[SomeGuyDude]

As far as I can see that graph doesn't even have any scale on the axis, kind of says everything about it imo......

The proportions are more important than the axis scale. If I showed you an FR graph for any major headphone even without scale you'd get a pretty good idea of what you're looking at.

 

[FUYU]

The proportions are more important than the axis scale. If I showed you an FR graph for any major headphone even without scale you'd get a pretty good idea of what you're looking at.

Not really. You'd assume that the respective axes (X and Y) are linear, which often is not the case, particularly with Chinese manufacturers. Frequency response is not really a good indicator without a reference. Even when measuring the same earphones, there is lots of variance to account for.

 

[SomeGuyDude]

Not really. You'd assume that the respective axes (X and Y) are linear, which often is not the case, particularly with Chinese manufacturers. Frequency response is not really a good indicator without a reference. Even when measuring the same earphones, there is lots of variance to account for.

Yes really, because no matter the scale the relationship between two points along the X axis is going to be the same. If the output at 100Hz is the same as the output at 5000Hz it doesn't matter what the scale is, they're going to be at the same Y coordinate. That's literally how graphs work.

 

[FUYU]

Yes really, because no matter the scale the relationship between two points along the X axis is going to be the same. If the output at 100Hz is the same as the output at 5000Hz it doesn't matter what the scale is, they're going to be at the same Y coordinate. That's literally how graphs work.

Yes, that's how a function is projected on a Cartesian coordinate system. "If I showed you an FR graph for any major headphone even without scale", but if I were to change that scale or the ratio of the Y-Axis the entire projection would flatten or elevate. It changes your outlook of the graph entirely, especially when you have no scaling to begin with. And I don't think you look at the points of the graph individually.

 

[SomeGuyDude]

Yes, that's how a function is projected on a Cartesian coordinate system. "If I showed you an FR graph for any major headphone even without scale", but if I were to change that scale or the ratio of the Y-Axis the entire projection would flatten or elevate. It changes your outlook of the graph entirely, especially when you have no scaling to begin with. And I don't think you look at the points of the graph individually.

It changes amplitude, not proportions, and proportions are the primary thing we're looking at, especially when it comes to deciding if it's warm/bright/neutral.

 

[FUYU]

It changes amplitude, not proportions, and proportions are the primary thing we're looking at, especially when it comes to deciding if it's warm/bright/neutral.

Yes, that is exactly my point. The projection and its amplitude changes. Hence, it manipulates the graph to possibly look more/less U, V, etc.-shaped. Wasn't this the whole point of it? To make an accurate assumption of the frequency response and subsequent tonality?

 

[SomeGuyDude]

Yes, that is exactly my point. The projection and its amplitude changes. Hence, it manipulates the graph to possibly look more U, V, etc.-shaped. Wasn't this the whole point of it? To make a accurate assumption of the frequency response and subsequent tonality?

No, because all this started thanks to the King Pro's frequency graph which looked like this:

Your talk about U or V shapes is just a matter of the extent of what is a symmetrical relationship. If a headphone starts with bass way high and then falls off consistently from there it's a bassy headphone no matter what the scale is. Likewise, this here graph shows a damn worrisome bump regardless of what the exact axes are.

 

[peter123]

No, because all this started thanks to the King Pro's frequency graph which looked like this:

Your talk about U or V shapes is just a matter of the extent of what is a symmetrical relationship. If a headphone starts with bass way high and then falls off consistently from there it's a bassy headphone no matter what the scale is. Likewise, this here graph shows a damn worrisome bump regardless of what the exact axes are.

If the interval on the y-axis is 1dB the bumb is pretty neglecable, if the interval on the x-axis is big it's even more so.

My point is still that as long as the intervals are unknown the graph is useless. I realize that you'd like to argue otherwise but I honestly cannot see how, I've only studied statistics for a couple of years and that was many moons ago though so maybe I'm missing something....

 

[SomeGuyDude]

If the interval on the y-axis is 1dB the bumb is pretty neglecable, if the interval on the x-axis is big it's even more so.

My point is still that as long as the intervals are unknown the graph is useless. I realize that you'd like to argue otherwise but I honestly cannot see how, I've only studied statistics for a couple of years and that was many moons ago though so maybe I'm missing something....

You're the one being pointlessly argumentative here because it's flamingly obvious what's going on in the chart but you're being all "well what if the scale is different than every other graph? What if the guy making it was drunk? What if they dropped the chart in brown sauce and had to redraw it from memory?"

You can see what's happening there, quit playing dumb games.

 

[peter123]

You're the one being pointlessly argumentative here because it's flamingly obvious what's going on in the chart but you're being all "well what if the scale is different than every other graph? What if the guy making it was drunk? What if they dropped the chart in brown sauce and had to redraw it from memory?"

You can see what's happening there, quit playing dumb games.

Eh, maybe you should go out for walk or something......

I'm not the one spending post after post on this meaningless argument.

 

[FUYU]

No, because all this started thanks to the King Pro's frequency graph which looked like this:

Pardon, "To make a accurate assumption of the frequency response and subsequent tonality of the King Pro". Yes, if the Axis is "linear" (I forgot the terminology here) like going from 1 to 2 to 3, or 3 to 6 to 9, or log1 to log0 to log-1, etc.. But there have been instances where the scaling suddenly jumps from 100 to 110 to 130 for no reason, just to alter the projection, making it appear more balanced/whatever.

Frequency response is not really a good indicator without a reference. Even when measuring the same earphones, there is lots of variance to account for.

My actual point was that a singular graph describing tonality is nigh useless, without having A) Metrics for what you are actually measuring B) What measuring tool/standards you apply C) Model the graph with compensation and/or factors like insertion depth, tip-selection, etc. and D) having a reference plane.
Even though A) is SPL(dB)(Y-Axis) and Frequency in hz (X-Axis) in 99% of cases, it still could be something entirely different for what its worth.

 

[Dobrescu George]

I can see now where everybody is coming from actually

I might just get a pair to tell how they actually sound.

 

[HungryPanda]

Yes George, only ones ears can actually tell what they sound like. People could argue all day about nothing I suppose

 

[Selenium]

So don't... https://www.aliexpress.com/store/pr...MMCX-Headphones-With/1922340_32847434348.html
Gets under $70 with just the $2 coupon.

Also:

 

[loomisjohnson]

looks compelling--dzat makes a nice product. i'm trying to avoid impulse purchases (my new year's resolution) or i'd take one for the team....