[bowei006]

Quote:

If it is really important to you, it is still very easy to add back the 3dB on 20kHz via EQ.
In fact, you should do a blind test to see it you actually notice the missing 3dB or not. It should be easy if you can ask somebody to switch EQ on/off silently while you focus only to the music. I just listened to two different Kaki King's guitar tracks with / without +3dB and I absolutely can't tell a difference. In fact, it takes +20dB @ 20kHz for me to even notice there might be some difference (and I can't be 100% sure if there is a difference or I just want to hear a difference). Not too much of a surprise there since I doubt I still have much hearing left beyond 18kHz.

I doubt most have any above 18KHz. Most adults have hearing in the 16KHz range. Teen's and young adults are in the 17-18KHz range(said to be less now adays with loud music) and babies have 20-22KHz which is why we have Nyquists law of having a Sample rate over double the highest human hearing(theoretically) and so 44.1KHz

 

[Tilpo]

If it is really important to you, it is still very easy to add back the 3dB on 20kHz via EQ.
In fact, you should do a blind test to see it you actually notice the missing 3dB or not. It should be easy if you can ask somebody to switch EQ on/off silently while you focus only to the music. I just listened to two different Kaki King's guitar tracks with / without +3dB and I absolutely can't tell a difference. In fact, it takes +20dB @ 20kHz for me to even notice there might be some difference (and I can't be 100% sure if there is a difference or I just want to hear a difference). Not too much of a surprise there since I doubt I still have much hearing left beyond 18kHz.

Even if you did have much hearing left there, there are a combination of things that make music at that range unimportant.

First of all, frequency selectivity sucks at >5kHz. It's probably impossible to tell 15 and 16 kHz apart.
Secondly, through the middle ear transfer function there is a huge attenuation at those frequencies, reducing the loudness by a large factor.
Thirdly, loudness selectivity sucks, since there are no to very few outer hair cells close to the oval window (where the high frequencies peak)

But finally, no tone found in music contains fundamentals >5kHz. This means you won't even be able to distinguish the high-treble sounds. They can only affect the timbre in real music (i.e. not test tones).
Additionally, the content is going to be of very low amplitude, and the hearing system also sucks at detecting small changes of timbre at those ranges, especially because most of the content is going to be a very high harmonic in any case.

Under ideal circumstances, you might be able to detect the roll-off. That means, using test tones in an anechoic chamber.
With music there is no way you'd be able to hear this roll-off. It's not a matter of subtleties; it's beyond the physical capabilities of the human hearing system.

You are right that it's at the border of audibility thresholds, but the thing is, some people like me can hear the difference.  How big of an impact that is to the overall sound depends on what type of music you're listening to.  For example, when I am listening to solo guitar or violin tracks I know something is definitely missing there, and once I pop my iem back to clip+ I get a big boost in high treble.  And no it's not in my head, it's just the quantity of high treble I'm talking about here, it's either there or not.

Like you said, some may notice it and some may not, I just hope to point this out so that those who are planning to buy this great device have a more complete picture of what they're getting.

Like I just explained above: there is simply no way you'd be able to hear the difference. It'd be extremely difficult, if possible at all, under absolutely ideal circumstances, but it's not possible at all under normal circumstances of listening to music.

 

[bowei006]

Rikkun(Tilpo) you really should just ask for the Academus title. You read way too many audio theory books. although it is fun!

 

[Tilpo]

Rikkun(Tilpo) you really should just ask for the Academus title. You read way too many audio theory books. although it is fun!

AGAIN messing up the Latin, are we?
It's 'Academicus', not 'Academus'.

 

[bowei006]

Quote:

AGAIN messing up the Latin, are we?
It's 'Academicus', not 'Academus'.

And I say Pandacus, anyway, back to topic.
 
I didn't notice much, CLIEOS didn't notice much, and Rikkun using his Academicus knowledge states the objective details and thus, it is very hard to tell apart and like Currawong's title, it is all in your head probably. No debatting for you today. Go debate with some American next to you, they love it.

