This discussion started in this thread
The discussion revolved around acoustic measurement, digital measurement, the totality of data / total lack thereof, how data correlates to the listening experience, et cetera.
Using the Skullcandy MMM versus LCD-3 as a random example on acoustic data, I asked where the differences are.
You can easily equalize these deviations to elicit a 'golden FR' from the Skullcandy which turns it into the LCD-3, or is something else missing?
Apparently I was cherry picking data from flawed measurements, I was supposed to use innerfidelity or something.
So, now they look the same at 300Hz instead of 500Hz.
So can I easily 'golden FR' the Skullcandy into a $2000 headphone, or am I missing something here? Apparently SWR isn't even important to measure.
Are the vital differences located in THD+N and IMD? If that's true, then the Skullcandy is only a very slightly noiser, or slightly more distorted LCD-3? I think this needs some explaining.
Novices tend to want to look at raw, unflinching data, rather than read glossy reviews subject to emotion.
What if the data is only 50% of the final sound spectra? Then 70% human reviews are more accurate.
Is the lustrous musicality of the Denon Dx000 series in the FR? Where?
Is the bass presence and extreme realism of the JH13 in the FR? Is the featherlite bass, narrow soundspace, and white glistening highs of the RE272?
Is the harsh fire of the EX700 versus the liquid sky of the EX1000?
Sony MDR-V6 versus Tesla T1?