maxxevv
500+ Head-Fier
Thought you would say Hugo though! ... lol ...
Firstly, all those graphs are from the same source with an identical compensation scheme. You missed the fact that I gave links from a single site.You're comparing graphs from different sources and different compensation schemes...
And you're comparing earphones with very different tuning orientations...
No one is trying to say ZSTs are reference tuned (because they're not...)
You could just as easily pick through that data and find "squiggly" graphs for "big names" too... so what? People aren't allowed to use anything but reference tuning?
Whatever works, works. I run just about everything through a HiFime Sabre 9018 usb DAC into a Cayin C5 amp. Plays well with everything from the KZ zs5 to my Beyerdynamic DT 880 600 ohm. Doesn't do so great with my Koss ESP-6, but those need power by the watt out of speaker taps...My favorite thing is plugging chi-fi **** into a Mojo. It just feels so unnecessary, but works so well.
Amen to that, I have everything that he has recorded and all of the live Blu Ray/DVD's. Also if you haven't already check Black Country Communion.If you don't already love Joe Bonamassa - you should get acquainted.
But you go on to compare them to the graphs here and on audiobudgetFirstly, all those graphs are from the same source with an identical compensation scheme. You missed the fact that I gave links from a single site.
Secondly, I'm talking about general variation of points on y axis in a graph
This all just strikes me as rather contradictory. If I pulled up random Shure graphs that "aren't flat", then you'd tell me that's tuning. But KZ ones not being flat is obviously just "random haphazard drivers thrown in a shell". That seems to be about the gist of your point?and here it is obvious that Chifi frequency responses are way more unrefined. I'm not delving into the fact that different people are deaf in their own ways and might need different tuning than the average person, to perceive the sound as flat.
Thirdly, no, big names usually have quite flat graphs even for older models.
And, no, people can listen to whatever they want. My point is that KZ is miles behind even a decade old big brand models in terms of having a decent looking frequency response graph.
Firstly, all those graphs are from the same source with an identical compensation scheme. You missed the fact that I gave links from a single site.
Secondly, I'm talking about general variation of points on y axis in a graph - and here it is obvious that Chifi frequency responses are way more unrefined. I'm not delving into the fact that different people are deaf in their own ways and might need different tuning than the average person, to perceive the sound as flat.
Thirdly, no, big names usually have quite flat graphs even for older models.
And, no, people can listen to whatever they want. My point is that KZ is miles behind even a decade old big brand models in terms of having a decent looking frequency response graph.
Why even say that ? We are talking about cheap multidrivers stuff, clearly not tuned for be used for monitoring.Thirdly, no, big names usually have quite flat graphs even for older models.
And, no, people can listen to whatever they want. My point is that KZ is miles behind even a decade old big brand models in terms of having a decent looking frequency response graph.
Damn that's good.
And the reason this bothers me is because it is a spear in completely the wrong direction, all the things you're critiquing them on are related to how they don't match your preferred tuning, or what you consider to be "acceptable measurements" (again, your preferred tuning).Firstly, all those graphs are from the same source with an identical compensation scheme. You missed the fact that I gave links from a single site.
Secondly, I'm talking about general variation of points on y axis in a graph - and here it is obvious that Chifi frequency responses are way more unrefined. I'm not delving into the fact that different people are deaf in their own ways and might need different tuning than the average person, to perceive the sound as flat.
Thirdly, no, big names usually have quite flat graphs even for older models.
And, no, people can listen to whatever they want. My point is that KZ is miles behind even a decade old big brand models in terms of having a decent looking frequency response graph.
But you go on to compare them to the graphs here and on audiobudget
This all just strikes me as rather contradictory. If I pulled up random Shure graphs that "aren't flat", then you'd tell me that's tuning. But KZ ones not being flat is obviously just "random haphazard drivers thrown in a shell". That seems to be about the gist of your point?
Pretty sure this isnt a model
Thirdly, no, big names usually have quite flat graphs even for older models.
And, no, people can listen to whatever they want. My point is that KZ is miles behind even a decade old big brand models in terms of having a decent looking frequency response graph.