[Inks]

Quote:

 
I disagree, I think headphones differ greatly in how well they can reproduce sound dynamics. In fact, I have no doubts that I can clearly hear differences in dynamics between headphones and that RE0, in particular, has an obviously limited dynamic range reproduction capability compared to many other IEMs and headphones. Of course, recordings can differ greatly in dynamics as well, and I agree that recordings can have much greater variations in dynamics than headphones. However, listening to music with a wide dynamic range, like a well recorded classical or instrumental can reveal great differences between headphones in this area as well. With RE0, I felt that dynamic music sounded quite a bit flatter and less expressive than it should - the variations between louder and quieter sounds became far less pronounced and exciting.

That's a result of it's frequency response,not dynamic range. IEMs don't simply have their own dynamic range, any engineer will tell you this. 

 

[Pianist]

Quote:

That's a result of it's frequency response,not dynamic range. IEMs don't simply have their own dynamic range, any engineer will tell you this. 

 
Recordings have dynamic range and headphones have varying abilities to reproduce it - some can reproduce more of it than others. In my opinion. Do you have the proof to support your claim that all headphones can reproduce the same maximum dynamic range, regardless of recording? Right now, I am trying to imagine iBuds reproducing the full dynamics of a complex classical orchestral performance...

 

[redrich2000]

Has anyone compared the RE400 to the Brainwavz B2? Would the B2 be much of an upgrade?

 

[Deni5]

Quote:

 
Recordings have dynamic range and headphones have varying abilities to reproduce it - some can reproduce more of it than others. In my opinion. Do you have the proof to support your claim that all headphones can reproduce the same maximum dynamic range, regardless of recording? Right now, I am trying to imagine iBuds reproducing the full dynamics of a complex classical orchestral performance...

Interesting subject but a little off topic.

Dynamic Range is dependant on many factors - here are some (there are probably more)
 
Source material:
The 16-bit compact disc has a theoretical dynamic range of about 96 dB (or about 98 dB for sinusoidal signals, per the formula). Digital audio with 20-bit digitization is theoretically capable of 120 dB dynamic range; similarly, 24-bit digital audio calculates to 144 dB dynamic range. All digital audio recording and playback chains include input and output converters and associated analog circuitry, significantly limiting practical dynamic range. Observed 16-bit digital audio dynamic range is about 90 dB. (wiki)
 
Isolation:
The higher the dynamic range reached, the better the isolation offered by your headphones. In general, "closed" headphones and "in-ear" earphones provide more isolation than the "open" type of headsets. (ibuds have bad isolation)
 
Digital-to-analog converter (DAC):
Different DAC's have different dynamic ranges.

 

[Pianist]

Quote:

Isolation:
The higher the dynamic range reached, the better the isolation offered by your headphones. In general, "closed" headphones and "in-ear" earphones provide more isolation than the "open" type of headsets. (ibuds have bad isolation)

 

 

[james444]

Quote:

That's a result of it's frequency response,not dynamic range. IEMs don't simply have their own dynamic range, any engineer will tell you this. 

 
You sure don't mean impulse (transient) response? I'd think the time domain is also relevant for lifelike reproduction of dynamics.
 
Quote:

With RE0, I felt that dynamic music sounded quite a bit flatter and less expressive than it should - the variations between louder and quieter sounds became far less pronounced and exciting.

 
X2, the RE0 were simply overdamped imo.

 

[Deni5]

Quote:

 

 
Got the info from Audiocheck. They also state:
"Dynamic range represents the ratio between the loudest signal you can hear and the quietest. Dynamic range is not part of any headphone specification, but will help you when benchmarking the isolation offered by your headphone in a noisy environment."

 

[ClieOS]

Quote:

Has anyone compared the RE400 to the Brainwavz B2? Would the B2 be much of an upgrade?

 
If you like a lot of detail and clarity then B2 can be considered an upgrade. If you are looking for better bass and more texture mid, then it is not.

