Pricing, tiers, TOTL, etc. - What is the *material* difference?

[castleofargh]

Hypothetically speaking, I suppose if two cans measure exactly the same across all aspects then they necessarily must sound the same. But in reality that will never be the case. If you look at Stealth, Susvara and HE-1 all three adhere almost perfectly to the Harmon target (was it 2018 version?), but they don't sound alike at all (yes I have spent a good amount of time with all three).

There are still enough differences, including distortions types other than THD that could be relevant to listeners.
But there is an even simpler explanation. If 2 headphones did measure exactly the same on a given dummy head, they would not on another dummy head or on another real head. The changes brought up by the ear when a driver is at a different distance, has a different size, maybe even a slight angular shift, and of course the pads, how do they seal on a rubber type skin isn't how they will seal on my head or on someone's head with actual hair on it. We expect and would get a few dB change here and there that I do expect to often be audible.

And of course there is also the thing about the pair measured VS the pair you tried. Those too probably have variations of a few dB here and there.
So even hypothetically, the logic is flawed from the get-go, and does not point toward some unmeasurable things that a human can perceive. Which, I guess, was the argument someone else associated with that fake premise.

 

[gregorio]

Waterfall plots DOES NOT say anything about the initial attack, sustain and decay.

That is the opposite of the truth/facts. A waterfall plot says everything about the “initial attack, sustain and decay” (of the headphone response), that is what a waterfall plot is for. The amplitude and frequency of the initial attack is what you see at 0ms, the amplitude and frequency of the sustain/decay is what you see later than 0ms.

It can only show resonance on the fixture which will NOT exactly translate to what you actually hear.

Resonance IS the sustain/decay in a waterfall plot. So if, as you stated, the waterfall plot does not say anything about the sustain and decay, then it could not tell us anything about the HPs resonance either but you’re claiming here that resonance is the only thing it’s showing? I’m not sure what you mean by “fixture” but sure, the equipment used to make the HP measurement can affect the measurement.

Again, I'm NOT referring to inverse Fourier transform of the frequency response which is how you can calculate waterfall measurements

Again, what you’re stating doesn’t make sense. A waterfall plot is a Fourier transform, not an Inverse Fourier transform, specifically a Fast Fourier transform. Maybe that’s just a typo? A Fourier transform converts the signal/sound wave amplitude in the time domain to the frequency domain, without the Fourier transform there could be no frequency axis on the waterfall plot. An Inverse Fourier transform transforms back from the frequency domain to the amplitude/time domain.

that's why I just proved to you attack, sustain and decay profile of a specific headphone across the frequencies CANNOT be accurately measured or predicted by FR (through some inverse Fourier transform)

The frequency response IS the attack + sustain/decay (combined). So the attack, sustain/decay is accurately measured in a FR plot, it’s just not differentiated as attack, sustain/decay. EG. There is no way to tell from a FR plot what amount of the measurement of a particular part of spectrum is due to EQ or sustain/decay (a resonance). That is why a waterfall plot can be useful, as it does differentiate attack from sustain/decay.

BTW, I’ve written “sustain/decay” because there really isn’t any sustain, there is only decay. To produce ”sustain” would require the input of more energy. I’m not quite sure where you got the “attack, sustain, decay” thing from, it seems to be taken from “Envelope Generators” in synthesis theory; ADSR - Attack, Decay, Sustain and Release.

G

 

[colonelkernel8]

A step further, there is a market segment that would buy a $10,000 headphone simply BECAUSE it is very expensive.

You can bet every single one of them resides on this forum, which is why this forum bends over backwards to protect their feelings.

 

[evanft]

Why would you want anything to sound like the Raal Immanis? It's just another poorly engineered audiophile product that uses coloration as a marketing gimmick to make it sound "unique". The simple reality is if you have 2 headphones that use two different driver technologies (say, planar magnetic and dynamic) that measure the same, they will sound the same. In this case Raal has picked a technology that no one uses for headphone drivers because the FR looks like the attached (ignore the target). This is an abysmally performing headphone in an objective sense, but it acts like its own effed up mechanical EQ in a way, providing a coloration that I guess some people find pleasant (or at least they've convinced themselves they find it pleasant to justify spending $10k on this homebrew pile of garbage).

I still can't believe they charge real human money for that absolutely horrific frequency response. A $25 IEM has better tonality than this.

 

[theveterans]

I still can't believe they charge real human money for that absolutely horrific frequency response. A $25 IEM has better tonality than this.

The frequency response IS the attack + sustain/decay (combined). So the attack, sustain/decay is accurately measured in a FR plot, it’s just not differentiated as attack, sustain/decay. EG. There is no way to tell from a FR plot what amount of the measurement of a particular part of spectrum is due to EQ or sustain/decay (a resonance). That is why a waterfall plot can be useful, as it does differentiate attack from sustain/decay.

BTW, I’ve written “sustain/decay” because there really isn’t any sustain, there is only decay. To produce ”sustain” would require the input of more energy. I’m not quite sure where you got the “attack, sustain, decay” thing from, it seems to be taken from “Envelope Generators” in synthesis theory; ADSR - Attack, Decay, Sustain and Release.

In ideal world it is, but reality it isn't. You can have the same 100% FR on a different set of headphones (ribbon vs moving coil) with distortion values between 0.1 %- 0.5 % THD @ 94 dB SPL (aka inaudible) and both will still sound different.

 

[colonelkernel8]

In ideal world it is, but reality it isn't. You can have the same 100% FR on a different set of headphones (ribbon vs moving coil) with distortion values between 0.1 %- 0.5 % THD @ 94 dB SPL (aka inaudible) and both will still sound different.

I can assure you that if you overdrive the Raal Immanis's low frequency using EQ to match the low frequency response of a headphone like the DCA Stealth, you'd be pushing low frequency distortion to north of 25% at 94dB, probably north of 50% at 104dB. I'm not even close to kidding.

 

[theveterans]

I can assure you that if you overdrive the Raal Immanis's low frequency using EQ to match the low frequency response of a headphone like the DCA Stealth, you'd be pushing low frequency distortion to north of 25% at 94dB, probably north of 50% at 104dB. I'm not even close to kidding.

Of all the people that I know and met in real life who own the Immanis (4 people that I know and met in person BTW), NONE OF THEM EVER EVER USE EQ that. It's an audiophile OCD generally (some will but I've never met one Immanis owner yet that EQ'ed their Immanis) to never EQ a 10K headphone. That means, the FR measured on the fixture IS NOT the same FR that these owners perceive with their own HRTF

EQ adds distortion as you already noted which is a NO NO on an expensive system. It's as simple as whether one enjoy its sonic presentation or not without any EQing whatsoever

 

[Diet Kokaine]

Of all the people that I know and met in real life who own the Immanis (4 people that I know and met in person BTW), NONE OF THEM EVER EVER USE EQ that. It's an audiophile OCD generally (some will but I've never met one Immanis owner yet that EQ'ed their Immanis) to never EQ a 10K headphone. That means, the FR measured on the fixture IS NOT the same FR that these owners perceive with their own HRTF

EQ adds distortion as you already noted which is a NO NO on an expensive system. It's as simple as whether one enjoy its sonic presentation or not without any EQing whatsoever

100%.
FR graphs are extremely overrated. In real life use they're practically useless.
Not a single person who's running a high end system, that I know of... ever uses EQ. It's a GIANT NO-NO.

Hell, I don't use EQ even in my Lexus sound system.

 

[colonelkernel8]

Of all the people that I know and met in real life who own the Immanis (4 people that I know and met in person BTW), NONE OF THEM EVER EVER USE EQ that. It's an audiophile OCD generally (some will but I've never met one Immanis owner yet that EQ'ed their Immanis) to never EQ a 10K headphone. That means, the FR measured on the fixture IS NOT the same FR that these owners perceive with their own HRTF

EQ adds distortion as you already noted which is a NO NO on an expensive system. It's as simple as whether one enjoy its sonic presentation or not without any EQing whatsoever

EQ only adds distortion if your headphones suck and have no overhead before distorting (like the RAAL Immanis). When I say “EQ” I’m talking about DSP, which if you’re opposed to, you’re simply unserious and more of a “crystal healing magic” kind of audiophile as opposed to someone who actually cares about sound reproduction quality. It’s the only tweak that ACTUALLY DOES SOMETHING. No HRTF is going to fix it that sawtoothy pile of garbage FR and that’s the bottom line. You can say it will, but know you’re completely wrong since those sawtooth artifacts come from the ribbons themselves. It’s called comb filtering.

 

[theveterans]

EQ only adds distortion if your headphones suck and have no overhead before distorting (like the RAAL Immanis). When I say “EQ” I’m talking about DSP, which if you’re opposed to, you’re simply unserious and more of a “crystal healing magic” kind of audiophile as opposed to someone who actually cares about sound reproduction quality. It’s the only tweak that ACTUALLY DOES SOMETHING. No HRTF is going to fix it that sawtoothy pile of garbage FR and that’s the bottom line. You can say it will, but know you’re completely wrong since those sawtooth artifacts come from the ribbons themselves. It’s called comb filtering.

You must be living in the matrix or something that’s so far away from what me and people who own the Raal Immanis experiences lol. No need for coping on the Stealth being the best headphone. It actually sounds dead to those that actually heard BOTH Raal and Stealth. A proven sample that measures perfectly but sounds just okay nothing audio nirvana inducing IRL.

If I was given the Stealth for free, I’d sell it in a heartbeat to fund my Immanis

 

[Diet Kokaine]

@theveterans
***Frequency response graphs don't just measure headphones—they reshape how we hear them.***

Once you've seen a graph of a headphone's performance (whether before listening, during, or after), it becomes nearly impossible to separate the data from your perception. The measurements *retroactively* color what you've heard, *actively* influence what you're hearing, and *subconsciously* steer what you'll hear in the future.

