Anyone having been into the audiophile / Hi-Fi business knows loudspeakers and headphones should never be tested alone, without comparing their audio quality (and other parameters) to other, comparable headphones (speakers etc.). This is why strictly comparative tests are needed to fairly compare the sound quality of each set to one another. Unfortunately, the vast majority of the A2DP stereo Bluetooth headphones reviews doesn�t belong to this category and, therefore, shouldn�t really be taken seriously. By the way, A2DP stands for Advanced Audio Distribution Profile; note that I haven�t recommended the Wiki page because it�s full of mobility-related mistakes like stating A2DP was added to the BlackBerry OS with version 4.2 (not true: several 4.2-based models like the 8800 do NOT have A2DP; it�s only the Curve that is 4.2-based and has it � and, of course, the 4.3-based Pearl); it states A2DP only arrived to Symbian S60 with S60 FP1 (not true � some pre-FP1 models like the N73 with the latest upgrade also has it; and, of course, some earlier models like the Nokia 5300 dumbphone [based on S40 3rd ed FP2] too) it doesn�t explain the Windows Mobile situation (the major differences between the two stacks and, with Microsoft�s stack, the pre-WM6 and the WM6+ situation) etc.
Also, it�s pretty much important for a technical writer to know what he or she is writing about. Unfortunately, many of the currently available A2DP reviews have major factual errors (like not knowing how canalphones should be used or the major difference between them and traditional earbuds and, therefore, comparing apples to oranges or even mistaking A2DP dongles for remote controllers, showing the review was indeed rushed and the reviewer didn�t even bother testing all the facilities and/or reading the manual).
Almost none of the reviews contain real battery life / recharge tests. As, in most cases, the figures provided by headset manufacturers are, (in some cases, overly) optimistic (except for some rare cases), failing to measure this (and just reciting the official figures) don�t help much the prospective buyers in deciding which model to go for, should they want to base their selection on these parameters (too).
Finally, in addition to not comparing the audio quality of the headphones to each other and making sometimes major factual mistakes, the third biggest problem with the currently available headphones reviews are either not being multiplatform (some of the, particularly older, reviews are made using either dumb phones for plain headset and the enclosed A2DP dongle for music) or, if it at all uses Windows Mobile as a A2DP source, most of the cases it uses pre-Windows Mobile 6 Microsoft Bluetooth stack versions, which equals to very bad sound quality. Incidentally, none of the reviews I�ve read (and linked from the article) even mentioned the problems of the pre-Windows Mobile 6 Bluetooth stacks � not even ones that have been published long after my (among others, Pocket PC Thoughts-frontpaged) well-known article on the problems of the Microsoft A2DP implementation, showing the authors of these reviews haven�t really made their homework (checking out other, related articles for background information before publishing theirs). This is a major flaw with all these reviews, as far as usage under Windows Mobile is considered. (A2DP implementations on other platforms like Palm OS, BlackBerry and Symbian S60 don�t have such, version-dependent quality problems.) Some of the reviews, which, basically, "trash" the attainable A2DP sound quality, may have been got to their conclusion because of the bad A2DP quality in pre-Windows Mobile 6. This also shows the reviewers didn�t bother testing the headphones with alternate, non-Windows Mobile sources and/or reading others� (most importantly, my) reports on the A2DP quality issues.
Therefore, you will really want to read this roundup so that you can easily pick a model and learn more about the current state of A2DP on all major mobile platforms.
First and foremost, (if you�re a Windows Mobile user and you use a non-Windows Mobile 6 device coming with the MS BT stack) in addition the above-linked article on the WM6 sound quality increase, you�ll definitely want to read my previous A2DP headphones roundup HERE. Please note that, in this roundup, I do not repeat the information already available in those articles. Let me know (in a public question) if you don�t understand something and need additional info and I�ll answer you. You will also want to thoroughly read the Headphones article in the Wiki; particularly the Types of Headphones section, which excellently explains the (major) difference between circumaural, supra-aural, earbud, and in-ear (canalphone) models. I will not repeat the information available there here either. Also note that I�ve devoted a separate article to the question of listening to music / non-phone audio on mono (non-A2DP) headsets and using the microphone of the A2DP headphones as, say, a wireless mike for your handset � again, when NOT in a phone call. You might want to check it out too for additional uses of Bluetooth for bidirectional audio transfer on Windows Mobile.
Note that, while the Wiki article, in the Types of Headphones section, explains the speaker part pretty well, there isn�t similar info on the main other distinction based on the head/neckband it uses (except for purely cable-based in-ear solutions like the Voyager 855): behind-the-neck (the vast majority of current headphones) like the HT820 and over-the-head ones like the Pulsar 590. Both have advantages and disadvantages. Personally, I prefer over-the-head headphones because they�re, in general, far easier to wear and put less pressure on the ears than many? most? behind-the-neck solutions. Also, they�re far easier to remove and put back in, which may be really advantageous when you often need to interrupt wearing it and expose your ear(s) to listen to, say, colleagues. (This is pretty common with me � I just put on the hedphones when I need to concentrate on work so that I don�t hear the phone and other distracting sound sources.) Many, however, prefer behind-the-neck ones; most importantly because, then, the headband can be much smaller as it doesn�t need to encompass the entire head, meaning, in general, a smaller size to carry. (Of course, careful over-the-head designs can still be folded into a smaller package; see the on-road size difference shots between the Moto HT820 and the Pulsar 590. While the former is a behind-the-neck model and the latter an over-the-head one, the Pulsar folds into a smaller size than the Motorola and it�s, therefore, easier to carry in even a large(r) shirt pocket.
For the roundup, I�ve purchased (fortunately, I�ve got some of them pretty cheap second-hand) / received five A2DP headphones. Probably most of you have already heard of the Motorola HT820, probably the most widely known headphones model. I, of course, include Plantronics too, who have pretty popular A2DP phones. From them, I included the Pulsar 590 (which is, despite its age, taking everything into account, is still pretty much the best supra-aural / over-the-head headphone) and their latest, pretty cool, hybrid model, the Voyager 855 (on which I�ve already quickly elaborated HERE). From UK-based Gear4, I�ve included their latest model, the BluPhones (also mentioned in the just-linked MWC Bluetooth article) and from Cellink, a well-known phone accessories company, the BTST-9000D.
Compared to my previous A2DP headphones roundup, I�ve added Windows Mobile 6 (which was still not available during the writing of the previous roundup), BlackBerry and Symbian S60 testing. I�ve also thoroughly elaborated on issues like comfort and pedestrian usage.
Finally, before starting to elaborate on the different headphones, I need to point out that, as with most of my articles, the vast majority of the information you�ll find the most important is presented in the comparison / feature / measurement chart belonging to the article. It�s available here and is a must. As has already been explained in many of my articles, it�s in a chart that one can compare different, alternative products the most easily and tersely.
(tested: a D-series model � that is, the fourth revision)
This is an old, widely known, comparatively cheap, supra-aural, behind-the-neck model with excellent sound quality, platform compatibility and battery life but really bad comfort, looks and weight and not very stellar maximal volume.
(Shots from the front and the back so that you can see how much it protrudes, where the headband is when in use etc.)
