[arnaud]

 
Quote:

 
I think they'll help.
 
There would be a natural range (Gaussian distribution assuming there are no special causes) of variation between all headphones. The issue is how "tight" that distribution is for said headphones. So A and B would only be relevant if you you had one pair at each end of the distribution. Many have reported differences in other headphones like the T1s (a friend of mine has had 2 different sounding pairs); while some swear that the HD800s are "thin and too strident" (even on some very good amps) while others don't share those views in any way.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution
 
If there are wider variations in the LCD-3s, then I'm fairly certain that there would be at least the same variations (or likely more so) on the LCD-2s (either revision). Now whether those variations are wider than other top headphones is the bigger question. But to date, we have insufficient data to really make that call. My two cents anyway.

 
MH, do you have references for this (normal distribution among the population)? Reason I am asking is because the general understanding is that the response of complex systems and in particular the variations among a population, assuming we're in the high frequency range (large modal overlap)  is following a log-normal, not a gaussian distribution... It also  doesn't apply to headphones where modal overlap is low for instance.
 

 

[arnaud]

 
Quote:

As pointed out, the SR009s were of the same headphones...measured twice.

Sorry to read you got confused and thought I posted the same result with different trace color. How stupid would that be?
 
To clarify again: there are 2 headphones shown , one them (SN displayed) being measured before and after burnin, so 3 curves total...
 
I admit the labeling may be confusing, but you're borderline dishonnest with your posts (dismissing stuff while you failed to get it apparently).
 
 

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

 

Sorry to read you got confused and thought I posted the same result with different trace color. How stupid would that be?
 
To clarify again: there are 2 headphones shown , one them (SN displayed) being measured before and after burnin, so 3 curves total...
 
I admit the labeling may be confusing, but you're borderline dishonnest with your posts (dismissing stuff while you failed to get it apparently).
 
 

Thanks for the personal attack. All I said was that it was confusing on first glance. Sheesh..
 
As no serial number was given for the the first, I'm not sure if it was or wasn't the same headphone. Unless you have specific information to the contrary, I would appreciate that you PM me with this instead.

 

[arnaud]

MH: ok, I understand where you're coming from and will check again Tyll's data. If I was indeed to have plotted the same headphone response , then I will surely apologize to you and all within this thread. Apologies if you felt attacked, only meant to prevent further confusion.

 

[khaos974]

FWIW
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/innerfidelity-november-update
 
Quote:

Electrostatic Measurements - With many thanks to the Stax Mafia (There is no Stax Mafia - Ed), I've completed the first round of electrostatic headphone measurements, and the lovely HeadAmp Blue Hawaii will be winging its way back home by week's end. Please don't send anymore 'stat headphones as I'll not have an amp to use with for measuring. Electrostatic headphones measured include: two Stax SR-009s; two SR-007s; SR-Sigma; SR-507; SR-404 LTD; SR-404; SR-003; and the Sennheiser HE-60.

 

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

MH: ok, I understand where you're coming from and will check again Tyll's data. If I was indeed to have plotted the same headphone response , then I will surely apologize to you and all within this thread. Apologies if you felt attacked, only meant to prevent further confusion.

Thanks. The other issue with the observed differences in plots that we can see, is based on the variability of the measurements, even though graphs may have some variation, are they statistically significant for us to say with any confidence (say 95% ish) that they are truly different or equivalent? I am curious to know whether some of the variations we see are truly "different" or just the limitations of the measurements. I'm generally speaking here....regardless of headphones.
 
Maybe this is better in the Sound Science forum?
 

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

FWIW
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/innerfidelity-november-update
 
 

 
Thanks for the clarification.

 
But 2 is pretty far from understanding the variability of a population with any real confidence. I think you would agree?

 

[khaos974]

Quote:

Quote:

FWIW
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/innerfidelity-november-update

Thanks for the clarification.

 
But 2 is pretty far from understanding the variability of a population with any real confidence. I think you would agree?

For understanding the variability of a population with any statistical confidence? Yes, too little data.
For conjecturing that there may be be some variability? No, it's enough to raise some questions.
 
 

 

[SP Wild]

I used to get company cars, fresh off the boat to drive up until several thousand kays, before I got a new car...I even set the cars up electronically for the local market.  Long story short, two cars with the same specs and options...from new one goes way harder than the other and no AB needed, go figure, those cars were not cheap either.  One car faults before another, why?  yup...manufacturing tolerances.
 
If one cannot reliably tell one sample from another without AB tests...is it really that bad?  I've never owned two of the same headphones before, but if one sounded SLIGHTLY different to the other, who the heck cares...there is far more variation from record studio to record studio for this to be a real issue, think about it guys.
 
 

 

[Loevhagen]

 
Good point. Very valid indeed. 
 
I guess the obvious answer will be - "But we want the 1/2mm extra when we pay $2K".
 
I support your valid point, though. Easy to loose track of the big picture in this hobby.

 
Quote:

there is far more variation from record studio to record studio for this to be a real issue, think about it guys.

 

 

[arnaud]

 
Quote:

I used to get company cars, fresh off the boat to drive up until several thousand kays, before I got a new car...I even set the cars up electronically for the local market.  Long story short, two cars with the same specs and options...from new one goes way harder than the other and no AB needed, go figure, those cars were not cheap either.  One car faults before another, why?  yup...manufacturing tolerances.
 
If one cannot reliably tell one sample from another without AB tests...is it really that bad?  I've never owned two of the same headphones before, but if one sounded SLIGHTLY different to the other, who the heck cares...there is far more variation from record studio to record studio for this to be a real issue, think about it guys.
 
 

The car analogy is interesting because some research has indeed be done on variability of the acoustic response (SPL at driver's ear for an impact at a front shock tower). Long story short: the narrow band point to point transfer function varied by something like 20+dBs at any frequency above 250Hz among a population of 100 nominally identical cars taken out of the assembly line... That's an example of a complex system which is modally dense and  whose response is very sensitive to slight perturbations. The tolerancing doesn't explain it all, similar observations were made with a set of cans of coke...
 
Now, indeed the whole conversation is moot if differences are barely audible but 1) this depends on the people (and I tend to believe the crowd these 2k+ audiophile headphones are targetting does not have tim ears), 2) the discussion started because of the very reason people were reporting perceived differences among pairs.
 
Finally, relativising against over variations like mastering is a slippery argument because I would ask you then what is this hobby for?? I mean, obviously nobody owns reference recordings exclusively but well, for the most part, people spending that kind of money on audio have some good justification for it (apart from a healthy disposable income) .
 
 

 

[SP Wild]

 
Quote:

 

The car analogy is interesting because some research has indeed be done on variability of the acoustic response (SPL at driver's ear for an impact at a front shock tower). Long story short: the narrow band point to point transfer function varied by something like 20+dBs at any frequency above 250Hz among a population of 100 nominally identical cars taken out of the assembly line... That's an example of a complex system which is modally dense and  whose response is very sensitive to slight perturbations. The tolerancing doesn't explain it all, similar observations were made with a set of cans of coke...
 
Cut to the chase, you enjoy disagreeing with my subjective analogy of propulsion power with objective studies on coke, I say this cause I can't comprehend what you're saying, unless you mean too sweet for some is perfectly sweet for others?

 
Now, indeed the whole conversation is moot if differences are barely audible but 1) this depends on the people (and I tend to believe the crowd these 2k+ audiophile headphones are targetting does not have tim ears) I was saying, I would expect two identical model headphones to sound different if you concentrate hard enough, 2) the discussion started because of the very reason people were reporting perceived differences among pairs.  Which might be related to the sweetness analogy...compounded with manufacturing tolerances, no one really knows for sure exactly what anyone is experiencing.
 
Finally, relativising against over variations like mastering is a slippery argument because I would ask you then what is this hobby for?? I mean, obviously nobody owns reference recordings exclusively but well, for the most part, people spending that kind of money on audio have some good justification for it (apart from a healthy disposable income) .
 
What I'm trying to say is stop listening to the same reference tracks over and over trying to find faults...a different track can blow away the hours spent coming to a conclusion.  One engineer prefers the HD800 for his professional application, anther prefers the Fostex T50RP...or speakers etc.
 
By now if you guys aren't getting a slight idea of what output signatures an engineer was using to finalise a piece of musical art...then I give up.
 
 

 

 

[arnaud]

^^ 
haha, sorry, I was purely writing about vibro-acoustics and should have clarified! The cans were prealably emptied and the spl inside the can was measured while speaker was blasting sound on the outside. What you saw is a little variability with 1 can measured 20 times but a lot more with 20 cans measured one time (at high frequency which like in several kHz range in that example). Nothing to do with sweetness lol ).
 
The gist was that people think it all boils down to tolerancing while this is actually just one bit in the problem... The tin cans are produced in such huge volumes that tolerance is down to some very tight values. Bottom line is you have to think of the physics and, in that sense, headphone is drastically different from an assembled car (coming back to the point I made earlier about modal overlap).
 
Hope I clarified myself...

 

[m0gwai]

Received my pair today, right driver dead, not a sound, nice quality control Audeze.
 
Guess I have to wait another 2 weeks now

 

[MuppetFace]

Wow. That's horrible, m0gwai.
 
I think one of the previous posts said it best: "Does Audez'e actually bother listening to these before they ship them out now?"