[Head Injury]

Quote:

 
According to this site, the bose ae2's frequency response looks pretty darn good, very little bass roll off.

The Y axis has big steps. It's down about 6dB at 30Hz, which isn't bad but not that great. We don't know how the graph was compensated. I sure hope it was compensated, otherwise it's going to have no mid-range. If it was compensated in the same way Tyll compensates his graphs, that is a LOT of treble.
 
We also don't know the testing methodology. Unless you know that and can post it.

 

[KevinWolf]

Quote:

The Y axis has big steps. It's down about 6dB at 30Hz, which isn't bad but not that great. We don't know how the graph was compensated. I sure hope it was compensated, otherwise it's going to have no mid-range. If it was compensated in the same way Tyll compensates his graphs, that is a LOT of treble.
 
We also don't know the testing methodology. Unless you know that and can post it.

I think it's not compensated, most graphs I saw on this site shows roll-off on bass.

 

[Head Injury]

Quote:

I think it's not compensated, most graphs I saw on this site shows roll-off on bass.

Compensation the way Tyll does it has little effect under 1kHz, so I'm not talking about compensated bass. If the graph is compensated, the frequency balance is somewhat similar to the HD800, but with more bass roll-off and more (more!) treble. If it's uncompensated, you can take everything from 3-5kHz and shove it down 10dB. Which means, like I said, missing upper mid-range. Pray it's not uncompensated.

 

[dyl1dyl]

Quote:

The Y axis has big steps. It's down about 6dB at 30Hz, which isn't bad but not that great. We don't know how the graph was compensated. I sure hope it was compensated, otherwise it's going to have no mid-range. If it was compensated in the same way Tyll compensates his graphs, that is a LOT of treble.
 
We also don't know the testing methodology. Unless you know that and can post it.

Haha, I dont, just saw this site.
 

 

[Ham Sandwich]

Quote:

Compensation the way Tyll does it has little effect under 1kHz, so I'm not talking about compensated bass. If the graph is compensated, the frequency balance is somewhat similar to the HD800, but with more bass roll-off and more (more!) treble. If it's uncompensated, you can take everything from 3-5kHz and shove it down 10dB. Which means, like I said, missing upper mid-range. Pray it's not uncompensated.

The graphs at doctorhead are compensated and corrected from the raw measurement data.  Just compensated differently, to a different perspective, than the graphs at Inner Fidelity.
 
Compare some headphones like the D2000, HD600 and LCD2 at both doctorhead and Inner Fidelity (the LCD2 at doctorhead is a rev1).  You'll see the pattern that each sites measurements have.  A "proper sounding" headphone at Inner Fidelity has a downward sloping upper midrange and treble.  A "proper sounding" headphone at doctorhead has a flat graph.  Different compensations for what are essentially the same measurements.  
 
The graphs at doctorhead are easier for me to understand because deviations from flat are easier to comprehend and see.  I'm still in the air trying to understand the graphs at Inner Fidelity.
 
According to the doctorhead graphs the AE2 would have a boosted treble compared to neutral. I guess Bose took to heart the jokes about "no highs, no lows, must be Bose".  So they gave it too much highs.
 
The AE2 aren't the only headphones to suffer from that same sort of treble boost in that same frequency range.  Some respected headphones we all know have a similar treble bump.

 

[tdockweiler]

If anyone is interested, here is a graph I found for the AE1:
 

 
Found here:
http://www.geocities.jp/ryumatsuba/
 
Check that site out. Tons of frequency graphs! BTW I just ordered the Beyerdynamic DJ1-X. It's graph on that site looks pretty good.
Hopefully it'll give my DJ100 some competition.
 
Have to say, the Bose AE1 and AE2 aren't bad. Not nearly as bad as people make them out to be. The AE1 actually has so much treble that I gave my $40 pair away to my mom. She loves them.
The AE1's mids are very, very slightly recessed sounding to me, but it's not enough to be a problem. Bass is quite good and not bloated to my ears. Definitely not bass heavy which people seem to say. Overall they had a balanced sound if it wasn't for the extra treble.
 
I bought a pair again recently because they were an old favorite. I was very surprised I still liked them.

 

[lunchpaddle]

dubstep girl,
i find this generalisation to be quite irritating. im currently trying to decide between AKG's and keeping my bose AE2's. let me assure you, (and i know youve never tried a pair) but the AE2's are excellent
ive been through quite a few higher end commercial headphones with a couple of pairs each from sony, sennheiser, bose and razer so far. and ive found the bose to be the best, in fact a pair got stolen and i bought another set even thoguh theyre $200. i just want to say, dont knock em till youve tried em. highly recomment givign them a try, just annoying not being able to find legitimate tech specs for the AE2's, cheers for the link above though to whoever posted that with the graphs! much appreciated
www.soundcloud.com/skerrick