Review: Ultrasone iCans

by James Bain Jul 19, 2006

I had to explain to my 6-year-old son why this product name made sense.

Cans, as headphones, weren’t in his vocabulary. So, maybe the name could use a bit of work. Maybe not. Having i-anything these days does get the point across as to what you’re targeting or emulating. And they aren’t targeting these to the 6-year-old market with these awesome headphones.

The Ultrasone iCans are bigger than I am normally used to. I haven’t worn monitors this large since my radio and band days way way back in the dark eighties. I’ve been using ear buds since they first were available, always opting for convenient portability over perfect audio clarity.

After listening to these, however, I’m not so sure anymore.

My earphones of choice presently are Shure E4Cs. One day, when I grow up, I might buy their top of the line model, the Shure E5Cs, or maybe go all out and buy custom Ultimate Ears UE 10 Pro™ studio reference monitors. For now, however, the E4Cs are doing it for me.

Why would I mention the Shures in a review of the Ultrasone iCans? Because I wanted to a baseline for sound, and I used my day-to-day phones as reference.

Not a good idea as it turns out. I succumbed to listening to the iCans.

In short, the iCan’s sound is incredible, for something in this price range, for something in any price range really.

The technology involved in how they do what they do is a bit beyond me. Their site has a the nitty-gritty of all that if you want it, but to me what is more important is the effect, not the means. These phones sound BIG, and at much lower volumes than you’d expect. You can hear a very wide spread of everything, can pick out interesting details, without deafening yourself.

They’re delicious.

I used “Ribbons”, by The Sisters of Mercy, as my reference song. It’s got a lot of stuff going on and has an organic sound to it that a lot of bands aren’t quite able to get with studio mixes.

First, the E4Cs. Enjoyed listening to the detail, liked the spread. The intimacy of the in-ears is something I like. It’s like the sound is right there, comfortably lodged in your head.

Then I plugged in the iCans.

Ohmygosh!

Where the Shures give me detail and intimacy, the iCans sounded like I was in a room, like I had strapped a great, vast room to each side of my head and Andrew Eldrich was in there singing.

Loads of space. Great Big Sound. GREAT BIG SOUND. Lush trebles. Substantial bass. Huge headphone sound in a moderately sized headphone package. Really neat.

And disturbing.

image

I am rethinking my twenty years of earphone experience and wondering if that really is the right way to go.

I’m an audiophile, not an audiophanatic, but right now I want everything to sound like the iCans. Or better.

You see, small-scale portability is a trade off. Tiny little speakers in your ears cannot sound like great big cans over your ears. They don’t have the power. It would be dangerous if they did. There’d be a lot of deaf former audio fans stumbling around if there were. What the iCans manage is dangerously enticing.

Some notes here.

The iCans are fairly nice looking (obviously geared visually to match white iPods) and comfortable over the ear headphones that are, as I said, much bigger than I am used to wearing.

These however do strike a good balance between great sound and their obvious size, which isn’t that big really. And they fold up so nicely. Ultrasone has thoughtfully included a hard case, a padded two piece tin can actually, to keep the phones safe when you’re not using them. A case is big plus with a product this size. The carrying can might not stand up to long-term abuse, but for those with at least some concern for their gear, I think it serves quite nicely. Something hinged and made of high impact plastic would have shot these up a price point or two, so I do appreciate the effort Ultrasone took include something that works with their phones. Well done. I like that sort of finishing touch in a productization.

image

As a minus, the over the ear design doesn’t block a lot of ambient noise, which is what you need when you’re out in the big noisy world. The iCans, however, would be amazing for home or work use where pesky street noise isn’t that much of a consideration. Some of us do still listen to our iPods at home.

If you like great sound, and haven’t bought into my whole ‘in-ear is it’ spiel, then consider these. Even if you do like in ear buds, these would make great indoor headphones and are worth considering as such. Seriously BIG audio in a more traditional headphone format, and at a truly reasonable price ($129.00 MSRP). Overall, the iCans are a great piece of kit that I’d have no problem adding to my collection of audio gear.

Comments

  • Excellent sound quality, but they just don’t fit over my head! :( Otherwise I’d get one right away. I think it’s best for people with less than size 7-3/4 head, not my 8….

    dona83 had this to say on Jul 19, 2006 Posts: 2
  • On Head-Fi there is this thing called “Team Ugly Phones”. These easily qualify for sheer garishness.

    Bad Beaver had this to say on Jul 19, 2006 Posts: 371
  • A noise-cancellation feature would be a Bose-“killer” if your sound quality tests are indeed GREAT! I am looking one to replace my white ear-buds that came standard.

    iCans sure sounds “garish -BB”. To counter your naming iffiness, the “iPod” name was not immediately striking, was it? What exactly is a “pod” to Apple? Doesn’t make too much sense either. But look at the results - an iconic, almost holy, brand name. “iCans” is an OK name with me.

    Robomac had this to say on Jul 19, 2006 Posts: 846
  • It’s not about the name.

    Bad Beaver had this to say on Jul 20, 2006 Posts: 371
  • Page 1 of 1 pages
You need log in, or register, in order to comment