Analyticity in headphones - what are the factors
Jan 26, 2016 at 1:44 AM Thread Starter Post #1 of 7

paulguru

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 27, 2014
Posts
611
Likes
16
What are the factors that make unforgive ( selective with lower quality recording tracks ) the sound of an headphone ?
( for analytic i means the capacity of headphone to reveals the defects in a bad recording )
 
unfogive sound = neutral / flat sound ?
Is it only a matter of equalization mode ? Or is it a particular physical characteristic of the internal drive ?
 
Jan 26, 2016 at 3:34 AM Post #2 of 7
What it is : transparency, as flat sound as possible; bass fall-off usually preferable to plateau; this will playback a song as close as to how it sounds like (even if the studio monitors it was mixed on isn't perfectly flat either) since it minimizes distortion of the signal due to the response curve of the headphone/speaker
 
What people think it is : anything with a treble spike; this does not "reveal" bad recordings, it makes them worse. The first example is a white paper report, the second is some politician grandstanding by highlighting the negative bits included in that report, if not adding things that weren't there.
 
Jan 26, 2016 at 5:29 AM Post #3 of 7
  What it is : transparency, as flat sound as possible; bass fall-off usually preferable to plateau; this will playback a song as close as to how it sounds like (even if the studio monitors it was mixed on isn't perfectly flat either) since it minimizes distortion of the signal due to the response curve of the headphone/speaker
 
What people think it is : anything with a treble spike; this does not "reveal" bad recordings, it makes them worse. The first example is a white paper report, the second is some politician grandstanding by highlighting the negative bits included in that report, if not adding things that weren't there.

This is the only one factor to make the "analyticity" ?
 
The unforgive sound is gettable only with bass enphasizing / mids recessing ?
Not possibile have neutral signature + not analytical ? 
 
Jan 26, 2016 at 8:32 AM Post #4 of 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulguru /img/forum/go_quote.gif
This is the only one factor to make the "analyticity" ?
 
The unforgive sound is gettable only with bass enphasizing / mids recessing ?
Not possibile have neutral signature + not analytical ? 

 
Again, I'm going to reiterate the problem: I outlined "what it really is" vs "what people think it is." An "analytical" speaker from a technical standpoint doesn't really exist, because to be "analytical" as it truly means, it has to present to the you sound as it is, which means totally flat response. No such transducer system really exists.
 
The problem is the second definition - what people think an analytical speaker is - and it has no real basis on a technical level. What people define as analytical is nothing more than a speaker with enhanced treble response. If you really, really, really think about it, that isn't being "analytical," that's "highlighting parts of a (bad) recording where it can hurt listeners the most," because unless you have some deficiency in hearing treble frequencies (like age-related hearing loss), you either have normal hearing where this can still hurt, or you have hyper-acusis, which means you're more sensitive to high frequencies than average.
 
Look at for example the following graph presenting two "musical" headphones and two "analytical" headphones:

 
Now, look at the bass:

 
Now, the treble:

 
But then look at the comparable midrange graphs where their lines are more bunched up together and with the exception of the Sony are nearly parallel, variances in level are attributable more to their sensitivity/efficiency than actual response balance:

 
 
Notice a pattern here? When people call a headphone "musical" what they really mean is that it can really highlight the beat of the music, be it a string instrument like a bass guitar or a bass viola or a percussion instrument like the bass drum and the toms. When people say "analytical" they mean
 "details shine through," if not full-on "OMG MY EARS MY EARS OH FOR THE LOVE OF GOD NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!" 
 
My point however is that if you really think about it, aren't there details in the bass region too, and if the response is too weak you won't hear those detailed notes, and when it's too strong, it bloats the bass and you can't hear the proper detail because everything sounds like creeping and bubbling molasses than actual bass beats (unless what you're listening to is synthetic bass normally designed to blow windows off a rapper's SUV when played through his 22inch MTX Jackhammer subwoofer). Similarly, isn't treble also vital to enjoying music? The cymbals are part of the drums and they carry the beat, and what if you're listening to an alto soprano?
 
Basically, "analytical" and "musical" as antithetical terms are highly misleading. The reality is that a perfectly flat sound off the speakers/headphones that is uncoloured by the listening environment (ie room modes, or equivalent factors in headphones like earpad wear, variance in clamping force, etc) makes for a truly analytical sound that shows all the details without being harsh, while also musical in the sense that you hear the "groove" of the music well. The reality however is that such a transducer does not exist yet, as there are a lot of factors involved in driver design. Even planars which can get almost perfectly flat from 10hz to 1000hz have to deal with a sharp deviation somewhere in the midrange-treble region (see below) and ultimately all headphone and speaker designs bear with them a compromise that the manufacturers' engineers are willing to live with at that price range. It would be more accurate to just refer to these as "warm" and "bright" rather than "analytical" and "musical," since that more accurately states how "well we prefer it's a bit stronger at one end than the other."
 
Almost perfectly flat from 10hz to 1000hz, then after that, relatively weaker between 1000hz and around 5000hz, then peaks just before 10000hz.

 
 
So again, if you look at it in terms of public human behavior, with the recording equivalent to any random social/economic/political phenomenon, a truly analytical speaker is like a technocrat presenting a well-researched, multi-faceted, collaborative research paper that involved as many social science experts as possible (ie all ranges of sound properly represented), while the treble-enhanced "analytical" speaker isn't really "analytical," but a "critical, pessimistic" perspective presented by a grandstanding politician who wants the public to focus on some part and will even add things that werent in that report if he can get some political mileage out of it.
 
Jan 26, 2016 at 11:50 AM Post #5 of 7
ok, maybe may question is not correct.
i try to replicate the question :
 
What are the factors that make unforgive ( selective with lower quality recording tracks ) the sound of an headphone ?
 
 
you think can be right now ?
 
Jan 26, 2016 at 12:45 PM Post #6 of 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulguru /img/forum/go_quote.gif
ok, maybe may question is not correct.
I will try to rephrase the question :
 
What are the factors that make the sound of a headphone unforgiving with lower quality recording tracks?

 
My response is still essentially the same, but so it will be clearer I'll address this question in particular as well. Again the problem isn't a headphone being "unforgiving" of bad recordings, but that many recordings will sound worse depending on the headphone. Most badly recorded music sounds thin, poor mastering on the bass drum if not all drums in general* means weak drums if not also improper mic positioning or gain and EQ during mastering on the cymbals, so when played back on a headphone known to that people describe as "unforgiving of flaws" or "analytical," which tend to have boosted treble response and earlier bass roll-off (and sometimes no upper bass plateau) you end up exacerbating what is already wrong with the mastering of these tracks. Basically, you have a weak bass+strong treble track being played back by a headphone that further de-emphasizes the bass and further emphasizes the treble.

The very short, very direct answer to that rephrased question is in bold letter above. My main point however is that such descriptions are problematic and I'm trying to clarify these problems to you early on so you do not help proliferate it. While people think that "unforgiving" and "analytical" means "reveals flaws," they are actually referring to a headphone that has the kind of response described above - a taller, wider treble peak paired with an early bass roll-off, sometimes with not much of a bump in the upper bass either. They describe that as "analytical" or "clinical" or "unforgiving" because it "doesn't sound like music." Fair enough, because a lot of modern music, again, depends on the beat, which is in the bass region, and a headphone with enough deficiency in bass will lack that "groove" due to the bass.
 
Now, the problem with using the descriptions of it as "analytical" or "unforgiving" or "clinical" obscures a few realities: that poor mastering is only problematic in the treble and all detail has to do with treble, when there is a lot of detail on how bass notes emanate from the instruments, and a track can be badly mastered another way. That is, you can do bad mastering with too low/soft bass, and using a headphone known to be "musical" and "forgiving" - which actually is a headphone that likely has the opposite response issues, now sporting a strong bass boost and weak treble relative to its response at 1000hz, will actually be unforgiving of this mistake, except we just call it "bloated" instead of "unforgiving," when it's just doing for the bass what the "unforgiving" headphone does to bass.*
 
I sum, what I'm saying is that, essentially, all headphones are flawed in their own ways, and the flaws in the mastering will decide which ones are more "forgiving" - ie, their response generally has a "correction effect" - and which ones are "unforgiving" - ie, their response exacerbates the problem. It just happens that there are more recordings that were badly recorded in one way than the other.
 
 
*If you listen to symphonic power metal, compare the sound of Angels Fall First to all other Nightwish albums, but focus on the drums.
**Again, an example from symphonic metal - listen to After Forever's first two albums at less than 320kbps on the LCD-2 first version, and then compare that to the K701. There's a possibility you will actually like the AKG better. This is an example of how the de-emphasis on treble (curiously enough, one track on Decipher is entitled Emphasis) will result in the "musical" headphone being the one that's "unforgiving" with it.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top