or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by briskly

Diffuse field equalization was developed for circumaural headphones, but it is assumed that with the relative positioning of the transducer and the eardrum that canalphones that they would also resemble a diffuse field. As it relates to the graph, the graphs from Sennheiser are already compensated for the diffuse field spec, with third-octave averaging to make the graphs look flatter.
Dynamic drivers will do most things better than a balanced armature within the same frequency range, as a note. Balanced armatures can skew heavily towards the bass and put out plenty of subbass through the usage of multiple bass receivers and other techniques; this is critically dependent on seal quality. The nature of the sealed ear canal means that you don't need massive drivers to get good low-frequency reproduction because it is moving air in a very small space.
Like most other single dynamic driver IEMs, the impedance curve on the RE-600 is near dead flat. Adding 100 ohms of serial impedance won't alter the bass frequencies or the rest of the spectrum appreciably
It would be easier to draw a camel through the eye of a needle than getting the masses to repurchase all their favorite music only for a benefit that seems nigh irrelevant to human ears.
This sounds much like the subject matter of Sean Olive's research, posted here: http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2014/01/the-perception-and-measurement-of.html The need for more data than what redbook can provide is questionable at very best.
Beating out dynamic IEMs? How so? Some of multi-BA in-ears have good amounts of high treble, but in distortion performance, they are significantly worse than other dynamic in-ears (e.g. the RE400 and MDR-EX1000). The advantages of the balanced armature are in efficient sound output and size. I guess we can also count not needing a depressurization hole as a plus as well.   Balanced armatures are old technology; they've been around since before the 1940s.
Here's a measurement of the LCD-XC isolation. XC is green, LCD-X is purple, tested at 75db.   Isolation is good, not at the top of closed cans, and certainly nowhere near an IEM. Edit: The TH900 for comparison
If the k1k design is retained in a newer headphone, it would still be painfully inefficient. The appeal of a largely free air design would be limited to only die-hard audiophiles, aesthetic issues would be a major turn off for a large chunk of the market.The k1k wasn't that popular back then either.
The first looks like a certain inexpensive closed headphone, an on ear. Peaking at around 9khz or so, and lacking in the upper-mid to low-treble, pretty common as measured. Surprisingly smooth in the bass and mids. As a disclaimer, Tyll's head should be taken with a few grains of margin past 8khz. Looks nice.   The second looks like a certain not-quite-sealed up headphone that happens to cost a pretty penny, closed over-ear. Bassy as all hell, much smoother in the mid to...
New Posts  All Forums: