[derbigpr]

   
This is the standard answer, as is the post you were agreeing with, but it doesn't address my question: why can manufacturers not make headphones that measure as well as they sound? As I said, graphs are not everything, but they're something, and wouldn't a headphone that measures well be more likely to sound better than one that doesn't, all things being equal? And please nobody reply that all things are never equal; it's beside the point.
 
Frankly, I think the FR of the T1 and HD800 pretty awful given their respective prices. Does this mean that good measurements and good sound are somehow incompatible, or mutually exclusive? Enquiring minds wish to know.

 
 
What is a "better measurement"?  What you think is better on paper is not actually always better in reality. What makes you think DT880's FR is better than T1's FR? Because it's more flat? Or because the shape of the graph looks nicer? That's not how hearing works, it's much more complex than just the simplest of all measurements you can do on a headphone. You can't say that a headphone has a pretty awful FR given it's price without hearing how it actually sounds. Often when you hear a headphone it will sound nothing like what you expected just by looking at the graphs.
 
Frequency response graph has ALMOST NOTHING to do with what we perceive as sound quality, it doesn't show you the "quality" of the headphone. You can have a 50 dollar headphone and a 1500 dollar headphone that have virtually identical frequency response graphs, and they will clearly sound different. It's just the balance of the sound, or how loud a tone of certain frequency will be compared to some reference volume level, usually 1khz, not of which quality that tone will be. And that tone is not just defined by it's frequency. Imagine a piano and a violin both playing a tone of the exact same frequency, yet they sound completely different. It's the same thing with headphones / speakers.  A frequency response is just there to show you, very roughly, what you can expect in terms of sound balance, and it tells you absolutely nothing about the actual sound resolution (which is the most important thing), dynamics, separation, imaging, detail, how tight the bass is, etc.
 
Imagine  it  like this...you have two TV's to choose from. On paper you can only see that  they're 46 inches in size. But one costs 400 dollars, other one costs 1400 dollars. Why? Well, once you see their picture  quality, it will be obvious why one is more expensive than the other. The same with headphones. I have both the DT880 and T1 (and 990's which are actually better than 880's IMHO), and even though their graphs are virtually identical, and they should sound almost identical according to those graphs, they don't. In fact, it's very clear which one of the two is the more expensive headphones, not a big difference (much smaller than most people would imagine), but T1's are clearly the better headphones, they do absolutely everything better than 880's.

 

[pp312]

Everyone seems intent on lecturing me on the dissociation between headphone sound and its FR, but nowhere have I said that a headphone that measures worse must sound worse. What I'm asking is, why can the better headphones not measure better, and why is there often so little correlation between FR graphs and the quality of the sound?  
 
I tend to be one of those who "hear" the FR. It seems most people don't. Over the years I've found I can listen to a headphone for a while and reliably predict the broad outline of its FR. I must be sensitive in that way. Consequently I'm loathe to buy a phone with an erratic FR. When a new phone comes out to universal praise, I head straight for the graphs to see how it measures. If I see a topographical nightmare I wipe it off my list. It's not that I don't think I'd like the sound, though I think it's unlikely. It would just bother me to know that I was listening to that FR, even if it were not particularly assaulting my ears.
 
Maybe you'd better wake me when a headphone comes out that measures as well as it sounds. Until then I'll plug on with the 880, which sounds pretty damn good, measures acceptably and feels like a kitten on my head.

 

[Brooko]

I'm hearing you Paul - just don't go and demo those T1's 

.  Could be an expensive exercise - especially as you already love the DT880.
 
How much do I like the T1's?  Well the HD700 have gone, so have the DT880, and I'm about to sell the HD600 (pretty sure anyway) 

 

 

[pp312]

I hope you gave the 880s a kiss goodbye. The 600s? Meh, I'd just wave them off.

 
About auditioning the T1s--it takes me back to the early 80s when I was auditioning a pair of Stax Lambdas and the salesman asked if I'd like to audition the Pro version, which even then was about $1200. I said I'd love to, even though I couldn't afford them. He looked at me blankly for a moment, said, "Oh well, better forget it then" and walked off. Not the greatest saleman I've ever encountered.

 

[Brooko]

Have to admit - I'd love to try a Stax (entry level) one of these days.  Was tempted before I bought the T1s.  Think that will have to wait until I actually get to one of the bigger US meets eventually.

 

[earfonia]

  Have to admit - I'd love to try a Stax (entry level) one of these days.  Was tempted before I bought the T1s.  Think that will have to wait until I actually get to one of the bigger US meets eventually.

 
In Singapore, when there is Mook Headphone Festival, we can try all models of the STAX they have, for the whole day 

Just another option of place to try the STAX line.
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/675508/pictorial-mook-headphone-festival-singapore

 

[Syan25]

Way cool.....

 

[i luvmusic 2]

 So i finally heard the T1,I went to Downtown Toronto to try this out with my newly built Crack and i gotta admit CRACK + T1 is a very nice Combo however to my ears it's not worth $$$$ pair compared to CRACK+DT880 600 sure the T1 is better than the DT but it's not like night and Day defirence this is just my opinion it might be defferent from other sets of ears.  

 

[Brooko]

Spend a couple of days with it - I think you'd change your mind 

 

[pp312]

But first consider how much money you'll save if you go with first impressions. 

 

[i luvmusic 2]

No thanks I'am out,Maybe if i have another couple thousand $ for DAC and AMP i will consider the T1 maybe it will make the comparison night and day again it's just my opinion.

 

[i luvmusic 2]

Now i understand why those guys at the shop was looking at me and smiling with their DT's(880/990) on their nick trying out high end AMPS and DAC while i was trying out the T1 and CRACK.

 

[Brooko]

Hey enjoy it - I loved my DT800 when I had it.  But the T1 (after about 2 weeks) in direct comparison - I know I made the right choice for me.  Any you don't need $1000 dollar set-ups.  NFB-12, LD MKIV, heaven 

 

[62ohm]

Personally the DT880 never impressed me, I found the soundstage to be condensed. The imaging is good, but its nowhere near as good as the imaging of the angled-driver T1. As always, YMMV.

 

[i luvmusic 2]

T1 is a very nice HP no doubt about that but it's not for me,For the price DT is better.