[Bill-P]

And that's why I want measurements. If it can be expressed in numbers, then at least one would know what to expect.

Or if it cannot, then... there's that, too. No conclusive difference with measurements would essentially mean... well, no significant difference.

 

[jerg]

And that's why I want measurements. If it can be expressed in numbers, then at least one would know what to expect.

Or if it cannot, then... there's that, too. No conclusive difference with measurements would essentially mean... well, no significant difference.

I would argue that typical measurements (FR, THD, CSD, and to a lesser degree impulse/sqwaves) are only able to show "macro" signature changes and fixes/introduction of major issues (i.e. ringing).
 
There are "micro" sonic attributes that current measurement methods do not reveal, things like resolution, soundstage, and extension (bass extension because head seal =/= measurement apparatus seal, and treble extension because it is innately inaccurate). So if certain modifications alter those attributes, it bypasses measurements even if the ears pick it up immediately.

 

[Sonic Defender]

  I would argue that typical measurements (FR, THD, CSD, and to a lesser degree impulse/sqwaves) are only able to show "macro" signature changes and fixes/introduction of major issues (i.e. ringing).
 
There are "micro" sonic attributes that current measurement methods do not reveal, things like resolution, soundstage, and extension (bass extension because head seal =/= measurement apparatus seal, and treble extension because it is innately inaccurate). So if certain modifications alter those attributes, it bypasses measurements even if the ears pick it up immediately.

But how do we know that? If something can't be measured how can we be sure it can be heard? I'm not saying you are wrong, but what evidence do we have that un-measureable things are actually audible? Beyond subjective impression? I will freely admit that while I report hearing differences from using my NAD over the Yulong A18 I am unsure if these differences are actually measureable so if that is the case, then it could all be in my mind.

 

[Bill-P]

No, I agree with Jerg.

For instance, frequency response measurement is typically done by taking into account the highest peaks of impulses sent by a frequency sweep. The highest peak is one thing, but looking at an RTA read out, I can see there are other less high peaks that resonate out at other frequencies due to various factors (enclosure reflection, ear pads?) and those peaks are definitely audible, too. I suspect they are related to harmonic distortion, or something along that line.

I have tried to eliminate those extra peaks just to see what happens, and sure enough... extra resolution, and somewhat faster decay, but the frequency response sweep still won't show this, and I suspect CSD won't, either, since CSD deals mostly with decay of a particular frequency rather than as a whole (but please correct me if I'm wrong!).

I really need to put together my own measurement rig one of these days and conduct more thorough studies...

 

[HPiper]

No, I agree with Jerg.

For instance, frequency response measurement is typically done by taking into account the highest peaks of impulses sent by a frequency sweep. The highest peak is one thing, but looking at an RTA read out, I can see there are other less high peaks that resonate out at other frequencies due to various factors (enclosure reflection, ear pads?) and those peaks are definitely audible, too. I suspect they are related to harmonic distortion, or something along that line.

I have tried to eliminate those extra peaks just to see what happens, and sure enough... extra resolution, and somewhat faster decay, but the frequency response sweep still won't show this, and I suspect CSD won't, either, since CSD deals mostly with decay of a particular frequency rather than as a whole (but please correct me if I'm wrong!).

I really need to put together my own measurement rig one of these days and conduct more thorough studies...

I wish you would. I have seen dozens of FR graphs and said to myself, "That isn't what that headphone sounds like." I know it is a flawed science but flawed in what way is the question.

 

[ThurstonX]

@Bill-P, @jerg or anyone else, have you tried the Fuzzor mod on the outside of the array, and if so, did you apply felt on every vertical piece, or just partially?  Bill, I seem to recall you using three(?) felt strips on the outside, but I could be mistaken.  Just wondering if I should bother.  If I do, I'll post impressions.
 
TIA.

 

[Bill-P]

Yeah, I did fuzzor and something else outside for a while, I have since moved on to a more... insane method. But it honestly doesn't hurt it to try. I don't think I noticed much of a difference, but you may find otherwise.

 

[ThurstonX]

  Yeah, I did fuzzor and something else outside for a while, I have since moved on to a more... insane method. But it honestly doesn't hurt it to try. I don't think I noticed much of a difference, but you may find otherwise.

