Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › MDR-SA5000... Can they be bettered?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

MDR-SA5000... Can they be bettered? - Page 15

post #211 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by sokolov91 View Post
It could be heard has cold and clinical in overall feel. But what you hear just sounds so clear and unchanged. Drums sound perfect... bass strings, voices and guitars just come across as super organic. The over all sound is not a very musical one... but each instrument when listened to on its own sounds amazing. It's kind of hard to explain.
Greenie should try the DT48a. Corpse have more life.. & the DT48e makes the SA5000 sound like a grado..
post #212 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catharsis View Post
As limited as technical (objective) data may be, it's still more accurate than human hearing and I don't trust my ears as much as head-fier's would insist that I do.
I don't "insist" that you trust your ears at all, in fact you may be right that yours are untrustworthy. I do insist that I trust mine, however.

As far as data being more "accurate" than human hearing, I would say that measurements are the tail and our perceptions the dog. I have measured audio gear for a living, so I have no irrational thing about measurements.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Catharsis View Post
Our ears are extremely limited in their perception, and are heavily influenced by psychoacoustics and expectation bias.
The ears are the "thing itself". And psychoacoustics and expectation bias is also experienced by people who use measurements to decide what they have "heard", so that's a sword that cuts both ways.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Catharsis View Post
In fact, over the last couple of years I've learned to pretty much weigh everyone's opinion about sound with a grain of salt and stick to objective measurements.
Personally, I weigh everyone's (including my own ) opinions about EVERYTHING with a grain of salt. And sticking to "objective" measurements does save you the effort of actually listening, so carry on!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Catharsis View Post
Head-fi consists of an overwhelming majority of subjective pseudoscience voodoo sound believers that will suck you in and spit you out with all of their mumbo-jumbo crap; almost as bad as creationism in my books. No offense head-fiers,
I am sure no offense is taken . Funny, I am usually the guy boring everyone with the scientific stuff (as KBI will attest), but I also know there is uncertainty in science, especially the science of headphones. In fact, there is no universally accepted objective FR curve of how a headphone should measure or how it should be measured, for that matter!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Catharsis View Post
I'll give anyone here a million bucks if they can measure the specs of my EMU-0404 USB with their ears with the precision of electronic instruments; not that you just couldn't read the technical manual
The ear/brain system converts acoustic pressure to electrical signals which are sent to a processor (brain) that is constantly performing real-time fast-fourier transforms on these signals (while processing tremendous amounts of other non-related information) and interprets the results as emotions, directional perceptions and body movements. Pretty impressive, to me.

Measuring the specs of your EMU-0404 is trivial, that can be done with mere inanimate objects (test gear). As long as there is a thinking being to control the equipment and interpret the results of course.

Kevin
post #213 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by k3oxkjo View Post
I don't "insist" that you trust your ears at all, in fact you may be right that yours are untrustworthy. I do insist that I trust mine, however.

As far as data being more "accurate" than human hearing, I would say that measurements are the tail and our perceptions the dog. I have measured audio gear for a living, so I have no irrational thing about measurements.



The ears are the "thing itself". And psychoacoustics and expectation bias is also experienced by people who use measurements to decide what they have "heard", so that's a sword that cuts both ways.




Personally, I weigh everyone's (including my own ) opinions about EVERYTHING with a grain of salt. And sticking to "objective" measurements does save you the effort of actually listening, so carry on!



I am sure no offense is taken . Funny, I am usually the guy boring everyone with the scientific stuff (as KBI will attest), but I also know there is uncertainty in science, especially the science of headphones. In fact, there is no universally accepted objective FR curve of how a headphone should measure or how it should be measured, for that matter!



The ear/brain system converts acoustic pressure to electrical signals which are sent to a processor (brain) that is constantly performing real-time fast-fourier transforms on these signals (while processing tremendous amounts of other non-related information) and interprets the results as emotions, directional perceptions and body movements. Pretty impressive, to me.

Measuring the specs of your EMU-0404 is trivial, that can be done with mere inanimate objects (test gear). As long as there is a thinking being to control the equipment and interpret the results of course.

Kevin
Actually, I learned a lot from your post, just have a hard time understanding half of it.. Your expertise in this area is just greater then mine, but always find your post informative.
post #214 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by kool bubba ice View Post
Actually, I learned a lot from your post, just have a hard time understanding half of it.. Your expertise in this area is just greater then mine, but always find your post informative.
Thanks, but I can take no credit. I am just an inveterate reader, the other folks do the heavy lifting. And half of it I don't understand .

I'm just like the thief in Dirty Harry; I gots to know!

Kevin
post #215 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by k3oxkjo View Post
Thanks, but I can take no credit. I am just an inveterate reader, the other folks do the heavy lifting. And half of it I don't understand .

I'm just like the thief in Dirty Harry; I gots to know!

