[grokit]

Great frequency charts guys, thanks!
 
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by grokit 

The LCD-2's treble is a bit recessed, but not rolled off as it extends quite nicely.

  


Quote:

 
At least in so far as I can tell, and per the graph below, it looks to me like the LCD-2's are "rolled off" in the sense of exhibiting "gradually reduced response at the upper end of the working frequency range."  ( http://www.thefreedictionary.com/roll+off )

 
 
I would say that isolated headphone frequency graphs aren't that representative to what we actually hear; I think they can be helpful when comparing one headphone to another if the measurements were taken the same exact way though.
 
Perhaps my statement should have read, "The LCD-2's treble is a bit recessed compared to the HD800, but not rolled off as it extends quite nicely to me. Have you listened to the two headphones in question? I have owned both, and neither sound rolled off to me, it's just a different tonal presentation. The HD650 OTOH sounds rolled off.
 
As always, my statements are qualified by my signature (IMO, IME, YMMV, etc.), so please take them in that context.

 

[Roger Strummer]

Quote:

 

Edit: thanks for sharing that chart Roger!  How much consensus is there in the audio world about the frequency range of the various descriptors written across the bottom area?

From what I've gathered, there is quite a good consensus about those descriptions, although I'm no professional, so it would be nice if a pro could say something about it.


Quote:

Good question!
 
http://www.uwec.edu/walkerjs/media/38228[1].pdf
 
See document I referenced about if you're interested.
 
There is a great deal of very audible information that is above all the fundamental frequencies that allows us to identify and differentiate instruments from one another.  The frequency emphasis around 6kHz is simply very audible and unnatural.  Because it is not natural, it sticks out as such, the instant I put the headphones on.  I heard it the instant I put the headphones on for the very first time.  It seems to be a "voice" characteristic of the HD-800s just as the 10Hz peak is for the Beyerdynamic T1s.  I suspect the subdued HF FR of the LCD-2s does not jump out because is follows more or less, the HRTF of the average person, which is also why the headphone tends to sound "natural" to many listeners.  Keep in mind, I do not view the FR aberrations I've mentioned as criticisms of these various headphones, but rather simply honest observations.

I'm wondering, has there been any study of the average HRTF? That would be incredibly interesting and enlightening. 


Quote:

Great frequency charts guys, thanks!
 
 
 

The LCD-2 chart is from Tyll's measurements at CanJam last year, he also measured the 800 (and R10, HP1000 and quite a few others). It is somewhere in the thread at the Sound Science subforum, I have the link somewhere if you want it.

 

[pp312]

I'd like you to have a word with a couple of posters on the HD650 Appreciation thread who found the 650 too bright, one claiming he could hear a peak around 16khz. I never bought it, not least because the 650 shows little output at that frequency, but he was adamant. The mystery remains unresolved.
 
 

 
In my perhaps flawed understanding, 6khz is basically irrelevant to anything but overtones (I will return to this topic) if you are listening to recordings of vocals and natural instruments.  (See: http://www.listenhear.co.uk/general_acoustics.htm  )  For example, violins appear to cut off, on the high end around 3.5khz - and even piccolos only extend to around 5khz.  A serious spike sub 4khz (hello there DT880s) seems like it might be a real factor with respect to fatigue and treble balance, but peaks at 5khz and beyond don't seem like they should matter so much unless you are listening to a lot of recordings featuring the highest pitched pipes on a pipe organ.
 

 

[grokit]

Roger, I think it would be great to see that LCD-2 graph with the appropriate HD800 overlay or at least see the two graphs in the same post; not just for myself but I would think it would be helpful for this thread in general.

 

[rhythmdevils]

Tyll measured the HP1000?  I don't remember seeing that.

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

From what I've gathered, there is quite a good consensus about those descriptions, although I'm no professional, so it would be nice if a pro could say something about it.

I'm wondering, has there been any study of the average HRTF? That would be incredibly interesting and enlightening. 

Does a retired pro count?
 
Yes there has been a great deal of analysis done regarding human HRTFs.  One good primer about this is the article I've referred many to in Stereophile about headphone measurement.

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Roger, I think it would be great to see that LCD-2 graph with the appropriate HD800 overlay or at least see the two graphs in the same post; not just for myself but I would think it would be helpful for this thread in general.

