or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Shure SE846: A New In-Ear Flagship From Shure. Finally! (Impressions p26-28)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Shure SE846: A New In-Ear Flagship From Shure. Finally! (Impressions p26-28) - Page 209

post #3121 of 3180
Quote:
Originally Posted by milford30 View Post

it's in LOG scale, not linear scale a 3db difference doubles the power required the drive it at the same frequency. the difference in bass db is around 2-3. They are not measuring with human ear but with microphones. Test it with a dap with a software preamp, increase it by 2db, you can clearly hear the volume change.
Which I said could be problem with the particular 846 tested by Golden Ears as the graphs clearly indicate the left and right imbalance.

We begin this discussion with your absolute belief that the Golden Ears graphs had to be wrong I notice you are no longer making that assertion.
post #3122 of 3180
Quote:
Originally Posted by spook76 View Post


Which I said could be problem with the particular 846 tested by Golden Ears as the graphs clearly indicate the left and right imbalance.

We begin this discussion with your absolute belief that the Golden Ears graphs had to be wrong I notice you are no longer making that assertion.

I never said it was wrong I said that to compare fairly you have to match the volume at 1khz. Look at the graph you posted 1khz is not the middle between 300hz and 3khz, it's the vertical line before 3khz or the one before that, that's why it's confusing and harder to read for someone who's not used to reading log scale graphs. You can't just point at graphs that are volume matched at the bass region and say there is no change in the bass region. 

 

Edit: i.e for this discussion, that graph can be misleading, and it clearly misled you to think there is no change in the mid or bass region. Hence not useful in this discussion


Edited by milford30 - 4/2/15 at 2:40am
post #3123 of 3180

Since it is log scale if you look at the green (white filter) like on your graph at 3khz it's around -6db and 30khz around -4db, difference of 2db, but if they volume matched at 1khz (the standard) and measured the difference would be different. i.e greater or less than 2db, while keeping the profile of the graph the same. You can't just use photoshop and shift the lines at up and down to match at 1khz since it is log scale.

 

hence a graph volume matching at a random bass frequency cannot be used to compare to any other graph, I can match the volume at a random higher frequency and say the bass has been boosted. If the graph does not use the standard it really tells you very little.....


Edited by milford30 - 4/2/15 at 3:01am
post #3124 of 3180
Quote:
Originally Posted by milford30 View Post

I never said it was wrong I said that to compare fairly you have to match the volume at 1khz. Look at the graph you posted 1khz is not the middle between 300hz and 3khz, it's the vertical line before 3khz or the one before that, that's why it's confusing and harder to read for someone who's not used to reading log scale graphs. You can't just point at graphs that are volume matched at the bass region and say there is no change in the bass region. 

Edit: i.e for this discussion, that graph can be misleading, and it clearly misled you to think there is no change in the mid or bass region. Hence not useful in this discussion
Your arrogance and paternalism astound me. I was never misled by the graphs or charts but it is nice of you to make that assumption.

As for you staying that you never said the graph was wrong, please explain your post #3104. "Either way the graph you presented is definitely wrong for comparing different headphones/earphones."
Edited by spook76 - 4/2/15 at 4:13am
post #3125 of 3180
Quote:
Originally Posted by spook76 View Post


Your arrogance and paternalism astound me. I was never misled by the graphs or charts but it is nice of you to make that assumption.

As for you staying that you never said the graph was wrong, please explain your post #3104. "Either way the graph you presented is definitely wrong for comparing different headphones/earphones."

 

Look at the graph! even the you graph you posted does not line up under the 1khz region (most probably close to the first vertical line on the left of the 3khz mark, AND it's LOG scale not linear scale). i.e your comment on the filter ONLY changing the highs is not correct. There is no denying it, plus I have explained why the errors cannot be in the range of +- 1db.... 

 

I don't see how that's an assumption given the graph + youre comment on only changing the highs

 

Yes wrong for comparing different headphones because it's not measured by using the standard measurment techniques (i.e 1khz volume matched).... that's the context. I stand by that. It's not wrong in the context that they wanted to match the maximum volume wherever that may be.

post #3126 of 3180

There I marked it on the graph:

 

 

Edit: Actually 1Khz should be a bit more to the left


Edited by milford30 - 4/2/15 at 7:05am
post #3127 of 3180
Quote:
Originally Posted by milford30 View Post

Look at the graph! even the you graph you posted does not line up under the 1khz region (most probably close to the first vertical line on the left of the 3khz mark, AND it's LOG scale not linear scale). i.e your comment on the filter ONLY changing the highs is not correct. There is no denying it, plus I have explained why the errors cannot be in the range of +- 1db.... 

I don't see how that's an assumption given the graph + youre comment on only changing the highs

Yes wrong for comparing different headphones because it's not measured by using the standard measurment techniques (i.e 1khz volume matched).... that's the context. I stand by that. It's not wrong in the context that they wanted to match the maximum volume wherever that may be.
Yet all of Golden Ears' measurements are done the same way so you are WRONG that a reader using Golden Ears' graphs could not compare one headphone to another.
post #3128 of 3180
Quote:
Originally Posted by spook76 View Post


Yet all of Golden Ears' measurements are done the same way so you are WRONG that a reader using Golden Ears' graphs could not compare one headphone to another.

