I'm considering bone-conduction headphones, but I know I'll probably drop them in the sink if I buy a non-waterproof pair. I'd also like to use them in the shower and possibly while swimming. A friend told me waterproof models usually have noticeably worse audio quality than non-waterproof ones. Is that actually true, or are they generally comparable? I'm not expecting audiophile-level sound, but I don't want something that sounds awful either.
4 Answers
Check the exact water-resistance rating before buying. A pair suitable for sweat or accidental splashes may not be safe for showering, and swimming usually requires a model specifically rated for submersion. Also, Bluetooth often won’t work reliably underwater, so swimming-focused headphones may use built-in storage instead.
Waterproofing itself shouldn’t necessarily make them sound worse. The electronics and speaker components can be sealed behind plastic, while the sound-producing parts still contact your skin. Differences are more likely to come from the specific model’s design and tuning than from it being waterproof.
If you plan to use them in the shower or while swimming, waterproofing is probably the more important feature. Water and the noise from showering or swimming will affect what you hear anyway, so the small difference in sound quality—if there is one—may not matter much. You could always buy a better pair later for dry use if you decide you want higher-quality audio.
Bone-conduction headphones generally aren’t known for amazing sound quality in the first place. They can be fine for podcasts and spoken audio, but music may sound thin compared with regular headphones. Sound quality is also subjective, so I wouldn’t assume a waterproof version will automatically sound terrible.
Related Questions
Lenovo Thinkpad Stuck In Update Loop Install FilterDriverU2_Reload