Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › The Beyerdynamic DT48 Arrives...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Beyerdynamic DT48 Arrives... - Page 233

post #3481 of 3877
Quote:
Originally Posted by EYEdROP View Post

Another thing I noticed is the bass response seems to improve a little if you have a quiet room. This goes for any headphone...

not just bass but everything does listening in a quiet room. that's why i only listen at home in my listening area where it's ''dead'' sounding from all the room treatment i did. being in a dead room does more wonders than just for speaker listening.
post #3482 of 3877
Quote:
Originally Posted by lejaz View Post

Do you have a link to that graph of the dt48?  I was just listening to Sinatra and switching from the hd580 to the dt48, I preferred the dt48 by a fair margin. The dt48 sounds closer to the way I remember the 240DF sounding. Unfortunately I've never heard Sinatra live, so I can't say which is more true to life... Vocals definitely not coming from behind a curtain with the dt48....more, as someone else wrote, 'like getting a direct mic feed in the control room'.

 

These are the measurements Tyll got.

 

Did anyone ever send Tyll more 48s to measure? I had a look at the comments for his review of the 48, and he was asking people to give him more chances to measure those phones to learn more about them.

 

You guys in the US are so lucky to be able to send him stuff to measure for a few bucks.

post #3483 of 3877
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post

 

These are the measurements Tyll got.

 

Did anyone ever send Tyll more 48s to measure? I had a look at the comments for his review of the 48, and he was asking people to give him more chances to measure those phones to learn more about them...n

 

You guys in the US are so lucky to be able to send him stuff to measure for a few bucks.



Thanks. I remember that graph now. Mine don't sound much like that graph... no big peak at 80hz or at 9k. It wouldn't surprise me if there was a boost around the 1-2k area however, like the graph shows. I've seen quite a few graphs lately that people claim are not at all representative of the actual sound of the phones, so I've become pretty suspect of all of them.

post #3484 of 3877

I've come to understand that graphs are most deceiving in the upper mids/treble area due to individual ear shape variance (any other factors?). I've taken measurements with and without a fake ear and found that anything below 2 kHz changes relatively little when you account for the ear (though there's no guarantee that I'm measuring anything correctly to begin with).

 

Tyll didn't seem very convinced in his own listening of the pair of 48 he had either. So it would be cool if he got more 48s to measure and hear.

post #3485 of 3877

Now that I think of it, the mids of that graph don't look very convincing either, other than a little peak around 2k. I don't hear a big dip around 400-700hz that's in the graph.

post #3486 of 3877

Could be that resonances of whatever kind in the lower frequencies spoiled the graph, as Tyll speculated. If one assumed the line from 1 kHz down to be flat at 0 dB as in Beyer's own graphs, it wouldn't be too bad of a response. A bit colored in the upper mids, but not so bad.

 

Since you don't hear those low-level problems on your pair, send them off to Tyll. I'll PayPal you $15 to cover part of the shipping.

post #3487 of 3877

Yes, somethings definitely off  about the 10dB boost at 80hz in the graph, and the big treble peak as well. They have nothing like the treble of the k70X. I do hear a dip in the upper mids/low treble area. Compared to the hd580 they have significantly less energy in that area, which you can notice with high pitched horns and strings. The rest of the midrange sounds very flat though. I tried to download sinegen last night but I wound up with some malware, so I stopped the download. Going to look for another place to download it later.  I've been very busy during business hours(when the post office is open) so I probably can't take you up on the offer. Hopefully another dt48 owner will be able to send a set to Tyll. I'm not sure he'd want to use mine since the writing on the cups has completely worn off. However, the former owner(a former member here, and something of an authority on the dt48) assured me they were the 25ohm model, and probably from the mid-late '80's. He bought them second hand himself. Since they play very well out of my Sansa Clip I'm pretty certain that they're the 25ohm model. In fact I barely have to turn the knob on my amp to get a good volume out of them. Even the 55 ohm k240S needs a lot more gain then the Beyer.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post

Could be that resonances of whatever kind in the lower frequencies spoiled the graph, as Tyll speculated. If one assumed the line from 1 kHz down to be flat at 0 dB as in Beyer's own graphs, it wouldn't be too bad of a response. A bit colored in the upper mids, but not so bad.

 

Since you don't hear those low-level problems on your pair, send them off to Tyll. I'll PayPal you $15 to cover part of the shipping.



 

post #3488 of 3877
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post

These are an interesting pair of phones. Not so much because of their sound (haven't heard them), but because of the disagreement between measured graphs and listener perception regarding the neutralness of the mids.

 

If you look at two points on Tyll's graph, 500 Hz and 2300 Hz, you see that they're way off in relation to each other. Those two points, roughly, define the speech sound /e/ (as in "wet"). As such, on Tyll's setup, I don't see how the word wet would be rendered neutrally given that graph.

 

Yet, at the same time, many experienced people seem to find the DT 48 neutral. It's interesting.

 

(Tyll's DT 48 graph, as far as mids go, looks quite similar to the graph I measured off my AKG K 160. Same kind of mid hump. The vocals on that thing sound quite pleasing, but as if coming from behind a curtain.)

