Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Skeptico Saloon: An Objectivist Joint
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Skeptico Saloon: An Objectivist Joint - Page 16

post #226 of 820

Interesting

 

Now I need to look into that WaveLab 8 software...

post #227 of 820
I know this is already a very well established phenomenon but bear with me while I have a quick rant. I was reading up on couple of threads and there is an unwavering overriding consensus that a higher price MUST yield better SQ. But... x is times 5 the price of y there is NO way y is better than x and so on. My question is this. Considering most people on head fi are working adults or students with education just how on earth do 99 percent of the individuals on this forum use such rationale with fervent dogma. It is simply beyond me.
post #228 of 820
Quote:
Originally Posted by xnor View Post

All you need is a head- or in-ear-phone that has low enough distortion and well extended frequency response on both ends. (Distortion is usually a problem at the low end so I'd prefer a headphone with boosted instead of recessed bass as starting point.)
Oh, and some headphones have nasty treble spikes which are hard to tame (but also hard to exactly replicate!) with a parametric EQ.

From there you can go pretty much anywhere with an EQ sound signature wise.

Are you sure about this? EQ can increase or reduce the digital signal on the parametric band, but it cannot change the physical damping of the headphones. And the level of physical damping varies from headphone model to headphone model.

Its like tapping a car with and without shockobsorbers. You cant make them wobble identical with applying different pressure. The headphones with lesser damping will wobble longer and more uncontrolled, you cannot change that with EQ.
Edited by MatsGyver - 9/9/13 at 2:18am
post #229 of 820
Quote:
Originally Posted by MatsGyver View Post

Are you sure about this? EQ can increase or reduce the digital signal on the parametric band, but it cannot change the physical damping of the headphones. And the level of physical damping varies from headphone model to headphone model.

 

However, the effects of damping can be measured on the impulse response (and everything else that is derived from the impulse response, like frequency response, CSD, square wave response, etc.), as long as the headphone is considered to be close enough to a linear time invariant system (FR variations due to changes in placement/seal are a problem in particular, as they effectively make the headphone not time invariant). That is, the lack of damping mainly shows up as errors (peaks) in the frequency response, which can be corrected.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MatsGyver View Post

Its like tapping a car with and without shockobsorbers. You cant make them wobble identical with applying different pressure.

 

It is actually possible by applying the different pressure in the right way that counteracts the resonance. However, in practice, it is a problem if too much pressure would need to be applied.


Edited by stv014 - 9/9/13 at 3:26am
post #230 of 820

As an example, here is a filter (FR and IR shown, click to zoom) with a 6 dB resonance (Q=2) at 100 Hz, and a 12 dB/octave roll-off below that. This could be a simple model of a speaker with a primary resonance frequency of 100 Hz, a mass-spring resonance can be simulated with a second order IIR filter.

 

   

 

Not too surprisingly, the 30 Hz square wave response of this looks quite bad:

 

 

Now, since the filter is minimum phase, it can actually easily be inverted, except for the roll-off towards infinite attenuation at 0 Hz. So, here is the inverse filter (the EQ), with the low frequency emphasis clamped at slightly less than 24 dB (check the third link in my signature for the utility that was used to generate the inverse filter):

 

   

 

With the correction filter applied, the frequency response is flattened out, save for some minor roll-off at the bottom end, and the resonance in the impulse response is eliminated as well:

 

   

 

Finally, the square wave response with the correction EQ. There is no resonance now, only the effect of the roll-off is visible:

 

post #231 of 820
Quote:
Originally Posted by uchihaitachi View Post

I know this is already a very well established phenomenon but bear with me while I have a quick rant. I was reading up on couple of threads and there is an unwavering overriding consensus that a higher price MUST yield better SQ. But... x is times 5 the price of y there is NO way y is better than x and so on. My question is this. Considering most people on head fi are working adults or students with education just how on earth do 99 percent of the individuals on this forum use such rationale with fervent dogma. It is simply beyond me.

 

Maddening, isn't it?  I think that 99 percent of the people on this forum really don't care if they are being rational or not.  Audio in general and headphones in particular are an escape from work and/or school, and there seems to be a conscious choice to leave logic behind for a while and explore the mysterious, mystical world of headphones.

