Pretty sure it's done mathematically, rather than by eye. I don't pay much attention to their scores though on frequency response, because I don't think their target curve is quite right, especially in the treble.
Most overrated headphone brands
- Thread starter bcasey25raptor
- Start date
-
- Tags
- headphones
Pretty sure it's done mathematically, rather than by eye. I don't pay much attention to their scores though on frequency response, because I don't think their target curve is quite right, especially in the treble.
SilverEars
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2013
- Posts
- 14,523
- Likes
- 6,508
Their scoring seems very subjective to me (I guess as with any reviews out there). I can't figure out how they derive those scores. Do they compute the area of deviation or what are they doing? It seems to be by looking at by eye. Their scoring system totally sucks. Albeit it's tough to have a scoring system for audio, you can still make certain aspects objectively scored.
Last edited:
Some of these are gettin a bit more into the weeds. But still in fairly neutral territory...
CLOSED-BACK - PART 3
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#565/4011
RAW RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#565/4012
COMPENSATED: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#565/3992
The steep rise and bump in the sub-bass on this concerns me a little. So I'd probably try to take that down a scosche. And the transition from midrange to treble is a bit awkward. But otherwise not too terrible.
RAW: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#794/4011
COMPENSATED: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#794/3992
Bass resonance is too high in frequency. And the midrange is probably a little too inclined. And a few notes may get lost in the rather steep dips in the treble. But otherwise not too bad.
RAW: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#714/4011
COMPENSATED: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#714/3992
Depressed in the low-treble. And could use a bit more bass lower down, as well as some smoothing of the transition from midrange to bass. But could be worse...
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#386/4011
RAW RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#386/4012
COMPENSATED: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#386/3992
Definitely a bit U-shaped. And too rolled off in the upper treble. But the resonances are more or less in the right spots, and pretty nicely arranged. So this would not be too difficult to EQ for a pretty decent sound imo. And possibly easier than some of the other headphones which are a little closer to neutral out of the box. The one potential trouble spot might be the steep falloff in the treble. That might be fixable with some parametric controls. Or you might just have to make due without a little air on the top end... which could be ok.
RAW: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#237/4011
COMPENSATED: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#237/3992
Could be worse.
RAW: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#927/4011
COMPENSATED: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#927/3992
Could be worse.
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#346/4011
RAW RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#346/4012
COMPENSATED: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#346/3992
Too much bass! But still pretty workable imo, with some tweaking to the treble and bass response. And pretty nice flow... Actually it's not even so much the quantity or amplitude of the bass that is the problem. It's more that it's too high in frequency. If the main driver resonance was a bit lower down in frequency (ie with a larger driver), then these would probably sound pretty decent. Circa 2014 Beats signature.
CLOSED-BACK - PART 3
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#565/4011
RAW RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#565/4012
COMPENSATED: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#565/3992
The steep rise and bump in the sub-bass on this concerns me a little. So I'd probably try to take that down a scosche. And the transition from midrange to treble is a bit awkward. But otherwise not too terrible.
RAW: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#794/4011
COMPENSATED: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#794/3992
Bass resonance is too high in frequency. And the midrange is probably a little too inclined. And a few notes may get lost in the rather steep dips in the treble. But otherwise not too bad.
RAW: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#714/4011
COMPENSATED: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#714/3992
Depressed in the low-treble. And could use a bit more bass lower down, as well as some smoothing of the transition from midrange to bass. But could be worse...
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#386/4011
RAW RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#386/4012
COMPENSATED: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#386/3992
Definitely a bit U-shaped. And too rolled off in the upper treble. But the resonances are more or less in the right spots, and pretty nicely arranged. So this would not be too difficult to EQ for a pretty decent sound imo. And possibly easier than some of the other headphones which are a little closer to neutral out of the box. The one potential trouble spot might be the steep falloff in the treble. That might be fixable with some parametric controls. Or you might just have to make due without a little air on the top end... which could be ok.
RAW: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#237/4011
COMPENSATED: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#237/3992
Could be worse.
RAW: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#927/4011
COMPENSATED: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#927/3992
Could be worse.
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#346/4011
RAW RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#346/4012
COMPENSATED: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#346/3992
Too much bass! But still pretty workable imo, with some tweaking to the treble and bass response. And pretty nice flow... Actually it's not even so much the quantity or amplitude of the bass that is the problem. It's more that it's too high in frequency. If the main driver resonance was a bit lower down in frequency (ie with a larger driver), then these would probably sound pretty decent. Circa 2014 Beats signature.
