How do we have stuff like this on a science board?

  I'd say the outcome of equalization is a large improvement over no equalization. Now we both have an equally citable source.

Yet another person looking to argue their beliefs on the science forum, only to leave with their argument stripped but their beliefs held even firmer.

  Sure. But that you align to Redcarmoose's notion of 'the way it was meant to sound' means you may have chosen sides too soon. As arnyk pointed out indirectly, headphones have no meaningfully inherent sound, because in interfacing with them you introduce relatively unpredictable distortion...

  From what I gather, you made an argument against eq and that argument was countered. Whether you agree with his choice of words, you've either got an argument to defend or opinions to let go of.

  Eq, ideally. Unless this is for use with a device that has no good software for it.

  I'd charge $700 for my work, too, and no point not to. People insist on a correlation between $ and fidelity.

You're free to do as you please, of course.

Even past preference, this isn't hardware that probes the shape of your ear and adapts to it to produce the 'intended' sound. If they didn't design the phones for your particular ear, which is likely, it's not a stretch that you can improve on their design even where you share the exact...

  You will get these features for an order of magnitude less $.

Either that, or because those headphones are objectively of higher fidelity and the tiering system is useless.

I see that sansui looking fearfully at the towering unipolar.

Meanwhile, the hok 80 are still going for 5 € without box and 15 € with box.

My sole experience with the akg warranty service was that it took about four months, I eventually got the wrong model as a replacement - even though they specifically asked me which model I would like - and they didn't agree to re-replace it. The replacement sounded notably worse than what I had...

Incidentally, any treble peak in the current dt 990 is likely 100% in the pads when you factor out variation in the hrtf.

  Certainly not the only difference. The prestige word 'gold' in the name, the luxurious carrying case, and the exorbitant price are likely bigger factors here than any driver matching. Measurements'll work a treat to clarify, here.

The frame of my philips-branded k 260 (though I haven't seen actual proof that they're the same thing as the k 260) was notably flimsier than the one on the k 250, and the k 260 both sounded and measured worse. Which is why I trashed them.

Wualta said his pro 50 sounded terrible, as well. Who knows why or how.   I went digging a few years back, but never saw a pro 50 without passive radiators, and never saw a k 250 without sound ports. It's possible the pro 50 was a way for akg to clear sextett stock, given they were introducing...

My theory is that the later sextetts had the same or very similar driver as the k 250/241; in other words, that akg's move from free field to diffuse field around that time bled into the changes they were making to the sextett. What version of driver is in the pro 50, I don't know, but still...

  The pro 50 is not the k 250. The pro 50 is more clearly with the sextett lineage, the k 250 was pushing towards the df, and with my hrtf does a better job of neutrality in the midrange than the df. Typical sextett ringing in the treble, still.

10 sennheiser unipolar, modded 7½ kwh hok 80, modded 7 yamaha hp-50, modded 6½ stax sr-5 6½ akg k 250 6½ beyer dt 990 from the '80s 6 akg k 141 monitor 5½ akg k 240 df, modded 5½ akg k 241 5 sennheiser hd 530, modded 4 sennheiser hd 600 1 audio-tehnica ath-2, modded

Yeah, bit unfortunate that the fit issues haven't been easily solvable, and also, I wonder whether the measurement sheet should have some room for remarks in these cases.

  If you did take the sansuis as shown, you'd be listening to the world's tinniest $500 headphones. And if you did measure them with a proper seal - assuming that's what the problem was here - you'd be looking at a different impulse response.   My take on why the sony measure different on...

The impulse response is the frequency response is the decay. If you wave off the frequency response, you wave off the impulse response.   The small soundstage and lack of subbass on some models aren't for everyone. Apart from those, the sound of the yamas is largely malleable.

We were talking about tyll's latest measurements, weren't we?