[Chamade]

I'm sorry but saying that a peak around 11khz is "excruciating" is really very exaggeration and very unrealistic. If the peak is maybe in region of 6-8 khz, yes, this can sounding problematic for some persons, but 11khz or even 10 khz, no, even when playing music loud.

I am happy it doesn’t bother you and you like them.

 

[MayaTlab]

I'm sorry but saying that a peak around 11khz is "excruciating" is really very exaggeration and very unrealistic. If the peak is maybe in region of 6-8 khz, yes, this can sounding problematic for some persons, but 11khz or even 10 khz, no, even when playing music loud.

I beg to differ. Both samples that I listened to, I would also describe their trebles response as "excruciating".

It's a part of the spectrum where individual variations and coupling issues can be significant, so perhaps this could be a cause for the variation in subjective impressions in that range. Or not.

I have concerns about the use of blocked ear canal entrance microphones to perform in-ear, in situ measurements, but I've measured both samples mounted on my head in this fashion and while I don't think that the location of the peak(s) was accurately represented by these measurements, I think that they're a good illustration of the problem I experienced, and indeed it's quite a massive elevation at a narrow Q.

 

[jthomp72]

I beg to differ. Both samples that I listened to, I would also describe their trebles response as "excruciating".

It's a part of the spectrum where individual variations and coupling issues can be significant, so perhaps this could be a cause for the variation in subjective impressions in that range. Or not.

I have concerns about the use of blocked ear canal entrance microphones to perform in-ear, in situ measurements, but I've measured both samples mounted on my head in this fashion and while I don't think that the location of the peak(s) was accurately represented by these measurements, I think that they're a good illustration of the problem I experienced, and indeed it's quite a massive elevation at a narrow Q.

You got a decent song or two I could test this out at? I’m not disagreeing I just wanna hear what you mean in some absolute terms and I wanna compare it to other phones I got.

 

[MayaTlab]

You got a decent song or two I could test this out at? I’m not disagreeing I just wanna hear what you mean in some absolute terms and I wanna compare it to other phones I got.

You may actually not experience them the same way I do. At these frequencies it is possible that the headphones interact with each individual in different ways. Perhaps the design lends itself to being more prone to produce an unpleasant treble response on a wider range of individuals, IDK.

The issue for me was bad enough that track selection doesn't matter. A good majority of the songs I played through them was unpleasant to listen to.

Any other qualities or drawbacks they may have had was over-shadowed by that issue as far as I'm concerned.

 

[jthomp72]

You may actually not experience them the same way I do. At these frequencies it is possible that the headphones interact with each individual in different ways. Perhaps the design lends itself to being more prone to produce an unpleasant treble response on a wider range of individuals, IDK.

The issue for me was bad enough that track selection doesn't matter. A good majority of the songs I played through them was unpleasant to listen to.

Any other qualities or drawbacks they may have had was over-shadowed by that issue as far as I'm concerned.

This exact argument you’re making is a really good example of why I just don’t really bother with charts and graphs. I know I’m controversial for this but I just care how it sounds, to me. What sounds amazing to me might be awfully harsh to you.

 

[MayaTlab]

This exact argument you’re making is a really good example of why I just don’t really bother with charts and graphs.

Well I certainly hope that my comment will not be understood as a dismissal of graphs or measurements, far from it.
In fact had I performed in situ, in ear measurements with a method better suited IMO to these higher frequencies it's quite likely that I'd have measured a pretty significant peak exactly in the right spot.
It's just that in some cases (emphasis on "some"), a specific individual's experience may deviate from what is measured on an ear simulator, but that doesn't mean that anything goes either and that this divergence can't be explained... by more measurements (preferably in situ then).

In regards to the Mark Levinson 5909, for example, I don't think that a lot of people are likely to experience the 1.5-4.5kHz range in a way that deviates significantly from ear simulators for reasons a little long to explain here.

 

[angelom]

I beg to differ. Both samples that I listened to, I would also describe their trebles response as "excruciating".

One thing is the treble region in all the frequency spectrum, and other thing is specifically 11 kHz.