 

[ClieOS]

Actually, guitar has fundamentals only up to around 1.2kHz and harmonics only up to 5kHz. Violin will be better for detecting any missing 'air' since its harmonic can go up to 16kHz.

 

[Tilpo]

Actually, guitar has fundamentals only up to around 1.2kHz and harmonics only up to 5kHz. Violin will be better for detecting any missing 'air' since its harmonic can go up to 16kHz.

That only enforces my point. But what I mean to say is that the musical system of notes breaks down at >5KHz (at 4~ish actually), since human hearing can't detect the tonal differences effectively anymore.
Anyway, the harmonics of a violin at 16kHz will be very soft.

 

[MattTCG]

I guess we all hear differently. Perhaps even different at different stages of the eq spectrum. I'm very sensitive to hear pitch sounds or treble. Always have been. And I definitely notice the treble roll off.

 

[alflying]

Quote:

If it is really important to you, it is still very easy to add back the 3dB on 20kHz via EQ.
In fact, you should do a blind test to see it you actually notice the missing 3dB or not. It should be easy if you can ask somebody to switch EQ on/off silently while you focus only to the music. I just listened to two different Kaki King's guitar tracks with / without +3dB and I absolutely can't tell a difference. In fact, it takes +20dB @ 20kHz for me to even notice there might be some difference (and I can't be 100% sure if there is a difference or I just want to hear a difference). Not too much of a surprise there since I doubt I still have much hearing left beyond 18kHz.

 
I'm too lazy to do EQ'ing on foobar, I just do a +4 treble in e17 when I am playing violin albums like Accardo's Diabolus in Musica and it does make a difference.  I guess which gear you use will also affect the amount of roll off you detect.  I am using TF10 and it has a 15db roll off from 15-20k, so to me, that 3-4db difference from e17 will be magnified and make or break the edgy treble notes.  Add 4db and those edgy notes sound like they exist with a purpose, without that 4db and they sound like it's a whisper without importance.
 
It is fair to say that I cannot notice this 15k-20k roll off in most of the tracks I listen to.  But for this Diabolus in Musica album, since I heard it so many times using other gears, I have the memory of the quantity of the edgy violin notes.  I think my situation is pretty extreme to begin with.

 

[ClieOS]

I'm too lazy to do EQ'ing on foobar, I just do a +4 treble in e17 when I am playing violin albums like Accardo's Diabolus in Musica and it does make a difference.  I guess which gear you use will also affect the amount of roll off you detect.  I am using TF10 and it has a 15db roll off from 15-20k, so to me, that 3-4db difference from e17 will be magnified and make or break the edgy treble notes.  Add 4db and those edgy notes sound like they exist with a purpose, without that 4db and they sound like it's a whisper without importance.

It is fair to say that I cannot notice this 15k-20k roll off in most of the tracks I listen to.  But for this Diabolus in Musica album, since I heard it so many times using other gears, I have the memory of the quantity of the edgy violin notes.  I think my situation is pretty extreme to begin with.

For all seriousness, I wonder if you are sight-listening. The ears hear what the mind wants them to hear, and thus why blind test is important. Also, if you take note on the EQ measurement I have posted in the beginning of the thread, you will take note that treble boost on E17 starts as low as 1kHz (and sometime lower) which is not nearly as good a compensation as the EQ in FooBar. A +4dB boost on E17 will give a very wide boost from upper mid all the way to treble. I will be surprised if you didn't detect any difference at all.

 

[bowei006]

Quote:

For all seriousness, I wonder if you are sight-listening. The ears hear what the mind wants them to hear, and thus why blind test is important. Also, if you take note on the EQ measurement I have posted in the beginning of the thread, you will take note that treble boost on E17 starts as low as 1kHz (and sometime lower) which is not nearly as good a compensation as the EQ in FooBar. A +4dB boost on E17 will give a very wide boost from upper mid all the way to treble. I will be surprised if you didn't detect any difference at all.

