[adrianm]

With the Ferrom OOR + Hypsos 22.0V high gain if you get on the volume the Expanse driver will beat on your head like a drum. I think the Expanse is plenty dynamic but do love the physicality that a dynamic driver can bring to the listening experience. This is especially true in the Utopia's case.

I’m actually finding the same with Stealth. Less mid bass i imagine, but that sub bass rumble is to die for. Using 22v in bypass eith the Rossini pre is a shocking difference

 

[OhHeyItsLou]

I’m actually finding the same with Stealth. Less mid bass i imagine, but that sub bass rumble is to die for. Using 22v in bypass eith the Rossini pre is a shocking difference

I’ve tried bypass with the A90D and I found that the dynamics weren’t as good. Maybe the A90D is the weak link. Running the A90D in high gain as a pre into the OOR standard is a whole other story.

 

[Jonathan Crouch]

Yeah I know. I asked because I was watching the Bloom Audio YT reviewer saying he ran his Expanse on it and it sounded good, so I wanted to reach out and see if anyone had tried. I don't want to put blind faith into one YT review.

I'm not ready to pull the trigger yet, still want to do some research and I still have the Bliss KTE coming in. The Expanse is not the only TOTL cans I have so it's not a necessity for whatever tube amp I buy to be able to run them, just a nice cherry on top.

The HA-6A is on my list, I also like the Black Ice F35 and F22.

They're my favorite headphone, I've tried the AB 1266, Susvara, Arya (v2 which is my next favorite tied with Susvara for 2nd,) The Dan Clark Stealth, Focal Elex and Clear, HD 600, 58x, 650, 700 etc.

Bottom line the Expanse sounds close to a Susvara with a slightly harder punch in the bass it's not fatiguing if you can put it on a proper amp/dac.

Except they're tied w/ the HD 700 and Stealth for being the most comfortable headphone I've put on my head. You can wear glasses and not be impacted by the fit.

Edit if you're getting the Bliss KTE they'll sound heavenly. It's my dream amp and sadly I can't get one right this moment.

 

[alxw0w]

I never thought I'd be saying this but I'm beginning to prefer the Expanse over my Susvara these days. I've been listening only to the Expanse over the last few weeks and put my Susvaras on today and a few minutes in I was missing the Expanse. Beyond technical ability I think it's come down to tuning. I've read many criticize the Susvara's "weird/odd" tuning and never really heard what they were talking about. Taking nothing away from the Susvara, it's still one of the best headphones I've ever heard and one that will probably never leave my collection. Based on my library and subjective preferences, I'm increasingly preferring the Expanse.

No wonder. Susvara is nothing special. Expanse is much better.

 

[OhHeyItsLou]

No wonder. Susvara is nothing special. Expanse is much better.

I think this hobby is incredibly subjective. Even if someone doesn’t like the Susvara, I think it’s hard to deny they’re the benchmark, the gold standard that all others are compared to. Love it or hate it the iPhone for example holds the same status. Without the Susvara, many other competitor headphones today may not exist. Competition in the marketplace is in the end best for the consumer. We get better products when companies push the envelope of what’s possible. There’s a reason there’s a Burger King in the horizon line of most Macdonald’s. I happen to see a lot of similarities between the two. In fact, more commonalities than differences. I think the fact that the Expanse is in this conversation with the Susvara is not only good for all of us but a testament to how great of a product @mrspeakers took to market.

 

[jlbrach]

No wonder. Susvara is nothing special. Expanse is much better.

I had both sold the expanse so your opinion is yours but not consensus

 

[gadus]

I think this hobby is incredibly subjective. Even if someone doesn’t like the Susvara, I think it’s hard to deny they’re the benchmark, the gold standard that all others are compared to. Love it or hate it the iPhone for example holds the same status. Without the Susvara, many other competitor headphones today may not exist. Competition in the marketplace is in the end best for the consumer. We get better products when companies push the envelope of what’s possible. There’s a reason there’s a Burger King in the horizon line of most Macdonald’s. I happen to see a lot of similarities between the two. In fact, more commonalities than differences. I think the fact that the Expanse is in this conversation with the Susvara is not only good for all of us but a testament to how great of a product @mrspeakers took to market.

Can you elaborate on this very beautiful stand?
Thank you!
It seems that you are very invested in the matter!

 

[OhHeyItsLou]

Can you elaborate on this very beautiful stand?
Thank you!
It seems that you are very invested in the matter!

https://www.etsy.com/shop/OquetlupucDesign?ref=yr_purchases&page=1#items

 

[adrianm]

I think this hobby is incredibly subjective. Even if someone doesn’t like the Susvara, I think it’s hard to deny they’re the benchmark, the gold standard that all others are compared to.

It is subjective, but I think the only reason people care about the Susvara is because of the hype dealers and forums made around it. And that hype is owed to the fact that it's probably the headphone with the best margins out there due to a combination of ridiculous pricing and terrible build quality and qc. It sounds nice, but i failed to find anything special about it except for that extremely smooth and boring tuning, which i guess can make up for deficiencies around source gear, provided you feed it enough power. From a technicalities perspective I found the D8k Pro LE better, and even picked the Elites over them time and time again.
I think the Stealth really is a new standard, so much so that I'm considering selling off everything else.