This isn't just confirmation bias—it's **expectation bias weaponized**, where the graph becomes the unshakeable lens for every sonic judgement.

So you have to decide very early on in this hobby. What kind of a listener are you? Do you like graphs? Or do you like music?

If you like music? Every door for further discovery suddenly opens up.

Graphs? Your gear even if it sucks, is distorted, sounds sterile and lifeless, it looks good to you on paper.

 

[BS5711]

Am I reading that right ?

On the one hand you don't look at crappy measurement data because you don't want that psychologically changing your perception and enjoyment of the expensive but poor measuring headphone ?

On the other hand, however, you shun the notion of psychology in your perception of a DAC or amplifier or cables because you "know what you hear" and it isn't influenced by psychology ?

Seems you want a quid both ways and pick and choose what suits your argument at the time.

 

[colonelkernel8]

You must be living in the matrix or something that’s so far away from what me and people who own the Raal Immanis experiences lol. No need for coping on the Stealth being the best headphone. It actually sounds dead to those that actually heard BOTH Raal and Stealth. A proven sample that measures perfectly but sounds just okay nothing audio nirvana inducing IRL.

If I was given the Stealth for free, I’d sell it in a heartbeat to fund my Immanis

What you call “dead”, I call the highest fidelity headphone ever created (that isn’t electrostatic). You can just admit you love free range, cage free, organic coloration in your sound and that would be fine dude. You clearly listen to your gear and not the music, which again is totally valid. I’d love to hear the Immanis, but if it’s anything like the other woo-woo boutique audiophile headphones I’ve either owned or listened to for a considerable amount of time (Abyss 1266, Sony MDR-Z1R, and Ultrasone Edition 10) it’s junk.

 

[JamoBroGuy]

I still can't believe they charge real human money for that absolutely horrific frequency response. A $25 IEM has better tonality than this.

Not sure I agree with this. More appropriate wording would be “A $25 IEM is much more conventionally tuned than this”. I’m sure someone, somewhere, genuinely enjoys the tuning of the Immanis, despite how… unusual it is.

I can assure you that if you overdrive the Raal Immanis's low frequency using EQ to match the low frequency response of a headphone like the DCA Stealth, you'd be pushing low frequency distortion to north of 25% at 94dB, probably north of 50% at 104dB. I'm not even close to kidding.

Okay, what in the actual hell?

I’m an advocate of sound being preference-based and that the best frequency response and harmonic distortion is completely up to you. What sounds good is separate from what’s high fidelity.

But this? How did that get past production? It’s not like people actually listen at 94+ dB, but with THAT much distortion, I’m sure it’s audible at even reasonable listening levels (like 75 dB).

 

[gregorio]

In ideal world it is, but reality it isn't.

Huh, I wasn’t referring to an ideal world, I was talking about this world, what reality are you living in where a waterfall plot does not show attack and sustain/decay? Are you really living in an alternate reality and if so, why would you post here, where we are discussing the sound science of this world?

You can have the same 100% FR on a different set of headphones (ribbon vs moving coil) with distortion values between 0.1 %- 0.5 % THD @ 94 dB SPL (aka inaudible) and both will still sound different.

Again, Huh? Can’t you even guess what a FR plot measures, despite it’s name? Can’t you guess what it doesn’t differentiate, even though I’ve told you some of them? It’s astonishing that you’re arguing about a scientific/engineering measurement, in a science discussion forum, without knowing what it is, what it’s measuring, what it’s differentiating and what it isn’t differentiating.

EQ adds distortion as you already noted which is a NO NO on an expensive system.

EQ distorts the signal, that is of course the whole point of EQ but it doesn’t add distortion (THD) and he did not note that it does. That is why it is NOT a “no no” on an expensive system! In fact, it’s actually a requirement for a system to qualify as “high end” in the first place. EQ is not necessarily required for a HP system though, unless one is trying to create a perceptually high end HP system (with a HRTF, etc.), but it can be applied according to personal preference without being a “no no”!

FR graphs are extremely overrated. In real life use they're practically useless.
Not a single person who's running a high end system, that I know of... ever uses EQ. It's a GIANT NO-NO.

So you’re effectively saying you don’t know “a single person who’s running a high end system”? That isn’t surprising, as you’ve already admitted that you only own $40k worth of music gear, which probably doesn’t even qualify as a mediocre setup, let alone a high end one! Those who actually run a high end system ONLY run a high end system because they’ve used FR graphs. They’ve had a professional acoustician use FR and waterfall plots in order to apply the appropriate acoustic treatment, EQ and timing/phase corrections. Without that, a system cannot be “high end” and therefore, not a single person I know running a high end system does not use EQ! EQ is a required GIANT YES-YES. Not a single one of all the top class commercial studios and dubbing threatres I’ve ever worked in around the world did not employ EQ.

It’s just never ending falsehoods on top of falsehoods, in a science discussion forum, even after you’ve been refuted so many times and even after you’ve had your entire thread deleted.

G