Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › New Headroom graphs
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New Headroom graphs

post #1 of 34
1/2/09 at 9:16pm
Thread Starter 
So, there are some new graphs up on Headroom, and I found some things interesting.

1) What happened to the single-ended HD650 and K701 graphs? I only see balanced ones in the list now.

2) If my memory of those now-unavailable single ended graphs is accurate, the balanced graphs have significant differences. I wish they made more information available about what equipment was used and how the conditions compared to the single-ended test, but this would be a big deal. Other attempts I've seen to make comparison graphs of single-ended and balanced have provided frequency response results of barely measurable differences.

3) Again, if my memory of the now-unavailable single ended K701 graph is accurate, Headroom's results for the K701 and K702 have not-insignificant differences. Less deep bass and a slightly more pronounced upper midrange on the K702. Again, more information is needed to know if this really is accurate. For example, amount of hours on each pair of phones, amplification info etc.

4) Comparing the Denon D5000 and D7000 measurements, the D5000 would seem to have the better response graph on paper. Whether or not they sound better is of course another matter.

5) The extremely weird/poor frequency response measurements for the W5000s. If that graph is accurate...that's pretty shocking. I haven't heard the phones, so I withhold any judgments other than that. Considering all the discussion of fit problems, however, you have to wonder whether maybe they couldn't get them to fit the artificial head properly.

6) The addition of the 500 Hz and 50 Hz square-wave response graphs. I won't pretend to have enough expertise to make much sense of them, but if anyone could give a little workshop, that would be great.

What does everyone else think?
Reply
post #2 of 34
1/2/09 at 9:30pm
There's already a thread on this which sort of went off-topic into a more general discussion on non HD280-related measurements:

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f4/new...adroom-395933/

To sum it up from my point of view: I find their method of measurement (1 KHz output level matching) less than ideal for comparison of FR graphs between headphones. I also cannot see how the K701 could have an almost identical Frequency Response compared to the HD650. There's a few other quirks that don't really make sense, for example the fact that some graphs aren't even properly level-matched or that the isolation FR curve of balanced/non-balanced D5000/D7000 is different.
Reply
post #3 of 34
1/2/09 at 9:34pm
Interesting. Not quite what you would expect eh.
Surprising the D2000 has a flatter line that the D7000.
W5000? Don't know, I'm in the middle of trying to remove a mod made by the previous owner.
Reply
post #4 of 34
1/2/09 at 9:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by big-ban View Post
or that the isolation FR curve of balanced/non-balanced D5000/D7000 is different.
I think the 5k and 7k have different drivers.
Reply
post #5 of 34
1/2/09 at 9:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by digger945 View Post
I think the 5k and 7k have different drivers.
Of course they have. What I meant was that there's a difference in the D5000 stock isolation curve compared to the D5000 balanced isolation curve as well as in the D7000 stock curve compared to the D7000 balanced curve.
Products - HeadRoom - Right Between Your Ears
Products - HeadRoom - Right Between Your Ears

As for the W5000, I think they were probably having some fit problems with the W5000 on the dummy head. Getting a proper seal is really important, otherwise bass is practically gone.
Reply
post #6 of 34
1/2/09 at 10:06pm
For comparison, first the old HD-600 graph, and then the new one. They are a bit different.

Reply
post #7 of 34
1/2/09 at 10:10pm
FQ graphs only say so much...if anything.
Reply
post #8 of 34
1/2/09 at 10:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by tot View Post
For comparison, first the old HD-600 graph, and then the new one. They are a bit different.
LOL...On the new graph, they used a well burn in cans. Or Sen change the drivers on the HD600.
Reply
post #9 of 34
1/2/09 at 11:01pm
Has anybody noticed the different scale on those two headroom graphs? Makes it hard to compare.
Quote:
Originally Posted by danmagicman7 View Post
FQ graphs only say so much...if anything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by myself
FQ graphs say much... but there's more than just graphs
My graph says something different again. The HD600 I had here for measurement must have been the version more similar to the one on the second headroom graph, though mine was obviously more tipped towards upper mids/lower treble. What I don't quite understand is the big dip from 5-10 KHz. It's probably because the earbuds sit inside the outer ear, I'm not sure.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Acix
Or Sen change the drivers on the HD600.
At some point, they did that on the HD650 for certain, I heard both versions side by side, both were in use for several years, the older version probably 1-2 years longer. I also read on head-fi they did it with the HD600, too. There ARE different versions. We don't know how many though.

Now we're all left to guess which graph is the most accurate. But in the end we're probably all right since there's many different versions out there...
Reply
post #10 of 34
1/3/09 at 12:01am
the x axis is different on the old vs new graphs. With a log scale like that, you can't just eyeball it for differences.
Reply
post #11 of 34
1/3/09 at 12:49am
how do u test these headphones and produce a graph of your own?
Reply
post #12 of 34
1/3/09 at 1:19am
Thread Starter 
Yes, the x axis is different in the new graphs, but that does not explain all of the differences. For example, look at the two HD600 graphs posted above. In the old one, there's a canyon at 6,000 Hz of -13 dB. In the new one, it's only at -5 dB 6,000 Hz. Also, the little hump at about 3,500 Hz in the old graph is not present in the new graph. And the overall treble curve in the new graph suggests a much smoother performance, with the peaks and valleys being lower in magnitude.

The different scale also doesn't explain how the HD650 and K701 graphs have become so similar when they were markedly different before.
Reply
post #13 of 34
1/3/09 at 3:02am
square wave responses are great, they test the transient speed ability of the headphones.

however, they don't seemed to be lined up with respect to phase, which is dumb.
Reply
post #14 of 34
1/3/09 at 9:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by member1982 View Post
how do u test these headphones and produce a graph of your own?
See this thread:
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f4/hea...phones-388711/
Reply
post #15 of 34
1/3/09 at 11:06am
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayG View Post
Yes, the x axis is different in the new graphs, but that does not explain all of the differences. For example, look at the two HD600 graphs posted above. In the old one, there's a canyon at 6,000 Hz of -13 dB. In the new one, it's only at -5 dB 6,000 Hz. Also, the little hump at about 3,500 Hz in the old graph is not present in the new graph. And the overall treble curve in the new graph suggests a much smoother performance, with the peaks and valleys being lower in magnitude.

The different scale also doesn't explain how the HD650 and K701 graphs have become so similar when they were markedly different before.
They weren't that different before, the match point was lower (about 600 hz). The k701 had a slight dip in the midrange, which included the match point, so it looked like it had boosted bass and treble. It actually only had the 6-8k spike like the k702 has now.

The current graphs show the k601 as having flatter bass with less rolloff than the k702 - if the k702 sounds the same as the k701, it should have the same bass response, as the old k701 graph did.

The new graphs actually make the k601 look like a flatter headphone than either the or the balanced hd650, while that fits my own experiences with a single ended hd650 and the k701, I would think it is pretty obvious that the measurements aren't perfect.


Also, the fact that the isolation figures don't match for balanced vs unbalanced models of the same headphone would point to either variation from headphone to headphone in a specific model, or positioning differences between tests:

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › New Headroom graphs