[dprimary]

  I think it's worth noting that the amplitude scale is measured in dBr, AKA decibel reference value.
 
Disadvantages of decibel reference value, excerpt taken from Wikipedia
 
According to several articles published in Electrical Engineering[26] and the Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,[27][28][29] the decibel suffers from the following disadvantages:
 
The decibel creates confusion.
The logarithmic form obscures reasoning.
Decibels are more related to the era of slide rules than that of modern digital processing.
Decibels are cumbersome and difficult to interpret.
Representing the equivalent of zero watts is not possible, causing problems in conversions.
 
Hickling concludes "Decibels are a useless affectation, which is impeding the development of noise control as an engineering discipline".[28]
 
Another disadvantage is that quantities in decibels are not necessarily additive,[30][31] thus being "of unacceptable form for use in dimensional analysis".[32]
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decibel  
 
Like I said it's all BS

 
http://whalerider.bandcamp.com/album/was-it-only-a-dream
Was it only a dream

If not a in dB then what? Linear scale is not that useful in audio. You can convert it to pascals at 50dBSPL your 15 dB variance in your response will now range from 6,000 uPa to 35,000uPa now you are linear and absolute. 
 
dBr when comparing frequency responses is the correct way if you are planing to compare. Since the 0dB mark is in the center of the graph we would think that is not an absolute. 
 
The argument to use pascal instead of dB make little sense. The general public doesn't understand dB scale so we should pascals? They may not understand decibels but they have never heard of pascals. Hickling really needs to get out of the lab. Then as soon as you leave acoustics you have change back to dB. You can't change the gain of a circuit by 20,000 uPa, it is an acoustical unit. Since I talk to acousticians often I will ask them for everything in Pascals just to see the response.

 

[Stereocilia]

 
http://my.execpc.com/~dluisa/ArithVsLog.html "Chart reading is often more art than science"
 
How relevant is that quote.. Think about it and how that applies to headphones. Measurements, scales, and charts are great. I like to analyze but what I really want to know is how does it sound. Furthermore how do you measure the musicality of a headphone in dB's ??
 
"Tier 1" headphones are like CD's and "Tier 2" is like vinyl...Observed 16-bit digital audio dynamic range is about 90 dB.[11]
Vinyl microgroove phonograph records typically yield 55-65 dB, though the first play of the higher-fidelity outer rings can achieve a dynamic range of 70 dB.[15]  (This analogy is exaggerated) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_range
 
The headline reads 'Vinyl Album Sales Hit Historic High in 2014, Again'
 
http://www.audiocheck.net/soundtests_headphones.php  Test your dynamic range

 

[vid]

I wonder, can posts in the science section be reported for being pseudoscience?

 

[bigshot]

  Furthermore how do you measure the musicality of a headphone in dB's ??
 
"Tier 1" headphones are like CD's and "Tier 2" is like vinyl.

 
I don't understand what the heck you're talking about, and comments like this make me wonder if it's worth trying to puzzle out what you are trying to say. If you want to go down this path of discussion, it would be best to do that in a different forum. It has nothing to do with what we talk about here.

 

[bigshot]

No. A listener with speakers setup in a room is fully susceptible to F/M effects driven by the amplitude of the playback material. You're dead wrong.

 
I'm sorry for responding to this so late. Your terseness made it hard for me to understand what you were saying. I read your abbreviation as Frequency Modulation and had no idea what you were talking about.
 
But in answer to this... The sound mixer that mixed and balanced the EQ in the recording did it using speakers and ears that were affected by Fletcher Munson. They already compensated for it when they made the creative decisions when balancing levels and EQ in their mix. When you play it back on your own speakers, you don't need to account for Fletcher Munson again. A straight presentation of the sound mixer's balances would be exactly what the engineer intended. If you apply Fletcher Munson again, you will end up with something with recessed upper mids. Some people like V shaped response curves, but that is personal taste, not accuracy.
 