 
Thanks for the reply.  I had the full "reverse" Fuzzor (by mistake) on my old HE-500s.  Didn't bother repeating it on my current pair.  At this point, it's a matter of motivation with the HE-560s.  I'm enjoying listening to music too much, but when the urge to tweak arises, as it will, that one's on the list.
 
I hope your measurements yield something, as I want pix of the insanity 

 

[Sonic Defender]

Anyway, I suspect all of this talk of to measure or not to measure belongs in sound science. While I am a skeptic, it is certainly not a deep skepticism as first and foremost I am a music lover, and a lover of audio gear. I want nothing more than for the notion that measurements are alone not the whole story to be true believe me. My feeling is that like our knowledge of genetics; even though we are looking at the human genome, it raises more questions than answers. Musical measurement may be like that, we may be looking at everything, and yet still not understanding it. Not to mention how on earth are words ever going to be able to convey the emotional, subjective response? Thankfully in the end it really doesn't matter, what matters is how we feel when we listen, everything else is ultimately academic.

 

[StanD]

  Anyway, I suspect all of this talk of to measure or not to measure belongs in sound science. While I am a skeptic, it is certainly not a deep skepticism as first and foremost I am a music lover, and a lover of audio gear. I want nothing more than for the notion that measurements are alone not the whole story to be true believe me. My feeling is that like our knowledge of genetics; even though we are looking at the human genome, it raises more questions than answers. Musical measurement may be like that, we may be looking at everything, and yet still not understanding it. Not to mention how on earth are words ever going to be able to convey the emotional, subjective response? Thankfully in the end it really doesn't matter, what matters is how we feel when we listen, everything else is ultimately academic.

Is it that easy? In jest I could say that we could save a ton of money and effort by simply employing self-hypnosis or auto-suggestion as the ultimate mod or upgrade path. I don't think this is as complex as genetics, although we are complicated creatures.

 

[Sonic Defender]

  Is it that easy? In jest I could say that we could save a ton of money and effort by simply employing self-hypnosis or auto-suggestion as the ultimate mod or upgrade path. I don't think this is as complex as genetics, although we are complicated creatures.

I wasn't being literal per say, but I think you know what I meant so I will leave it at that.

 

[Bill-P]

   
Thanks for the reply.  I had the full "reverse" Fuzzor (by mistake) on my old HE-500s.  Didn't bother repeating it on my current pair.  At this point, it's a matter of motivation with the HE-560s.  I'm enjoying listening to music too much, but when the urge to tweak arises, as it will, that one's on the list.
 
I hope your measurements yield something, as I want pix of the insanity 

 
Well, I'm waiting on purrin/marvey to come back with some measurements of a stock HE-560, then I'll take that pair, mod it (nothing irreversible, so no cutting ear pads or anything), and send it back to him to measure so that we can get proper "delta" on how the headphone sounds like.
 
Meanwhile, I have my hands full with the Sony MDR-Z7. Lovely headphone, though somewhat very very tedious to mod... but I'm getting results that are... startling me. Almost to the point where I'm considering selling my HE-560 now (mostly since I'll be traveling soon, and then the 560 would sit unused for months). 

 

[hifimiami]

Received HE-560 about 10 days ago to replace HE-500 my impressions: increased dynamics, detail, 3D image and instrument location very natural tones.
Using with NFB7>Mjolnir>HE-560 with Q audio Silk. Experienced some discomfort but bending headband at corners (outward) solved issue.

 

[rawrster]

So I decided to audition these today along with the HE-400i. I left the shop thinking I want the HE-560 so these will most likely be my next set.
 
I have a pretty modest setup now so this should be a good step up without spending too much money.

 

[brokenthumb]

  So I decided to audition these today along with the HE-400i. I left the shop thinking I want the HE-560 so these will most likely be my next set.
 
I have a pretty modest setup now so this should be a good step up without spending too much money.

 
Had mine for a couple of weeks and they have a very addictive sound.  To me it sounds like the love child of a HE-500 and HD800.
My main complaint is I wish the pads had bigger openings like the HD800 or LCD-2.  Still very comfortable though.