best headphone for Harman Target?

[bigshot]

If engineers don't mix on different monitor speakers depending on the kind of program, then why would you need different headphones for different kinds of music? And if you do, what aspect would you need to change to make a set of cans suitable for dubstep as opposed to small group jazz? I've never understood EQ settings described by music genres. That just sounds to me like a whole bunch of wrong settings and maybe one good one.

People reading this thread are probably interested in headphone rankings based on Harman preference score: https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq/blob/master/results/RANKING.md

My cans aren't on there... Oppo PM-1

 

[KeithPhantom]

For IE models the Samsung Galaxy Buds come very close

So that's the reason my Galaxy Buds + are so bassy. I don't like the fake bass bump Harman gives to their curve, it may be preferable statistically but not necessarily accurate.

 

[bigshot]

Try using the older Harman Curve. It didn't have as much of a bass boost.

 

[KeithPhantom]

Try using the older Harman Curve. It didn't have as much of a bass boost.

Could you find a source that has one of their older curves, something from 2013 or earlier?

 

[bigshot]

There's a graph that shows the different ones by year here... https://www.headphonesty.com/2020/04/harman-target-curves-part-3/

It's basically a cut of -6dB under 200Hz.

 

[castleofargh]

Note that I'm not looking up Harmon curve studies right now, but from what I remember, the curves for speakers are a lot more consistent since it's more realistic modeling of intended environment. Headphone studies are a lot more varied. We do know there are differences in perception and preferences due to age (some of it due to reduced frequency range range, but also differences in preference in music choice). Harmon has noted all this and tries to make averages. Way back when I was really active on this forum, I did notice there could be heated arguments about what is the best brand headphone for metal or electronica (from people roughly in the same age range). Given that the outer ear can vary quite a bit with people, and given that it funnels certain frequencies, I think those are ultimate factors about why no one brand/model headphone will sound "neutral" to everyone. To continue what was recently raised in the soundstage thread: perhaps the ultimate approach would be to take whatever headphone and then apply advanced DSPs (ones that do measure your actual ear anatomy and try to do virtual modeling of a 3D space).

Who's that Harmon guy?

I might seem like an audio monster, but to me variations in bass treble preferences of 1 or 1.5dB are not really significant for entire groups of listeners. I mean it is because it's audible, but at the same time you will often observe that much change from how people place some headphones on their head, if they wear glasses, etc. And you will find bigger variations between listeners' HRTF.
On the other hand, and despite my expectation that individual HRTF would have a huge impact on preferences, the results over countries, age, sex, training, music genre were still a consistent move to raise the bass and lower the treble of the initial response. That was a real surprise for me and is IMO a strong indication that we all at least aim for a pretty similar frequency target ballpark. Nothing suggesting we want the crazy variations we can find between 2 typical headphones.
I'd still personally take simulation of some speakers measured at my ears over all this. I'm a Realizer A16 owner and fanboy, and I was using bad DIY convolution for years before that to simulate speakers at 30°, and EQ+crossfeed before that. Sadly it's still not something you can hope to find everywhere with a cheap and accurate method. I'd say it's coming, but I've been saying that for the last 20 years. At this point I'm like my grandpa who used to say "death is coming! You laugh but one day you'll see I was right!".

So in the meantime, if I had to advise a friend, I'd tell him to start with that Harman curve and just fool around with simple bass or trebles EQ. That's assuming he's not able to do anything more complicated with an EQ because of lack of experience. But if he was able to, he wouldn't need any help from a target curve in the first place. That's why I think it's fair to make the "noob with EQ" assumption for the general population, and conclude that they would benefit from the Harman reference.

 

[Davesrose]

Who's that Harmon guy?

I might seem like an audio monster, but to me variations in bass treble preferences of 1 or 1.5dB are not really significant for entire groups of listeners. I mean it is because it's audible, but at the same time you will often observe that much change from how people place some headphones on their head, if they wear glasses, etc. And you will find bigger variations between listeners' HRTF.
On the other hand, and despite my expectation that individual HRTF would have a huge impact on preferences, the results over countries, age, sex, training, music genre were still a consistent move to raise the bass and lower the treble of the initial response. That was a real surprise for me and is IMO a strong indication that we all at least aim for a pretty similar frequency target ballpark. Nothing suggesting we want the crazy variations we can find between 2 typical headphones.
I'd still personally take simulation of some speakers measured at my ears over all this. I'm a Realizer A16 owner and fanboy, and I was using bad DIY convolution for years before that to simulate speakers at 30°, and EQ+crossfeed before that. Sadly it's still not something you can hope to find everywhere with a cheap and accurate method. I'd say it's coming, but I've been saying that for the last 20 years. At this point I'm like my grandpa who used to say "death is coming! You laugh but one day you'll see I was right!".

So in the meantime, if I had to advise a friend, I'd tell him to start with that Harman curve and just fool around with simple bass or trebles EQ. That's assuming he's not able to do anything more complicated with an EQ because of lack of experience. But if he was able to, he wouldn't need any help from a target curve in the first place. That's why I think it's fair to make the "noob with EQ" assumption for the general population, and conclude that they would benefit from the Harman reference.

