[Czilla9000]

<Puts on flame retardant jacket>
 
I agree with you guys that cables do not make a difference for solid engineering reasons. I am somewhat skeptical, however, of the DBT methodology. I hope someone here will put my unease to rest.
 
What I sometimes wonder if anyone could identify different headphones, yes headphones, under DBT testing. Surely you would hear differences. However, could you really identify which headphone was which consistently...especially if you had no foreknowledge of each headphones characteristics?
 
Besides - as cable DBT has shown - you might be fooled into thinking you were listening to a different headphone when the headphone was never really switched. But no one seriously argues that headphones don't make a difference. 
 
EDIT: Based on some of the responses thus far I think I should clarify.  I'm not arguing that headphones have no differences. I'm arguing that under DBT conditions you might FALSELY conclude that they don't. I'm questioning whether DBT would give a false negative. If I need to provide more clarification let me know.

 

[mythless]

Well, I believe there is, and I've ask family members to see if they can tell the difference, it's not a DBT, but they don't know the price difference between them either, which one is cheaper or expensive nor which companies make them.  All they know is they sound different, and which one they like better. 
 
Edit: I should clarify, hearing the difference in sound signature is somewhat easier to the difference, but detail and such are not. 

 

[Uncle Erik]

Have you seen Tyll's measurements?  The differences are real, can be repeatedly tested and measured.  Perhaps some would have a hard time telling sound signatures apart, but you know the claims manufacturers make aren't a load of fertilizer because they can demonstrate it.
 
Cables have nothing to back them up.  UFOs, ghosts and Bigfoot have more credible evidence.  Even ghost hunters attempt to use scientific tools to measure a "presence," while cable manufacturers insist that every scientific tool is broken, worthless and totally inaccurate because they tend to discredit their attempt to sell $20 of materials for $500.

 

[Somnambulist]

Trying a few out would answer your question.

 

[Czilla9000]

Not to be snobish, but what I'm asking is NOT the question most of you are answering....please read the actual thread and not just the title. Don't jump to conclusions based on the name of the thread. The thread title is get you to click the thread and, hopefully, read it.
 
It you actually read the thread and did not understand what I was getting at, I'm sorry for not being clearer the first time around.

 

[Meliboeus]

With the same track being played as a reference and phones swapped durning playback i think i would be able to tell "which is which" blind, at least if we talk about consistently different models...a pair of HD650 and a Dt-880...it would be more difficult to tell a Sr-60 and an Ms-1 apart.
 
Instead, if you refer to a less controlled situation like someone plays a track at random, then swaps phones on my head and puts on another record... i think i'd fail the test, as it would be like trying to evaluate the transparency of mp3 compression against lossless comparing different albums, quite difficult.

 

[jcx]

http://home.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_crit.htm give frequency response thresholds that have been distinguished in DBT
 
looking at headphone frequency response graphs its pretty clear no different models come close to matching well enough over frequency to "sound the same"
 
Linkwitz headphone subjective eq proceedure http://www.linkwitzlab.com/reference_earphones.htm suggests the resolution possible with subjective judgments
 
yet another way to look at the problem is the fact that the SVS Realizer can make a (very good) headphone sound remarkably like a range of different speaker/room combinations http://www.smyth-research.com/technology.html
 
it seems highly likely that a person could train to identify some set of headphones by model entirely by listening tests - particularly with selected test signals like sweep center frequency 1/3 ocative pink noise

 

[mythless]

Of course it can produce a false negative.  People vary, each will produce a different result, now if you're gonna talk statistically that's completely different. 

 

[krmathis]

No, they are all 100% identical. Both in design and the sound they output.

 
Well, seriously. I may not be able to tell exactly what make/model it is, but should (hopefully) come a bit close.

 

[Jack C]

I tried it the other day: both the DT990/600 and DT880/600s feel identical physically. So I had both setup with a splitter, closed my eyes, grabbed one and tried to guess which one it was based on what I remember about their signatures. It was pretty easy to tell. 
 
We are not talking about little differences here. 
 
The same thing with speakers: it's easy to tell them apart.

 

[aimlink]

Quote:

<Puts on flame retardant jacket>
 
I agree with you guys that cables do not make a difference for solid engineering reasons. I am somewhat skeptical, however, of the DBT methodology. I hope someone here will put my unease to rest.
 
What I sometimes wonder if anyone could identify different headphones, yes headphones, under DBT testing. Surely you would hear differences. However, could you really identify which headphone was which consistently...especially if you had no foreknowledge of each headphones characteristics?
 
Besides - as cable DBT has shown - you might be fooled into thinking you were listening to a different headphone when the headphone was never really switched. But no one seriously argues that headphones don't make a difference. 
 
EDIT: Based on some of the responses thus far I think I should clarify.  I'm not arguing that headphones have no differences. I'm arguing that under DBT conditions you might FALSELY conclude that they don't. I'm questioning whether DBT would give a false negative. If I need to provide more clarification let me know.

I'd wager that this would be easy with some headphones and not so easy with others.
 
What's more pesky is the value placed on the differences in terms of quantity.  Some claim a huge difference, but what is that huge difference based on?  An actually big difference or bias?  
 
You often see comments about a new FOTM to the effect that a listener fails to hear what the fuss is and that the new can sounds very similar to his other can.  Since the differences are measurable, these subjectively quantitative comments are never taken seriously.  A very serious challenge for new comers.  I've personally discovered that I need to try things for myself.  There is a LOT of hype here and defended by graphs showing differences.

 

[Czilla9000]

 
Quote:

I'd wager that this would be easy with some headphones and not so easy with others.

 
Ya, I especially wonder if someone could tell the difference between, say, a Grado SR-80 and a Grado SR-125 or Grado SR-225 in DBT testing. Would make for an interesting experiment.
 
Of course the difference between a Sony Streetstyle and Sennheiser HD-580 would be appearent. But between a Sennheiser HD-580 and Sennheiser HD-600 I've more skeptical.
 
This doesn't mean that there aren't real engineering differences between the phones, as evidenced for FR graphs. The question is whether in day-to-day usage you could tell, and if DBT testing might tell you you couldn't tell, when sub-consciously you really could after pro-longed listening.

 

[KnightK]

I've DBT'ed the 80i's and the 225s. The 80is sounded very muffled and less detailed, compared to the clarity of the latter. Also, I think the 225 was a bit more balanced in its signature. Not sure about 125 vs 225, though.
uote:

 
 
Ya, I especially wonder if someone could tell the difference between, say, a Grado SR-80 and a Grado SR-125 or Grado SR-225 in DBT testing. Would make for an interesting experiment.