Kevin
That brings me to a movie that had a funny line.. Reading rots your brain.. Some old baby sitter said it..
post #216 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by kool bubba ice View Post
That brings me to a movie that had a funny line.. Reading rots your brain.. Some old baby sitter said it..
Hmmm... Maybe that's what wrong, my brain is rotten .
post #217 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by kool bubba ice View Post
When does enjoying the music come into play.. Data can also be unreliable & biased, ala, the whole global warming scandal.. In the end, I trust my ears on what sounds good instead of measurements & data run by a flawed/biased scientist, etc.. Since no one is perfect..
Global warming scandal....you're confusing science with politicization of science. Politicians, journalists and shareholders like to poke there big faces into science and yes they can even influence the occasional study to their liking. But by and large scientists including me are only interested in acquiring knowledge, and care little about manipulating it to serve a purpose. We ask nature the questions and it provides the answers - simple as that.

It's very easy to measure sound, it's about as easy as reading the temperature outside, or the number of milliliters of green tea in my cup. There's nothing difficult about it - at least not compared to more complex multi-variable data.

Irregardless, the human ear tolerancee is usually less than 1db, whereas a simple machine is precise to several hundred / thousand times beyond that. Multimeters, thermometers, scales, microscopes, mass spectrometers etc (all basic measuring devices) offer precision that no human could ever dream of measuring. Furthermore, one of the fundamentals of science is that it can be reproduced. You don't have to take my word for it or any other scientist, you can go out and take the measurements yourself, just like you can throw an apple into the air and watch it fall to the ground. All it takes is a little investment to learn the basics of science and suddenly the world opens up to you.
post #218 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by k3oxkjo View Post
I don't "insist" that you trust your ears at all, in fact you may be right that yours are untrustworthy. I do insist that I trust mine, however.

As far as data being more "accurate" than human hearing, I would say that measurements are the tail and our perceptions the dog. I have measured audio gear for a living, so I have no irrational thing about measurements.



The ears are the "thing itself". And psychoacoustics and expectation bias is also experienced by people who use measurements to decide what they have "heard", so that's a sword that cuts both ways.



Personally, I weigh everyone's (including my own ) opinions about EVERYTHING with a grain of salt. And sticking to "objective" measurements does save you the effort of actually listening, so carry on!



I am sure no offense is taken . Funny, I am usually the guy boring everyone with the scientific stuff (as KBI will attest), but I also know there is uncertainty in science, especially the science of headphones. In fact, there is no universally accepted objective FR curve of how a headphone should measure or how it should be measured, for that matter!



The ear/brain system converts acoustic pressure to electrical signals which are sent to a processor (brain) that is constantly performing real-time fast-fourier transforms on these signals (while processing tremendous amounts of other non-related information) and interprets the results as emotions, directional perceptions and body movements. Pretty impressive, to me.

Measuring the specs of your EMU-0404 is trivial, that can be done with mere inanimate objects (test gear). As long as there is a thinking being to control the equipment and interpret the results of course.

Kevin
I think it is important to remember that measurements give us a standard, and remove the subjective. Without measurements you couldn't:

Drive a car (mmm...I think I'm going below the speedlimit)
Turn on a TV
Build a house
Make it to work
Call a friend
Type this message
etc etc etc

If you tell me something is "bassy" and I disagree with you, the only way to tell the truth about it is to apply an objective standard such as: The signal is attenuated by 3db at 250hz. But words like that are totally frowned upon by people at head-fi. Do you know how many arguments could be resolved if we stuck to measurements? Conversations about how "bassy" a headphone is would be totally unnecessary because then it would only be relative, and psychoacoustics (a confounding variable) would be eliminated.

This isn't rocket science - I'm actually amazed at how many head-fiers are actually anti-science. You wouldn't have anything to listen to if it weren't for science, nor would we be having this discussion in such a way as we are now.
post #219 of 274
I knew it. k3oxkjo, your post was like trying to cut butter with a laser beam. The only explanation Catharsis needs is that different ears have different hrtf's. If the people who decided the SA5000's frequency response were grilled by their bosses "why is there a scooped out midrange" they could provide an hrtf example where the midrange is actually just fine. There is no 100% correct hrtf model because every single person on the planet has a unique ear shape.
post #220 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catharsis View Post
I think it is important to remember that measurements give us a standard, and remove the subjective. Without measurements you couldn't:

Drive a car (mmm...I think I'm going below the speedlimit)
Turn on a TV
Build a house
Make it to work
Call a friend
Type this message
etc etc etc

If you tell me something is "bassy" and I disagree with you, the only way to tell the truth about it is to apply an objective standard such as: The signal is attenuated by 3db at 250hz. But words like that are totally frowned upon by people at head-fi. Do you know how many arguments could be resolved if we stuck to measurements? Conversations about how "bassy" a headphone is would be totally unnecessary because then it would only be relative, and psychoacoustics (a confounding variable) would be eliminated.

