[Resolve]

compeletely agree



my main point on this was that, if we looked at the graphs you shared further back on how the Tungsten and Susvara seem similar and inferred from them that they were, it would be a very wrong conclusion. They really are not. So, while these graphs are very usful to glean some key aspects of tonality, their are not (yet?) able to account for a lot of the other factors that distinguish these two headphones.

I didn't share any graphs here comparing Tungsten and Susvara did I? Maybe that's someone else or I forgot haha. But yeah I'd agree that they don't sound alike. There are similarities but IMO they are different enough to where I'd expect them to be received differently too - and they also measure differently as well.

 

[Dixter]

if your the person that has completed the ear burn in and then decide to measure graphs then those graphs will have more value to your experience and you can look at the graphs and tell what your ears/brain was telling you how they sounded... its one more way to validate what a set of phones sounded like mounted on your head and confirmed with a graph of that experience... and the rest of us can look at the graph and maybe or maybe not get an idea of how they could sound on our own heads...

 

[Resolve]

if your the person that has completed the ear burn in and then decide to measure graphs then those graphs will have more value to your experience and you can look at the graphs and tell what your ears/brain was telling you how they sounded... its one more way to validate what a set of phones sounded like mounted on your head and confirmed with a graph of that experience... and the rest of us can look at the graph and maybe or maybe not get an idea of how they could sound on our own heads...

Definitely there's a benefit to being able to do the measurements yourself, and actually running an FFT just to see how the headphone behaves in situ in real-time can be very revealing. There's a sense in which having all of this equipment is effectively 'cheating', and so I completely understand if folks aren't able to make sense of it the same way that those of us doing the measurements can. And this is something where everything needs to be improved. What people get from looking at a graph isn't necessarily what the graph actually indicates, and so the onus is on us to better represent them.

This is a project that we've started with the introduction of preference boundaries. There's still a long way to, and we need to also show positional variation, HpTF variation and so on. But it's a start.

 

[goldwerger]

I didn't share any graphs here comparing Tungsten and Susvara did I? Maybe that's someone else or I forgot haha. But yeah I'd agree that they don't sound alike. There are similarities but IMO they are different enough to where I'd expect them to be received differently too - and they also measure differently as well.

yea you're right, I mixed up the source of this. It was the post below from someone else, sorry. I was referring to a comment made on that graph not yours... sorry for the wrong attribution

Graph Comparison.

 

[Resolve]

yea you're right, I mixed up the source of this. It was the post below from someone else, sorry. I was referring to a comment made on that graph not yours... sorry for the wrong attribution

Yup. Even from this result though it indicates the Susvara has meaningfully more emphasis to 4.5khz and the rest of the treble in general, and that's also the difference I've observed in comparisons for that as well.

 

[goldwerger]

Yup. Even from this result though it indicates the Susvara has meaningfully more emphasis to 4.5khz and the rest of the treble in general, and that's also the difference I've observed in comparisons for that as well.

yea I can see that.

btw, for my preference, I use the ultra perf pads with the DS which have more treble (but I think further into higher frequnecies than that). to my subjective taste, it offers a bit more sense of space and opennes with that slightly elevated treble

 

[theangelboy]

Definitely there's a benefit to being able to do the measurements yourself, and actually running an FFT just to see how the headphone behaves in situ in real-time can be very revealing. There's a sense in which having all of this equipment is effectively 'cheating', and so I completely understand if folks aren't able to make sense of it the same way that those of us doing the measurements can.

This. I learned way more about how measurements related to sounds I was hearing when I started making measurements on my janky flat-plate rig than I ever did staring for hours at measurements made by someone else with a $50k HATS. Especially since all of those "standard" measurements go out the window as soon as you do a pad swap (which I do, A LOT). Anyway, I'm well aware that my crappy homemade rig is not industry standard or comparable to anything else, but doing it myself, with my own collection, helped me immensely understand some of my preferences (like my visceral sensitivity to large spikes or dips at 3khz, and general distaste for too much in the ear-gain region). Also, some kind of measurement rig is a must for modding since humans have such terrible audio memory.

With all that being said, the measurements you posted for the Tungsten make it look very intriguing to me, but due to their price I'm going to have to wait a while and maybe pick up a used pair eventually. Even if they are "bang-for-the-buck" compared to TOTL stuff like the Sus, $2k is a lot for a blind buy (and a 12+ week wait).

But, it's genuinely heartwarming to see a small business like Mod House create such a universally lauded product on the first try. I'm definitely looking forward to reading more reviews and impressions in the future as more people get their hands on them!

 

[chrisnyc75]

Graph Comparison.

I fully acknowledge that frequency response isn't everything; nonetheless, THIS is the overlay graph I've been waiting to see. Sure, Susvara, Caldera, & Tungsten are technically in three totally different price leagues, but I think we can all agree they are also in direct competition with each other. Add Empyrean 2 (and maybe Diana MR?) to this graph and we've got a real battle of the champions.

 

[Nk1133]

Not just with a grain of salt. GRAS and 5128 results are totally incompatible and should never be cross compared in raw form. The only exception is when both are calibrated to each rig's DFHRTF, and even then the results will look different because they are different heads. This is precisely why we don't use squiglink - people mistakenly compare incompatible results like this all the time.

@Resolve yeah I know, I'm talking about the same,comparing gras FR's from one rig to another rig, not 5128 to Gras FR's.i know that graphs don't tell the whole picture but you can get a general understanding of turning.

 

[OhmsClaw]

Did some quick maffs

Here's a simulation of a class D output filter with various loads. With a 155 Ohm load of tungsten, you could be creating a couple dB boost in the upper treble, with over TWENTY DB increase at 40khz.


L = 11.26uH
Cbtl = 0.703uF



I would not put headphones on a class-D amp without an impedance adapter, at best it's gonna colour things by boosting treble, and at worst could damage your hearing or headphones and you may not even realise it's happening

Wouldn't this be entirely dependent on the transducers being capable of producing high frequency content at damaging amplitudes? Best to stick to A / AB anyhow for the application.

 

[cgarciah92]

This thread truly has it all, people doing maths to try and determine if they're going to blow their ears (or drivers) out by hooking up a speaker amp to a headphones, arguing about graphs and rigs, people asking the same questions instead of searching the thread, I just need someone to start arguing about chi-fi or whether DAC's make any sonic differences and I'll complete my audiophile bingo square

But seriously though, can't wait for my SS Tungstens to arrive, placed my order in mid-november and given what's already been said about them vs the DS and my brief time demoing them they seem like they'll be more to my tastes.

 

[Yodamanjaro]

I just need someone to start arguing about chi-fi or whether DAC's make any sonic differences and I'll complete my audiophile bingo square

Well, I DID just pick up a Modius E over splurging on a Bifrost 2/64 because I'm after the 4V balanced out, not whatever binary to real world conversion magic may occur for $600 more.

 

[Resolve]

@Resolve yeah I know, I'm talking about the same,comparing gras FR's from one rig to another rig, not 5128 to Gras FR's.i know that graphs don't tell the whole picture but you can get a general understanding of turning.

I don't think people realize just how incompatible raw data from GRAS to B&K 5128 is. I've even seen various manufacturers make this same mistake, thinking "the 5128 is more accurate, but it should still be similar", or comparing 5128 data to Harman. This is all stuff that cannot and should not be done for any reason. For people wanting to compare across rigs, you need to use the DFHRTF calibration from each rig.

 

[Nk1133]

I don't think people realize just how incompatible raw data from GRAS to B&K 5128 is. I've even seen various manufacturers make this same mistake, thinking "the 5128 is more accurate, but it should still be similar", or comparing 5128 data to Harman. This is all stuff that cannot and should not be done for any reason. For people wanting to compare across rigs, you need to use the DFHRTF calibration from each rig.

@Resolve There is no one at fault. 5128 is a new rig, until Harmon or some big companies do research and give some general STD graph to compare against and clones of 5128 available at low cost, There will be discrepancies while using FR's.

 

[Resolve]

@Resolve There is no one at fault. 5128 is a new rig, until Harmon or some big companies do research and give some general STD graph to compare against and clones of 5128 available at low cost, There will be discrepancies while using FR's.

I don't blame people for making this mistake, and yes, people need to learn how to read the new graphs. But there should be no comparisons with raw data across rigs of any kind, let alone the 5128. You can't compare raw data for GRAS and the 4128 either, and those are both on the older standard. Different rigs = different heads/ears. You cannot cross compare data of different headphones at different ear drums.

With regards to future standards, the nice thing about calibrating to the DFHRTF, which is the appropriate sound field for headphones given their use condition (on the head as opposed to at a distance like speakers), is that it can incorporate Harman or any future preference research as well. We know Harman is working on new preference research, as I'm sure will also be done by other groups, and having the old data be compatible with any future data is super useful - BUT this is the only way to do it.