 
Guys, remember that measurement of the frequency response of headphones above 8-10kHz is somewhat un-reliable and fluctuates all over the place due to standing wave cancellation/reinforcement in the artificial ear canal of the dummy head and minute differences in headphone placement on the dummy.  Same is true for us dummies as well, slight changes in the placement of the cans on your noggin will affect the HF that you hear.
 
I said all that to say this...  You can't read too much into the minutiae of HF measurements for cans, but you can and should pay attention to the trends that do repeat.  That's why Tyll made multiple measurements and averaged them for each can in his headphone FR measurements.

 

[Roger Strummer]

Quote:

Roger, I think it would be great to see that LCD-2 graph with the appropriate HD800 overlay or at least see the two graphs in the same post; not just for myself but I would think it would be helpful for this thread in general.

 
This are images I was using last year, in which I edited out the raw FR, and just left the compensated and averaged curves. I can post the originals if anyone wants, and I'll dig the link of Tyll's thread.
 

HD800
 

 
 
LCD-2
 

 
 
Superimposed, brownish is 800:
 

 
 
 
The comparison is highly dependent of where you normalize both headphones (ie the frequency at which you make both FR equal), I just put one over the other using the margins, but I can easily move them to normalize them if someone wants (say at 1khz or wherever else).
 
My first conclusion is.... they are not trivial to compare

, but there are clear tendencies.
 

 
Quote:

Tyll measured the HP1000?  I don't remember seeing that.

 
It was a HP2, isn't it the same (my knowledge of Grado's history ain't that great)? It is in the CanJam pdf.

 

[Roger Strummer]

Quote:

Does a retired pro count?
 
Yes there has been a great deal of analysis done regarding human HRTFs.  One good primer about this is the article I've referred many to in Stereophile about headphone measurement.

Of course a retired pro counts! In that point I was referring to the question about terms of the frequency chart I posted (rumble, bottom, sibilance, etc), and whether they are widely accepted.
 
I've read that Stereophile article like 10 times (very informative and useful), but what I was wondering is whether I can find somewhere a paper or statistical study or something of hrtf's of a bunch of subjects in order to see what the averages look like and also the variance, which I think is not trivial (at least looking at head-fi and the neverending fights

).
 

 

[grokit]

 
Quote:

 
You can't read too much into the minutiae of HF measurements for cans, but you can and should pay attention to the trends that do repeat.  That's why Tyll made multiple measurements and averaged them for each can in his headphone FR measurements.

I agree; like I just said, isolated headphone frequency graphs aren't that representative to what we actually hear.
 
But do you agree that they can be helpful when comparing one headphone to another if the measurements were taken the same exact way with the averaging that Tyll applied?

 

[Roger Strummer]

BTW for anyone interested I found Tyll's post with the link to the measurements at CanJam, here it is.
 
Edit: corrected the link

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

 

I agree; like I just said, isolated headphone frequency graphs aren't that representative to what we actually hear.
 
But do you agree that they can be helpful when comparing one headphone to another if the measurements were taken the same exact way with the averaging that Tyll applied?

Absolutely, yes, particularly if you know that the plots you're comparing are themselves, averages of multiple measurements so that you're seeing a statistical averages of the measurements.  If I remember correctly, Tyll averaged 8 placements for each can.
 

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Of course a retired pro counts! In that point I was referring to the question about terms of the frequency chart I posted (rumble, bottom, sibilance, etc), and whether they are widely accepted.
 
I've read that Stereophile article like 10 times (very informative and useful), but what I was wondering is whether I can find somewhere a paper or statistical study or something of hrtf's of a bunch of subjects in order to see what the averages look like and also the variance, which I think is not trivial (at least looking at head-fi and the neverending fights

).

I'll see if I can dig something up for you.  Sennheiser themselves marketed a surround processer/headphone amp which offered 10 or 15 different HRTF user selectable profiles which were themselves averages of sampling and were programmed into the DSP.  If I remember correctly, there was a user customizable setup option in addition the the preselected options.  I don't remember what happened to the one I used to have, but the surround effect was pretty cool even though overall the thing sounded pretty lousy.  The crummy sound was primarily due to some poor amplifier design in the box...Lots of clipping, no headroom, etc.
 
Dolby headphone which is a feature of many AV receivers is somewhat based on that body of research as well.

 

[grokit]

Was Tyll averaging any other variables besides placement?

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Was Tyll averaging any other variables besides placement?

The results of the whole FR measurement process were repeated and averaged, so everything involved was repeated and averaged.  Placement was just part of it.