or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › The State of Flagships - Ranked And Graded Via Measurements
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The State of Flagships - Ranked And Graded Via Measurements - Page 2

post #16 of 46

Well that's a pretty interesting read... Go HD800s!

Not sure I'd agree on closed losing a point automatically though.

 

I would also say the end ratings are not that useful vs. just comparing what domains certain headphones do well in.  


Edited by Spakka - 12/23/13 at 9:03am
post #17 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Austin Morrow View Post
 

A friend on Facebook shared this with me. I don't really like measurments, but I thought it was an interesting read...

 

The State of Flagships

Thank you!

:beerchug: 

post #18 of 46

Also thank you,

 

Very informative to read.

post #19 of 46
Thank you for the link. Very interesting article.
post #20 of 46

Old read which was posted on the other site, that bear in mind that is just one person's (engineers) perspective even objectively via measurements. Since the human hearing is such a variable with the affect of bias and placebo even different interpretations via measurements can vary between two engineers on the same problem and not 100% they will always agree with translating what a dip, peak can be from or what it can do. The human mind is a powerful tool.

post #21 of 46

Even though I never put much stock in them, I always enjoy reading comparisons like this. The one comment I'll make pertains to Grados, though. I've not heard the PS1ks, but I've owned four pairs of Grados and enjoy them quite a bit. Grado's phones are voiced by ear...they say right on their website that they're not focused on flat FRs and other such measurements. Most people who have spent any time on here know that Grados don't measure well. Some people criticize Grado like they're idiots who have no idea what they're doing, when the truth of the matter is nothing of the sort. They focus more on audio as an art, not a science...for those who aren't into that, there are plenty of other products to choose among. Criticizing them for not being something they never sought out to be in the first place is pointless. 

 

The other thing I noticed is the way the results are distributed...there isn't much middle ground...seems like he rates a phone as either completely brilliant or an absolute piece of crap, lol. 

 

But as I said, I still enjoy stuff like this, especially when it's based on comparisons of different products. Thanks for posting, Austin. 

post #22 of 46

They've certainly mastered the art of inducing hearing damage via distorted treble spikes. Voicing by ear may not be very reliable when you've lost perception of high frequencies, just sayin' :tongue_smile:. I disagree with a few things in this comparison, but the section on the PS1000 is spot on; only the GS1000 is a bigger failure in the Grado lineup. With that said, the PS-500 is tolerable to my ears in the treble (at lower volumes than I usually listen to) and the measurements are indeed better than either of the above HPs.

post #23 of 46

It is making premature conclusions from only very partial data/perspectives, personally I don't put much stock into it; the same author has however written other pieces (like his sound science headphone modding compilation thread) which are way more well-rounded.


Edited by jerg - 1/21/14 at 12:42pm
post #24 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle 491 View Post
 

They've certainly mastered the art of inducing hearing damage via distorted treble spikes. Voicing by ear may not be very reliable when you've lost perception of high frequencies, just sayin' :tongue_smile:. I disagree with a few things in this comparison, but the section on the PS1000 is spot on; only the GS1000 is a bigger failure in the Grado lineup. With that said, the PS-500 is tolerable to my ears in the treble (at lower volumes than I usually listen to) and the measurements are indeed better than either of the above HPs.

 

I think you missed the entire point of what I said, but that's okay lol

post #25 of 46

@Austin Morrow I think your friend is off to a good start, but the paper really needs some serious improvement. The grading is completely arbitrary, no listening impressions, and who said a closed headphone can't be a flagship? This is "subjective objective" at best and I really hope he remains open to improvements. He is onto something though.

post #26 of 46
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by brunk View Post
 

@Austin Morrow I think your friend is off to a good start, but the paper really needs some serious improvement. The grading is completely arbitrary, no listening impressions, and who said a closed headphone can't be a flagship? This is "subjective objective" at best and I really hope he remains open to improvements. He is onto something though.

 

Oh! I don't know who wrote it, but one of my Facebook friends just shared the post. ;)

post #27 of 46
No offence to the writer of the article but I feel that they are missing two important parts of headphone listening enjoyment: a cochlear and a brain. You can measure till your heart's content and show that the drivers are producing sound with a particular signature but this forum clearly shows the variance between people's tastes in audio. I feel it is also misguidedly elitist to call into question a headphones "flagship" status. It may be a good or bad headphone relative to other manufacturer's headphones, but the term "flagship" is relative to the other headphones within that brand only. I find it needlessly negative to point out how a particular headphone might not create a certain graph or measurement as these points have already been scrutinised by their creators and what happens if someone loves the sound of this flawed headphone, are they wrong to enjoy it?

Like so many things that are created to be enjoyed, measurements are a useful guide but that is all they can be. Removing the individual from the equation and stating your findings as fact is ridiculous.

IMO of course.

[EDIT: cswann1 makes a good point, I feel the author could have been more clear in describing the intent of the article. If it is just a matter of how good they measure that's fine]
Edited by Audio Jester - 1/22/14 at 3:29am
post #28 of 46

I think some may be missing, or misinterpreting, the point of this document.   The author is not rating or even grading flagship headphones from the consumers perspective.  He is simply attempting to put (as he freely admits) a fairly brood and and somewhat arbitrary rating of flagship headphones based on how well the engineers attempted to overcome the challenges presented by designing headphones.  These types of measurements are much more useful to engineers to tell them if they are on the right path than to tell listeners what sounds good.   From the perspective of engineering, flat response, low distortion and the like are the indicators of success and any company that puts out a flagship product should pay attention to these indicators in the authors mind.


Edited by cswann1 - 1/21/14 at 11:38pm
post #29 of 46

I appreciate the effort and the knowledge contained in the write up, but the ranking system fails in my opinion, as it is either passed or not passed. No weighting of results either.

post #30 of 46

.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: High-end Audio Forum
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › The State of Flagships - Ranked And Graded Via Measurements