Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Battle Of The Flagships (58 Headphones Compared) UPDATE: AUDEZ'E LCD-2 Revision 2 (6/4/13)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Battle Of The Flagships (58 Headphones Compared) UPDATE: AUDEZ'E LCD-2 Revision 2 (6/4/13) - Page 69

post #1021 of 4945
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidMahler View Post

I didn't forget to mention this.  I agree that a graph can demonstrate technical excellence (in many ways). And if someone is seeking a headphone which measures well, then obviously a graph will be a the most significant resource in making a decision.  But I also feel that, in most instances, basing sound purely on technical performance in graphs is a practice which tends to deny your ears. 

 

Do you know of better way how to achieve that I hear music from my setup in a same way that I hear it in reality? I think there is no better way how to do it than using measurements in order to buy the most neutral and technically perfect gear at your price range...

post #1022 of 4945

I would rather just listen to the gear and see if I like it.  Personally, I don't care how it measures.  For example, I did not care for the sound of the ODAC.  I understand it measures well, but my ears didn't care.  Now that is just me, of course.  Everyone has their own way of finding the sound that works for them.
 

post #1023 of 4945
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MHOE View Post

 

Do you know of better way how to achieve that I hear music from my setup in a same way that I hear it in reality? I think there is no better way how to do it than using measurements in order to buy the most neutral and technically perfect gear at your price range...

if your aim is to hear the source recording in the most accurate way, then no, graphs trump even your ear.

 

one needs to decide if the goal is to:

 

A) is to be true to the source recording because in doing this you are most likely to hear the music as it was recorded.

 

B) is to connect with the music despite (or because of) colorations and distortions that present to you (the listener) simulations of events that happen when one encounters a performance in real life.

 

BOTH versions are perfectly valid, and if one connects with the music by choosing choice A, then that is the obvious choice.  I find both versions to be very compelling, and depending on the music I'm listening to (and my mood), I may choose one over the other.  I'm just stating all this to suggest that seeking technical excellence is easier BECAUSE of graphs. Everything else is more-or-less based on personal experience and word-of-mouth from people who you trust based on shared listening experience.  So no, there really is no better way I can think of.  We are really lucky to have a forum that allows us to discuss in detail these things with others.  That's the only other way I know, but it's not better.


Edited by DavidMahler - 11/16/12 at 9:43pm
post #1024 of 4945
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifimanrookie View Post


for instance i found out i like certain very raw metalica ( u know those guys who scream like animals and sing about devils and like)..those crazy bands sometimes have geniuses on the electtric guitars!

Not sure if serious.

post #1025 of 4945
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidMahler View Post

if your aim is to hear the source recording in the most accurate way, then no, graphs trump even your ear.

 

one needs to decide if the goal is to:

 

A) is to be true to the source recording because in doing this you are most likely to hear the music as it was recorded.

 

B) is to connect with the music despite (or because of) colorations and distortions that present to you (the listener) simulations of events that happen when one encounters a performance in real life.

 

BOTH versions are perfectly valid, and if one connects with the music by choosing choice A, then that is the obvious choice.  I find both versions to be very compelling, and depending on the music I'm listening to (and my mood), I may choose one over the other.  I'm just stating all this to suggest that seeking technical excellence is easier BECAUSE of graphs. Everything else is more-or-less based on personal experience and word-of-mouth from people whom you trust based on shared listening experience.  So no, there really is no better way I can think of.  We are really lucky to have a forum that allows us to discuss in detail these things with others.  That's the only other way I know, but it's not better.

 

Thank you for you answer... I can always use DSP effects in order to achieve your version B (if interested, not really so far).

post #1026 of 4945
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidMahler View Post

I didn't forget to mention this.  I agree that a graph can demonstrate technical excellence (in many ways). And if someone is seeking a headphone which measures well, then obviously a graph will be a the most significant resource in making a decision.  But I also feel that, in most instances, basing sound purely on technical performance in graphs is a practice which tends to deny your ears. 

 

I agree, we can look at graphs all we want, but ultimately, our ears will be the judge.

post #1027 of 4945
Quote:
Originally Posted by MHOE View Post

 

I agree with the majority of this... But you forgot to mention that if anyone wants to have a technically great pair of headphones, measurements are absolutely needed and are of more importance than your ears which can be fooled quite easily with short-time listening sessions. If you want to record and listen to music accurately and true-to-the-source, you simply need measurements in order to not go wrong.

 

Also, using an equalizer, you can always educate yourself on how changing the FR in specific frequencies is going to affect the sound... You can even read up books which will tell you how it is possible to subjectively name sound effect of emphasising or lowering certain regions of the FR graph. Graphs can help you to find out potential pairs of interest if you are after some sort of sound as well... Personal listening session is more desirable in case you are not very serious about what you want to spend your money for. Maybe you can just spend 40k on gear, trial or error, doesn't matter to you really, but I simply can't. 1000USD are enough for me to not judge by subjective personal opinions from the community anymore.

 

See, this is when I start to take issue with the folks who are always throwing around measurements. To say that people who place less emphasis on objective data are "not very serious" about how they spend their money, that's absolute nonsense. It's simply two different approaches to this hobby, and because you happen to place greater importance and value on measurements doesn't mean that those who prefer to evaluate subjectively are "less serious" about spending their money wisely. 

 

 

David: One of the best reads I've ever come across on here, or any other audio forum for that matter....thanks for sharing all of that hard work with us!!!