Last edited:
Some open-back HPs that are close to neutral...
OPEN-BACK - PART 1
It's pretty clear that the Sennheisers are king of the hill in this category, except that there are some planar-magnetics which are better extended in the bass. The Senns have a superior response in the midrange and treble though, and better flow than most planars imo. These are a few of the better ones imho...
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#891/4011
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#891/3992
This particular plot of the left channel of the Senn HD 58x Jubilee has the best extension in the bass, and also excellent response in the treble. It's maybe just a tad forward in the upper-midrange. And perhaps also a tad dark in some spots in the treble, which is probably easier to see on the compensated plot. I expect to see a little bit of a downward tilt in the treble on Rtings' compensated plots though, on neutral HPs. So these are fairly minor criticisms. And resonances all line up well in the treble at approximately 3, 9 and 15 kHz. The bass extension on the right channel of this headphone is not quite as outstanding though.
Bass extension is a critical component in achieving a neutral response imo. (Though certainly not the only one.) The Senn with the next best extension in the bass (and decent treble response) in the Rtings plots is sort of a toss-up between three different headphones: the HD 650, HD 660S, and the Game One. We'll start with the 650 and work our way down...
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#245/4011
RAW RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#245/4012
COMPENSATED L &R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#245/3992
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#816/4011
RAW RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#816/4012
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#816/3992
The 660 has a slightly more pronounced dip between the lower and mid treble than the 650, which is fairly easy to see on the compensated plots. But very well-defined ear canal resonances at 3, 9 and 15 kHz. The 650 looks a bit more like the venerable HD 600 in it's low to mid treble range though, fwtw. Based on some comparisons here, the HD 660S should have a noticeably darker sound in the treble than either the HD 600 or HD 650.
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#500/4011
RAW RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#500/4012
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#500/3992
The Game One does not have quite as well-defined a resonance at 15 kHz as the 650 and 660S. But it is otherwise pretty good in the treble.
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#325/4011
RAW RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#325/4012
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#325/3992
The HD 600 does not have quite as good extension in the bass as the above HPs. But it has excellent treble response. Which is probably a tad brighter than all of the others above.
Some approximate rankings of the above headphones in terms of their tonal characteristics, based on the above plots...
Treble Brightness:
1. HD 600 (brightest in treble)
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#325/3992
2. HD 650
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#245/3992
3. HD 58x Jubilee
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#891/3992
4. HD 660S (darkest in treble)
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#816/3992
The HD 650 may have a slightly darker tilt in the mid to upper treble than the HD 58x. But the 58x has a few more recessed areas in the treble than the HD 650. So depending on the specific areas you're looking at, it could be more or less a wash between those two.
Bass Extension:
1. HD 58x Jubilee (most extended in bass)
2. HD 650, HD 660S, Game One (all about the same)
3. HD 600 (least extended in bass)
OPEN-BACK - PART 1
It's pretty clear that the Sennheisers are king of the hill in this category, except that there are some planar-magnetics which are better extended in the bass. The Senns have a superior response in the midrange and treble though, and better flow than most planars imo. These are a few of the better ones imho...
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#891/4011
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#891/3992
This particular plot of the left channel of the Senn HD 58x Jubilee has the best extension in the bass, and also excellent response in the treble. It's maybe just a tad forward in the upper-midrange. And perhaps also a tad dark in some spots in the treble, which is probably easier to see on the compensated plot. I expect to see a little bit of a downward tilt in the treble on Rtings' compensated plots though, on neutral HPs. So these are fairly minor criticisms. And resonances all line up well in the treble at approximately 3, 9 and 15 kHz. The bass extension on the right channel of this headphone is not quite as outstanding though.
Bass extension is a critical component in achieving a neutral response imo. (Though certainly not the only one.) The Senn with the next best extension in the bass (and decent treble response) in the Rtings plots is sort of a toss-up between three different headphones: the HD 650, HD 660S, and the Game One. We'll start with the 650 and work our way down...
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#245/4011
RAW RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#245/4012
COMPENSATED L &R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#245/3992
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#816/4011
RAW RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#816/4012
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#816/3992
The 660 has a slightly more pronounced dip between the lower and mid treble than the 650, which is fairly easy to see on the compensated plots. But very well-defined ear canal resonances at 3, 9 and 15 kHz. The 650 looks a bit more like the venerable HD 600 in it's low to mid treble range though, fwtw. Based on some comparisons here, the HD 660S should have a noticeably darker sound in the treble than either the HD 600 or HD 650.
