[nordkapp]

Except when you realize that he meant 10 out of 100

dumb

 

[Pirakaphile]

Well, probably mostly because of budget. Or lots of top of the line gear is so perfect that it takes the enjoyment out of a lot of music. Or once you get a really good headphone you usually feel compelled to pair it with similarly priced sources and you start getting angry at all the money running away from you. 
 
I guess second-tier for me means that it's a well performing can that usually falls pretty close to ideal on the price/performance ratio. Who wouldn't like that? Once you make your millions it's easy to spend money on more expensive models, but with a budget you usually get the best you want to afford and believe that it's the best you could get anyway.
 
Or a multitude of other reasons that I can't care to think about because who gives a damn? It's just people's opinion on their own cans, ask em yourself!

 

[cjl]

  Well, probably mostly because of budget. Or lots of top of the line gear is so perfect that it takes the enjoyment out of a lot of music. Or once you get a really good headphone you usually feel compelled to pair it with similarly priced sources and you start getting angry at all the money running away from you.

You really don't need to spend a bunch of money on sources though - they're all audibly perfect past a certain (fairly low) pricepoint as long as they were designed competently. Also, perfect gear shouldn't take the enjoyment out of music, and if you enjoy a bit of bass boost, or some kind of coloration, an EQ is a hell of a lot cheaper than trying to find just the right level of euphonic inaccuracy in a pair of headphones.

 

[Pirakaphile]

  You really don't need to spend a bunch of money on sources though - they're all audibly perfect past a certain (fairly low) pricepoint as long as they were designed competently. Also, perfect gear shouldn't take the enjoyment out of music, and if you enjoy a bit of bass boost, or some kind of coloration, an EQ is a hell of a lot cheaper than trying to find just the right level of euphonic inaccuracy in a pair of headphones.

True, budget products like the Grado RS80, or Schiit's Magni and Modi get pretty damn good sound out of any kind of music. It's the little teeny fractions and feelings that you're paying for afterwards I guess. But then again, you can EQ frequency response and such, but no matter how much you EQ you can't change soundstage from nothing to concert hall. Nor can you turn a closed can into an open one with EQ. I guess it's all preference for what kind of sound you want from your headphone in the first place. Then you can EQ the little bits in.

 

[vid]

  no matter how much you EQ you can't change soundstage from nothing to concert hall. Nor can you turn a closed can into an open one with EQ.

 
Cite your sources? I assume by eq you mean digital filtering in general, too.

 

[Pirakaphile]

   
Cite your sources? I assume by eq you mean digital filtering in general, too.

By EQ all I mean is frequency response changing. I don't use it at all, and I don't have much knowledge on the subject, but from what I know it's the position and size of the driver that gives soundstage, as well as padding, the ability for the headphone to get the reverbrations of a concert hall, and a gazillion other physical differences. However, I'm just assuming things based on my understanding, so if I'm wrong and an in-ear can produce the technical clone of a concert hall live, tell me where I'm going wrong. In my experience, I've never heard any headphone or speaker that gets the sound of a live concert, though I haven't listened to a wide array of equipment yet. 

 

[bigshot]

Soundstage can be manipulated by using DSPs in a 5.1 speaker system. Headphones don't generally have soundstage. They are a straight line through the middle of the head.

 

[vid]

If you're looking for temporal effects (echo), look for temporal filters. On the other hand, regular eq was used from what I recall by Wightman & Kistler for their (fairly well cited) two-part paper, Headphone simulation of free-field listening, to match headphones to speakers in sound localization.

 

[Redcarmoose]

Soundstage can be manipulated by using DSPs in a 5.1 speaker system. Headphones don't generally have soundstage. They are a straight line through the middle of the head.

I think there are two different schools of thought on EQ, I myself don't use it but believe headphones have their own particular sound characteristics.

Example could be record a gong then try to EQ it. There will always be a a character. Thus you can only go so far as to make a headphone or headphone complete system change with EQ.

Headstage I would think varies between headphones and again your only going to be able to change it so much. This is the interesting reason why every pair reacts different to DSP in the soundstage/headstage illusion of space outside the listeners head.
If all were truly the same open back and closed back to would be the same but mainly open back have a larger headstage. IMO


In my limited experience I have also found closed back that leak sound tend to have a larger headstage than closed back that contain sound inside?

 

[bigshot]

DSPs are not equalization. They alter the timing of the various channels in a 5.1 system to create space by manipulating phase. It creates a dimensional sound field around you. Headphones can't do that because they only have two channels and they are strapped directly to your ears.

 

[BlackbeardBen]

DSPs are not equalization. They alter the timing of the various channels in a 5.1 system to create space by manipulating phase. It creates a dimensional sound field around you. Headphones can't do that because they only have two channels and they are strapped directly to your ears.

More clearly stated, DSP is not limited to equalization, but equalization is most certainly a very useful form of DSP.

 

[Redcarmoose]

DSPs are not equalization. They alter the timing of the various channels in a 5.1 system to create space by manipulating phase. It creates a dimensional sound field around you. Headphones can't do that because they only have two channels and they are strapped directly to your ears.

But, there there is the pure illusion of space inside your head in relation to the signal. Turning a switch and making even stereo into mono would be one of the most simple of ways to compress the headstage.

And again in mono it is still going to be up to the character of the heaphones to show us a wide or narrow headstage. Same as some speakers can sound super wide making the sound stage seem to be coming from other than just the speakers.

 

[Redcarmoose]

Another strange belief on my part actually deals with how different equipment seems to change headstage. Some equipment seems to widen it and others compress the field. This is all just from listening tests as I would not know how to measure it otherwise?

 

[bigshot]

But, there there is the pure illusion of space inside your head in relation to the signal. Turning a switch and making even stereo into mono would be one of the most simple of ways to compress the headstage.

 
Then the spec involved would be channel separation, which would be something the sound mixer who produced the album (and to a much lesser degree the amp) would be responsible for.

 

[vid]

I myself don't use it but believe headphones have their own particular sound characteristics.

 
Have you ever heard these innate sound characteristics, or are you speculating that they may exist?