New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New Beyer DT1350 - Page 123

post #1831 of 3813

Wow - this thread has gone for a walk on the wild side...

 

I like the DT1350's.  Mine sound like the early ones were described - decently deep bass, articulate, pretty detailed, pretty accurate.  Excellent for a $300 on ear portable.

 

I am disturbed that 3 out of 3 pairs are all over the map.  I wonder about position sensitivity, seal, etc. in the testing, but I don't discount Purrin's testing, just would like a full description.  As for requiring "Scientists" before you believe it - those who feel this way give "scientists" far too much credit.  I did several years as a rocket scientist - we are bright guys, but hey, humans build tests, and as far as I know, Purrin is human.  Heck, he could be a scientist.  A scientist after all is one who uses the scientific method.  State a hypothesis - all DT1350's sound alike.  Test, and evaluate the results.  Purrin has done this, and disproved the hypothesis.

 

However - the next step is repeatability and verification by peers.  We need his method, and someone else with similar equipment, who cares enough to bother.

 

OK, I'm out of here for a while...


Edited by aamefford - 6/23/12 at 8:27pm
post #1832 of 3813

What's shocking is all this skepticism of Purrin contrasted with blind faith in Beyerdynamic. 

 

We have evidence of serious QC problems.  What do we have suggesting good QC?  Flashy pictures on Beyer's website, and owners unwillingness to accept imperfection in something they own and enjoy. 

 

Shameful.  Seriously shameful. 


Edited by rhythmdevils - 6/23/12 at 9:10pm
post #1833 of 3813
You think that is wild. Should have read the 30 posts that we're deleted by the mods. It was definitely getting crazy.

Graphs aside...mine sound great.

There are many things in this world that science is not yet able to explain...perhaps the DT's will be one of them? wink.gif. Just kidding.....
post #1834 of 3813

2012-06-16 23.25.02.jpg

 

Hope that explains.

post #1835 of 3813

just realized swarthy got banned, no wonder its getting quiet in here all of sudden.

post #1836 of 3813
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhythmdevils View Post

What's shocking is all this skepticism of Purrin contrasted with blind faith in Beyerdynamic. 

 

We have evidence of serious QC problems.  What do we have suggesting good QC?  Flashy pictures on Beyer's website, and owners unwillingness to accept imperfection in something they own and enjoy. 

 

Shameful.  Seriously shameful. 

 

Who are you even talking to anymore?  Swarthy's been banned, remember?

 

Skepticism of Purrin doesn't equal blind faith in beyerdynamic.  Evidence doesn't always equal proof.  

 

Is there something shameful about people wishing for "repeatability and verification"?  Or heaven forbid...a random sample, even?  Yes, shameful indeed when people insist on basic scientific principles.  Perhaps it's not realistic in this setting, but it's nice to wish for all the same.

 

As I said before, Purrin's methods may be perfectly valid, and he may very well have stumbled upon something here.  Then again, maybe he hasn't.  I'm sorry if you're offended by people considering both possibilities.  

post #1837 of 3813
Quote:
Originally Posted by maverickronin View Post

 

That's specifically why I don't go.

 

It stops being enjoyable when my ears hurt.  I'd still like to be able to enjoy music well into my old age.

 

So true.  I have no idea why people ruin their music with concerts pumped up to the maxxxxxxxx - I've stopped going.

post #1838 of 3813

FWIW, the good ones measure well. These are slwiser's DT1350 with the HD pads. FR still on the wigglely side, but overall not bad. The pads do make measurements more consistent than the stock pads which are touchy on the measurement rig. (This is still old data.)

 

dt1350pads fr.txt.jpg

 

CSDs are actually very clean for a closed headphone.

dt1350 l.txt.jpg

 

dt1350padsr.txt.jpg

 

I don't know why I never posted these, but when someone goes ballistic over the smallest criticisms of a headphone, it's difficult for me to concentrate on my task at hand. Those who have read my subjective impressions and analyses of objective measurements of other headphones know that my style tends to be fairly dry and dispassionate.

 

And BTW, I did mess up on the measurement for the 3rd pair.


Edited by purrin - 6/23/12 at 10:28pm
post #1839 of 3813
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyline315 View Post

Who are you even talking to anymore?  Swarthy's been banned, remember?

Skepticism of Purrin doesn't equal blind faith in beyerdynamic.  Evidence doesn't always equal proof.  

Is there something shameful about people wishing for "repeatability and verification"?  Or heaven forbid...a random sample, even?  Yes, shameful indeed when people insist on basic scientific principles.  Perhaps it's not realistic in this setting, but it's nice to wish for all the same.

As I said before, Purrin's methods may be perfectly valid, and he may very well have stumbled upon something here.  Then again, maybe he hasn't.  I'm sorry if you're offended by people considering both possibilities.  

Thing is, purrin's findings came into the picture AFTER people have already stated pretty contrasting impressions. I'm not against doing further experimentation (with as many 1350s as we can hopefully) but I personally don't understand why, for example, there are timbre accuracy issues with some models while others compare the timbre accuracy to that of the HE-500. Sure it could just be different impressions but after Purrin's frequency test I would think he's definitely on to something. I also presume he has a lot of experience measuring headphones numerous times. He's also found inconsistencies in other Beyer headphone models. I don't think those headphones depend as much on getting the seal right (a la 1350) yet he still found those inconsistencies. Just saying.
Edited by roma101 - 6/23/12 at 10:15pm
post #1840 of 3813
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrAdrian View Post

 

Hope that explains.

Thanks! That clears it up. I actually don't use need the arms to swing, so I'll still try to get the headbands. 

post #1841 of 3813

The measurement thing is a hobby and to be honest I pay more attention to certain details than others. Here is a link the corrected DT1350 measurements of the most recent pair. It still doesn't change the current situation that much. In the future I will be much more careful and methodical in measuring these.

 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/574139/t1-channel-imbalance-and-beyer-tesla-headphone-variance-issues/60#post_8471170

 

I've started to crank out more tests on repeatability (including changing the position slightly on the measurement rig) and will be posting some results in the usual place in the next few days.

post #1842 of 3813

Just out of curiosity, what kind of microphone are you using to get the data?

post #1843 of 3813

Calibrated panny capsule on a stick. The coupler(s) are semi-secret. CLIO box and software for data acquisition. Custom code for plots. A few industry folks have prodded me about my techniques but I'm not giving things away for free.


Edited by purrin - 6/23/12 at 10:41pm
post #1844 of 3813

interesting read. my 1350 are fantastic, had them since july last year.

post #1845 of 3813
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhythmdevils View Post

What's shocking is all this skepticism of Purrin contrasted with blind faith in Beyerdynamic. 

 

What's shocking is all this skepticism of Beyerdynamic (and the decades of experience of their acoustic engineers have) contrasted with blind faith in Purrin*.

 

*No offence to Purrin, this post isn't directed at him.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav: