you if the mic is active or not.) The Kave also does not tend to oversteering like the Medusa easily does. Besides that, it's not as loud to the outside and it blocks outside noise much better. Because of that, the full spectrum down to the basses are much more enjoyable.

 

In case you still decide to go for the Medusa, please make sure you pick the version with the external amplifier. A friend of mine has the version with just the normal 3.5mm plugs and I had a much better sound with the ability to control volume beyond windows and x-fi than he did without the external amplifier.

 

Both headsets are heavy! Please be aware of that. For most games, especially flightsims, my personal recommendation is to use the x-fi's virtual surround and go for a decent headset and attach a mic to it - the 5.1-sound doesn't make a real difference (especially since it's rarely fully supported).

Edited January 19, 2010 by Feuerfalke

[Haukka81]

KOSS SB45, Very good sound quality and very comfortable.

 

 

-haukka81

[sobek]

For audio quality i would also recommend a closed or in ear setup, but since there are no headset designs with the latter, that leaves you basically with the closed setup.

 

the 5.1-sound doesn't make a real difference (especially since it's rarely fully supported).

 

That is because for the binaural decoding, they use HRTFs (head related transfer functions) that were measured and derived from a generic artificial head. If it would be practical to measure each user's individual HRTFs down to the very ears (which works in the laboratory, but it takes a few hours, so it's hardly feasible for the 0815 user), this stuff would blow your mind away. :)

 

I've taken a course on algorithms in acoustics and computer music this semester and the guy told us that even with the generic HRTFs used, psychoacoustic research has shown that your brain can get accustomed to it after a while of using and therefore the accuracy of audio source localisation rises with the users experience. Also, micro movements of the head are a means of localisation, so if properly implemented, trackir can add a new dimension to game audio as well. :)

 

Uh... i got carried away ;) now back OT

Edited January 19, 2010 by sobek

[Feuerfalke]

Well, to be perfectly honest, even some basic EAX, realistic sound occlusion, 3D rendering or surrounding dependent reverberation and amplifying would already make a huge difference to turn this stereo-rendering into a useful 5.1 environment.

[sobek]

Well, to be perfectly honest, even some basic EAX, realistic sound occlusion, 3D rendering or surrounding dependent reverberation and amplifying would already make a huge difference to turn this stereo-rendering into a useful 5.1 environment.

 

True, you need a decent source to begin with, or all the witchcraft (aka signal processing :D) in the world won't make a difference.

[CyBerkut]

Groove, I use a Turtle Beach AKR8, with has an external USB card.

http://www.turtlebeach.com/products/akr8/home.aspx

 

Since you want to use your X-Fi sound card, the equivalent would be their HPA2: http://www.turtlebeach.com/products/efhpa2/home.aspx

 

These have 4 speakers per ear rather than doing the electronic wizardry of simulating surround sound with fewer speakers.

 

If you use a TrackClip Pro with your TrackIR, these headsets make a very good mounting platform for that. I wrote about my AKR8 headset thoughts over here: http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/2871924/Re_Headset_advice.html#Post2871924

 

Someone else wrote about the HPA2's there as well:

http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/2933880/Re_Do_you_game_via_speakers_or.html#Post2933880

 

Happy headset hunting!

[Mugenjin]

steelseries siberia V2 (V2 is important)

 

just my 2c

[sobek]

These have 4 speakers per ear rather than doing the electronic wizardry of simulating surround sound with fewer speakers.

 

No offense but technically speaking, adding speakers for better surround in a headset is nonsense. I'm guessing that those are for a better frequency response and are hopefully coincidental (one speaker inside the other). If that is not the case, the frequency response will be messed up by comb-filter effects, negating all benefits (if not worse). Surround sound in a headset can only be achieved by electronic wizardry, namely folding the signal with head related transfer functions.

Edited January 19, 2010 by sobek

[Boulund]

For audio quality i would also recommend a closed or in ear setup, but since there are no headset designs with the latter, that leaves you basically with the closed setup.

 

There is actually! Take these ones for example:

Klipsch Image S4i Headset

Roccat Vire

Steelseries Sibera In-Ear Headset

I'm not sure about the audio quality of these things tough as I haven't tested them myself or know anyone that has...

 

For myself I'm thinking along the lines of the Steelseries Siberia V2, but can anyone tell my why V2 isn't available in black without USB? I fell in love with giant ear-pieces several years ago but never really got around to getting a decent headset with them. Looking around it seems most "gaming" headsets are just crappy plastic, stiff headbands with lousy coushions...

