Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › MrSpeakers Alpha Dog Revealed! - The World's First Production 3D-Printed Headphones
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

MrSpeakers Alpha Dog Revealed! - The World's First Production 3D-Printed Headphones - Page 260

post #3886 of 7829

Regarding EQ settings...

 

Each person's ears are physically different (I shouldn't have to post lots of silly pictures of ears to make that point).

 

This means that each person hears a different balance of frequencies. (Which is one of the reasons that people have different musical taste.)

 

So, it is reasonable to say " I prefer a cut of 2db at 3khz on these headphones " but not correct to say " These headphones have a boost of 2db at 3khz ".

 

And it is therefore not a good idea to simply use someone else's EQ settings, simply because their review writing makes it sound like they are thorough...

post #3887 of 7829

I think I made it very clear that everything I said was entirely based on my preferences and that it wouldn't necessarily apply to everyone. However, I did use the two measurements floating around on the net to help narrow down what areas in particular were bothering me. I did not find the measurements to be an exact match to what I heard, but they were close enough to help. I'd say I was about as thorough as you can get in that process for someone limited on time (have them for 3 days on top of working a night shift job).

 

That said, there is no harm in trying out someone's suggestions before knocking it just because we don't all have exactly the same ears. You also can't leave out the many similarities our ears share among us all. We all are humans after all...I assume.


Edited by hans030390 - 11/11/13 at 10:50am
post #3888 of 7829

There HAS to be a good degree of agreement (though never perfect) in terms of frequency sensitivity in healthy human hearing from individual to individual, otherwise the whole hi-fi industry would be a lie.

post #3889 of 7829
I just changed my mplayer setting to "-af equalizer=0:0:0:0:0:0:0:-2:0:-1", because I like more treble. I'm actually not sure if I do prefer this -2dB @ 4kHz and -1dB @ 16kHz, or pure flat. Currently listening to John O'Callaghan - Subculture, and with eq sound is more punchy biggrin.gif I could use these screws though, but I'm quite not sure if I want to touch them... Anyone tried that maybe?
post #3890 of 7829

This argument about treble peak is kind of funny/interesting when I look at it from the other side of the fence.  When mixing and mastering, especially for vocal, it's very common to cut a bit between 3k to 4k depending on the voice/gender to avoid some very easily audible annoyances in this frequency range,especially after multiple compression stages.  At the same time, during the final stage of mastering, it's also not uncommon to boost a bit in the high frequencies to give the mix a little more air and opening it up, often at 8-10 or around even 12k depending on the type of music and the track composition overall.  So, from this angle, if a pair of HPs has some more boost around these frequencies, it might not a good thing.

If the mix is flat/not boosted/neutral in the first place then these HPs would do wonder at giving the music a little extra kick/presence/air.  IMO and experience, the majority of music I've listened have some sort of frequency boost in low and high in their mix.

 

The essence of my post is that "adjust/EQ/buy the HPs/Amp/DAC so that they best fit your taste/preference" cuz you would rarely know what the point of neutral is and you have too many components in the chain to judge.  Enjoy your music! not your HPs.

 

Just something to ponder upon...;) 


Edited by koiloco - 11/11/13 at 2:38pm
post #3891 of 7829
Quote:
Originally Posted by koiloco View Post
 

 

The essence of my post is that "adjust/EQ/buy the HPs/Amp/DAC so that they best fit your taste/preference" cuz you would rarely know what the point of neutral is and you have too many components in the chain to judge.  Enjoy your music! not your HPs.

 

Just something to ponder upon...;) 

Totally agree on electronic or synthesized sound, and for studio recordings.  When listening to music made (mostly of) acoustic instrument sounds portraying a simultaneous performance (a lot of constraints, I know), I have a reference, which is what the class of instrument sounds like unamped in such a group -- that is, a trumpet should sound trumpet-like, and not french-horn like (silly example but you get the point).  That is what I want to recreate in my headphones when I listen to music like that.  And in fact, when I get a headphone that accurately portrays those instruments, I believe I can start even hearing the room in which the recording is made, which again is better for me.  But I guess that could still be called my preference.  :) 

post #3892 of 7829
Quote:
Originally Posted by hans030390 View Post
 

I think I made it very clear that everything I said was entirely based on my preferences and that it wouldn't necessarily apply to everyone. However, I did use the two measurements floating around on the net to help narrow down what areas in particular were bothering me. I did not find the measurements to be an exact match to what I heard, but they were close enough to help. I'd say I was about as thorough as you can get in that process for someone limited on time (have them for 3 days on top of working a night shift job).

 

That said, there is no harm in trying out someone's suggestions before knocking it just because we don't all have exactly the same ears. You also can't leave out the many similarities our ears share among us all. We all are humans after all...I assume.

Great review, and a good example of a balanced look at the AD's.

 

 

I am a huge fan of judicious EQ-ing.  I would rather spend time and pennies learning how to do it correctly than thousands of dollars experiment with different HP's/amps/dacs.  I find the AD's to be nicely responsive to subtle EQ.

 

But what's with all this talk about ears?  Ears are only the receiver:  The processing takes place in the audio cortex of the brain, NOT in the ears.  But that's another topic.

post #3893 of 7829
Quote:
Originally Posted by swspiers View Post

Great review, and a good example of a balanced look at the AD's.


I am a huge fan of judicious EQ-ing.  I would rather spend time and pennies learning how to do it correctly than thousands of dollars experiment with different HP's/amps/dacs.  I find the AD's to be nicely responsive to subtle EQ.

But what's with all this talk about ears?  Ears are only the receiver:  The processing takes place in the audio cortex of the brain, NOT in the ears.  But that's another topic.

The physical shape of the ear is already modulating the sound being received before processing takes place. It's a valid statement.
post #3894 of 7829
Quote:
Originally Posted by vaed View Post


The physical shape of the ear is already modulating the sound being received before processing takes place. It's a valid statement.

1+

Even with in ear and IEM's.  People are reporting different characteristics most likely from different size and shape ear canals.

post #3895 of 7829
Quote:
Originally Posted by koiloco View Post
 

This argument about treble peak is kind of funny/interesting when I look at it from the other side of the fence.  When mixing and mastering, especially for vocal, it's very common to cut a bit between 3k to 4k depending on the voice/gender to avoid some very easily audible annoyances in this frequency range,especially after multiple compression stages.  At the same time, during the final stage of mastering, it's also not uncommon to boost a bit in the high frequencies to give the mix a little more air and opening it up, often at 8-10 or around even 12k depending on the type of music and the track composition overall.  So, from this angle, if a pair of HPs has some more boost around these frequencies, it might not a good thing.

If the mix is flat/not boosted/neutral in the first place then these HPs would do wonder at giving the music a little extra kick/presence/air.  IMO and experience, the majority of music I've listened have some sort of frequency boost in low and high in their mix.

 

The essence of my post is that "adjust/EQ/buy the HPs/Amp/DAC so that they best fit your taste/preference" cuz you would rarely know what the point of neutral is and you have too many components in the chain to judge.  Enjoy your music! not your HPs.

 

Just something to ponder upon...;) 

 A well thought out take on this.  I generally search out headphones that let the music sound as I like to hear it to avoid messing with EQ (AD's do this for me, for instance).  Mostly because my rigs are portable, and I've yet to find a good EQ solution that is portable.  The apps eat batteries, the amps over do it.  The CEntrance treble and bass switches are really subtle, but are boosts, not cuts.  Still, a very interesting case for EQ.  Nicely done - thank you.

post #3896 of 7829
Quote:
Originally Posted by vaed View Post


The physical shape of the ear is already modulating the sound being received before processing takes place. It's a valid statement.

No, it's really not a completely valid statement.  As long as people think it is all merely a matter of engineering, physics, and physiology, the endless debates of subjectivism/objectivism will circle on and on and on.

 

The fact is that when a human processes music, there is FAR more going on than the design of the equipment or the characteristics of the ear.  All of the above still matter quite a bit. But the neurobiology of what is going on is possibly even more important, especially when accounting for differing tastes and preferences.

 

Ultimately, this was one of the major reasons I wanted the Alpha Dogs, to have as neutral a presentation as possible in closed design.  Mentally adjusting to the sound signature takes place much further down the auditory chain than the ears.

 

I sure wish I could write this without coming across as pretentious, but it's late.  Still, the psychology of what's going on when we subjectively analyze what we are hearing is worth a mention.

post #3897 of 7829
Quote:
Originally Posted by swspiers View Post
 

No, it's really not a completely valid statement.  As long as people think it is all merely a matter of engineering, physics, and physiology, the endless debates of subjectivism/objectivism will circle on and on and on.

 

The fact is that when a human processes music, there is FAR more going on than the design of the equipment or the characteristics of the ear.  All of the above still matter quite a bit. But the neurobiology of what is going on is possibly even more important, especially when accounting for differing tastes and preferences.

 

Ultimately, this was one of the major reasons I wanted the Alpha Dogs, to have as neutral a presentation as possible in closed design.  Mentally adjusting to the sound signature takes place much further down the auditory chain than the ears.

 

I sure wish I could write this without coming across as pretentious, but it's late.  Still, the psychology of what's going on when we subjectively analyze what we are hearing is worth a mention.

I don't mean to offend you but you just sort of contradicted yourself by listing all the reasons... due to human physiology, especially how each person's brain reacts and processes sound differently....then stated that you wanted the AD to have a neutral presentation.  How would you know your ears and brain are physically wired to be neutral?  Or what you are saying is that once your brain knows that the AD is "neutral", it will retrain/force itself accordingly?  cognitive bias, I feel?

I partially get/understand what you are trying to say but yeah, border-lining pretentious.  We all need a nice beer before bed. :D

post #3898 of 7829

all these EQ-ing italk s messing my peabrain... where is that pure unadulterated AD, oh nevermind... i need a shiraz.

:beerchug: 

post #3899 of 7829

Apart from listening to a variety of acoustic music and vocals, I find listening to pink noise very useful finding out how the tonality / frequency balance is - and if there is any notable peaks in the treble they are usually quite easy to hear ...

post #3900 of 7829
Just a quick comment after hearing both the Mad dog and Alpha dogs at NY meet I have to say, if you think mad dogs are great, what I herd from the Alpha dogs was like 5x greater in every conceivable sonic way. In fact I preferred it's midrange presentation over some other similar type top open cans. Yet the Alphas didn't sound as great or impressive on another setup in the back which greatly perplexed me..
Actually I think it had to do with the SS amp & overall setup compared to what I was hearing at Mrspeakers table which consisted of tubes wink.gif
Anyway it seems like a no-brainer for any can its price range(!)
Edited by Maxx134 - 11/12/13 at 12:46pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › MrSpeakers Alpha Dog Revealed! - The World's First Production 3D-Printed Headphones