[PTheD]

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazyfrenchman27 Frequency response is a meaningless specification in determining the quality of a headphone. -Matt

I wonder just how meaningless it is. I know the scientific standards of accuracy are based on how large a dB drop is considered "actively respondent frequency." But I wonder just how useless this measurement is. Nevermind, I sort of know how useless it is, standards for -3 dB should be in place for stereo equipments stated frequency responce. That is just the number I would like to see used. Half volume is enough for me to say yeah this thing isn't getting it done anymore.

 

[PTheD]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDA OT, but since I already put something semi-useful in this post... why the HD500, of all things?

Well I would love to blaber on about it, but there really isn't that much to it. That and I don't want to distract Little J's thread too much. I'll drop you a PM here soon, k.

 

[RnB180]

oops I misread that frequency range. The numbers were reversed.

anyhow I doubt they can go down to 8 Hz.

 

[PTheD]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RnB180 oops I misread that frequency range. The numbers were reversed. anyhow I doubt they can go down to 8 Hz.

I bet they can't do 8 Hz at or above -3 dB anyway.

 

[allenf]

There is a point here.
If you had tones of say 70KHz and 75kHz present, interference between the tones will produce a tone of 5KHz, which you certainly can hear.
The contribution that interference from non-audible frequencies makes to audio reproduction has been debated for years.