Presenting At The HBK (Hottinger Brüel & Kjær) Product Physics Conference
Oct 7, 2020 at 4:01 AM Thread Starter Post #1 of 18
Tomorrow, 15 October (Thursday), I will be presenting a talk titled

Did we really need a new hearing simulation standard?
Measuring headphones with the HF-HATS Type 5128

The talk is free to watch (registration link below). This year's entire virtual HBK Product Physics Conference is free.

While my talk will cover some of what was discussed in my Headphone Measurements: The New Standard, Part 1 post, I will also go over some of the key discussions that will be in my upcoming follow-up post Headphone Measurements: The New Standard, Part 2.

The HBK Product Physics Conference takes place October 13th, 14th, and 15th, 2020. Again, attendance is virtual and free.

My presentation will take place on October 15th, 2020, at 12:00 PM to 12:30 PM ET, and I will be available after the presentation for one hour at the Guest Speaker Booth to answer questions.

Register to attend and learn more by clicking on the images below or at the following link:

https://hbkworld.com/product-physics-conference/

HeadphoneMeasurements_ANewStandard_PartI_01c1.jpg
HBK_Product_Physics_Conference_-_Jude.png
 
Last edited:
Oct 14, 2020 at 9:31 AM Post #3 of 18

Joe Bloggs

Member of the Trade: HiBy / EFO technologies Co
His Porta Corda walked the Green Mile
Joined
Oct 21, 2001
Posts
11,377
Likes
3,224
Location
Hong Kong and Melbourne
headphones distortion measurements are way more of use for me than frequency response measurements. I Use schiit Loki EQ to solve the later.
A 4-band EQ makes headphone frequency response a moot point for you? Much you have yet to learn, young padawan... 😁
 
Oct 15, 2020 at 3:02 PM Post #4 of 18

csglinux

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jun 4, 2014
Posts
3,603
Likes
2,760
bass_response.png
 
Oct 16, 2020 at 7:31 PM Post #5 of 18

mucklechumps

Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 22, 2006
Posts
79
Likes
44
Location
Portland Maine USA
Jude, thank you for a really well produced and easy to understand presentation yesterday. It was concise, packed with compelling info, and convinced me that the new standard 5128 is here to stay and long overdue.
 
Oct 16, 2020 at 9:15 PM Post #6 of 18

432789

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 21, 2015
Posts
303
Likes
278
A 4-band EQ makes headphone frequency response a moot point for you? Much you have yet to learn, young padawan... 😁
I don't want to learn as much as I want to Listen. Frequency response can always be corrected. Distortion not so much. a less distorting headphone is thus a wiser choice. especially with the future looking very bright for software processing.
 
Last edited:
Oct 20, 2020 at 1:56 AM Post #8 of 18

Joe Bloggs

Member of the Trade: HiBy / EFO technologies Co
His Porta Corda walked the Green Mile
Joined
Oct 21, 2001
Posts
11,377
Likes
3,224
Location
Hong Kong and Melbourne
I don't get it. Some of the same people obsessed with frequency response are the same ones who treat EQ of any sort like kryptonite.
Not me... 😃
Beyerdynamic DT770-80-4.PNG
 
Oct 20, 2020 at 7:22 AM Post #9 of 18

mucklechumps

Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 22, 2006
Posts
79
Likes
44
Location
Portland Maine USA
I don't get it. Some of the same people obsessed with frequency response are the same ones who treat EQ of any sort like kryptonite.
I can't speak for anyone else but I can tell you how I feel about frequency response, and being obsessed about learning in general. Did you watch Jude's short presentation? If you did you'd understand that the current mainstream measuring devices are not accurate for very low or very high frequencies. This is cool to me for a couple of reasons:
1. Would you want a car speedometer that was inaccurate below 30mph or above 70mph? I wouldn't. Why? because besides the obvious safety issues or getting a ticket, I like accuracy, and I think most people who spend time here on Head-Fi like it too. Obsessed as you say.
2. What's the point in years of discussion if we are not constantly improving? That would get boring pretty fast.
EQ (especially PEQ) is a great tool for adjusting frequencies and amplitude to suit our personal tastes. And we can share settings with our fellow Head-Fi'ers so they can experience what we find pleasing. Personally, I do most of my listening straight from my Iphone to my IEM's and EQ is impractical, so I look for graphs that suit my taste, and I read reviews, then I buy. The more accurate the graphs are, the better informed I am. Same is true for you if you choose.
If you're into EQ'ing, that's awesome!! Keep at it and share your settings with us. There's no wrong way to do this hobby (and profession for some of us) and not agreeing with someone is an opportunity to learn if you post in a way that encourages respectful discussion.
 
Dec 23, 2020 at 1:10 PM Post #10 of 18
If you haven't seen it already, HBK posted my presentation from this year's HBK Product Physics Conference. While only 20 minutes long, it covers quite a lot of ground, and will explain clearly why the Brüel & Kjær Type 5128 is the most human-like hearing simulator, and the only hearing simulator to cover the full audio band.

You can watch it here:

 
Last edited:
Dec 23, 2020 at 2:59 PM Post #11 of 18

491838

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 17, 2018
Posts
382
Likes
183
If you haven't seen it already, HBK posted my presentation from this year's HBK Product Physics Conference. You can watch it here:

Do you have the ER4 graph measured by this new rig? It would be interesting to see what it looks like and how it correlates with what people hear. I think Etymotic's KEMAR measurements are pretty accurate (by ear).
 
Dec 23, 2020 at 3:38 PM Post #12 of 18

Pokemonn

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Apr 26, 2015
Posts
1,267
Likes
1,102
Location
cute dog town
classical 20th c industry standard ideas will be past
because
future powerful AI adaptive feedback HP system will takeover any standardized HP systems
bacause
ordinal listeners just want only personal good feeling sounds system for him/her not industrial standard...!
people will not care standard in the future
its just my guess
 
Dec 25, 2020 at 12:27 AM Post #14 of 18

Virtu Fortuna

Reviewer: Headfonia
Joined
Jan 12, 2014
Posts
832
Likes
801
I took the ear canal part as the most important. We know that the anatomy of ear canals affect the sound. AFAIK, it even affects different people in different ways because our canal shapes are simply different from each other. Having an average ear canal should produce more accurate results.

I honestly never took measurements too seriously but the 5128 can change the game.

And I agree about the Westone W60. Thank you for the insightful video.
 
Dec 27, 2020 at 10:46 AM Post #15 of 18

Shabda

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Oct 31, 2020
Posts
147
Likes
28
Location
Pittsburgh
Impressive presentation and so well delivered!

Question about the ear canal modeling part: isnt it LESS accurate to smooth out the model for the ear canal? I realize that the averaging process necessarily smooths out the natural texture to generate the average ear canal in the first place, but is it not true that texture / bumpiness in the ear canal is itself a quality that we find in every ear canal?

Like comparing a smooth wall to one with bumps on it i guess. If we average ten bumpy walls we may get a smoother wall, but if it’s not bumpy anymore, does it still represent the essence of what the walls had in common?

Just spit balling here but I wonder if the ear canal model would be a better simulation if we went back post-averaging and artificially added some topology to the smoothened result at certain spots.

Thoughts?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top