 

Here's the link:

 

http://en.goldenears.net/30016

 

Look at the golden ears plots titled "Frequency response comparison" i.e the blue and green line with after modification and before modification. They're all matched at near 1kHz, NOT at the bass region... Do you even look at the charts? They're doing exactly what I'm saying!

 

The plot your posted is from Headroom, it even has the Headroom logo on it, they don't use it on their website anymore as I have pointed out at the beginning of the discussion.


Edited by milford30 - 4/2/15 at 6:59am
post #3129 of 3180

Here is the plot to make it easier:

 

 

You see the difference between this properly done response plot vs the one you posted before from headroom?

 

Nowhere in the golden ears post does it say ONLY affect high freq....

 

IF you still don't see it, I give up, I spent enough time teaching log plots at my university labs..... you can BELIEVE whatever you want, others should be able to see the logic in the discussion.


Edited by milford30 - 4/2/15 at 7:13am
post #3130 of 3180
Quote:
Originally Posted by milford30 View Post

Here's the link:

http://en.goldenears.net/30016

Look at the golden ears plots titled "Frequency response comparison" i.e the blue and green line with after modification and before modification. They're all matched at near 1kHz, NOT at the bass region... Do you even look at the charts? They're doing exactly what I'm saying!

The plot your posted is from Headroom, it even has the Headroom logo on it, they don't use it on their website anymore as I have pointed out at the beginning of the discussion.

Milford you are wonderful for never answering the questions I pose just filling your replies with wind and fury that sidestep my question. I see now it is pointless to continue this discussion.

Apologies for derailing this thread. Back to the discussion of. SE846
post #3131 of 3180
Quote:
Originally Posted by spook76 View Post


Milford you are wonderful for never answering the questions I pose just filling your replies with wind and fury that sidestep my question. I see now it is pointless to continue this discussion.

Apologies for derailing this thread. Back to the discussion of. SE846

 

Look at your question

 

"Yet all of Golden Ears' measurements are done the same way so you are WRONG that a reader using Golden Ears' graphs could not compare one headphone to another."

 

My whole reply post is detailing Golden Ears measurements are great, but however the graph you posted from Headroom with the Headroom logo is not (the one with the 2 black bars top and bot i.e first graph I drew on), and the fact that the Golden Ears post DOES NOT state or imply ONLY high frequencies are affected by the filters....

 

I even detailed it by drawing on the graphs.....

 

I've explained in nearly every post how the Headroom graphs you posted does not show what you claim which is: no effect in bass and mids in changing the filters, only the highs.


Edited by milford30 - 4/2/15 at 8:35am
post #3132 of 3180
Quote:
Originally Posted by milford30 View Post

Look at your question

"Yet all of Golden Ears' measurements are done the same way so you are WRONG that a reader using Golden Ears' graphs could not compare one headphone to another."

My whole reply post is detailing Golden Ears measurements are great, but however the graph you posted from Headroom with the Headroom logo is not (the one with the 2 black bars top and bot i.e first graph I drew on), and the fact that the Golden Ears post DOES not state or imply ONLY high frequencies are affected by the filters....

I even detailed it by drawing on the graphs.....

I've explained in nearly every post how the Headroom graphs you posted does not show what you claim which is: no effect in bass and mids in changing the filters, only the highs.
Like I said when you took exception to Golden Ears' graphs, if you have a problem with the Headroom graph I posted take it up with them. I certainly did not make it up and if there is a discrepancy it is Headroom's problem not mine.
post #3133 of 3180
Quote:
Originally Posted by spook76 View Post


Like I said when you took exception to Golden Ears' graphs, if you have a problem with the Headroom graph I posted take it up with them. I certainly did not make it up and if there is a discrepancy it is Headroom's problem not mine.

You pointed at the Headroom graph and drew the conclusion that the bass and mids are NOT affected. while the graph says otherwise. 

 

Edit: ALL the graphs say otherwise as a matter of fact, I clearly stated I had a problem with the graph you posted, you only posted 1 graph from Headroom in post 3094, I used the Golden Ears graph to show your conclusion is wrong....


Edited by milford30 - 4/2/15 at 8:47am
post #3134 of 3180
Quote:
Originally Posted by spook76 View Post


I hope you realize the filters ONLY change the treble response. The bass and midrange remain unaffected. Take a look at the frequency response chart of the three filters. What a filter change can do is change your perception of the sound but realize that it is only your perception not the actual frequency response.

 

The proof of my above post is THIS qoute.

 

As i have said the graph is not technically wrong, just misleading 'wrong'

 

The 2 plots i drew on clearly show that conclusion is not true


Edited by milford30 - 4/2/15 at 8:44am
post #3135 of 3180
Quote:
Originally Posted by milford30 View Post

The proof of my above post is THIS qoute.

The 2 plots i drew on clearly show that conclusion is not true
Ah so now the graph is correct if it supports your conclusions. Interesting. The crux of my arguments with you Milford was and remains your blithful dismissal of any graph that was not your blessed Headroom graph.

As for my assertion, as I stated earlier to Castle's post my definition of "treble" was different and I humbly apologized for that assertion.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Shure SE846: A New In-Ear Flagship From Shure. Finally! (Impressions p26-28)