Edited by Focker - 11/16/12 at 8:05pm
post #1028 of 4945
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Focker View Post

 

 

David: One of the best reads I've ever come across on here, or any other audio forum for that matter....thanks for sharing all of that hard work with us!!!

Thank you Focker:) 

post #1029 of 4945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Focker View Post

See, this is when I start to take issue with the folks who are always throwing around measurements. To say that people who place less emphasis on objective data are "not very serious" about how they spend their money, that's absolute nonsense. It's simply two different approaches to this hobby, and because you happen to place greater importance and value on measurements doesn't mean that those who prefer to evaluate subjectively are "less serious" about spending their money wisely. 

I agree.

I myself like measurements too but not everyone really understands how those measurements relate with what they hear exactly so they might actually complicate things more for the noobies. Subjective reviews from experienced ears are better to me than measurements without explanation any day... But, having measurements, impressions, and an explanation of the relation between the subjective impressions and the measurements is definitely a cool thing. Stereophile does that for example.
Edited by donunus - 11/16/12 at 9:41pm
post #1030 of 4945

In regards to measurement, I can also attest to them not always being accurate vs what I hear.

 

For example, I just got the LCD-3's, and based on the freq graph, it should be just as neutral as my HE-6 (if not better), but it certainly isn't to my ears. Well, so far, nothing I've tried is, and the HE-6 are not perfectly neutral either. I also think the HD800 is more neutral than my LCD-3, even though they extend up real high; I hear it as extra resolution more than coloration.

 

Also, I think the lcd-2's freq response based on what I hear is mediocre in comparison to HE500/6, HD800, LCD-3. The freq response graph may measure flat across most of the bass and midrange, but I find them to be a bit too hefty down low and the mid bass/ low mids are sometimes too bloomy. They're a great set of cans for musical enjoyment with certain genres; but to me, they are not that neutral and one of the least versatile headphones in terms of flagships. Oh, and the timbre of guitars and many other stringed instruments seems off on many occasions.

post #1031 of 4945
Quote:
Originally Posted by dleblanc343 View Post

Oh, and the timbre of guitars and many other stringed instruments seems off on many occasions.

 

In comparison to what? Other headphones or live music?

post #1032 of 4945

Do you think MHOE's gone to sleep now...? blink.gif bet his fingers are sore.

post #1033 of 4945
Quote:
Originally Posted by MHOE View Post

 

Do you know of better way how to achieve that I hear music from my setup in a same way that I hear it in reality? I think there is no better way how to do it than using measurements in order to buy the most neutral and technically perfect gear at your price range...

 

 

I use measurements to narrow down my choices. I know I can eliminate certain phones where there's obviously, for whatever reason, little attempt made to obtain a flat FR. There isn't time or opportunity to audition every phone so this is a good time saver. I suppose it's just possible that there might be a phone among the latter type that I'd enjoy, but it's unlikely, and once I knew it had a weird FR I probably couldn't settle to it--I'd be listening for the peak or valley. Thus:

 

 graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=3801

 

However, a flattish response is no guarantee of excellence. The Senn HD598 has a brilliant response by comparison...

 

  graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=2851

 

...yet I didn't care for it at all. I may even have found it inferior to the HD700, which I've never heard. So I consider measurements an aid rather than the be-all-and-end-all. Why choose between the phones with an erratic response when you can choose between those with a flattish response?

post #1034 of 4945
Quote:
Originally Posted by dleblanc343 View Post

In regards to measurement, I can also attest to them not always being accurate vs what I hear.

 

For example, I just got the LCD-3's, and based on the freq graph, it should be just as neutral as my HE-6 (if not better), but it certainly isn't to my ears. Well, so far, nothing I've tried is, and the HE-6 are not perfectly neutral either. I also think the HD800 is more neutral than my LCD-3, even though they extend up real high; I hear it as extra resolution more than coloration.

 

Also, I think the lcd-2's freq response based on what I hear is mediocre in comparison to HE500/6, HD800, LCD-3. The freq response graph may measure flat across most of the bass and midrange, but I find them to be a bit too hefty down low and the mid bass/ low mids are sometimes too bloomy. They're a great set of cans for musical enjoyment with certain genres; but to me, they are not that neutral and one of the least versatile headphones in terms of flagships. Oh, and the timbre of guitars and many other stringed instruments seems off on many occasions.

 

I like that every single sentence in your text is based on your hearing only... FR graph of LCD-2 is for sure more neutral across the bass and mids than of both LCD3 and HD800. It's perfectly neutral, not almost. You only need to correct treble a bit in order to achieve ideal FR graph.

 

Perfectly neutral phones do not exist... And if I feel that I have finally heard one, I would definitely not shout it loud out without having objective arguments in order to support it.


Edited by MHOE - 11/17/12 at 4:00am
post #1035 of 4945
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifimanrookie View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidMahler View Post

I didn't forget to mention this.  I agree that a graph can demonstrate technical excellence (in many ways). And if someone is seeking a headphone which measures well, then obvious a graph will be a the most significant resource in making a decision.  But I also feel that, in most instances, basing sound purely on technical performance in graphs is a practice which tends to deny your ears. 

Well said..damn..why am i still awake at 4:12 am redface.gif

 

Don't know. But it's 0422 hours on the West coast (California) and I'm only now getting around to my listening session in 30 minutes. It will be a hot & fast 90 minute session!

 

Earlier, I decided to forgo the session and clean the entire house - now free for a Saturday filled with College Football and no chores remaining. wink.gif

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Battle Of The Flagships (58 Headphones Compared) UPDATE: AUDEZ'E LCD-2 Revision 2 (6/4/13)