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#500/4011
RAW RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#500/4012
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#500/3992
The Game One does not have quite as well-defined a resonance at 15 kHz as the 650 and 660S. But it is otherwise pretty good in the treble.
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#325/4011
RAW RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#325/4012
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#325/3992
The HD 600 does not have quite as good extension in the bass as the above HPs. But it has excellent treble response. Which is probably a tad brighter than all of the others above.
Some approximate rankings of the above headphones in terms of their tonal characteristics, based on the above plots...
Treble Brightness:
1. HD 600 (brightest in treble)
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#325/3992
2. HD 650
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#245/3992
3. HD 58x Jubilee
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#891/3992
4. HD 660S (darkest in treble)
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#816/3992
The HD 650 may have a slightly darker tilt in the mid to upper treble than the HD 58x. But the 58x has a few more recessed areas in the treble than the HD 650. So depending on the specific areas you're looking at, it could be more or less a wash between those two.
Bass Extension:
1. HD 58x Jubilee (most extended in bass)
2. HD 650, HD 660S, Game One (all about the same)
3. HD 600 (least extended in bass)
Last edited:
Yes! 
FInally some plots on the new Philips X2HR! These were posted just today...
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#2056/4011
RAW RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#2056/4012
COMPENSATED LEFT & RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#2056/3992
Maybe a little strident in spots in the mid-treble? But some pretty nice lift in the bass for an open-back HP (as usual for Philips).
Full Rtings Review in case anyone wants to check it out...
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/philips/fidelio-x2hr
FInally some plots on the new Philips X2HR! These were posted just today...RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#2056/4011
RAW RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#2056/4012
COMPENSATED LEFT & RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#2056/3992
Maybe a little strident in spots in the mid-treble? But some pretty nice lift in the bass for an open-back HP (as usual for Philips).
Full Rtings Review in case anyone wants to check it out...
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/philips/fidelio-x2hr
Last edited:
SilverEars
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2013
- Posts
- 14,523
- Likes
- 6,508
I always liked the look of X2 headphones, but never heard any Philips headphones personally. Looks like how a better designed Grado should look. I wished the cables were 2 sided. I don't like one sided cabling.Yes!
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#2056/4011
RAW RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#2056/4012
COMPENSATED LEFT & RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#2056/3992
Maybe a little strident in spots in the mid-treble? But some pretty nice lift in the bass for an open-back HP (as usual for Philips).
Full Rtings Review in case anyone wants to check it out...
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/philips/fidelio-x2hr
Last edited:
Haven't tried one either. At least not the better ones.
The peaks in mid-treble concern me slightly. Both the one at 9 kHz, and the slightly smaller one at about 5 kHz in the sibilant range. I normally like to see a little more of a dip in that 5 kHz area. So these might be a little "sparkly" in that region. That's just a guess though.
Except for the dropoff in the lower bass, these appear to have reasonable good flow from the treble to the bass, with the exceptions noted above. These are rather impressively flat on the compensated plot for a dynamic open-back HP, from the mid-range all the way down to about 55 Hz in the bass, give or take!
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#2056/3992
The dropoff below about 50 Hz is pretty sharp though. A more rounded-off response in that region would probably be more desireable.
These are all just first impressions from looking at the graphs btw. So take with large grain of salt.
Last edited:
Some other HPs I'd like to see plotted/reviewed by Rtings, if anyone's listening. These are in alphabetical order, but I've highlighted the ones I'm probably most interested in.
- AKG K361, K553 MKII, K52, K72, K92, K612
- AudioTechnica MSR7B, R70X, AD500X
- Beats Solo 2 Wired or Bluetooth
- Beyerdynamic DT-150, DT-240 Pro, DT-250
- CAD MH300, MH310
- Denon, all current models
- Marantz MPH-1, MPH-2, MPH-4
- Meze 99 Classics, 99 Neo
- Monoprice Monolith M1070, M1060, M1060C, M650, M600, M570, M565, M565C, HR-5, HR-5C, and Electrostatic
- Nady QH-200 (somethin cheap!)
- 1More Triple Driver Over-the-Ear
- Sennheiser HD 200 Pro, HD 300 Pro, HD 25 & 25 Plus, HD 380 Pro, HD 4.30 G, HD 559, HD 569, HD 6XX
- Shure SRH-840, 940, 1440, 1540
- Sony MDR-1AM2, 7510, Z7, Z7M2, A900
- Takstar Pro 82
- Tascam/TEAC TH-05, TH-06, TH-07, TH-200X, TH-300X
- Yamaha HPH-MT7, HPH-MT8
Am I leavin anything out?!
- AKG K361, K553 MKII, K52, K72, K92, K612
- AudioTechnica MSR7B, R70X, AD500X
- Beats Solo 2 Wired or Bluetooth
- Beyerdynamic DT-150, DT-240 Pro, DT-250
- CAD MH300, MH310
- Denon, all current models
- Marantz MPH-1, MPH-2, MPH-4
- Meze 99 Classics, 99 Neo
- Monoprice Monolith M1070, M1060, M1060C, M650, M600, M570, M565, M565C, HR-5, HR-5C, and Electrostatic
- Nady QH-200 (somethin cheap!)
- 1More Triple Driver Over-the-Ear
- Sennheiser HD 200 Pro, HD 300 Pro, HD 25 & 25 Plus, HD 380 Pro, HD 4.30 G, HD 559, HD 569, HD 6XX
- Shure SRH-840, 940, 1440, 1540
- Sony MDR-1AM2, 7510, Z7, Z7M2, A900
- Takstar Pro 82
- Tascam/TEAC TH-05, TH-06, TH-07, TH-200X, TH-300X
- Yamaha HPH-MT7, HPH-MT8
Am I leavin anything out?!
Last edited:
OPEN-BACK - PART 2: Open & Semi-open HPs with Some Bass
In addition to the Philips X2HR above, here are few more open and semi-open headphones with some bass. The response in the treble is not necessarily ideal on all these...
BEYERDYNAMIC DT 990
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#329/4011
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#329/4012
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#329/3992
Bass response on this headphone is quite smooth. But bleeds into the mid-range some.
SUPERLUX HD 681
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#471/4011
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#471/4012
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#471/3992
SUPERLUX HD 681 EVO
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#523/4011
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#523/4012
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#523/3992
SUPERLUX HD 668B
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#439/4011
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#439/4012
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#439/3992
Superlux is a budget brand btw, as noted earlier in this thread. And all three models above are semi-open. If I had to choose between the three, based solely on the above plots, I think I'd probably go for the EVO, because it seems the least strident in the treble. And also has pretty good extension in the bass for an open headphone. YMMV though.
SENNHEISER HD 599
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#408/4011
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#408/4012
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#408/3992
In addition to the Philips X2HR above, here are few more open and semi-open headphones with some bass. The response in the treble is not necessarily ideal on all these...
BEYERDYNAMIC DT 990
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#329/4011
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#329/4012
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#329/3992
Bass response on this headphone is quite smooth. But bleeds into the mid-range some.
SUPERLUX HD 681
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#471/4011
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#471/4012
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#471/3992
SUPERLUX HD 681 EVO
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#523/4011
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#523/4012
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#523/3992
SUPERLUX HD 668B
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#439/4011
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#439/4012
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#439/3992
Superlux is a budget brand btw, as noted earlier in this thread. And all three models above are semi-open. If I had to choose between the three, based solely on the above plots, I think I'd probably go for the EVO, because it seems the least strident in the treble. And also has pretty good extension in the bass for an open headphone. YMMV though.
SENNHEISER HD 599
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#408/4011
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#408/4012
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#408/3992
Last edited:
Some other neutral-ish open headphones with a few issues, for your consideration...
OPEN-BACK - PART 3
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#493/4011
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#493/3992
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#246/4011
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#246/3992
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#589/4011
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#589/3992
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#371/4011
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#371/4012
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#371/3992
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#352/4012
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#352/3992
OPEN-BACK - PART 3
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#493/4011
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#493/3992
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#246/4011
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#246/3992
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#589/4011
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#589/3992
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#371/4011
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#371/4012
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#371/3992
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#352/4012
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#352/3992
Last edited:
Couple more closed-backs that are in the neighborhood...
CLOSED-BACK - PART 4
RAW LEFT; https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#751/4011
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#751/3992
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#592/4011
RAW RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#592/4012
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#592/3992
Sharp drop-off in the low bass for a closed HP. And a bit too bright in the treble and upper midrange (around 3 kHz). Pretty good resonance structure though in the treble, esp. on the right channel.
And a couple on-ears that aren't too bad-lookin... (Wrong forum, I know.)