This isn't rocket science - I'm actually amazed at how many head-fiers are actually anti-science. You wouldn't have anything to listen to if it weren't for science, nor would we be having this discussion in such a way as we are now.
Music has been around longer then science..& music, however primitive, could survive without science.. Measurements means very little if we don't actually hear what the data represents.. We all have preferences, we all hear differently, & we all have biases, either consciously or subconsciously.. So, when it comes to measurements, studies, etc, I'm not 100% sold on it..

Too be frank, science just muddies things.. You want to put science in with something as subjective as music, where emotional, history, preference, etc come into play.. The D7000 could measure flat on every test, but how many would believe it when they heard it? Try telling someone they are wrong in what they hear.. Science is flawed. Science isn't always right... Science & audio doesn't mix.. Music is emotional, & you want to involve numbers, 'facts', & hard data into the equation. It doesn't work.
post #221 of 274
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catharsis View Post
I think it is important to remember that measurements give us a standard, and remove the subjective. Without measurements you couldn't:

Drive a car (mmm...I think I'm going below the speedlimit)
Turn on a TV
Build a house
Make it to work
Call a friend
Type this message
etc etc etc

If you tell me something is "bassy" and I disagree with you, the only way to tell the truth about it is to apply an objective standard such as: The signal is attenuated by 3db at 250hz. But words like that are totally frowned upon by people at head-fi. Do you know how many arguments could be resolved if we stuck to measurements? Conversations about how "bassy" a headphone is would be totally unnecessary because then it would only be relative, and psychoacoustics (a confounding variable) would be eliminated.

This isn't rocket science - I'm actually amazed at how many head-fiers are actually anti-science. You wouldn't have anything to listen to if it weren't for science, nor would we be having this discussion in such a way as we are now.
Yeah I made a thread about neutrality due to the Research Methods class I am taking at my college. That class is really shedding a ton of light on a lot of stuff...

But ignorance of facts, or dismissal of facts goes very deeply into our society, and affects things much more important than head-fi... like our politics, government policies.. public opinion..

Take a look http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f4/let...s-fact-477739/

SA5K are not bassy, but graph aside, you do end up hearing a lot of it and it is quick to change notes, much more so than other headphones. But it does require constant effort.
post #222 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by kool bubba ice View Post
Greenie should try the DT48a. Corpse have more life.. & the DT48e makes the SA5000 sound like a grado..
Hi Kool, I actually brought and sold the DT48e as new a year ago, the heavy weight aggrevate some health problem of mine. I was looking to see if the SA5000 is a close call. Thanks for your suggestion anyway.
post #223 of 274
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kool bubba ice View Post
Music has been around longer then science..& music, however primitive, could survive without science.. Measurements means very little if we don't actually hear what the data represents.. We all have preferences, we all hear differently, & we all have biases, either consciously or subconsciously.. So, when it comes to measurements, studies, etc, I'm not 100% sold on it..

Too be frank, science just muddies things.. You want to put science in with something as subjective as music, where emotional, history, preference, etc come into play.. The D7000 could measure flat on every test, but how many would believe it when they heard it? Try telling someone they are wrong in what they hear.. Science is flawed. Science isn't always right... Science & audio doesn't mix.. Music is emotional, & you want to involve numbers, 'facts', & hard data into the equation. It doesn't work.
Music is only emotional because it evokes emotion in humans... by nature it is not emotional... it is just sine waves.

Just because your perception doesn't match whats on paper, doesn't mean its correct. Life as we know it is an improper interpretation of the world... we don't see infrared, we don't see ultraviolet, we can't perceive time outside the scale of our lives... etc etc.

Science serves to quantify things that are otherwise hard to get a grasp on, or get an honest answer about.

Science also does not strive to be right, it strives to be accurate and probable/repeatable. Science never claims to be set in stone or the ultimate answer, just the best currently available.

IMO if people were able to better see the difference between their personal EQ and factual, data things would be much better. Hell, if we could SEE sound, it would be easier :P.

Whether or not one chooses to actually use the info to get the sound they desire does not have to change for our standards to be better :/.
post #224 of 274
This thread looks like it might be on its way to closure considering how radically off-topic it is now.

To the OP: I recommend a much better amp and DAC as the solution for your SA5000s. My regular cans are bright and fast, and they are only not fatiguing because the gear I use them with is high quality.
post #225 of 274
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Currawong View Post
This thread looks like it might be on its way to closure considering how radically off-topic it is now.

To the OP: I recommend a much better amp and DAC as the solution for your SA5000s. My regular cans are bright and fast, and they are only not fatiguing because the gear I use them with is high quality.
I will looking into getting a REF 7 and Phoenix in the summer and then just stop with audio upgrades and tweaks and just focus more on my cd collection and listening to music :P.

I will be reterminating any of my headphones that can to a 4 pin XLR, as I simply refuse to spend absurd amounts of money on recables if I can simply solder 4 wires myself :P.

how are the REF 1 and phoenix for bright phones specifically?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › MDR-SA5000... Can they be bettered?