New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by briskly

I do not know of earphone studies in particular, but audible effects of phase and polarity are preferentially tested in anechoic chamber or with headphones. Not all instruments can be identified by polarity even over headphone, and typical recording techniques of multi-miking or anything more than a single instrument tend to make this more difficult to distinguish.
This was made from analysis of headphone measurement data from innerfidelity, and at the time there weren't many lower range Stax measured. You can always go over it yourself using the criterion established in the first post, and the Lambdas generally do well based on that, besides some minor quibble with the bass response.
Is there any particular reason to test a DAC using a 997 Hz sine instead of 1kHz? I figure that 48/96/192 kHz sampling rates are integer multiples of 1kHz, but what difference could we expect from that?
The reference plane in the human ear canal is defined as corresponding to the position in the canals where plugs would normally terminate in the ear. See here.This is around the second bend of the canals, where the cartilage makes way for the skull proper, as stated in the 711 simulation you linked. Hence the reference to the bony part of the ear canal. As to @speakerphone and distance to reference plane measurements, a snippet regarding insertion and reference plane...
Basically, all the stuff shotgunshane said. You could have gotten the Fiio EX1 for a lower price which is pretty much the same thing as the Titan 1.   Don't you already have the RE-600? Why would you order the very similar sounding RE-400? It won't fix the bass woes you had on RE-600, and likely still be too dull.
Titan 1 insertion depth by Tyll seems unrealistic. The large body makes a fit at the reference plane (bony part of the ear canal) very difficult, so the peak goes down in frequency.Here's what happens as you move Titan 1 away from the reference plane. Note that this is raw data, using a comparable ear canal simulator to Tyll's.Canal resonance is a pesky thing, isn't it?
Tyll's measurement on my IM02 puts it as a very sensitive IEM, and thus very sensitive to hiss and noise. BA superior sensitivity makes them more prone to hiss in general. Impedance and power at one point doesn't tell you very much, since the crossover turns the impedance curve into a roller coaster. The noise would hopefully be given by SNR/Dynamic range compared to output value, explicitly stating the actual noise level as a voltage makes it even more...
Pfft. Science doesn't save you money. Just look at Tyll and his measurement gear. He could have the new Orpheus with money left over for cable risers if he didn't buy into that science crap.
 As for variation between listeners, the curve represents an average result.
All those questions and more have answers you can find on Sean Olive's blog, and this freely available summary of his more recent publications. The charts are taken directly from the publications.   The -9 dB slope is observed end-to-end deviation from the flat equalized speaker response. It wasn't explicitly about DF, but they noted the flat in-room response resembles diffuse-field response as measured by the GRAS 45CA with pinna simulators.
New Posts  All Forums: