[kman1211]

   
Oh, I've seen the last few minutes of that. Where is the exact point in the video where he talks about the HD 800?

Don't remember, It was around the middle somewhere I believe. He said it was quite close except the upper regions. Tyll basically seems to suggest the HD 800 with the Anax mod to help calm down the treble a bit. The HD 800 and SR-009 measure very well, especially in terms of impulse response, square waves, distortion, it's mainly just the treble doesn't taper off enough causing an overall too bright sound to many people. There is also more to headphones than measurements too, I consider some headphones that don't measure as well as others to sound more natural. Neutral and flat is a more personal thing than many will admit, there is a general range of measurements for headphones, but outside that is actually up for debate. I'm just referring to what I personally consider neutral, it's quite in line with the harmen curve, but I may find a somewhat different curve a bit more natural to my ears. There is plenty of debate about what is neutral in terms of headphones. The best thing to do is to just listen to a range of well-regarded headphones that are consider natural by many people and find what sounds the most natural to your ears.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  Don't remember, It was around the middle somewhere I believe. He said it was quite close except the upper regions. Tyll basically seems to suggest the HD 800 with the Anax mod to help calm down the treble a bit. The HD 800 and SR-009 measure very well, especially in terms of impulse response, square waves, distortion, it's mainly just the treble doesn't taper off enough causing an overall too bright sound to many people. There is also more to headphones than measurements too, I consider some headphones that don't measure as well as others to sound more natural. Neutral and flat is a more personal thing than many will admit. I'm just referring to what I personally consider neutral, it's quite in line with the harmen curve, but I may find a somewhat different curve a bit more neutral to my ears. There is plenty of debate about what is neutral in terms of headphones. 

 
I don't have time to find it. If someone wants to direct me to the exact part in the video, I might watch that part. But if he said it was not neutral, then he would be taking back what he said before about how it was the most neutral headphone he knows of.
 
You're right about the debate. There are other target curves as well, and none of this is definite.
 
Since I want to buy the SR-009, I would be extremely disappointed if I spent four to five figures on a system for it only to find that the sound was not as accurate as I had hoped -- despite it having the best reputation in terms of accuracy and sound quality. On the other hand, if the main issue is just too much treble, that should be something EQ can fix.

 

[kman1211]

   
I don't have time to find it. If someone wants to direct me to the exact part in the video, I might watch that part. But if he said it was not neutral, then he would be taking back what he said before about how it was the most neutral headphone he knows of.
 
You're right about the debate. There are other target curves as well, and none of this is definite.
 
Since I want to buy the SR-009, I would be extremely disappointed if I spent four to five figures on a system for it only to find that the sound was not as accurate as I had hoped -- despite it having the best reputation in terms of accuracy and sound quality. On the other hand, if the main issue is just too much treble, that should be something EQ can fix.

I get the feeling Tyll has changed a bit in his opinion of neutral over time. He's always seemed to preferred darker and warmer headphones than the HD 800.
 
It's not near as simple as speakers sadly. The thing is of what you have heard do you consider the most neutral? What do you consider too bright? 

 

[TMRaven]

   
You seemed to be saying that the Harman curve (black line) is what a neutral headphone should follow. This implies that the HD 800 and SR-009 have horrible measurements and are not what people say they are -- neutral reference headphones. If this was not your implication, it is up to you to clarify.

Ok, first of all, I wouldn't be ranking the HD800 at the top of my most accurate list if I didn't think it was a great headphone.  Its treble is elevated above a neutral response for what I'd consider an accurate headphone, so mods and/or EQ is necessary.  Never in my posts did I say or even imply that the HD800 (or even the 009) were horrible measuring headphones.  My giving understanding to how the target response curve was arrived at has nothing to do with saying X or Y headphone measures poorly.
 
Second, on the notion of measurements, I've made a point of saying that FR measurements aren't the end-al tell-tale picture of how a headphone sounds.  You still need to take into account the time domain, distortion and other qualities of the sound that objective data can not tell you.  There are lots of amps that measure with perfect frequency response and distortion numbers well below the audible threshold, but they all have very subtle differences in sound.  The same is true for headphones.  As I mentioned previously, a headphone with a notably boosted low-end on a FR chart doesn't have to be more bassy than one with linear measuring bass, like the LCD-X vs FSP example.  
 
The harman preferred listening curve has a lot to do with developing a new target response for headphones.  You can go back and reread some of Tyll's articles on the matter, but it essentially amounts to emulating a pair of flat measuring speakers in a good room.  The green line in those pictures is a pair of flat measuring speakers in an anechoic chamber measured in a good room.  There will be some natural treble attenuation from the room itself.  Headphones are placed right by the ears, and could possibly need more attenuation in the treble, and since headphones only play music into the ears, there's no gain from the bass taken in by the human body itself.  Anybody could tell you that a speaker system measuring flat will have way more powerful bass that's both heard and felt than just a pair of headphones.  I think you're underestimating just how much your body plays a role in shaping the overall sound that you hear.
 