 

[MayaTlab]

Just to remind people of the level of variation we are talking about, here are the responses from the ears of 15 different people to five different pairs of closed-backed headphones. IIRC one of these was the Stealth. From Sean Olive on Twitter. https://twitter.com/seanolive/status/1630389960904957953

A bit of a late reply, sorry, but if this helps in the context of that thread (albeit not for the Expanse per se, but Dan Clark's headphones) :

This is the Noire :

https://twitter.com/seanolive/status/1577395404026494976?s=20

This is the Stealth :

based on the process of elimination, these tweets (Link 1 Link 2) and a superposition of the graphs after scaling their aspect ratio :

Just get rid in your mind of the lonely trace that deviates most from the others, it's an error from Harman.

This data is very interesting but needs some degree of careful interpretation, particularly above 4-5kHz or so. Also, these measurements were taken without glasses.

 

[ThanatosVI]

It is subjective, but I think the only reason people care about the Susvara is because of the hype dealers and forums made around it. And that hype is owed to the fact that it's probably the headphone with the best margins out there due to a combination of ridiculous pricing and terrible build quality and qc. It sounds nice, but i failed to found anything special about it except for that extremely smooth and boring tuning, which i guess can make up for deficiencies around source gear, provided you feed it enough power. From a technicalities perspective I found the D8k Pro LE better, and even picked the Elites over them time and time again.
I think the Stealth really is a new standard, so much so that I'm considering selling off everything else.

The Susvara simply was so much ahead of its time that it earned itself a legendary Status.

If it were released nowadays it wouldn't receive nearly as much praise.
It's still a magnificent headphone overall and commonly used Benchmark for technicalities, but has since been bested in several disciplines.
Even in the technicalities it has been surpassed by like the Raal or Solitaire P imo.

 

[Hifivoice]

Just to remind people of the level of variation we are talking about, here are the responses from the ears of 15 different people to five different pairs of closed-backed headphones. IIRC one of these was the Stealth. From Sean Olive on Twitter. https://twitter.com/seanolive/status/1630389960904957953

You don't even need to have different people. Moving the Expanse in different positions on a jig already gives you differences. Here you have the Expanse on a miniDSP test jig in 5 positions (with HEX compensation);

• Magenta - MID; Headphone centred, so that the ear is (approx) located in the middle of the chamber
• Red - FRONT; Headphone moved backward, so that the ear is located at the front of the chamber
• Cyan - BACK; Headphone moved forward, so that the ear is located at the back of the chamber
• Yellow - TOP; Headphone moved downward, so that the ear is located at the top of the chamber
• Dark blue - BOTTOM; Headphone moved upward, so that the ear is located at the bottom of the chamber

Averaged:

So what did we test with the different people? Were the headphones set up consistent? How would you define consistent (position to what, pressure, angle)? What makes sense, is that the seal is consistent for variations; this is also what Sean Olive is stating: https://twitter.com/seanolive/status/1630392145965350912

You can also hear this very easily when putting up pink noise, and move a headphone around. The timbre changes considerably, and some headphones are more sensitive to it than others.

Not all measured deviations regarding HTRF per person are relevant to the Harman Curve. People have different shapes, and hence a neutral reference speaker measures differently when the measurement includes the person's shape. A neutral reference speaker would still be assessed being "neutral" by those people (assuming they can assess), despite the measured differences. The Harman Target, an average weighted curve, only makes sense for the jig for which it was defined. It doesn't matter that a headphone measures different on other jigs or other people's ears. And as being mentioned a couple of times before, the Harman target is not a golden reference, just a good approximate starting point.

As good as I could, I've recently measured the Expanse on my own head (without any compensation applied!), and compared it to the (MID) miniDSP jig measurement

• Magenta - MID JIG; Headphone centred on the jig, so that the ear is (approx) located in the middle of the chamber
• Red - MID EARS; Headphone centred on my own head, so that my ear is (approx) located in the middle of the chamber

I understand the drop in the low frequency region, as I cannot completely keep the seal when measuring with a UMIK-1 microphone on my head. But from say 60Hz to 7kHz I would call both measurements pretty consistent. What stays consistent with all measurements is the peak around 3-4kHz, that I attenuate with about 3dB, and to my opinion improves the perceived sound considerably.

 

[MayaTlab]

You don't even need to have different people. Moving the Expanse in different positions on a jig already gives you differences.

So what did we test with the different people? Were the headphones set up consistent? How would you define consistent (position to what, pressure, angle)? What makes sense, is that the seal is consistent for variations; this is also what Sean Olive is stating: https://twitter.com/seanolive/status/1630392145965350912

Positional variation on a test rig may not always match variation across individuals. Some variables (such as clamp force for example, presence of hair, etc.) aren't accounted for, and conversely some of these positions might not be superbly representative of how a cohort of real humans would wear the headphones.