 

I myself am a reformed subjectivist, and have found that my experience is actually enhanced when I pay attention to fundamentals, and avoid the syllogisms I usually encounter of forums like this. The irrational is not particular to Head-fi- it is found in all of the forums I participate in.  In fact, the human mind itself is amazingly irrational, which is a source for much frustration if one favors a rational point of view.

post #232 of 820
Quote:
Originally Posted by stv014 View Post

As an example, here is a filter (FR and IR shown, click to zoom) with a 6 dB resonance (Q=2) at 100 Hz, and a 12 dB/octave roll-off below that. This could be a simple model of a speaker with a primary resonance frequency of 100 Hz, a mass-spring resonance can be simulated with a second order IIR filter. [.....]

This was very interesting. I did not think that was possible.
post #233 of 820
Quote:
Originally Posted by MatsGyver View Post


Are you sure about this? EQ can increase or reduce the digital signal on the parametric band, but it cannot change the physical damping of the headphones. And the level of physical damping varies from headphone model to headphone model.

Its like tapping a car with and without shockobsorbers. You cant make them wobble identical with applying different pressure. The headphones with lesser damping will wobble longer and more uncontrolled, you cannot change that with EQ.

To put it bluntly, minimum phase equalization works by adding ringing to the impulse response. Depending on how linear the headphone is, the ringing will cancel more or less.

 

With a high damping factor it is pretty much impossible for a headphone driver to ring for a long time. The ringing you see in CSDs, imo, is either a nasty peak in the frequency response, or a resonance of the ear and the headphones' earcup. The former can be equalized if you have to, but you're probably better off with a headphone that has no such nasty peaks, the latter seems to have very little to do with the driver itself. An exaggerated comparison would be trying to equalize reverb away in an untreated large room. (Exaggerated because we're talking multiple seconds of reverb here while resonances are usually a few thousandth of a second.)

If you do not want to mod the headphone you can still equalize the problematic range by taking away energy. That way the resonant frequencies will be excited a lot less. This is not so bad because dips in the FR are a lot less noticeable than equivalent peaks.


Edited by xnor - 9/9/13 at 4:13am
post #234 of 820
Quote:
Originally Posted by xnor View Post
 

Oh hai there, thanks for re-opening the saloon.

 

Late to the party but I'll second that. This time I subscribed so I can keep up.

post #235 of 820

Holycrap I am trying so hard to not laugh out loud at work right now. XD

 

post #236 of 820
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

For the life of me, I don't know why folks with no interest in science and a chip on their shoulder keep marching into this forum and insisting that we respect their ability to throw money at phantom sound quality. There must be some sort of desire for us to accept their points as valid, but they don't make any effort to make valid points. I don't get it. There's a million other forums on headfi that they can get all the validation they want. Why do they keep gravitating to this one?

 

For the same reason some people get married to someone who has problems, "I can change him". They think they can change us. 

post #237 of 820

thank you,I didn't quite get whether this last bit was a significant difference though.

24.gif


Edited by cbdhouses - 9/19/13 at 6:42pm
post #238 of 820
Quote:
Originally Posted by roadcykler View Post
 

 

For the same reason some people get married to someone who has problems, "I can change him". They think they can change us. 

 

It may be as you say, but I can also think of another reason. Validation.

 

Post purchase dissonance is usually remedied by validation. Telling others you've bought something and hearing positive things about your purchase relieves the symptoms.

 

However, this is the wrong place to look for validation, especially after throwing money on pseudoscience.

post #239 of 820
Quote:
Originally Posted by proton007 View Post
 

 

It may be as you say, but I can also think of another reason. Validation.

 

Post purchase dissonance is usually remedied by validation. Telling others you've bought something and hearing positive things about your purchase relieves the symptoms.

 

However, this is the wrong place to look for validation, especially after throwing money on pseudoscience.

 

Indeed. I'd guess you have a better reason there. If one buys a $5000 set of speaker cables, they dang well better improve the sound, right?

post #240 of 820
Quote:
Originally Posted by roadcykler View Post

 

Indeed. I'd guess you have a better reason there. If one buys a $5000 set of speaker cables, they dang well better improve the sound, right?

Sure, that's also one of the main reasons people discard measurements. Expensive speakers/headphones better measure close to perfect, else there's something wrong with the ... measurements ... right? ;)

 

If the SRH1840 sounds harsh for example it's not the headphone, but the wrong amp you're using... it's never the headphones!!!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Skeptico Saloon: An Objectivist Joint