briskly
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2011
- Posts
- 214
- Likes
- 50
Quote:
I think the stated goal was for acoustic impedance matching and managing wave diffraction. I don't know the dimensions of the slits well enough to evaluate if any meaningful impedance difference is to be had from it. There was the disassembly of the LCD-3F a while back that makes it all a bit questionable whether Audeze can achieve their stated goals.
With the limited driver excursion and volume displacement through the wide slits that LCDs used in their stators, I find it difficult to envision the relevance of turbulent fluid flow for the Fazor, or for a certain other Ether. Of course, I could be wrong.
Quote:
If you're just trying to EQ the headphone to flat, the minimum phase EQ is the more accurate solution. Single driver headphones are a mostly minimum phase device anyway, so EQ'ing it flat improves phase accuracy as well. More so for the LCD-2 with a minimized all-pass part in its bass, unlike other moving coil headphones.
not sure an EQ can do that. AFAIK the fazor thing was to improve on air flow disturbances(did I get that right?), so if it does as advertised that should help as much for distortions than it may change the signature.
also using online measured graphs are of limited interest as you never know that the signature of your headphone is the same as the pair measured. for a hd800 it shouldn't be too far off as they really try to hit the target specs. but for audeze, between the eternal tweaking going on under the same model name, and usual manufacturing variations, it's hard to say that one pair sounds like another pair.
I think the stated goal was for acoustic impedance matching and managing wave diffraction. I don't know the dimensions of the slits well enough to evaluate if any meaningful impedance difference is to be had from it. There was the disassembly of the LCD-3F a while back that makes it all a bit questionable whether Audeze can achieve their stated goals.
With the limited driver excursion and volume displacement through the wide slits that LCDs used in their stators, I find it difficult to envision the relevance of turbulent fluid flow for the Fazor, or for a certain other Ether. Of course, I could be wrong.
Quote:
There are linear problems (frequency response, phase) and non-linear problems (distortion), and your typical EQ can only address ½ of the linear problems. That is, you can control the frequency response, but too much adjustment can mean issues with phase and distortion. Then consider the sometimes massive differences in FR between headphones, and you can see how sometimes you just can't turn all problems into nails for the EQ hammer.
If you're just trying to EQ the headphone to flat, the minimum phase EQ is the more accurate solution. Single driver headphones are a mostly minimum phase device anyway, so EQ'ing it flat improves phase accuracy as well. More so for the LCD-2 with a minimized all-pass part in its bass, unlike other moving coil headphones.