Now back to the HD800.  It actually does have a small bit of mid-upper bass emphasis over its midrange, while the upper-midrange is slightly recessed.  I consider this a very realistic sound.  The only area in which the HD800 is lacking is 60hz and below, where it could use 3-4db or so more bass.  For what it's worth, I correct that using EQ.  Taken as a whole, the HD800 is a brighter than neutral headphone, yes, but I'm not turning a cold shoulder to it and labeling it as a bad measuring headphone just because it doesn't exactly follow the black line.  Overall, the listener preferred curve on the Harman HRTF will help shape an eventual ideal headphone response curve, but a headphone's FR will not always tell you if it's the most accurate or not.  Do note how I said in my first post of the topic that the PM3 was the closest to the preferred listening curve, but that it wasn't the most accurate sounding.  My saying that it wasn't the most accurate sounding has nothing to do with me possibly thinking that it's too bass heavy, because it 's not.  Some headphones need the extra bit of boost, while some do not.
 
 
TLDR, stop showing us these dumb measurement pictures. 

 

[Music Alchemist]

I like this post:
 

Apparently its been said that the 009 are bright. Umm, maybe compared to the inside of a cave on the night of a new moon with heavy cloud cover. Bright? No. They are not veiled, or dark either. I'm sorry to disappoint people who want to complain about stuff but these headphones are EXTREMELY even handed. The highs are what I would consider to be perfectly represented. They dont jump out at you in front of anything, as they can on other headphones - I have spent a lot of time getting the HD800 to do this in my home system. At the same time, there is very ample detail and micro-detail in the highs, and pretty much everywhere really. 
 
After a few tracks passing the headphones back and forth we just kind of sat there and tried to describe what we heard. It was difficult. I never want to say it, and it seems nobody else in the room did either, but once the topic was breached I think it was well agreed upon. Not only did I hear things I have never heard before, I heard things you have never heard before. These headphones are that good. 

 
^_^
 
Comments like this inspire me further to just go for the SR-009.
 
The Focal Spirit Professional sounded unacceptably dark to me, and I owned two pairs. Although it still doesn't have enough mids and treble to meet the Harman curve, I doubt the Harman curve would sound as neutral to me as the flat speaker curve.
 
Since seemingly at least 90% of the people who have heard the SR-009 think it's one of the most (if not the most) neutral headphones they have heard, I just think it would be very strange if the curve it follows is not actually neutral. Whether or not it measures neutral, I still read more impressive things about it than any other headphone.

 

[paradoxper]

SR-009. Close contenders, not really. O2, Omega, HD800. But neutral, accurate or natural is all relative to your ears and brain - not mine. 

 

[Bmullock]

Most of what i read here sounds very much like tge story of the kings clothes. I doubt any person can discriminate sound to such a degree. Time guys to do some double blind crossover studies with neutral monitoring. I doubt this will get anyones support.

 

[Music Alchemist]

Most of what i read here sounds very much like tge story of the kings clothes. I doubt any person can discriminate sound to such a degree. Time guys to do some double blind crossover studies with neutral monitoring. I doubt this will get anyones support.

 
Wait...are you implying that all headphones sound the same or something? If so, you must be very new to headphones.

 

[jbarrentine]

HD600. My T90 sounds noticeably artificial in some way that's hard to pinpoint vs the HD600. The T90 would sound fine if I had not heard the HD600, but having heard it I now know there's a very audible difference and it irritates me. The T90 does detail far better, but the HD600 does wonders for tonality. 
 
There's a lot to be said for realistic tonality. 
 
I initially thought the HD600 was bass light, but I wonder if my new amp (Polaris) would rectify that problem. 
 
I want the hd600/650 badly. 

 

[Music Alchemist]

  HD600. My T90 sounds noticeably artificial in some way that's hard to pinpoint vs the HD600. The T90 would sound fine if I had not heard the HD600, but having heard it I now know there's a very audible difference and it irritates me. The T90 does detail far better, but the HD600 does wonders for tonality. 
 
There's a lot to be said for realistic tonality. 
 
I initially thought the HD600 was bass light, but I wonder if my new amp (Polaris) would rectify that problem. 
 
I want the hd600/650 badly. 

 
Yeah, I owned the HD 650. Its tonality was pretty good and it had nice sound quality...yet it sounded far too dark to me and smoothed over too much detail. I still want to get the HD 600, even if the measurements are very similar.

 

[TMRaven]

You might be a fan of brighter than neutral headphones.  You should really consider an HE-560 or HD800.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  You might be a fan of brighter than neutral headphones.  You should really consider an HE-560 or HD800.