What I want in a headset is this:

* LARGE ear-pieces (totally covers your ear, like a good pair of earmuffs)

* Good sound isolation from exterior sources (earmuffs, remember?)

* In-line volume control (I'm ok with only for the speakers, no need to shut off the mic - but welcome of course ;))

* NOT usb

* Long cord (talking 2-3 meters at least)

* HIGH quality microphone - nothing flimsy noise cracking like in every other headset I've ever used...

 

So far my findings have led me to Steelseries Sibera V2 and Saitek Pro Flight Headset.

Edited January 19, 2010 by Boulund

[asparagin]

Can anyone speak from experience how important is actually a soundcard to the overall pc performance. Maybe some of you have some before after experience. I don't have a soundcard (not an external one).

[Icarus2]

No offense but technically speaking, adding speakers for better surround in a headset is nonsense. I'm guessing that those are for a better frequency response and are hopefully coincidental (one speaker inside the other). If that is not the case, the frequency response will be messed up by comb-filter effects, negating all benefits (if not worse). Surround sound in a headset can only be achieved by electronic wizardry, namely folding the signal with head related transfer functions.

 

I read your posts with interest and defer to your expertise on this matter. However, I should relate to you my empirical experience. I have 5.1 surround sound headphones and yes when I first used them I was not used to them and they were a bit of a dissappointment (I was wondering why until I read your post). I am now used to them and hear a noticible difference in sound quality and sound movement over stereo headphones.

 

While there is little difference in the sound in older titles, IMHO the surround experience with 5.1 surround headphones in games like Crysis and COD4:MW2 is startling with 5.1 headphones. It is not a recreation of the surround experience I get from my home theatre speakers, but the footsteps walking around a room are umcanny in the 5.1 headset. Subwoofer speaker is tons better than 5.1 headphones even if it has vibration.

 

Where I think the headset excels over speakers is that they give an intense sense of immersion, because you are cut off from reality and this helps the illusion. I have both 5.1 speakers and 5.1 headset for my computer and I use the headset for gaming 99% of the time, even when no one is home.

 

Look forward to your thoughts sobek.

[Feuerfalke]

Well, technically speaking, Sobek is right for a simple reason: You have only one ear per side, up to a total of 2 for the majority of mankind. These two ears are used to determine direction of sounds by measuring differences in accoustics and time-differentials when they are sensed.

 

That's basically why you don't need more than 2 speakers in theory.

 

But there are 2 things which need to be noted:

 

1. Technical: Most people use onboard-sound. They'd never use onboard graphics on a 32"Monitor, but for some odd reason they believe that an onboard-soundchip makes no difference against a soundcard.

And when these guys find out, hey, there's a nice headset with USB-soundcard, they're in 7th's heaven. Wow, what an awesome headset that is! Yeah. You would have almost the same experience if you'd invested 1/4 of that money in a soundcard before.

 

2. Biological: As Sobek mentioned before, the human ear is a pretty complex system, the brain even more. While in theory there is only one sensor to hear sounds, infact the whole ear, even the skull sense sound (actually the whole body does - subconscious effects by infrasound is quite well known in the meanwhile.

So, if a sound comes from physiologically behind the ear, it is differently noted than a sound that comes from in front of it. And the more you get used to your 5.1 headset, the more you can notice these differences, just as you learned to do in real life as a baby.

 

 

But! and here we come back to the point already stated: To get this effect you need a sound-rendering device and of course a game that is able to simulate this 5.1 environment. Even with the artificial surround of modern soundcards a stereosound still differs a LOT from real 5.1 sound.

[EtherealN]

The whole soundcard debate isn't as simple as drawing a comparison between onboard sound and onboard graphics. A modern GPU usually has several times as many transistors as your CPU, but the tech cost of sound isn't as direct.

 

Also, of course, there is a lot of difference between different on-board sound chips just like there is with onboard graphics. Some on-board graphics cards are fully Dx10, whereas others only barely qualify for Dx9. I've seen graphics cirquits crop up in the DCS Problems and Bugs section and the LO Helpdesk that range from being full-featured but with crap framerate to ones that don't even have a programmable shader and thus causes the programs to simply not work. Similarly, a lot of onboard graphics cirquits are actually the same as other products available as an add-in card. My own mainboard doesn't have an oboard graphics chip at all, since they knew it's an enthusiast product they are making and the buyer will be running a PCIE card anyhow.