Just had to comment on your point abuot the 'e' sound in the word 'wet', since i was listening to a Sinatra song that had the word 'met', as in 'since we met'. It sound's almost the same on the dt48 as on the k240DF.... definitely no obvious difference. Perhaps the graph is not telling the truth about the midrange either. At least my ears tell me that it's not. Hopefully he'll get another set of dt48's to test.
 

 


Edited by lejaz - 2/16/12 at 9:09am
post #3489 of 3877

Malware in SineGen? That's not fair.

 

No worries about sending to Tyll. If someone else in this thread wants to send their bass-functional DT 48 to him for new measurements, I'll offer to offset shipping by $15.

 

I uploaded my SineGen here. I don't think it came with an installer, so it should just work like that. I scanned it with AVG and it came out with top scores in not being affected by malware. If you download the file, use your own anti-virus just in case.

 

I'm pretty sure the DT 48 has to sound better than what Tyll measured with that one pair, otherwise people wouldn't find them so neutral.

 

But speaking of true neutral, how neutral are the 240 DF? That one graph we looked at in the other thread (graph) gave them some hefty curves in the mids. Has someone on Head-Fi actually seen the IRT spec that the DF was based on? And how applicable is that today? It may well have called for slightly colored mids to begin with as far as we know.


Edited by vid - 6/26/12 at 9:46am
post #3490 of 3877

Many thanks vid! I just downloaded the files and I'll start it up later with the dt48. the malware came from the site that hosted the download...probably not anything dangerous.... but it did trigger my anti virus program and I got rid of it. AS for whether the DF or the dt48 is flat, so far all I've had to go by is my ears and the opinion of other head-fi'ers. But, I've been around live music for a few decades, so I know what a horn section or drum kit is supposed to sound like, and both phones seem to give a very true to life sound. The the DF is noticeably brighter, however. That could very well be due to a dip in the very upper midrange on the dt48. Oh yeah, the dt48 is maybe even more 'natural' sounding than the DF... to these ears. 


Edited by lejaz - 2/16/12 at 3:05pm
post #3491 of 3877
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post

These are an interesting pair of phones. Not so much because of their sound (haven't heard them), but because of the disagreement between measured graphs and listener perception regarding the neutralness of the mids.

 

If you look at two points on Tyll's graph, 500 Hz and 2300 Hz, you see that they're way off in relation to each other. Those two points, roughly, define the speech sound /e/ (as in "wet"). As such, on Tyll's setup, I don't see how the word wet would be rendered neutrally given that graph.

 

Yet, at the same time, many experienced people seem to find the DT 48 neutral. It's interesting.

 

(Tyll's DT 48 graph, as far as mids go, looks quite similar to the graph I measured off my AKG K 160. Same kind of mid hump. The vocals on that thing sound quite pleasing, but as if coming from behind a curtain.)


Just tested my set with sinegen and 500hz seems very close to the same level as 1000hz, so Tyll's graph is off there. There's a little boost around the 2400mark. Going down to 200 hz, it's a bit less than 500. Below 80 they really start to roll off. By 50 there's almost nothing there. But the bass and treble are consistent with the Fletcher Munson curve as I understand it. It's the 2400 area that's not consistent. It shouldn't sound louder than 1000hz if I understand correctly, but it does. It's also significantly louder than 4k. The very upper end of the mids is unfortunately fairly consistent with Tyll's graph. they roll off by 3k and are way rolled off at 4k, then come back up a little at 4.5 - 5k and way back down by 6 and continue down to the point where they're almost inaudible at 7k. Just some quick testing to get an idea of their 'flatness' or lack of same. One surprise was that 500 hz was equal to 1000, which isn't consistent with Tyll's graph, but is consistent with what my ears were telling me all along. 

 

edit: Looking at the equal loudness curve again, I now see that it should sound louder at 2.5k than at 1k, so the dt48 isn't off in relation to the equal loudness curve there, as I mistakenly believed. But it shouldn't have such a big dip at 3k-5k, so in the very upper mids there seems to be a significant dip in the frequency response.


Edited by lejaz - 2/16/12 at 5:33pm
post #3492 of 3877

For me the peaks in sinegen are at roughly 2700, 9400, and 13000. The peak at 2700 is supposedly natural to human hearing, our ears evolved to amplify that range for improved speech recognition. Peaks from 6-9 KHz are a result of the driver being too close to your ears and making an acoustic resonance. Many IEMs don't have this problem because they are located in the ear canal. Finally, the 13000kHz peak I cannot explain but it is fairly minor and doesn't seem to be a problem during actual music listening.

 

The inner fidelity review has some weird anomalies in the graph. But what makes me not like the review is I feel they didn't give the DT48 a fair listen. It takes a lot of listening time and patience to understand what these headphones are all about... Obviously they are very polarizing. Me and KBI thought "what the heck" at first listen and had our doubts. But the headphone grows on you with time and continues to surprise me over and over. These headphones really are something else...

post #3493 of 3877
Quote:
Originally Posted by EYEdROP View Post

For me the peaks in sinegen are at roughly 2700, 9400, and 13000. The peak at 2700 is supposedly natural to human hearing, our ears evolved to amplify that range for improved speech recognition. Peaks from 6-9 KHz are a result of the driver being too close to your ears and making an acoustic resonance. Many IEMs don't have this problem because they are located in the ear canal. Finally, the 13000kHz peak I cannot explain but it is fairly minor and doesn't seem to be a problem during actual music listening.

