A friend on Facebook shared this with me. I don't really like measurments, but I thought it was an interesting read...
Thanks for posting this. A lot of information in those slides. A great way to tackle the technicalities of headphones. The findings make the wallet sting of my recent HD800 purchase less painful knowing some great engineering is behind the HD800. Something like the TH-900 which did not score so great as a flagship is still a well-loved headphone. This is fine as it proves that a headphone with flaws can still reproduce music in an enjoyable way. And, I'd be interested to see how the Alpha Dog does with his tests.
Excellent presentation/article. As an engineer, I really like the way he analyzed each flagship by those 9 metrics, however, I already knew the conclusions for a few of the flagships even before reading . Brilliant work, we definitely need more emphasis on these kinds of issues.
At the moment, major companies (*cough*, Denon, Ultrasone and others) think that headphones are "just" luxury products. I am not a millionaire, therefore I wouldn't be buying them for that kind of purpose and I appreciate significant engineering behind flagships that contribute to the evolution of sound, and not the opposite.
My trusty old HiFiMAN HE-500's got a B+. Pretty good considering they're $699.
heh... my dream pair of heapdhones TH900 made a D... which is the same as my current HE400... so I guess I just saved $1,500.
I'm not sure what significance this would serve if any, but I noticed that a few of the headphones that measured poorly have been almost unanimously praised (I simply mean the supermajority, 75%+ is enough) in this community while I found zero head phones in his review that measured very well by his grading which were unanimously rejected by the audiophile community (similar to how the ED10s were). Maybe this shows that having good measurements guarantee unanimous praise, while poor measurements don't necessarily guarantee the counter-factual (rejection). That seems to be the general pattern of what's going on.
Tyll put some comments on this paper on innerfidelity
I've always just been one who would rather listen to my music through my equipment rather than listen to my equipment through my music. Although I can appreciate the effort, these objective measurements fail to account for personal preferences of musical genre, etc. Getting too caught up in such studies, to me, somewhat devalues music itself.