[redrol]

I don't think we should be pandering to people's precious preferences. In fact I think the LRAD-based frequency response target is a good idea.
Total compliance with the will of the music should be our aim. That would sort the wheat from the chaff. If a person can take a miniature LRAD point-blank to the head, then they're serious about listening to their Michael Bolton, or what have you. Of course we'd then have to mend the resulting permanent deafness with some state-of-the-art hearing aids, probably cyborg ears. But that's good. To be a post-human sound-receptacle should be the end-goal of any serious audiophile. The cyborg ears could expand the audible spectrum!

I had to read this a few times and laughed stupidly hard.

ALL YOUR MUSIC WILL COMPLY

 

[Elegiac]

I had to read this a few times and laughed stupidly hard.

ALL YOUR MUSIC WILL COMPLY

Ha! I was watching some TNG Borg clips on youtube earlier

 

[Eisenhower]

This is probably oversimplifying things, but it seems like a temporary 'band aid' solution would be to just modify the Harman curve based on the differences between the measurement systems' response, given an identical test input signal? Sorry if this is basically what has been suggested above.

Q: Why not just use a well-known headphone like the Sennheiser HD 650 as a reference point?
A: While this is useful as a point of comparison - and I imagine would be useful to many who have heard that headphone - this approach won't work for anyone who hasn't heard that headphone. Additionally, this is less helpful for evaluative purposes, because even the HD 650 has a particular 'flavor' to it - as do all headphones.

Also I'm not sure how tight the tolerances are with any consumer headphone.. They don't sound identical and companies even sneakily make changes while keeping the same model name.

 

[Resolve]

This is probably oversimplifying things, but it seems like a temporary 'band aid' solution would be to just modify the Harman curve based on the differences between the measurement systems' response, given an identical test input signal? Sorry if this is basically what has been suggested above.

It's because headphones behave differently on different heads, meaning you won't get a 1:1 comparison. This is also precisely why Harman's own internal method is merely a stop-gap to get data on the 5128 that's... familiar. But they likely wouldn't do that for the development of an actual reference curve on the 5128.

 

[bigshot]

Close enough for government work. Harman is an average, not a fixed target. It’s expected that you’re going to fine tune to your own ears and taste.

 

[Plumbus the Wise]

The thing is, calling Harman a "target" implies that if you reach it, you have hit the bulls eye. That isn't the case. Harman simply averaged a range of preferences. So if you hit the target, unless you are a perfect average person, you may still be off by a bit from your own preference. That's why Harman should be looked at as a rough calibration- a starting point- not a destination. Use your EQ deviation calculation to get in the ballpark, then tune the rest of the way by ear to your own preference.

Old bump here, but Sean Olive specifically made the target as a baseline for the end user to start eqing to their preferences (especially for the bass values). It's literally part of any literature you read or interviews you watch with him.

A target is just that...a target. How you interpret it from there is entirely in your hands.

 

[gregorio]

It's literally part of any literature you read or interviews you watch with him.

Ah, but that’s not the audiophile way. Firstly, you should generally avoid reading any literature or watching interviews/videos unless it is specifically audiophile marketing and Secondly, if you do accidentally stumble across some that isn’t just audiophile marketing, you must endeavour to only understand/contextualise it in terms of audiophile marketing myths and failing that, just deliberately misrepresent it regardless!

G

 

[Plumbus the Wise]

Ah, but that’s not the audiophile way. Firstly, you should generally avoid reading any literature or watching interviews/videos unless it is specifically audiophile marketing and Secondly, if you do accidentally stumble across some that isn’t just audiophile marketing, you must endeavour to only understand/contextualise it in terms of audiophile marketing myths and failing that, just deliberately misrepresent it regardless!

G

I think the more subjective a hobby or industry can be the worse the wuu wuu gets. Sadly audio is so subjective due to our preferences so we get wuu wuu out the bumbum.

 

[gregorio]

I think the more subjective a hobby or industry can be the worse the wuu wuu gets. Sadly audio is so subjective due to our preferences so we get wuu wuu out the bumbum.

True to an extent but the audiophile world goes beyond that extent. Sometimes extremist communities form within larger communities, who not only eschew but actively fight against the actual facts/science in favour of marketing/propaganda and so “wuu wuu out the bumbum” is pretty much all they’re left with. For example, audio is just as subjective to the pro-audio community as it is to the audiophile community and while it is still subject to wuu wuu to an extent, it’s only a tiny fraction of the wuu wuu in the audiophile world because it does not eschew the facts/science.

G

 

[bigshot]

It’s because audio components are a status symbol for some folks. They invest their ego in their equipment, and when someone says the equipment isn’t as good as they think it is, they take that as a personal attack on them.

Personally, I think investing your ego in transistors and wires is profoundly lame, but I guess that’s all they’ve got.

 

[Plumbus the Wise]

It’s because audio components are a status symbol for some folks. They invest their ego in their equipment, and when someone says the equipment isn’t as good as they think it is, they take that as a personal attack on them.

Personally, I think investing your ego in transistors and wires is profoundly lame, but I guess that’s all they’ve got.

Why cant they just buy a big truck like everyone else?

 

[bigshot]

Big truck, small..,”

 

[Plumbus the Wise]

Big truck, small..,”

 

[maddib]

There's also one important point regarding target curves. Some believe if they find or customize some target they prefer every music track simply must sound great. This is not true by nature. There are so many bad, good or even excellent recordings and masterings made with a broad range of overall sound quality. This makes it impossible to create one single target that fits for all tracks.
So, you also have to chose proper tracks while trying certain targets.
My question here. Is there any kind of music or artificial audio track that is well known to be a good base for subjective listening tests?