 

Also, note that the difference between onboard graphics and addin graphics is often the difference between running a game at all. Find me a game that will not give good (as opposed to "perfect") sound even on integrated solutions. For gaming a good GPU is a necessity, sound cards are a luxury. The comparison just doesn't work.

 

And do note that most onboard sound cirquits today, at least on enthusiast products, do not have an issue giving you 5.1.

 

I remember when the owners of Sierra (when it was still a small company) included papers in their products detailing their own experience of this new gizmo called the "sound card". If you remember the 286 era you'll know what the difference was - it was either the 1-4 channel digital "PC Speaker", or a much more advanced 16bit SB that instead of bleeps gave you CD-quality symphonies. Back in those days, which incidentally was before you started bothering with addin graphics cirquits much (though Matrox had some early win pieces back then for 2D rendering), the difference was monumental. Nowadays you basically have to be an audiophile to notice the diff. However, you do not have to be a connausoure to notice the difference between onboard graphics and addin graphics - the difference is whether you game is able to run at all.

Edited January 20, 2010 by EtherealN

[Feuerfalke]

I absolutely have to disagree with most things you just stated.

 

I am not a sound-guru, but I do have a good headset and the difference between using my high-fidelity onboard soundchip and my low-cost creative-card is immense!

 

Of course, as I posted before, it depends on a lot of factors. If you play a game that does not use these features, of course you won't make such a difference. But here again, we are at my above example, because you also don't benefit from a graphics card even in some modern games that simply don't use these features (HOI, DEFCON, Civilization, Stronghold, most browser-games, ...). It just depends on the example you chose.

 

The most dramatic difference between both is just the simple fact that graphics cards are more often used to push fps, which still seems the most important factor of joy for some people. The soundcard, however, comparatively only adds a fraction of that to the fps-performance, but that is simply because sound-rendering is either reduced dramatically or switched to software emulation, because the CPU isn't used that much in most modern games anyway. Again, it is exactly the same as with graphics cards.

 

There's just one critical difference: When you make a screenshot of your crappy-graphics-hardware rendered gamescreen, everybody says "Uhhh! How can you?", because the difference is obvious. When I send you my soundoutput, with your onboard-chip, it will still sound like shit.

 

I don't tell you, that you need a soundcard, but there are literally hundreds of statements on this very forum explaining what difference a soundcard makes and that once you tried it, you never will go back - no matter if it's PCI, PCIe or USB.

The fact that *you* may not have seen such a difference yourself does not mean that the example is wrong or that the majority of people making these posts are professional musicians. ;)

Edited January 20, 2010 by Feuerfalke

[Ramstein]

I got the Logitech USB 350 for $20.00 USD and am happy. it's not for rock music, but the microphone and sound worlk just fine for me..

I just bought my 2nd set in 3 years... not bad..

[sobek]

Well, technically speaking, Sobek is right for a simple reason: You have only one ear per side, up to a total of 2 for the majority of mankind. These two ears are used to determine direction of sounds by measuring differences in accoustics and time-differentials when they are sensed.

 

That's basically why you don't need more than 2 speakers in theory.

 

While i totally agree, i have to add that this goes only for headphones. In the usual surround setup, the 5 or more speakers are really needed, because you cannot cancel the crosstalk from one speaker to the not-corresponding ear(the sub is not critical in it's position, the human ear cannot locate bass range noises). Therefore all you can do is let the sound really come from the direction that it is supposed to come from (more or less) and let the head and ears work their magic.

 

So, if a sound comes from physiologically behind the ear, it is differently noted than a sound that comes from in front of it. And the more you get used to your 5.1 headset, the more you can notice these differences, just as you learned to do in real life as a baby.

 

Interestingly enough, it really sounds different, if it comes from behind, because the form of your ear is intended to be a direction-related filter (not only horizontal but also verical, albeit not with as much precision as in the horizontal plane). In time your brain learns to interpret this difference in sound into a more or less precise direction. At this point you would instincitvely move your head a little to make the direction more precise. What i didn't know is, that this learning process is not finished at baby-age, but really only stops at around age 20. :)

[Feuerfalke]

Actually learning never stops - it just get's slower.

 

However, at the age of 20-25 the human body starts to age, including your sensoric abilities. But especially the ear, it starts degenerating soon after you're born. The frequency spectrum of a new-born is far superior to an adult person. It's not clear now, if this is a general phenomenon, or simply because the ear concentrates on supporting the bandwidths normal life (communication) uses.

 

Well, but we better get back on topic ;)