Quote:
Originally Posted by Graphicism /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Funnily enough your preference of headphone is expensive; HD800's, PS1000, SR-007's, Ed8's ~ so if it has a high price tag you tell yourself it must be good and noticeably different, yet you don't play the same game on the source.
|
The simple and OBVIOUS answer is that these headphones have large differences in frequency response curves. Amp's and DAC's typically don't.
Quote:
| So despite this 'obviously financial disadvantageous' SR published the article in 1998 and continued presumably for the next 10 years to promote and 'talk up' amplifiers, DACs, CD players and so on. Almost as if the article was never even printed? |
Yep. Because people like you and a lot of people here refused to acknowledge the results. People buy these audio magazines to read how "clean and transparent" the sound is, how it made the listener's toes tap, etc. - that's what sells magazines.
Quote:
| And I can use a stethoscope, it doesn't make me a doctor. Your choice of soundcard could be limited to producing 20Hz to 20kHz (especially as you don't buy quality source) and therefore you'll hear more than you should. Don't you see what I'm saying, when I do the tests directly out of my soundcard using software I can hear them all, even the ones only a Dog or a Dolphin can here, and I am neither. |
Okay so that made absolutely no sense to me. I think what you're trying to say is that using your web-based tests, you can hear test tones beyond 20khz. This leaves three possibilities. 1) you are actually a dog or non-human animal, 2) you have supranormal hearing, or 3) the test tones were not pure sine waves, but blended tones that have lower frequencies mixed in. The fact that you claim to have downloaded web-based test tones and not a sine-wave generator suggests #3. The quality and thought put into your responses suggests #1.[/QUOTE]
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwatkins /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Can I just say thankyou to SmellyGas for giving your interesting views. At times, this forum can be a bit of an echo chamber, so I've enjoyed readng your posts. Your position would seem to make sense intuitively. (Not that it makes my decision for a dac to replace my onboard laptop audio any easier).
|
Thanks, man. Most of the stuff I write is basically the position argued and supported by the writers and engineers who contribute to The Audio Critic magazine. Needless to say, they don't have a very large advertising budget.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bmac /img/forum/go_quote.gif
SmellyGas, you figured it out. This whole audio business, the websites, forums, trade shows, all of it, was really just part of an elaborate rouse to see if you would notice that it was just a big scam. Congratulations on figuring it out. Jokes over people, go about your business. Nothing to see here.
|
You're mostly correct. The whole audio business is essentially driven by sales and marketing. When you walk into an audio retail showroom, are you met with engineers? Nope. You're met with SALESpeople. They're GOOD salespeople, and they're good at selling you things. Nobody disagrees that transducers (speakers, headphones) differ in how they sound. This has even been confirmed experimentally (blind listening tests). However, when it comes to things like cables, DAC's, amps, green markers on CD's, etc. it all comes down to the basic question - are there measurable differences that are compatible with audible differences? In most cases, the answer is no. That is the big scam of audio.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shike /img/forum/go_quote.gif
You're missing a key point of his argument, which is "assuming nothing is deficient". In other words if A measures the same or so close to B they sound the same. With onboard sound you have to worry about crosstalk, underpowered output stages, interference . . . all of which gets worse with a laptop due to placement of parts.
|
Thank you for being one of the few people who actually READS what I write.
Quote:
| As for hearing massive differences in headphones, it depends on the headphones. A blind test with Grado vs. Grado would be quite hard I imagine if they have similar FR and square wave response. |
I have never A/B'd two Grado's, but I have A/B'd Sennheiser 535 vs. 580 and 580 vs. 650, and for each, the difference is immediately audible to me. However, if two headphones had nearly identical FR curves, similar distortion vs. frequency, etc., then they would probably be hard to tell apart.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phelonious Ponk /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I can hear clear signatures among my headphones -- HD580, ATH-AD700, Etymotics ER6 -- but I can source the more efficient Etys and ATs through just about anything -- any of several amps I've had and still have, old receivers, my iPod Touch, or even straight out of my MacBook Pro and the differences are subtle enough that I'm not at all sure I'm not imagining them, subtle enough that when listening blindly, I can't identify them.
Could be my hearing, but then again there are lots of things I can hear, like those headphones, the differences between masters of the same recordings, sometimes even, mike placement and choice. So I suspect our controversial poster is more or less right. Are there differences? Probably. Are they "night and day?" That's just silly. If you've got a good quality DAC and amp, both of which have respectably low noise and distortion, appropriate input and output impedances, enough power to supply good headroom and flat response...spend your money on music and transducers. MHO. YMMV. Etc.
P
|
Exactly! Everybody here can tell you different headphones sound different. Nobody will argue that they measure differently. On the other hand, if there are no significant measurable differences in equipment, how COULD their possibly be audible differences?