It could just be that he or anyone may have just not felt the E17 could deliver on some parts, which isn't that hard to believe as this is only $150, and then analyzed the graph and found that slight drop and thus created a pshychiological explanation and further increased what one thinks one is hearing.

 

[DroidsRGod]

Does a FiiO E17 do much change for the Ultrasone HFI-780s? Should I get the E17 with my 780s or wait?

 

[bowei006]

Quote:

Does a FiiO E17 do much change for the Ultrasone HFI-780s? Should I get the E17 with my 780s or wait?

How much it changes differs from person to person. As someone moving up from an M50, you may not like it
http://www.head-fi.org/t/607256/best-headphones-under-200-for-the-highs-of-trance-and-the-lows-of-dubstep-cant-find-thread-on-this-plz-help
 
This person had the 780's and didn't really like them due to bass, in the end, I recommended the HFI 580 and DT770 (also in this thread)
http://www.head-fi.org/t/618786/choosing-over-ear-headphones-under-200
 
And they enjoyed both, they did not come back to tell me which one they finally picked.
 
Your $350 HP Laptop(edited in case readers thought HP=headphones) certainly is not a good audio device. I may be wrong and it is super good at it, but 9.9/10 and me being an Computer Enthusiast, I would say it's pretty crappy. I have a desktop ASUS motherboard with a well spec'd onboard codec and that to me sounds like utter...balony. 
 
The next thing is comfort, I like my 580's, but the comfort is unbearable at times, considering you came from a warmer bassir M50, the DT770's 80 ohm to 250 ohm sounds better (the second thread above that I linked, give it a short read, you will learn everything)
The DT770 80 ohms were good when I tried them, they were warm and had a bit too much bass quantity which would ease someone like you in more, they are an upgrade, they need an amp, which would justify the E17 IF you use the E17 per the ways we went over in the previous thread and yeah.
 
The Ultrasone's dont need an amp, and don't benefit as much as the easier to upgrade to and needy DT770 80 or 250 ohms. Some users with the E17 said 250 ohm beyers are driven adequately (most do) while a few here and there say there isn't enough power. IT depends on how loud you usually go.
Personally I would say to look at the DT770 pro 80 ohm. the thread that I linked to first and second should be read. They are very good.
 
And give it some thought. The E17 isn't for everyone, if you use it at home most of the time, a desktop DAC and amp unit would be much better, like HRT's at that range, also look at used if you are clawing for money.
 
Edited: $350 HP into HP laptop. HP may make some think I was referring to laptops.

 

[Tilpo]

It could just be that he or anyone may have just not felt the E17 could deliver on some parts, which isn't that hard to believe as this is only $150, and then analyzed the graph and found that slight drop and thus created a pshychiological explanation and further increased what one thinks one is hearing.

Yeah, but what he described does not correlate with what the graph says judging from both my experience and knowledge of psychoacoustics.

 

[alflying]

Quote:

For all seriousness, I wonder if you are sight-listening. The ears hear what the mind wants them to hear, and thus why blind test is important. Also, if you take note on the EQ measurement I have posted in the beginning of the thread, you will take note that treble boost on E17 starts as low as 1kHz (and sometime lower) which is not nearly as good a compensation as the EQ in FooBar. A +4dB boost on E17 will give a very wide boost from upper mid all the way to treble. I will be surprised if you didn't detect any difference at all.

Of cos I notice it, not only the upper mid to treble is boosted all the way, but the remaining of the frequency is recessed somewhat and it does not sound as neutral as no EQ'ing on e17.
 
I'm here to enjoy music not to argue, so if you suspect or don't believe what I am describing, so be it.  Actually i envy those who don't notice any or much of a recessed treble, your experience with e17 will definitely be better than mine.