[TSAVAlan]

Man that looks quite nice. Known about the plans to make the Meze planar for some time now and glad it is coming along and can't wait!

 

[JaMi]

Jude, will you be posting measurements using the leather pads as well?

 

[Skycyclepilot]

Again, the above frequency response measurement is uncompensated, and this is mostly how we'll be presenting frequency response measurements from now on.

Why? Because the random, willy-nilly use of compensations are a large source of confusion among those who read headphone measurements.

Many (perhaps even most) of the measurements you see online are made using DIY headphone measurement rigs. And overwhelmingly most of the measurements I've seen posted that were made on these types of setups are compensated. But compensated using which curve(s)? I've seen some apply the diffuse field compensation based on the data from ITU-T P.58. That curve (which I think was made using a Brüel & Kjær HATS) is not applicable to the output from DIY headphone measurement rigs (or to those from our GRAS 45CA). I've seen some apply the Harman target (which was made using a GRAS 45CA). Again, compensation derived directly from the Harman target is not applicable to the output from DIY headphone measurement rigs. I've seen some apply compensations to the output of a specific headphone from DIY measurement rigs that were based on measurements I've done of the same model of headphone. Again, that's not going to work either. Some simply apply a compensation curve to mold the raw output from the measurement fixture to look more reasonable when the raw output of the measurement rig would otherwise look completely wonky. And some who do these measurements are frequently changing and adjusting their compensation curves in a season-to-taste manner.

So, in consideration of all of the above, when you look at a compensated frequency response measurement, what are you looking at? Most of the time -- when you're looking at a compensated frequency response measurement -- you literally do not know.

I have posted diffuse-field-compensated measurements. For those, I have used only one compensation curve, which is from diffuse field measurements made by GRAS using their KEMAR measurement manikin (which we also have here). Because there is no specific DF data for the GRAS 45CA (and given the type of fixture it is, there's not likely ever to be), I have also applied that compensation to measurements made on the GRAS 45CA (which are always indicated clearly as being diffuse-field-compensated). That said, the KEMAR DF data doesn't directly apply to measurements made on the GRAS 45CA -- and, not surprisingly, I'm less satisfied with the DF-compensated output from the GRAS 45CA using the KEMAR DF data than I am with measurements made on KEMAR. Still, when it comes to compensation, I've still only used one (again, from GRAS's KEMAR DF measurements).

And I want to be clear about something else: You can not simply compensate one headphone measurement rig into another.

From discussions with many engineers in trade -- most of whom you'll also only see uncompensated measurements from -- I believe posting the pre-compensated frequency response (as it came from the measurement fixture) should be the standard, and what we become accustomed to looking at. In every measurement I post, I detail the gear that was used for that measurement. I have posted a video...

If you can't see the embedded video above, please click here.​

...showing the basics of how we perform the measurement (though we have to do a minor update to that, as we've changed the procedure a bit, such that we're no longer switching to a noise stimulus before the sweep in most cases).

We'll be talking about this topic a lot more going forward.

Some key questions to ask when looking at a headphone measurement found online:

• Who did the measurement?
• What system was used to make the measurement?
• Was the headphone measurement system that was used based on standards intended to model human perception by modeling the correct impedance (of the human hearing system)?
• How are the measurements done (how is placement determined over the fixture, etc.)?
• Is the frequency response measurement shown a product of compensation?
• If the frequency response measurement was compensated, why was it compensated, and what compensation curve was used?

As is probably clear from this post, I feel that's a vast understatement.

All this makes perfect sense. I would love to see you develop a comprehensive and extensive database of uncompensated headphone measurements, with the ability to compare one to another.

 

[Jacobal]

“$3,000... Oh well...”

Are you serious????? 3000 bucks??? I hope you’re joking. At first glance, I thought this thing couldn’t be worth more than $600.

I wasn't expecting a brand like Meze to create something only the top 1% can afford. What next? Skullcandy and Beats coming out with $7,000 headphones? I blame Focal for mass producing mortgage- priced headphones. The French guys there are the ones to start this whole Utopia trend, and now every other company wants to follow behind.

 

[Skycyclepilot]

“$3,000... Oh well...”

Are you serious????? 3000 bucks??? I hope you’re joking. At first glance, I thought this thing couldn’t be worth more than $600.

I wasn't expecting a brand like Meze to create something only the top 1% can afford. What next? Skullcandy and Beats coming out with $7,000 headphones? I blame Focal for mass producing mortgage- priced headphones. The French guys there are the ones to start this whole Utopia trend, and now every other company wants to follow behind.

Afraid so...

https://www.mezeaudio.com/products/meze-empyrean

And I agree with your sentiment. My feeling is that all these super-expensive headphones are almost totally profit. No way the Focal Utopia is that much more expensive to build than the Elear, which is overpriced to begin with. And if Beats did offer a $7,000 headphone, you'd be paying $20 for the headphones, and $6,980 for the name - and millennials would be standing in line to buy them, much like they do anything Apple makes.

 

[Jacobal]

Damn right. I’ve owned the Utopia and no doubt it’s a high-end product, but I actually prefer the sound of Hifiman He5le, tho only slightly. The only thing Utopia beats the He5 in is the eye candy department. That’s about it. You’re basically paying for a Bugatti logo. Focal had been known for creating $200,000 speakers, so the Utopia in comparison would seem like a bargain.

 

[Skycyclepilot]

Damn right. I’ve owned the Utopia and no doubt it’s a high-end product, but I actually prefer the sound of Hifiman He5le, tho only slightly. The only thing Utopia beats the He5 in is the eye candy department. That’s about it.

I just sold a pair of Oppo PM-3s, and bought a pair of HifiMan Anandas. I chose the Ananda because I also have a pair of HE400i, and I like the sound of planars. However, I'm really wondering if I've lost my mind, paying $1,000 for a set of headphones...

 

[thebkt]

Damn right. I’ve owned the Utopia and no doubt it’s a high-end product, but I actually prefer the sound of Hifiman He5le, tho only slightly. The only thing Utopia beats the He5 in is the eye candy department. That’s about it. You’re basically paying for a Bugatti logo. Focal had been known for creating $200,000 speakers, so the Utopia in comparison would seem like a bargain.

They're waaaay ahead of you.

This limited edition has been designed for collectors and the greatest fans of the series. Utopia by Tournaire Assassin’s Creed® Origins headphones (€50,000) and the special stand (€12,000)

 

[Deftone]

I havent heard it but i bet the treble is silky smooth, real shame about that price tag though. Ouch!

 

[up late]

impressive fr and i like the idea of providing uncompensated fr measurements

 

[Rowethren]

@jude Measurements of these compared to the Ether 2 would be appreciated

 

[JMR77]

I was able to listen to the Empyrean recently during a headphone event, the local distributor had it paired with a Chord Hugo 2, I was also able to pair it with a TT2 + M Scaler too.

This was one of the headphones that impressed me the most at the event. It certainly seemed to lean towards a thick sound signature, but everything felt balanced at the same time.

The Empyrean had a powerful, extended but well-controlled bass, which does not cover up midrange and treble, the later was also well-defined, clear but not harsh (I heard no sibilance but rather smoothness), detail retrieval was excellent too. Despite the great low-end it felt very spacious, with notable air between instruments and very good soundstage.

It felt very comfortable, very well constructed and light, especially compared to an Audeze headphone. Based on my limited time with it and the LCD-4 I would rather buy the “cheaper” Empyrean. Aesthetically speaking looks a bit like the headphone Batman would use.

I was told by Meze’s distributor the Empyrean will cost 2999 Euros, also that it is meant to be a statement product from Meze, i.e. that’s the best they can do under a price-no-object perspective, which thereafter may serve as baseline to develop more “affordable” hi-end Meze headphones.

 

[ToroFiestaSol]

Great looking plots!
Now that the cat is out of the bag, is possible to know which are the ear cavity dimensions of the earpads? @jude @MezeTeam

 

[SilverEars]

Just for kicks, would be nice to see compensated graphs with various compensations as well. It's really difficult to get an idea of linearity with uncompensated.

Personally, I like the comparison to other headphones, particularly to HD800(S) as I find them too strong in treble quantity.

Would also be informative with others like Utopia and HE1000 as well. I have experienced the, and would be insightfull to see the curve differences.

I won't say compensation fits what I look for in an ideal response as I've compared with what I prefer and graphs. I noticed, lowered treble than Rtings compensation to be better preferred.

If there was a library of uncompensated graphs, I can get an idea of preferred signature curve. For example, the Emperion could be my preferred headphone curve.

A library is very useful. I tend to refer to Rtings as they have a library.

@jude Have you noticed any differences of preferred target between full cupped headphones vs iems? I find there are differences, and it's likely due to the ear being involved for full-cupped

 

[Nokizaru]

I'd like to see this one compared to Final Audio D8000...