[zolkis]

Not to nit-pik, but a human ear and our description of what it is picking up is actually purely subjective, nothing objective about it. From that perspective any type of valid, even if imperfect, measurement would be definition be objective in comparison. But I get what you mean.

 
Actually we know quite a lot about the physiology of hearing, we know about the "subjective" Fletcher-Munson curve, there are in-canal measurements etc. Studies show the correlation between "objective" measurements and preferred "subjective" sound quality seems to be quite straightforward, but I agree it's not an exact science . Anyway, I think if something is off, most people can hear it, even though there is wide variety of personal preferences and hearing capabilities. That is (part of) the basis of operation for head-fi as well .
A few links for the interested:
 
HP study: Relationship between Perception and Measurement of Headphone Sound Quality
An interpretation: http://seanolive.blogspot.fi/2013/04/the-relationship-between-perception-and.html
A forum about it: http://www.hydrogenaud.io/forums/index.php?showtopic=104155
And of course a warning from Headroom: http://www.headphone.com/pages/evaluating-headphones

 

[zolkis]

Well headphones measurement is a difficult thing, and in most cases a trained human ear is more objective... 

I guess this needs some context: what I meant was that headphones measurements require such skill and experience (because after all it's an interpretation of raw measured data), that is comparable to the skills and experience required to call someone a trained listener. I have "perfect pitch" hearing, and I can clearly hear many issues which correlate with measurements, yet I don't consider myself to have trained ears - but I know such people, and they are amazing. There are not many sources of reliable headphones measurements, and not many trained ears either. What is more interesting that people without any training do hear things which correlate with objective measurements. Therefore if there is consensus about something in a representative (like this) forum, I pretty much trust it, or at least consider it seriously.

 

[Levaix]

I'm a bit late to the party, but I'll throw in a recommendation for the Purity Audio KICAS. Discontinued, but the used prices can be extremely reasonable. I have the "Caliente" version, and it offers a very fast but meaty sound with awesome bass. I don't own a TH900, but I was able to try it out on my system last fall with awesome results.

 

[Sonic Defender]

In the interest of clarification, I am not a pure objectivist per say; I also respect the subjective side of the hobby equally and I realize that subjective descriptions and impressions aren't categorically inferior. Both objective and subjective are important, and I did get what you meant (and I agree completely) zolkis about there being a highly subjective aspect involved with interpreting "objective" measurements.
 
In an interesting, but only vaguely related way, there has been research that looked to see whether or not experienced judges, police officers, and parole officers can tell whether somebody is lying to them better than non-professionals could. It turns out they can't. This is kind of the objective versus subjective thing if we consider the clinical experience of the judges etc as objective and the in-experienced lay-people as subjective. I think in this hobby we need a healthy blend of both and one without the other is an incomplete picture at best.

 

[Gibalok]

  Larry Carlton and Robben Ford - Live in Tokyo....really nice.
 
 
HS

Another masterpiece! Appreciated 

 

[HemiSam]

  Another masterpiece! Appreciated 

 
 
Glad you enjoyed it.  I've listened to that recording many times since I discovered it.
 
You might also like Jerry Granelli.  News From the Street CD/album....my favorite track being Sad Hour.  It's one of the tracks I use to test equipment.    
 
HS

 

[germay0653]

   
Actually we know quite a lot about the physiology of hearing, we know about the "subjective" Fletcher-Munson curve, there are in-canal measurements etc. Studies show the correlation between "objective" measurements and preferred "subjective" sound quality seems to be quite straightforward, but I agree it's not an exact science . Anyway, I think if something is off, most people can hear it, even though there is wide variety of personal preferences and hearing capabilities. That is (part of) the basis of operation for head-fi as well .
A few links for the interested:
 
HP study: Relationship between Perception and Measurement of Headphone Sound Quality
An interpretation: http://seanolive.blogspot.fi/2013/04/the-relationship-between-perception-and.html
A forum about it: http://www.hydrogenaud.io/forums/index.php?showtopic=104155
And of course a warning from Headroom: http://www.headphone.com/pages/evaluating-headphones

Sounds like the work PSB, Paul Barton, is doing with his speakers.  Correlating subjective preference with objective measurements.  zolkis, are you Paul Barton?

 

[zolkis]

Sounds like the work PSB, Paul Barton, is doing with his speakers.  Correlating subjective preference with objective measurements.  zolkis, are you Paul Barton?

 
I am no way such a fine gentleman . However, Mr Barton is not alone with that ars technica .

 

[Sonic Defender]

 
Sounds like the work PSB, Paul Barton, is doing with his speakers.  Correlating subjective preference with objective measurements.  zolkis, are you Paul Barton?

Paul Barton is up here, not in Finland! Well he was anyway here in Ottawa back in the day.

 

[up late]

Well headphones measurement is a difficult thing, and in most cases a trained human ear is more objective... Apart from that, if many, actually most people like the KG designs more, it increases enormously the likelihood of being correct, even if there are factors like the sunk cost fallacy. However, since "facts" need to have 100% likelihood (by definition),  I degrade my expression to a literary idiom . Are things fine now?

wasn't talking about headphone measurements or qualitative evaluations of cans and amps. was just trying to establish if there is any objective evidence supporting the claim that stax amps don't adequately drive their cans. surely this is something that could be ascertained through objective testing on the bench.

evaluation by ear is subjective no matter how closely and often it correlates with objective results. audiophile logic - often baffling but always endearing

Not to nit-pik, but a human ear and our description of what it is picking up is actually purely subjective, nothing objective about it. From that perspective any type of valid, even if imperfect, measurement would be definition be objective in comparison.

yep

 

[up late]

You're funny.  Thanks for the chuckle.  


Listened to the TH900's again last night.  These continue to grow on me and I now feel like a made a sound purchase vs another off the cuff I'm in the mood buy     I'm in my late 40's so the peaky treble is not my friend.  It seems to be taming further which is a good thing.  Whether it's brain burn-in or electro/mechanical burn-in I certainly don't want to debate, but they are smoothing out.  I've been listening to the same musicians repeatedly as that is the only way my simple mind can determine whether indeed I am hearing a change with time.

If anyone is considering the 900's with a Woo WA7...both beautiful objects that perform well....I think you will be quite pleased.

HS

thanks! and i wasn't even trying.

glad the th900 is growing on you. you might become inseparable. that could be funny too.

 

[up late]

Glad you enjoyed it.  I've listened to that recording many times since I discovered it.

You might also like Jerry Granelli.  News From the Street CD/album....my favorite track being Sad Hour.  It's one of the tracks I use to test equipment.    

HS

fan of robben ford's playing btw

 

[Sonic Defender]

Based on years of reading about the TH 900, and knowing how much I enjoyed the D7000 when I owned it I fully expect to be very happy with the 900. I think my amp is rock solid and my DAC is up to the task so really there isn't much to worry about other than finding enough time to enjoy!

 

[kugino]

Based on years of reading about the TH 900, and knowing how much I enjoyed the D7000 when I owned it I fully expect to be very happy with the 900. I think my amp is rock solid and my DAC is up to the task so really there isn't much to worry about other than finding enough time to enjoy!

I loved my d7000. they're more "fun" than the th900 and I felt they have more slamming or thumping bass than the th900. but the th900 are superior in most ways. better detail. wider soundstage. more refined. better bass. I think you'll like the th900 if you were fond of the d7000.

 

[Whazzzup]

Well im at my river house getting intimate with th900 and hugo. Dominik euleberg bliss