Also, Fletcher Munson applies to headphones exactly the same as it does speakers. Flat response is what you want for listening to music in the home if you want accuracy. The only time you need to apply compensation for Fletcher Munson is if you are calibrating response by ear using a tone sweep. Your ears would make the upper mids seem too loud, so you need to balance a little bit hot in that range. But if you are using a mike to calibrate, you wouldn't need to do that.

 

[castleofargh]

 

 
http://my.execpc.com/~dluisa/ArithVsLog.html "Chart reading is often more art than science"
 
How relevant is that quote.. Think about it and how that applies to headphones. Measurements, scales, and charts are great. I like to analyze but what I really want to know is how does it sound. Furthermore how do you measure the musicality of a headphone in dB's ??
 
"Tier 1" headphones are like CD's and "Tier 2" is like vinyl...Observed 16-bit digital audio dynamic range is about 90 dB.[11]
Vinyl microgroove phonograph records typically yield 55-65 dB, though the first play of the higher-fidelity outer rings can achieve a dynamic range of 70 dB.[15]  (This analogy is exaggerated) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_range
 
The headline reads 'Vinyl Album Sales Hit Historic High in 2014, Again'
 
http://www.audiocheck.net/soundtests_headphones.php  Test your dynamic range

why not just admit that you're wrong? at this point this is your best chance. join us and blame yourself for saying incoherent stuff.
first you talk about headphone curvesn, using a graph that has a bunch of compensations that another graph doesn't have, and still pretend like they're related because there was DB written on both. and now you just try to blame your misunderstanding of graphs on the unit used...
 
maybe next you'll decide that english isn't a proper language because the first man was found in africa?  come on. when you read a 2D graph it has most likely 2 units, and those units are what was measured. nothing more, nothing less. if it doesn't tell something useful to you, you were using the wrong graph or don't know how to read it, but it's not the graph's fault and certainly not the unit's.
if log is used and if DB came up it's because it was more practical to use, no unit was ever registered in your DNA. some guys came up with all of them so that they could work around formulas and identify rules of behavior. they didn't create the DB unit to tell you, who seem to read only half of everything, how to convert DB into "musicality".
if you're looking for that, the harman target for headphone would be a slightly better fitting graph, as at least it was created asking people to pick what they preferred.

now good luck pretending like it's directly related to the equal loudness contour you talked about the page before. as in fact it suggests the opposite. that we like headphones with a boost at 3khz, when the fletcher munson target would suggest to lower 3khz to sound flat as we hear it better. too bad.
of course if you stop looking at the wrong graph it becomes easier to understand
 
something like this

Quote:

Figure 1. Components used in ear resonance. Ear resonance is the combination of the spherical head, torso and neck, concha, pinna flange, the ear canal, and the eardrum. Real-ear measurements place the ear resonance at approximately 17 dB and about 2700 Hz.
 

that could have a practical use in telling us to change the signature of an IEM compared to a fullsize headphone compared to a pair of speakers.
 
and looking at some hrtf curves(free field/diffuse field) would also make sense to try and find out what should sound flat to most people.
 
but the fletcher munson one has nothing to do with it except in telling us that we shouldn't worry too much about ultrasounds. again please read my previous answers to you and maybe wiki the stuff you don't understand? it's not for me, it's for you.
because you were wrong there, and your wrong about something else now.
 
you're blaming a scientific unit for not being objective enough, and your point is that it's a wrong unit for not giving a good reading of something that is almost 100% a matter of taste and can't really be quantified: your own feeling of "musicality"!
 of course reading a graph is art if you pretend like you'll find some subjective values straight into a measurement. except that a graph measures what it measures and the reader's job is not to try second guessing what is hard objective measurement.

 

[Stereocilia]

The question is "How and why do members fall in love with second tier headphones?" This is NOT the How why do members get side tracked with off topic comments about how equalization can make different sounding headphones, sound the same.
 
I'm not going to deny that Tier 1 headphones have superior technicalities, the measurements back this up. However the quality of musicality can not be easily measured, it has to be experienced, something that most of us head folk already know is a personal preference.
 