ON-EAR
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#1626/4011
COMPENSATED: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#1626/3992
This was orginally posted in Closed-back - Part 1, but should have gone here. Kind of U-shaped, and depressed in the lower half of the mid-range. But otherwise pretty good. Treble is a bit "lumpy", but the resonances are in the right spots.
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#859/4011
COMPENSATED: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#859/3992
Needs better smoothing from the midrange to the bass. And maybe a tad more emphasis in mid-treble. But otherwise these look pretty good. Maybe a little combing in the treble. The treble resonances in this headphone line up surprising well with Rtings target response curve. Hence, the pretty flat response in that area on the compensated graph.
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#522/4011
RAW RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#522/4012
COMPENSATED: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#522/3992
Close, but no cigar imo. Mainly because of the emphasis in the upper bass, and lack thereof lower down. I have listened to these, and that bump in the upper bass (which is probably more visible on the left channel) adds just enough coloration to muddle the otherwise pretty nice sound signature on these headphones. Maybe some EQ-ing could be used to tweak that. Or not. There appears to be a fairly noticeable L/R imbalance in the lower bass as well on this unit.
CLOSED-BACK - PART 4
RAW LEFT; https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#751/4011
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#751/3992
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#592/4011
RAW RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#592/4012
COMPENSATED L & R: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#592/3992
Sharp drop-off in the low bass for a closed HP. And a bit too bright in the treble and upper midrange (around 3 kHz). Pretty good resonance structure though in the treble, esp. on the right channel.
And a couple on-ears that aren't too bad-lookin... (Wrong forum, I know.)
ON-EAR
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#1626/4011
COMPENSATED: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#1626/3992
This was orginally posted in Closed-back - Part 1, but should have gone here. Kind of U-shaped, and depressed in the lower half of the mid-range. But otherwise pretty good. Treble is a bit "lumpy", but the resonances are in the right spots.
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#859/4011
COMPENSATED: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#859/3992
Needs better smoothing from the midrange to the bass. And maybe a tad more emphasis in mid-treble. But otherwise these look pretty good. Maybe a little combing in the treble. The treble resonances in this headphone line up surprising well with Rtings target response curve. Hence, the pretty flat response in that area on the compensated graph.
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#522/4011
RAW RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#522/4012
COMPENSATED: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#522/3992
Close, but no cigar imo. Mainly because of the emphasis in the upper bass, and lack thereof lower down. I have listened to these, and that bump in the upper bass (which is probably more visible on the left channel) adds just enough coloration to muddle the otherwise pretty nice sound signature on these headphones. Maybe some EQ-ing could be used to tweak that. Or not. There appears to be a fairly noticeable L/R imbalance in the lower bass as well on this unit.
Last edited:
Yes!
RAW LEFT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#2056/4011
RAW RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#2056/4012
COMPENSATED LEFT & RIGHT: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#2056/3992
Maybe a little strident in spots in the mid-treble? But some pretty nice lift in the bass for an open-back HP (as usual for Philips).
Full Rtings Review in case anyone wants to check it out...
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/philips/fidelio-x2hr
Doesn't look like Mr. Wheezy's gonna be on the X2HR bandwagon any time soon. This is a pretty negative review unfortunately...
I should perhaps correct the above comment that I made earlier as well.
As I subsequently learned here, sub-bass is apparently bass in the audible range below about 60-80 Hz, down to about 16-20 Hz, depending on which definition you subscribe to. Whereas I was thinking more along the lines of below the audible range which is apparently not correct.
So... what I actually meant by the above comment was that most of the rolloff in the bass (if there is any) should be below about 20 or 30 Hz... which is asking alot of some headphones. Esp. some open designs. I'll broaden that out a bit as well, and suggest that ideally, for a neutral sound (imho), there should be no rolloff in the bass region above about 60 Hz. IOW, above the sub-bass... Unless we're talking about a slope into the lower mid-range, which is a different thing.
Corrected the above.
Eagle_Driver
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2001
- Posts
- 6,496
- Likes
- 61
Today's recordings, especially popular ones, are a sonic mess to begin with. They sound way too bright and shrill on even good equipment. They sound like they've been mastered through dark-sounding consumer headphones to begin with. As a result, they sound OK on cheap equipment but ear-bleeding on higher-end equipment. There's a reason for the hyped-up mid-treble response on good mastering headphones.
Last edited:
Users who are viewing this thread
