Wireless Headphones in 2022

Wireless headphones work because the device it’s connected to adjusts for latency. So if you’re watching a video, it delays the picture to match up with the audio latency.

Other than that, not sure what the question is asking.
 
chris said:
Wireless headphones work because the device it’s connected to adjusts for latency. So if you’re watching a video, it delays the picture to match up with the audio latency.

Other than that, not sure what the question is asking.
Click to expand...
He's asking for a recommendation on wireless headphones. You're thinking of Bluetooth. Not all wireless heaphones are Bluetooth, or digital for that matter. Sennheiser makes a good RF headphone. Good quality IEM's will also do of course. There's a tradeoff when using analog headphones, namely noise, but sometimes the convenience is worth it.
 
Last edited:
GlennO said:
He's asking for a recommendation on wireless headphones. You're thinking of Bluetooth. Not all wireless heaphones are Bluetooth, or digital for that matter. Sennheiser makes a good RF headphone. Good quality IEM's will also do of course. There's a tradeoff when using analog headphones, namely noise, but sometimes the convenience is worth it.
Click to expand...
What's the Sennheiser product you recommend?
 
I was told a very long time ago that “the very best wireless anything is almost as good as a wired solution”. Unless electrical shock hazard is an issue I always try to create an appropriate wired solution — works better, sounds better.
 
Look at gaming headphones. Steelseries Arctis models have a 16ms latency. Sennheiser rs175 and other rs models are also non Bluetooth wireless solutions.
 
Buy a secondhand older style RF unit and plug any wired headphones onto a clip on reciever. my mate got a decent one at an affordable price. Very very minimal latency.
 
I’m responding in a way that’s clearly off-topic … but I just can’t resist, as some of the people visiting this thread might be interested.

I just got a pair of the wired new Neumann NDH 30 open-back headphones, and I’m pretty much ecstatic with them. They differ from Neumann’s previous NDH 20 phones, in that the NDH 20s are closed-back.

The NDH 30s are meant to have the same reference sound as a Neumann studio monitor setup, and they’re extremely linear. I realize that this thread is about wireless headphones, but as the NDH 30s are specifically designed for tracking, mixing, and mastering (and come with a very flexible non-coiled 10-foot cable) the advantages of having a genuinely accurate (and latency-free) reference might prove to be a higher priority than going wireless for some users.

They just came out, so I thought I’d give people a heads-up. They’ve genuinely changed the way I work; now I only use my studio speakers for surround mixing, after I’ve done the tracking and EQing with the Neumanns. It really works – and the Axe-FX III sounds glorious.

Neumann NDH 30 Review (this link downloads a .pdf)
 
Last edited:
So I just replaced my trusty old Sennheiser TR-125 headset (RF, no latency, but some nagging auto-levelling or perhaps hearing protection limiter that annoyed me). I first tried a set of MEE (T1CMA, bluetooth, supposed to have the lowest latency available with bluetooth)... and I couldn't stand that (admittedly very small) lag. It didn't really sound like a delayed signal, more like being somehow "disconnected" or detached from my playing. They sounded better than the Sennheiser TR-125 but the lag was a distraction, so back they went.

I concluded that I had to get a more recent and upscale RF set, so Sennheiser again, but this time the TR-175. I just hooked them up and was horified to find the same annoying latency that the bluetooth MEE had! How on earth did Sennheiser manage to introduce more latency into the TR-175 compared to my decade old TR-125???

Profoundly disappointed, not sure what to do anymore...

I know not many here use wireless headphones (probably for that very reason), but I could swear I saw several posts here from happy Sennheiser users. Am I being picky, or perhaps not as good at managing expectations? Still, my old beat up TR-125 set have no perceivable latency (in spite of all its other problems)...

Any help or advice?

​

 
RF headphones use FM so there’s a limited audio frequency range and added compression, I’m surprised they sound acceptable.
 
blaggers said:
RF headphones use FM so there’s a limited audio frequency range and added compression, I’m surprised they sound acceptable.
Click to expand...
This... you have a lot of wireless headphones that are setup to connect to your TV\stereo (not using bluetooth), but you end up clipping off a lot of low end.
 
Dpoirier said:
So I just replaced my trusty old Sennheiser TR-125 headset (RF, no latency, but some nagging auto-levelling or perhaps hearing protection limiter that annoyed me). I first tried a set of MEE (T1CMA, bluetooth, supposed to have the lowest latency available with bluetooth)... and I couldn't stand that (admittedly very small) lag. It didn't really sound like a delayed signal, more like being somehow "disconnected" or detached from my playing. They sounded better than the Sennheiser TR-125 but the lag was a distraction, so back they went.

I concluded that I had to get a more recent and upscale RF set, so Sennheiser again, but this time the TR-175. I just hooked them up and was horified to find the same annoying latency that the bluetooth MEE had! How on earth did Sennheiser manage to introduce more latency into the TR-175 compared to my decade old TR-125???

Profoundly disappointed, not sure what to do anymore...

I know not many here use wireless headphones (probably for that very reason), but I could swear I saw several posts here from happy Sennheiser users. Am I being picky, or perhaps not as good at managing expectations? Still, my old beat up TR-125 set have no perceivable latency (in spite of all its other problems)...

Any help or advice?

​

Click to expand...
The RS-125 is analog RF with practically no latency. The RS-175 is digital RF with something like 45 ms latency.
 
mr_fender said:
The RS-125 is analog RF with practically no latency. The RS-175 is digital RF with something like 45 ms latency.
Click to expand...
Ah, that explains it. I wonder where such specs are available... Had I known, I could have expected it and avoid the expense and hassle (mind you, until now I had no idea that 45ms latency would drive me bonkers).

Do you know of any other rf headphones that are analog (or otherwise have "practically no latency")? I simply cannot deal with wired headphones, and am willing to put up with compression or frequency response limitations, but not with latency. This, for me, is just a rehearsal tool.
 
The sensation of “amp disconnect” and timing is an absolute deal-killer for me —and, given the amount of work Fractal puts into creating a “minimal latency” environment, a little antithetical to spending big bucks on an AFX3…
 
Last edited:
blaggers said:
RF headphones use FM so there’s a limited audio frequency range and added compression, I’m surprised they sound acceptable.
Click to expand...
Many wireless and iems are RF-systems, among them the Sennheisers that many pros use. Whatever problems with RF technology exist, there are ways. Now you shouldn't buy some cheap consumer stuff though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom