[Bengt77]

My ATH-A900Ti has angled drivers, my ATH-AD900 doesn't. The latter still has a better sound stage than the former. Although that's comparing an open to a closed headphone, angled drivers don't necessarily give you a larger sound stage.

 

[rds]

Quote:

Originally Posted by leeperry /img/forum/go_quote.gif Ultrasone uses decentralized drivers using their own SS technology...but not everyone's brain seems compatible w/ it, as they are pretty much cheating using psychoacoustics as I understand it...I personally hated the Pro750, but I know some ppl I trust who like their Pro2500 as much as their cd3k...so YMMV as usual and the good thing about Ultrasone is that the driver is behind a metal plate, so the level of EMF would appear to be far lower than on usual phones.

Could you link to something about this configuration being a psychoacoustic trick? As far as I can see it is using the exact same geometry as an angled driver.

 

[froasier]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rds /img/forum/go_quote.gif Could you link to something about this configuration being a psychoacoustic trick? As far as I can see it is using the exact same geometry as an angled driver.

I'm 99% sure it's just plain acoustic. AFAIK there is not even a related psychoacoustic effect for them to be using for this.

 

[leeperry]

well, I was really hooked on the Pro750 before receiving it...and their S-Logic thingie is not just about decentralized drivers/drivers window IIRC : ultrasone psychoacoustics - Google Search
Quote:

Ultrasone's S-Logic Natural Surround Sound employs proven psychoacoustic principles to create a 3-D sound field

their main mad scientist(who would also happen to be a doctor) always makes it sound like they use extraterrestrial technologies...you can imagine my sheer disappointment when I heard the damn thing

OTOH, all the phones that give a HUGE 3D SS use psychoacoustics to great extend.

 

[miscreant]

I made a few pads for 325i to test some angles. the cool thing was that angling "backwards" the opposite of normal (can't describe well.. bad english) makes them more revealing and more easily listenable - for example: listening to a familiar album(i think it was goldfrapp) it occurred that the singer had cold or something. the "m"-s and "n"-s were spelled like she had nasal congestion. That little detail just appeared while listening to other instruments instead. Such little details just came out better, without concentrating too much. But the bass sounded very annoying..

 

[froasier]

Quote:

Originally Posted by leeperry /img/forum/go_quote.gif ultrasone psychoacoustics - Google Search

Okay, now that I've done some more extensive reading (thanks for the link, IDK why I didn't try that), I think I can settle this once and for all: Yes, S-Logic relies on psychoacoustics, but it does so in the same way speakers or natural sound does. The acoustics of your outer ear affect sound in a way that your brain relies on for a full perception of the sound. All S-Logic does is try to make the sound hit your ear at the most natural angle(s) possible (via the decentralized drivers/grilles) so that the psychoacoustics you rely on normally remain in effect when using the headphones. It's that simple--no smoke and mirrors. I wouldn't call it a psychoacoustic "trick".

 

[Bilavideo]

One need not rely on a bunch of theories to know what difference driver orientation makes. Just adjust the cups on your headphone and hear for yourself. As for Dr. K's theory that headphone sound is different from natural sound, he's right but I doubt it's because the best orientation is to decentralize the drivers.

Headphone sound is different from natural sound because recorded sound is different from natural sound. You're not recording a single performance, from mics placed where the intended listener would be sitting during the concert. Each instrument is typically recorded separately and the mics are placed up close to get a point blank recording of that instrument's performance. It's only later, when the engineer mixes these separate recordings, that you have adjustments in volume and imaging to recreate the effect of hearing the band in concert. It's an artificial construct from the word "go."

Is it really all that surprising that a recording of this "concert" sounds less than live?

There are, of course, "live concerts" recorded for listeners, but even they sound less like a live concert than a recording of a live concert. In a case of "damned if you do and damned if you don't," the live concert doesn't sound right because it doesn't sound as good. It's got the reverbs and the clapping, the chambered artifacts and the occasional cough, but the actual music reproduced lacks the focus of a studio recording.

Now, sometimes the live concert doesn't sound as good because the instrumentation isn't as good, but quite often, our brains filter out the defects of the environment. When we hear those same defects contained in a "llive concert recording," we're confronted - yet again - with artifacts we didn't know we were tuning out. In a side-by-side comparison, most of us most of the time would prefer the studio recording.

 

[sokolov91]

Poor Bilavideo...

The guy tries to make some general comments about angled drivers, then tries to induct why they are all the rage, and people all of a sudden have to take a **** on him...

Whether you like Sennheiser or not... with the prominence of the HD 600 it is unquestionable that the HD 800 does have this sort of unspoken crown. Even the folks at Headroom deem it necessary to confirm it is the "best" headphone almost as to not upset people...

It's pretty funny how all it takes is one, less than perfectly etched sentence, to let someone assume the poster is a complete idiot.

Always taking something at face value (like assuming the post is the summary of all their knowledge), then blaming the other person for being ignorant, is a tad hypocritical, now isn't it folks?

Just my two cents

.

 

[froasier]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bilavideo /img/forum/go_quote.gif Headphone sound is different from natural sound because recorded sound is different from natural sound.

This is true, but the differences we're talking about are mainly those between headphones and speakers (many of which happen to also apply to headphones and natural sound).

This reminds me of another concept that parallels what I was talking about above: Binaural recording technology. The best binaural recordings are made using mics installed in the ears of an acoustically-realistic artificial head, so that all of the acoustics outside the middle ear shape the recorded sound. This way, when played back on normal headphones that project most or all of the sound directly to the middle ear, it simulates being there. The realism is only limited by the response of the mics and headphones, and the closeness in shape of the dummy head and ears to the listener's. Headphones that project the sound so that it interacts with the listener's outer ear are likely to lessen the effect (if the listener's ears are similar to the dummy's) because they add acoustics that are already approximated in the recording. Similarly, when played on speakers, adding the acoustics of the room and your head and ears to the acoustics present in the recording, as well as crossfeed and the much different placement of the speakers, causes binaural records to sound unnatural.

Most music is recorded and mixed to sound its best on stereo speakers, so when you take away the acoustics (and crossfeed and frontal positioning) by using headphones, it sounds less realistic. S-Logic and similar systems attempt to restore at least the outer ear acoustics to create a more natural sound, and probably work their absolute best with binaural recordings that use somewhat forward-facing mics just outside the ears, but also with well-mixed stereo recordings.

S-logic also involves the emphasis of certain frequencies in order to increase clarity without increasing the overall SPL. Again, a technology that's pretty simple to understand without going into all the technical details. For me it mainly comes off as peaky treble response, but I may be a rare case (a story for another thread and another time).

 

[leeperry]

Quote:

Originally Posted by froasier /img/forum/go_quote.gif no smoke and mirrors. I wouldn't call it a psychoacoustic "trick".

when you wear a cd3k(I can't comment on the Pro750 as it didn't "work" at all on me), it's so dead obvious that it's using all the psychoacoustics tricks in the book to fool your brain into believing that there's audio completely surrounding it, that I think we'll just have to agree to disagree

 

[froasier]

Quote:

Originally Posted by leeperry /img/forum/go_quote.gif when you wear a cd3k(I can't comment on the Pro750 as it didn't "work" at all on me), it's so dead obvious that it's using all the psychoacoustics tricks in the book to fool your brain into believing that there's audio completely surrounding it, that I think we'll just have to agree to disagree

Well then please describe these tricks and/or let us know what "book" they're in...

 

[sokolov91]

Maybe they they used their ears ears to design it... to trick people! It certainly has a horrible sound if you do not have ears! Just kidding.

I am going to play the ignorance card here, but if they use tricks, such as angling drivers, bumping certain frequencies to try and recreate sound as if it were being presented to the ear in its virgin form.... then how is that bad? Trickery insinuates something is wrong, or you are being cheated... unless you get the trade off of crazy THD and stuff like that it perfectly OK... better even.

It is being done through diver manipulation... you can't get less invasive in the audio quality than that if I am not mistaken... Running stuff through a DSP, using cross feed and what not all reduce quality on some level.

 

[froasier]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sokolov91 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I am going to play the ignorance card here, but if they use tricks, such as angling drivers, bumping certain frequencies to try and recreate sound as if it were being presented to the ear in its virgin form.... then how is that bad? Trickery insinuates something is wrong, or you are being cheated... unless you get the trade off of crazy THD and stuff like that it perfectly OK... better even.

Exactly! The way I see it, the only "trick" here is the ultimate goal of headphone makers: to trick you into thinking you're not wearing headphones.

P.S. It's not an insinuation:
Quote:

Originally Posted by leeperry /img/forum/go_quote.gif they are pretty much cheating using psychoacoustics as I understand it

 

[leeperry]

guys, there's been a misunderstanding I think..."cheaters always win", to me cheating is not negative at all. mp3 cheats, smart headphones cheat, some VST plugins allow you to cheat and add a very natural crossfeed to fool the brain into believing that he's in a room w/ 2 speakers in front of him(try VNoPhones, it's awesome and doesn't color the sound AT ALL).

well, psychoacoustics is a science, as such it's got to have rules and principles...and SONY sure knows a thing or two about it

most angled drivers were engineered to give a X/Z SS, and Ultrasone decided to try giving the same SS impression w/o angling the drivers...so they HAVE to cheat the brain one step further, and it didn't work for me...that's it.

you can't honestly expect a psychoacoustics "trick" to work on everyone, I've read some ppl saying that to them the cd3k sounded like "sound coming from a hole", and some ppl can identify high bitrate MP3 against lossless almost at 100%.

 

[froasier]

Quote:

Originally Posted by leeperry /img/forum/go_quote.gif most angled drivers were engineered to give a X/Z SS, and Ultrasone decided to try giving the same SS impression w/o angling the drivers...so they HAVE to cheat the brain one step further, and it didn't work for me...that's it.

So you're saying they're trying to trick us into thinking the drivers are angled? I don't get it...

I will have to try VNoPhones though