DIY Headphone Response Plots
Jan 17, 2003 at 5:59 PM Post #61 of 191
JonCovenant, perhaps I misunderstood you...
Just because the HD600 comes up almost flat is not to say that it has a perfect frequency balance. It depends on what you think about the balance of the HD580, and it's all relative from there.
 
Jan 17, 2003 at 6:02 PM Post #62 of 191
Pioneer Monitor 10R
attachment.php

(click for photo)
 
Jan 17, 2003 at 7:00 PM Post #67 of 191
Quote:

Originally posted by wallijonn
J-Curve,

seeing as so many Head-Fi'ers are ripping out the driver coverings on their HD600 in hopes of mitigating "the veil", I would love to see a "modified HD600" graph and see if there is any actual change in the graph. I guess we can call the modified HD600 a HD600SDC (Sans Driver Covering) to distinguish it from the HD600CR (Clou Red) or HD600E (Equinox)
biggrin.gif




Good suggestion, could you test the 580 again with covering removed since you used it as your reference headphone?
 
Jan 17, 2003 at 7:31 PM Post #68 of 191
it would be interesting if people who own more than 1 pair of headphones could compare them with the graphs in mind and see if they concur with the graphs. i know that this may not really prove anything as we do not listen to pink noise, white noise, etc, and the sound percieved would be greatly dependent upon the recording and mixing quality, but it may show some trends which we can correlate between the two headphones.

has anyone used an equalizer on any headphone and adjusted them to produce as flat a response as possible and then compared it to one which isn't equalised, but adjusted for comparable volume levels, and then stated their perceived differences? in the same vein, has anyone used an equaliser to produce the most pleasing sound and then compared it to the unequalised headphone response graph? again, personal preferences will play a large part in what one would consider ideal, but at least one would come away with validation that in truth one is truly a bass head, mid head or high head.
 
Jan 25, 2003 at 9:31 PM Post #69 of 191
I was very surprised that the Sony Z700DJ (V700DJ) actually measured 'flatter' than the Z900 (V900), whose bass response drops off rapidly below 40Hz. And I was surprised that the Z600 (V600) actually has overboosted mids relative to the rest of the audible spectrum - no wonder why the Z600/V600 sounds 'honky'. (For the record, all of the MDR-Z###DJ/V###DJ series headphones - at least those higher-end ones - actually have overboosted mids, but those overboosted mids really stood out in the Z600/V600.)

And several headphones came close to the relative 'flatness' of the HD580 and HD600 in the low range - namely the Sony CD2000, AKG K501 and Beyer DT831.

I did notice that the Sony 7506's response curve is actually a bit thin on the upper bass and lower midrange, and a big response peak at about 10kHz. No wonder why the 7506 (and V6) sounds a bit hollow and quite fatiguing.
 
Jan 25, 2003 at 9:58 PM Post #70 of 191
I've just replaced some of the graphs which had bad signal-to-noise ratios in the low end, or where the left & right channels were out of whack due to poor earpad fit. That includes almost all of the Audio-Technica range (because they were my first attempts and the failure rate was pretty high), but also the CD2000, D22 Eggo and the DT831. [I have to mention the Beyer because there is at least one person who won't let me slip any amendments through without an explanation!
wink.gif
].

There's a few more to come too...

PS: Eagle_Driver, thanks for your comments linking graphs with actual sounds!
 
Jan 25, 2003 at 10:35 PM Post #73 of 191
Audio-Technica F55
attachment.php

(click for photo)
That's quite a chunk of treble gone AWOL. Not quite as bad as the AKG K66, but still...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top