Resolve
Sponsor: Headphones.com
I've seen some discussion here about perceived detail vs FR and where that stuff lands. My take on this is that it would be a mistake to correlate the subjective qualities that are being described as 'detail' with treble presence or emphasis - even though a boosted treble can often be mistaken for extra 'detail'. So while I have come across folks who do treat a treble emphasis as more detail, that's not at all the quality that myself and a number of other reviewers are typically talking about (certainly for me, I can't speak for everyone here). And, the reason we can be sure of this is because even if you compare the Stealth with other headphones of a similar type - like the Aeon Closed X, the Closed X has much more treble and upper treble in general than the Stealth, and the Stealth is in a completely different league for the qualities being described as 'detail'. There are also countless additional examples that sort of debunk that notion, even if there are times when people also happen to conflate the two.
Now, that's not to say that this stuff isn't captured by FR (it's likely not in THD since this has been demonstrated to not have any meaningful correlation with listener preference), merely that an analysis of a headphone's tonal balance - the way we typically evaluate frequency response - isn't sufficient to determine or predict these qualities in headphones. With that said, I completely understand the desire to suggest that a listener might be deceived or misunderstand what they're hearing when it comes to detail merely because they've confused extra treble (or lack thereof) with this quality, but I promise you that's not what reviewers like myself or others who are talking about 'resolution' or similar qualities are ideally referring to when describing aspects of the sound that are in addition to tonal balance. Of course, that doesn't make us immune from making these kinds of mistakes as well, but this is where EQ can really come in handy.
Now, that's not to say that this stuff isn't captured by FR (it's likely not in THD since this has been demonstrated to not have any meaningful correlation with listener preference), merely that an analysis of a headphone's tonal balance - the way we typically evaluate frequency response - isn't sufficient to determine or predict these qualities in headphones. With that said, I completely understand the desire to suggest that a listener might be deceived or misunderstand what they're hearing when it comes to detail merely because they've confused extra treble (or lack thereof) with this quality, but I promise you that's not what reviewers like myself or others who are talking about 'resolution' or similar qualities are ideally referring to when describing aspects of the sound that are in addition to tonal balance. Of course, that doesn't make us immune from making these kinds of mistakes as well, but this is where EQ can really come in handy.
Stay updated on headphones.com at their sponsor profile on Head-Fi.
|