 

[Pianist]

Quote:

 
Got the info from Audiocheck. They also state:
"Dynamic range represents the ratio between the loudest signal you can hear and the quietest. Dynamic range is not part of any headphone specification, but will help you when benchmarking the isolation offered by your headphone in a noisy environment."

 
Of course it isn't. But dynamic range reproduction capability is an aspect of a headphone's (or speaker's) sound reproduction. Like james444 wrote it may be related to the impulse response/decay characteristics of a headphone, housing design/damping, and perhaps some other factors as well. IMO, not all headphones can reproduce dynamic range equally well.

 

[Deni5]

Quote:

 
Of course it isn't. But dynamic range reproduction capability is an aspect of a headphone's (or speaker's) sound reproduction. Like james444 wrote it may be related to the impulse response/decay characteristics of a headphone, housing design/damping, and perhaps some other factors as well. IMO, not all headphones can reproduce dynamic range equally well.

 
Personally, I don't think it has anything to do with impulse and decay. It doesn't really fit in the description of what "dynamic range" is imo. Also I think that you and Inks are correct but you look at it from different angles.

 

[james444]

Quote:

Personally, I don't think it has anything to do with impulse and decay. It doesn't really fit in the description of what "dynamic range" is imo. Also I think that you and Inks are correct but you look at it from different angles.

 
"Dynamic range" and "dynamics" may well carry different meanings. What I (and probably Pianist) meant can be illustrated by looking at the impulse response (last graph) of the AKG K3003, which I think have great dynamics, and the Ety MC3, which I feel are overdamped like the RE0. The latter have less amplitude from (presumably) the same signal and shorter decay.
 
I won't claim that the K3003 reproduce dynamics more accurately, just that they sound more lifelike and the MC3 rather lifeless to my ears.

 

[Pianist]

"Dynamics" is short for dynamic range. I don't know what the reason for it is, but RE0 just couldn't produce the same difference in volume between loud and quiet sounds as some other headphones can. It was clearly audible to me. I AB'ed RE0 a lot against other headphones to specifically test dynamics and I always found RE0 to be audibly compressed sounding. It doesn't bring forward quiet sounds as much as it softens the loud ones. The dynamic peaks in music that are supposed to be exciting can sound very flat on RE0 and it doesn't have anything to do with the frequency response. I found Hifiman RE262 much more dynamic, even though they had a less aggressive, less exciting sound than RE0. RE262 simply sound more effortless. That's another word I should use - effortless. Maybe this has to do with transient response. The more dynamic a headphone is the more effortless it sounds, from my experience. Perhaps, the faster the driver can move, the more of the recording it can capture and since dynamic range is also a part of the information on the recording, faster headphones can capture more of the dynamics. And then there is the damping issue - a fast driver can be put in a poorly designed housing that will create so many resonances that the speed of the driver will be completely compromised and the listener simply won't hear it due to all the resonances masking the true transients.

 

[Deni5]

Quote:

 
"Dynamic range" and "dynamics" may well carry different meanings. What I (and probably Pianist) meant can be illustrated by looking at the impulse response (last graph) of the AKG K3003, which I think have great dynamics, and the Ety MC3, which I feel are overdamped like the RE0. The latter have less amplitude from (presumably) the same signal and shorter decay.
 
I won't claim that the K3003 reproduce dynamics more accurately, just that they sound more lifelike and the MC3 rather lifeless to my ears.

I have many times wondered what the Y-axis of Impulse is. Is it Volts?

 

[james444]

Quote:

I have many times wondered what the Y-axis of Impulse is. Is it Volts?

 
Tbh never crossed my mind to wonder about it, but stereophile says you're right.

 

[Inks]

If the RE0 lacked dynamic range it will crackle  when you pump the volume. You can test dynamic range with a maximum FR input test, but it's dangerous cause you push the voltage limit of the driver, you crank it till it clips. Or THD vs input will be a good test. 
 
RE0 is NOT overdamped, it's a well vented design. If anything it's a bit underdamped, dampening evens out it's resonant points and gives it a more depth. Dynamic drivers in general are fine in dynamic range unless you underdamp a certain frequency. MC5 may be overdamped though.