Furthermore different headphones are tuned AKA "voiced" dare I say equalized for different purposes and listening experience, this becomes obvious to any Head-Fi seeker on the Hi-Fi quest.
 
What also becomes obvious almost from the start is the misleading hype, untested (BS) belief systems and false claims being spewed forth by commenters that obviously have nothing better to do. Yes I'm calling you out BigShot         

 

[castleofargh]

ok I just tried to explain things you yourself brought up for no reason. it sure makes my answers off topic, you're right about that at least. sorry for wasting my time.

 

[Stereocilia]

Off topic..Dude who can't see you coming a mile away? With handles like castle and bigshot you must think very highly of yourself, Dude your ego is enormous as your handle reflects are you some kind of super hero?
 
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereocilia_%28inner_ear%29 Science!

 

[vid]

Just nominate him for a ban - sooner the better.

 

[Shaffer]

I'm sorry for responding to this so late. Your terseness made it hard for me to understand what you were saying. I read your abbreviation as Frequency Modulation and had no idea what you were talking about.

But in answer to this... The sound mixer that mixed and balanced the EQ in the recording did it using speakers and ears that were affected by Fletcher Munson. They already compensated for it when they made the creative decisions when balancing levels and EQ in their mix. When you play it back on your own speakers, you don't need to account for Fletcher Munson again. A straight presentation of the sound mixer's balances would be exactly what the engineer intended. If you apply Fletcher Munson again, you will end up with something with recessed upper mids. Some people like V shaped response curves, but that is personal taste, not accuracy.

Also, Fletcher Munson applies to headphones exactly the same as it does speakers. Flat response is what you want for listening to music in the home if you want accuracy. The only time you need to apply compensation for Fletcher Munson is if you are calibrating response by ear using a tone sweep. Your ears would make the upper mids seem too loud, so you need to balance a little bit hot in that range. But if you are using a mike to calibrate, you wouldn't need to do that.

I didn't bother reading this; I get enough sleep as it is. Your previous claim was simply wrong, as I have no idea what this post says. This can be illustrated by anyone anywhere with a stereo and a dynamic recording. It's THAT easy. Sorry, you're incorrect, of-target, promoting a falsehood, wide off the mark, or whichever way you feel comfortable phrasing it.

Science. Repeating the same thing every day ain't it.

 

[Redcarmoose]

The question is "How and why do members fall in love with second tier headphones?" This is NOT the How why do members get side tracked with off topic comments about how equalization can make different sounding headphones, sound the same.

I'm not going to deny that Tier 1 headphones have superior technicalities, the measurements back this up. However the quality of musicality can not be easily measured, it has to be experienced, something that most of us head folk already know is a personal preference.

Furthermore different headphones are tuned AKA "voiced" dare I say equalized for different purposes and listening experience, this becomes obvious to any Head-Fi seeker on the Hi-Fi quest.

What also becomes obvious almost from the start is the misleading hype, untested (BS) belief systems and false claims being spewed forth by commenters that obviously have nothing better to do. Yes I'm calling you out BigShot         

No need to be aggressive here.
Still I think the science and understanding of EQ does belong here. We have folks falling in love with EQed second tier headphones. You also have folks believing that high end headphones can be emulated with EQ.

 

[bigshot]

  The question is "How and why do members fall in love with second tier headphones?" This is NOT the How why do members get side tracked with off topic comments about how equalization can make different sounding headphones, sound the same.

 
The reason people fall in love with second tier headphones is because they can be EQed into sounding like top tier headphones.

 

[bigshot]

I didn't bother reading this; I get enough sleep as it is.

 
Congratulations! You win the prize! You have progressed from calmly talking about things with people in a thread to ad hominem insults and out of hand dismissals faster than anyone ever has at Sound Science! Keep up the good work.

 

[Stereocilia]

  Amps have DRC buttons to fix that. Just pop that button on and it's the same response at any volume. Works like a charm.

I'll press that DRC button at Best Buy

you keep on pressing that I believe button..