 
I want absolute accuracy, hence the desire for the SR-009. Most people say it totally outclasses those two.
 
I don't buy into the Harman curve being accurate. Why do you think it is that virtually every planar magnetic headphone follows the green line in the bass and not the black one, yet they are regarded as having the most easily accurate bass?

 

[TMRaven]

No, I think you want some brightness in your life.  Unless you've heard the older black-liner HD650 with warmer sounding upstream gear, I wouldn't consider it all that dark at all.  Likewise with the FSP.  The FSP has a mild depression around 2-3khz, but that's about it.  Otherwise it's relatively even handed, and slightly warm-- not 'unacceptably' dark.  Given your displeasure at these slightly warmer than neutral headphones sounding very dark, I think you could use some brightness in your life.  I think it'd be rather foolish to go out and get an 009 while calling it 'absolute accuracy' based on other people's impressions while you haven't heard it yourself to begin with.  The most powerful deciding factor in whether or not you want a headphone is listening to it for yourself.  The 560 on the second-hand market sells for cheap, and you can sell it off with minimal loss if you don't like it, but at least you have a solid ground for which to compare from.  I've not heard the 009, but I know of plenty of people who dislike electrostats in general for certain aspects of their sound quality that don't sound realistic to them-- it's enough to make me weary about electrostats in general.
 
Different planar magnetics have different sounding bass, yet they will all measure completely flat on a graph.  For instance, I prefer the bass of the Hifiman HE-400 to the HE-560 and LCD-X.  The 560 is slightly soft sounding in the bass while the 400 remains solid and impactful, the X is a little sloppy sounding in the bass in comparison and a bit rounded on its attack and lingering in its decay.  The 400i measures completely flat in its bass region, yet in subjective listening has a mild mid-bass emphasis over sub-bass.  I definitely would not lump all planar magnetics as having the 'most easily accurate bass.'

 

[diamondears]

Assuming you have clean and un-damaged ears (whether due to age or etc.), the Harman curve is the most accurate. I think the exact reason why relatively younger people like more bass (Harman curve) is because a more linear curve will sound bright to them. Coz as soon as I had my ears cleaned specifically for audiophile purposes, few of my phones turned from neutral to bright (Grado and HE400) and some turned from dark/warm to just right (Audeze LCD-2.2, NAD HP50 and PSB M4U1)...lol...true story for me.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  No, I think you want some brightness in your life.  Unless you've heard the older black-liner HD650 with warmer sounding upstream gear, I wouldn't consider it all that dark at all.  Likewise with the FSP.  The FSP has a mild depression around 2-3khz, but that's about it.  Otherwise it's relatively even handed, and slightly warm-- not 'unacceptably' dark.  Given your displeasure at these slightly warmer than neutral headphones sounding very dark, I think you could use some brightness in your life.  I think it'd be rather foolish to go out and get an 009 while calling it 'absolute accuracy' based on other people's impressions while you haven't heard it yourself to begin with.  The most powerful deciding factor in whether or not you want a headphone is listening to it for yourself.  The 560 on the second-hand market sells for cheap, and you can sell it off with minimal loss if you don't like it, but at least you have a solid ground for which to compare from.  I've not heard the 009, but I know of plenty of people who dislike electrostats in general for certain aspects of their sound quality that don't sound realistic to them-- it's enough to make me weary about electrostats in general.
 
Different planar magnetics have different sounding bass, yet they will all measure completely flat on a graph.  For instance, I prefer the bass of the Hifiman HE-400 to the HE-560 and LCD-X.  The 560 is slightly soft sounding in the bass while the 400 remains solid and impactful, the X is a little sloppy sounding in the bass in comparison and a bit rounded on its attack and lingering in its decay.  The 400i measures completely flat in its bass region, yet in subjective listening has a mild mid-bass emphasis over sub-bass.  I definitely would not lump all planar magnetics as having the 'most easily accurate bass.'

 
I am comparing the sound of the headphones to real life. They sound darker than real life, at least to my ears. Simple as that.
 
I owned the newer, brighter HD 650. It wasn't super dark or anything, but it was obvious that it needed to be brighter to be accurate. The fact that the HD 650 (including the newer version) is on the dark, warm, smooth side is well-known.
 
Mild depression? Looks pretty huge to me. It doesn't even meet the Harman curve, much less the flat speaker curve.
 
Focal Spirit Professional:

 
(The FSP is one of my favorite headphones, though. Just wasn't accurate enough to justify keeping, and I owned it twice.)
 
Oh, so you admit that the green line is flat now?

 
HIFIMAN HE400i:

 
Fair enough. I should have said measured flat instead of being accurate, since there is more to it than that.