But since it's highly impractical to routinely measure headphones on a set of real humans, it is in my opinion a good proxy measurement for coupling issues, alongside tests under pad compression and tests under controlled leakage conditions.

Not all measured deviations regarding HTRF per person are relevant to the Harman Curve. People have different shapes, and hence a neutral reference speaker measures differently when the measurement includes the person's shape. A neutral reference speaker would still be assessed being "neutral" by those people (assuming they can assess), despite the measured differences. The Harman Target, an average weighted curve, only makes sense for the jig for which it was defined. It doesn't matter that a headphone measures different on other jigs or other people's ears.

Indeed and being able to assess how headphones vary across individuals in light of the latter's variation in HRTF is one of the things I'm eagerly waiting to learn more about.

However, there is a simpler test you can make to already have some valid data on that issue, based on the idea that if headphones vary inconsistently across individuals, then it necessarily and logically mean that at least all but one (if not all) failed to express the listeners' variance in (DF?) HRTF appropriately.

With blocked ear canal entrance measurements as Harman performed them, what you can do in that vein is assess the relative difference between headphones for each listener. If it is inconsistent then it necessarily means that at least all but one (if not all) headphones failed to track the listeners' variation in anatomy in a desirable way. I would have loved to see that issue being quantified in Harman's presentation.

As good as I could, I've recently measured the Expanse on my own head (without any compensation applied!), and compared it to the (MID) miniDSP jig measurement

• Magenta - MID JIG; Headphone centred on the jig, so that the ear is (approx) located in the middle of the chamber
• Red - MID EARS; Headphone centred on my own head, so that my ear is (approx) located in the middle of the chamber

I understand the drop in the low frequency region, as I cannot completely keep the seal when measuring with a UMIK-1 microphone on my head.

So you measured this by shoving a UMIK-1 in between the pad and the side of your head ? Did you repeat these measurements with other headphones ?

But from say 60Hz to 7kHz I would call both measurements pretty consistent. What stays consistent with all measurements is the peak around 3-4kHz, that I attenuate with about 3dB, and to my opinion improves the perceived sound considerably.

Mmm without questioning the method used, that would still result in highly audible differences between them to me. The scale on the left is a little bit too compressed I think.

 

[Hifivoice]

Positional variation on a test rig may not always match variation across individuals. Some variables (such as clamp force for example, presence of hair, etc.) aren't accounted for, and conversely some of these positions might not be superbly representative of how a cohort of real humans would wear the headphones.

Absolutely agree with you here. My point is that with moving the headphone around on a jig, you can anticipate on variations already. You can add hair, glasses etc. (off-topic, I already grew through my hair line , so the hair for me is less of an issue).

Indeed and being able to assess how headphones vary across individuals in light of the latter's variation in HRTF is one of the things I'm eagerly waiting to learn more about.

Yeps; the question is if some sort of personal measurement with in-ear microphones, can result in a correcting profile (as a good start), and whether a reference measurement can be defined for that.

So you measured this by shoving a UMIK-1 in between the pad and the side of your head ? Did you repeat these measurements with other headphones ?

Yes, for instance with a HD660S; here you see that due to the driver being much closer to the ear, you get measurement issues at higher frequencies. In general, I would say that these sort of measurement from 4kHz onwards are getting unreliable due to the wave length of the sound getting close to all the dimension that are present in the measurement space:

Mmm without questioning the method used, that would still result in highly audible differences between them to me.

Be aware that the UMIK-1 measurement is not "Harman corrected", it is only corrected for microphone deviations. The HEQ target curve (which is the call "Harman-inspired") has a tilt from 300Hz onwards, which explains the difference. You cannot compare those measurements 1-1, and you always need to understand the measurement conditions before being able to interpret it.

See here the title from say 200-300Hz to 1kHz from different Harman Targets (also showing they vary a lot over time).

 

[MayaTlab]

Yeps; the question is if some sort of personal measurement with in-ear microphones, can result in a correcting profile (as a good start), and whether a reference measurement can be defined for that.

Have you experimented a bit with in-ear measurements (ex blocked ear canal entrance mics) ?

Yes, for instance with a HD660S; here you see that due to the driver being much closer to the ear, you get measurement issues at higher frequencies. In general, I would say that these sort of measurement from 4kHz onwards are getting unreliable due to the wave length of the sound getting close to all the dimension that are present in the measurement space:

Which one of these is the one made on the EAR ?

Be aware that the UMIK-1 measurement is not "Harman corrected", it is only corrected for microphone deviations. The HEQ target curve (which is the call "Harman-inspired") has a tilt from 300Hz onwards, which explains the difference. You cannot compare those measurements 1-1, and you always need to understand the measurement conditions before being able to interpret it.

See here the title from say 200-300Hz to 1kHz from different Harman Targets (also showing they vary a lot over time).

Ok I understand a bit better now.

May I suggest trying blocked ear canal entrance measurements on both a DIY rig using these pinnae and in your ears ?