Maybe you don't like the 5909 treble, this is ok, maybe you don't like in general the tonal balance of the 5909, the is ok too. But saying that 11 khz is "excruciating" is very big exaggeration.

 

[jthomp72]

Well I certainly hope that my comment will not be understood as a dismissal of graphs or measurements, far from it.
In fact had I performed in situ, in ear measurements with a method better suited IMO to these higher frequencies it's quite likely that I'd have measured a pretty significant peak exactly in the right spot.
It's just that in some cases (emphasis on "some"), a specific individual's experience may deviate from what is measured on an ear simulator, but that doesn't mean that anything goes either and that this divergence can't be explained... by more measurements (preferably in situ then).

In regards to the Mark Levinson 5909, for example, I don't think that a lot of people are likely to experience the 1.5-4.5kHz range in a way that deviates significantly from ear simulators for reasons a little long to explain here.

Oh no I wasn’t implying you dismissed graphs. All I was saying is that I personally don’t put much stock in them. I listen, I see if I like the sound, and that’s it lol. I patently do not care about measuring. If headphone A provides a better sound to me and my ears then headphone B I do not care about price difference or what other people or reviewers say.

 

[MayaTlab]

maybe you don't like in general the tonal balance of the 5909, the is ok too.

This is just me, but, excluding the treble response above 8kHz, I actually found it quite decent, albeit a bit lean and fatiguing in some modes (particularly when ANC is turned on).

For the ML5909, the response below 1.5kHz and the difference one may experience between modes without a feedback mechanism and modes with it (ex : ANC on) could possibly be quite significantly influenced by how the headphones "couple" with an individual's anatomy BTW : https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...se-use-of-the-harman-curve.29633/post-1087051

 

[angelom]

This is just me, but, excluding the treble response above 8kHz, I actually found it quite decent, albeit a bit lean and fatiguing in some modes (particularly when ANC is turned on).

For the ML5909, the response below 1.5kHz and the difference one may experience between modes without a feedback mechanism and modes with it (ex : ANC on) could possibly be quite significantly influenced by how the headphones "couple" with an individual's anatomy BTW : https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...se-use-of-the-harman-curve.29633/post-1087051

If this is your opinion of the 5909 (in your auditions in audio store), then the sennheiser hd800 is probably complete rubbish for you. (for me the tonal balance of the 5909 is better than hd800. For me the hd800 treble is problematic, but not the 5909 treble at all)

 

[WDitters]

The 5909 are slowly growing on me … They're in their 5th power cycle now where I have left them playing 24/7 with the Tara Labs Cascade burn-in file.

What I remember from the Beoplay H95 that they were much quicker to shape up with their Titanium drivers. Beryllium however is technically better but also stiffer. Titanium gets its upper output from diaphragm breakup. Beryllium stays pistonic throughout the same range giving the impression of less extension when in reality it's capable of tracking the signal much more accurately when eq is applied / or a good DSP is active and tuned in a proper manner.

That might just be the case with the 5909. They seem to take longer to break-in but at the same time their clarity and detail are astonishing for a pair of Bluetooth headphones ...

The Intermediate decision for now is to definitely give the 5909 additional growing time. The higher range seems to calm down a bit and I am not at all disappointed so far ...

 

[angelom]

That might just be the case with the 5909. They seem to take longer to break-in but at the same time their clarity and detail are astonishing for a pair of Bluetooth headphones ...

A positive surprise for me in the performance of the 5909 in my long 'test' playlist is the clarity and extraction of details in this live version of the song "So American" by Portugal. The Man.

 

[woodcans]

The higher range seems to calm down a bit and I am not at all disappointed so far ...

I no longer detect any treble peaks. Either the phones and/or my brain has burned in.

 

[WDitters]

Listen to Anna Lee by Buddy Guy on Qobuz https://open.qobuz.com/track/15838644

Sounds absolutely stellar on the 5909... Those snares...

 

[jthomp72]

Listen to Anna Lee by Buddy Guy on Qobuz https://open.qobuz.com/track/15838644

Sounds absolutely stellar on the 5909... Those snares...

Oh man I love me some buddy guy. I saw him live with bb king. Man played the guitar with his toes.