Well I'm sorry, but if you look at the Harmon curves during the years is that the bass ranges are a difference of 8dB. I'll admit I'm a bit more bass centric in my preference since I'm into symphonic music (which has a recess in treble), alternative, and jazz. But from what I've gathered, other genres like spiked treble (intimate, detailed such as metal). What I do think we agree with is that DSP will be the ultimate solution for normalization of frequencies for an individual and realized surround formats.

 

[bigshot]

The difference in bass probably has something to do with headphones' ability to suck up bass. If you EQ bass in a room by 8dB, that makes a big difference, but headphones tend to even it out. Maybe because it lacks the kinesthetic ability to thump on your torso and make the windows rattle.

 

[ScareDe2]

Note that I'm not looking up Harmon curve studies right now, but from what I remember, the curves for speakers are a lot more consistent since it's more realistic modeling of intended environment. Headphone studies are a lot more varied. We do know there are differences in perception and preferences due to age (some of it due to reduced frequency range range, but also differences in preference in music choice). Harmon has noted all this and tries to make averages. Way back when I was really active on this forum, I did notice there could be heated arguments about what is the best brand headphone for metal or electronica (from people roughly in the same age range). Given that the outer ear can vary quite a bit with people, and given that it funnels certain frequencies, I think those are ultimate factors about why no one brand/model headphone will sound "neutral" to everyone. To continue what was recently raised in the soundstage thread: perhaps the ultimate approach would be to take whatever headphone and then apply advanced DSPs (ones that do measure your actual ear anatomy and try to do virtual modeling of a 3D space).

The moment Harman is quoted for other than their research on a preferred target in a room, it makes no more sens to me. The brain keeps equalizing the frequencies. The sound that I hear now is the same than when I was younger. The sound remains the same until the brain can no longer compensates. My headphones sound the exact same to me now than before and music happens within the frequency range of human hearing. I believe warm and bright sounding headphones will remain the same for the listener for most of the lifetime.

 

[ScareDe2]

And neutrality is a faithful reproduction. If you lose sensitivity to bass or treble, it doesn't matter. Neutral headphones/speakers will have the exact faithful amount of bass and treble for all listeners.

 

[KeithPhantom]

And neutrality is a faithful reproduction. If you lose sensitivity to bass or treble, it doesn't matter. Neutral headphones/speakers will have the exact faithful amount of bass and treble for all listeners.

Mathematically speaking, yes, a straight line with no distortion and resonances is pretty much neutral. But doesn't the biological aspect also count towards establishing neutrality?

 

[castleofargh]

Well I'm sorry, but if you look at the Harmon curves during the years is that the bass ranges are a difference of 8dB. I'll admit I'm a bit more bass centric in my preference since I'm into symphonic music (which has a recess in treble), alternative, and jazz. But from what I've gathered, other genres like spiked treble (intimate, detailed such as metal). What I do think we agree with is that DSP will be the ultimate solution for normalization of frequencies for an individual and realized surround formats.

My mention of 1 to 1.5dB was referring to the average variations per age on the study(I think it was about that order of variations).
+8dB is for IEMs.
And it's Harman. Harmon is the NCIS dude

 

[ScareDe2]

Mathematically speaking, yes, a straight line with no distortion and resonances is pretty much neutral. But doesn't the biological aspect also count towards establishing neutrality?

I don't know what that means. When you attend a live concert, every listeners in your position would hear the exact same thing, a faithful live concert, independantly of their own biological aspect. Audio materials are supposed to reproduce exactly what is on the record. Neutrality should be the same for everyone.

 

[castleofargh]

I don't know what that means. When you attend a live concert, every listeners in your position would hear the exact same thing, a faithful live concert, independantly of their own biological aspect. Audio materials are supposed to reproduce exactly what is on the record. Neutrality should be the same for everyone.

I agree with the conclusion, but every listener in my position would not hear the exact same thing. What justifies a common neutral and more or less a common signature preference is that a speaker triggers acoustic interactions with our body that are similar to any random sound source at that position. So if I replace a guitar with a speaker at the same place outputting the recording of that guitar, it makes sense that the speaker should be about flat at its position. Then the waves can be influenced by the room and our HRTF like the real guitar would from there. So yes, neutrality for speakers should be the same for everyone. I feel like this is the right idea. acoustically and in term of listeners' preferences that seems pretty consistent.

But with headphones, it doesn't work. A driver that is neutral near its output will sound weird to listeners and certainly not feel neutral to them. So how do we define neutral? Same pressure at all frequencies near the driver and we don't care that nobody likes it? Same pressure at all frequencies at the eardrum(then 1 neutral for all can't exist)?
Even with a purely acoustic approach there remains problems. Like why would so many listeners request a bass boost instead of good old flat? It's not like our body has a huge influence on low frequencies. Probably something to do with the missing tactile bass? Should we just ignore that because it's not something going on at the eardrum?
With headphones, I'm not sure we know what neutral is, and I'm not even sure it should be the same for everyone.

 

[ScareDe2]

If it doesn't work for headphones there would be no consensual discussions relative to an headphone sound signature. I have never read someone claims "this headphone is dark and lacks definition on top" and another one say "no! it's bright and lacks bass". I don't know but the agreement over headphones response seems quite on point in the discussions I have read.