well neutral would be part of what makes it feel natural. I do personally tend to give a lot of credit to frequency response in my appreciation of music. probably more than a lot of audiophiles, so perhaps you're right that I'm biased that way.
True with every instrument, each individual has its character which may be better for certain purposes. However, the goal in recording/reproducing is not to alter that.
If a reproducing system provides an accurate representation of the goal of the recording, how is "musicality" separate from that?
We define "detail" and "tone" as response variations. Headphones an speakers may intentionally emphasize some frequencies and de-emphasize others to create "detail" or "tone", but those fall outside of general preference of listeners. The Harman headphone curve study showed this. Their resulting curve showed only emphasis required for headphones because of the nature of that acoustic system, and no preference for frequency-emphasized "tone".
Well, my daily-driver ear-buds are under $50, and are both "musical" and "neutral". So I guess, at least in my case, my "endless" had an end.
I’m....I guess a bass head. So going to meets and listening to the Sony R-10 and AKG K1000s or for that matter all the Stax gear, I was always underwhelmed. And that was my introduction to close to flat or the Head-Fi talk of flat.
I’m a musican and a lover of music. Though from Head-Fi I’ve actually met electrical engineers and folks completely scientific minded. In fact obviously due to what ever mankind’s latest scientific levels are at.....much of the time they delineate the increase of our art/science here at hand. You could say our sonic playback is far from the Edison cylinders. And of course we have music playback worlds improved from the 1930s. And...I respect that, I respect what ever “tests” and testing graphs need to be implemented to further the cause.
Still much of those legendary “flat” headphones seemed like tweeters with the room response missing. I still think most headphones are missing something that speakers are capable of doing effortlessly.
I guess I’m just messing the curve up with bass, trying to add the room response. It’s due to that missing X factor that I still believe the graphs could be good science for stereos and speakers, though ......headphones.... not so much.
I use neiutral as a term for the calibration of the response. If it's balanced, it's neutral. If it's colored, it isn't. Variation in room acoustics of recording venues is baked into the recording. It has nothing to do with the calibration of the playback equipment.
I realize that audiophiles love to go to the extremes of abstract theory, but here is such a thing as perfection within the tolerances of human hearing. All that matters is what we can hear, so that is all I care about.
Natural is not neutral. Some of the above comments mentioned that neutral means a flat frequency response but in my view, this is wrong. Ok, headphones X have a very flat response, let's say, but this does no mean it will creat or reproduce a neutral sound because you can not judge the headphones in isolation, it must be judged within the entire system, source-amplifire and headphones. There is a relationship between the amplifier and the headphone, between the output impedance of an amplifier and the headphone. Even if the headphone has a flat frequency response, and so does the amplifier, together they might produce a frequency response that is not flat at all. Two comments above have mentioned the context and considering the flat frequency response theory, I find this to be correct if we relate the neutrality to a flat frequency response.
Any kind of distortions plus noise will influence the dynamic behavior of the impedance and this will affect the sound and will result in a non-neutral sound. My conclusion is that neutrality is a purely subjective perception and it can only be mentioned and related to the context and to another pair of headphones using the same system, the same source, amp, and cables. I would like to see a more objective approach to the reviews and will like to read more of the context in which a reviewer is doing the review, including the cultural context related to music and the way the reviewer likes to hear his music, if he likes more bass, or more treble, or more medium frequency, because if you like more bass, then, an audio system with less bass will be for you less neutral and you will say it and so on. The most reviews I like are the ones that are put into the context but the ones that do not use the neutrality word because it really means nothing.
Less distortion of any kind plus less noise = clearer and cleaner sound.
Less phase distortion = a better soundstage.
Less noise = blacker background
3D = the manufacturer plays with the phase of the signal (sound)
Response with headphones may be unnatural and an approximation because headphones are an unnatural approximation of the way recorded music is intended to be heard. The missing element is space, and that has an effect on response. Speaker systems in rooms can be either flat and balanced or not. A balanced response is a good thing always, and sorta balanced is better than making no attempt at all.
My conclusion is that neutrality is a purely subjective perception and it can only be mentioned and related to the context and to another pair of headphones using the same system, the same source, amp, and cables.
All that would matters if most headphones were close to neutral. Headphones are massively flavored and are the element of the chain that color the music the most. Therefore we don't have to care about perfect conditions to evaluate their sound response, like : same pads, same model number, same ear shape, same head position, same music preference, same reference, etc. That would be like using a microscope to determine if a black guy has darker skin tone than a white guy.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
