Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Audiophile cables, an interesting question.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audiophile cables, an interesting question. - Page 65

post #961 of 1186
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverEars View Post

Why do most headphones take a dip at 3k?

Fletcher Munson.
Edited by bigshot - 7/14/14 at 12:39am
post #962 of 1186
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeaj View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by castleofargh View Post
 

so here silver is clearly a bad choice, and that's why it drives me crazy when people make generalizations like saying that "silver improves trebles". just because it did on the one IEM they tried it with, doesn't mean that all IEMs will react the same, and obviously they won't as it depends mostly on the crossovers and the type of driver. when I read that the LCD2 sounds is more balanced/brighter with silver cable I LOL, that thing has like perfectly flat impedance response. and if the impedance difference between copper and silver would actually change the sound just with the difference in damping, then obviously the headphone is driven by the wrong amp and something is wrong.

 

In these kinds of situations, people aren't doing comparisons with literally the only difference in the cables being the materials types, right?

 

I mean, silver is what, 5% more conductive than copper? But also more expensive. Silver IEM cables are probably liable to be thinner, and who knows what the construction differences between actual products actually is. Even with all else equal, 5% less cable impedance should usually be no big deal.

well I'm sure that just doing some braids, having some shielding, or changing the length or thickness of the conductor part of the cable is what makes a cable good or bad for the proper needs, not the choice of metal in it. and that's probably what makes enough differences to be audible. I was talking real variations but of laughable magnitude, that's why I had to put so many "slightly" in my sentences ^_^.

post #963 of 1186

I've never seen braiding recommended on electrical grounds - may look pretty though

 

EE's spec twisted pairs, star quad, coax, shielding - for electrical performance, immunity to external field coupling

 

Litz wiring may be "braided" to move the individual conductors evenly over the radius of the cable - but it is then used as a single electrical conductor - and headphone cable are too a small gage wire to have audible skin effect loss

 

braiding is likely to cause measureable increase in channel cross talk compared to normal EE cabling practice like individually twisted pairs for each channel

post #964 of 1186

I hear that this opens the soundstage a great deal.

post #965 of 1186
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcx View Post

I've never seen braiding recommended on electrical grounds - may look pretty though

EE's spec twisted pairs, star quad, coax, shielding - for electrical performance, immunity to external field coupling

Braided cable was patented back in 1960. It was invented by Henry Albert Milloit for the Perfection Mica Corporation. It is still sold today under the Inter-8 Weave trademark by Magnetic Shield Corporation (a subdivision of Perfection Mica). It does indeed offer better performance over twisted pair.

http://custommagneticshielding.magneticshield.com/viewitems/magnetic-shielding-for-wiring-applications/inter-8-weave-cable

Ray Kimber was actually able to secure a patent on the very same braid. I was the one who broke the news to him that the money he had spent on the patent had been wasted and he should ask for a refund from his patent attorneys. biggrin.gif



se
Edited by Steve Eddy - 7/15/14 at 5:44pm
post #966 of 1186

I believe star quad will have same or superior electrical characteristics for similar wire awg and insulation thickness - the "inter-8" weave page gives no data - the shielding pdf only claims mechanical improvements when you recognize that star quad has the same conductor count when both are used as 2 conductor cable

post #967 of 1186
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcx View Post

I believe star quad will have same or superior electrical characteristics for similar wire awg and insulation thickness - the "inter-8" weave page gives no data - the shielding pdf only claims mechanical improvements when you recognize that star quad has the same conductor count when both are used as 2 conductor cable

Perhaps so, though I would imagine the starquad would have a bit higher capacitance. And I like the self-constraining nature of the braid.

se
post #968 of 1186
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

Fletcher Munson.

Huh? What has Fletcher-Munson have to do with it?

se
post #969 of 1186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Eddy View Post


Huh? What has Fletcher-Munson have to do with it?

se

 

Only thing I can think is that he's suggesting people tune to the equal loudness curves... since our sensitivity to those frequencies is higher, they are reduced in volume, so as to even out the overall sonic signature. Which would account for why so many show a dip in that frequency range. 

post #970 of 1186
Quote:
Originally Posted by liamstrain View Post

Only thing I can think is that he's suggesting people tune to the equal loudness curves... since our sensitivity to those frequencies is higher, they are reduced in volume, so as to even out the overall sonic signature. Which would account for why so many show a dip in that frequency range. 

But you don't want to "correct" for the equal loudness curves, except for something like a "loudness" button to help make the sound more even when played at lower levels. But you wouldn't want to "correct" for it overall. It's how we hear so listening through an inverse equal loudness filter would sound unnatural.

se
post #971 of 1186

Fletcher Munson only affects about the last three octaves of human hearing. As the frequencies and volume rises, Fletcher Munson becomes more important. -10dB or so splits the difference in the sensitive zone, and above 6kHz, a little boost is beneficial, especially for people 50 and over. If you can hit measured flat, try a slope down around 10kHz from 2kHz to 6kHz and a slope up to +10dB from 6kHz to 10kHz and +10 flatlined above. It's a compromise, a DSP that dynamically adjusted it would work better, but it is a good compromise. Try it. It allows you to play music at loud volumes without fatigue.

post #972 of 1186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Eddy View Post

But you don't want to "correct" for the equal loudness curves, except for something like a "loudness" button to help make the sound more even when played at lower levels. But you wouldn't want to "correct" for it overall. It's how we hear so listening through an inverse equal loudness filter would sound unnatural.

 

More likely, it could be due to the way full size headphone enclosures (especially closed ones) tend to interact with the acoustics of the outer ear. Perhaps the fact that the ears are covered affects the ear canal resonance, which is normally a large peak centered at ~3 kHz.

post #973 of 1186
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
 

Fletcher Munson only affects about the last three octaves of human hearing.

 

Actually, equal loudness contours affect the low frequency range significantly. 1 dB of increase in sub-bass SPL results in roughly 2 dB higher perceived loudness in the 20-80 phons range.

post #974 of 1186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Eddy View Post


But you don't want to "correct" for the equal loudness curves, except for something like a "loudness" button to help make the sound more even when played at lower levels. But you wouldn't want to "correct" for it overall. It's how we hear so listening through an inverse equal loudness filter would sound unnatural.

se

 

Definitely agree - I am just speculating what he might have meant. 

post #975 of 1186
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

Fletcher Munson only affects about the last three octaves of human hearing. As the frequencies and volume rises, Fletcher Munson becomes more important. -10dB or so splits the difference in the sensitive zone, and above 6kHz, a little boost is beneficial, especially for people 50 and over. If you can hit measured flat, try a slope down around 10kHz from 2kHz to 6kHz and a slope up to +10dB from 6kHz to 10kHz and +10 flatlined above. It's a compromise, a DSP that dynamically adjusted it would work better, but it is a good compromise. Try it. It allows you to play music at loud volumes without fatigue.

You'd only want to correct for Fletcher-Munson when listening at LOWER volumes. At normal listening levels, you want a flat playback. Because we become less sensitive at the frequency extremes as levels go down, adding a bit of bass and treble boost helps maintain the frequency balance we hear at louder levels.

se
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Audiophile cables, an interesting question.