 

The inner fidelity review has some weird anomalies in the graph. But what makes me not like the review is I feel they didn't give the DT48 a fair listen. It takes a lot of listening time and patience to understand what these headphones are all about... Obviously they are very polarizing. Me and KBI thought "what the heck" at first listen and had our doubts. But the headphone grows on you with time and continues to surprise me over and over. These headphones really are something else...

Mine seems to have a big valley around 6k as in the graph. It was very hard to hear anything above 7k on mine, but that corresponds to the equal loudness curve as I understand it. The k702 goes up at 10k whereas the dt48 is pretty much inaudible there. The 702 also is easily heard below 50hz, but not so with the dt48, so my set corresponds to what some have said about their poor extension on both ends. The dt48 are never sibilant which is likely due to a significant dip in the low treble area....6-7k. Just noticed a peak at 5k with the 702. No wonder they sound so much brighter than the dt48....big difference at 5k and especially at 10k

 


Edited by lejaz - 2/16/12 at 8:52pm
post #3494 of 3877

This is consistant with my impressions as well... The 2.5khz peak can be a bit nasty (ringing ?), depending on your HRTF. I read that the 12/13khz frequency range is used by the ear for spatial location in a FF soundfield which would explain the peak as well.

 

What you have to understand is that those peaks and valleys ideally DO follow an intention... Do NOT try to eradicate them by equalizing (or very slightly to fine tune to your own HRTF). They are not necesarly a bad thing. In fact, what I see is that the DT48 FR follows pretty closely the theorical Free Field frequency response... For some it will work better than others, because the FF frequency response is much more sensitive to HRTF variations than the DF for example.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by EYEdROP View Post

For me the peaks in sinegen are at roughly 2700, 9400, and 13000. The peak at 2700 is supposedly natural to human hearing, our ears evolved to amplify that range for improved speech recognition. Peaks from 6-9 KHz are a result of the driver being too close to your ears and making an acoustic resonance. Many IEMs don't have this problem because they are located in the ear canal. Finally, the 13000kHz peak I cannot explain but it is fairly minor and doesn't seem to be a problem during actual music listening.

 

The inner fidelity review has some weird anomalies in the graph. But what makes me not like the review is I feel they didn't give the DT48 a fair listen. It takes a lot of listening time and patience to understand what these headphones are all about... Obviously they are very polarizing. Me and KBI thought "what the heck" at first listen and had our doubts. But the headphone grows on you with time and continues to surprise me over and over. These headphones really are something else...

 

post #3495 of 3877

I don't mean to doubt your hearing, lejaz. And in any case, I've never heard the DT 48 (nor the DF), so I'm going purely on speculation here.

 

From what I understand, your ear canal naturally resonates at around 3 and 10 kHz (and 15 kHz?). Which frequencies they are exactly depends on the length of your ear canal, and whether or not you hear peaks there depends on your phones.

 

I'm not an expert on this, but because the ear canal naturally emphasizes the sound around those frequencies, I would assume that your brain has come to automatically account for it. I.e. the brain expects to hear a certain amount of emphasis on those frequencies, and thus it sounds normal to you instead of peaky. If the source emphasizes those frequencies either up or down, you'd hear that as a deviation, i.e. a peak or a dip.

 

From what I understand, if you were a headphone manufacturer and wanted your phones to conform to f.e. the free field spec, you'd get yourself a dummy head to test on and tweak the phones until the dummy head gave you a graph that matched the free field curve. If you then subtracted the free field graph from the graph of your phones, you'd get a flat line, i.e. your phones would produce sound that got bounced around a certain way, arriving at the eardrum of that dummy in a certain way and its dummy brain would interpret it as flat. (I'm not going to hazard a guess as to whether the free field curve represents anything accurately or not, because I don't know.)

 

Again, I'm not an expert, but I assume the problem comes in when you (being the headphone manufacturer) take your phones out of the lab and plant them on the heads of random people. Their ears vary from each other (and their brains do as well), meaning that a different type of sound would arrive at their eardrums than what you predicted in the lab, and their brain would process it in a different way. Thus your phones wouldn't sound flat anymore. The free field curve, for instance, seems to center around 3 kHz or so, but if your test subject had a shorter or longer ear canal, their 3 kHz ear canal resonance wouldn't be exactly at 3 kHz but a bit below or above that, resulting in peaks and dips at that area when they listen to your phones.

 

Anyway, that's how I understand it, and I don't understand it too well. (If lejaz hears a peak at 2400 Hz and EYEdROP has it at 2700 Hz, and assuming those are the 3 kHz ear canal resonances showing up, then lejaz possibly has a longer ear canal, which would be roughly 3.5 cm or so vs. 3.1 for EYEdROP. But that's just a guess.)


Edited by vid - 2/17/12 at 5:30am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › The Beyerdynamic DT48 Arrives...