I can see in phones spec. information about how much pressure (i.e. in Newton) each circumaural and supraaural phones put to a "standard" head (or ears in case of supraaural ones) to be able to compare the values before buying. Could possibly Sennheiser be a pioneer in the field? I think buyers would appreciate such care about them.
Hello Rosmadi Mahmood,
I have read the whole this thread and still have some questions I would like to ask you to kindly answer. Below are mostly my guesses and common logic conclusions, could you be please so kind to point where I am right and where I am wrong?
Q1) Is analog ALC in 180 and 185 models the same? If not what is a difference?
Q2) Data which is transmitted via RF band in models RS 1x0 (like RS 170 etc.) and 1x5 (like RS 175 etc.) is digital: "MSK Digital" and "8-FSK Digital" format accordingly. User mark2410 had gave us very good and useful review for RS 185, I am thankful to him. He supposed (and not only he) that there is an internal DAC in 1x5 models. Maybe the statement was based upon a price, maybe he has another information source, I do not know, I could not find any official information concerning to it.
Do models 1x5 (like RS 175 etc.) really have a DAC?
Q3) If they have a DAC, why it is needed?
I will try to illustrate in more details my logic below.
Is there is no DAC, processing for digital input data might go like this:
a) digital input data --> processing of digital data (maybe bass boost, surround modes in 175, balance control in 185, balance control, speech clarity etc. in 195) --> Sennhieser (not Kleer’s) digital data processing (prepare for transmission) --> transmitting digital data over RF --> RF read by phones and Sennhieser (not Kleer’s) digital data reverse processing/decoding --> phone’s DAC --> phone’s amplifier.
b) analog input data --> analog data processing (like setting sound level, ALC, MLC) --> ADC --> here we get the same digital data as in case 3-a and further processing goes the same way.
The mentioned above "processings" (bass boost etc.) work for both analog and digital input and could be controlled from phones remotely too, so they should logically be in digital circuit, but analog data processing (like setting sound level, ALC, MLC) is available only for analog input.
I suppose the architecture is a correct one, am I right?
If there would be an internal DAC within, then processing for digital input would rather go like this:
c) digital input data --> DAC --> analog data (like setting sound level, ALC, MLC) --> ADC --> digital data --> processing of digital data (maybe bass boost, surround modes in 175, balance control in 185, balance control, speech clarity etc. in 195) --> Sennhieser (not Kleer’s) digital data processing --> transmitting digital data over RF --> RF read by phones and Sennhieser (not Kleer’s) digital data reverse processing/decoding --> phone’s DAC --> phone’s amplifier.
d) analog input data --> analog data processing (like setting sound level, ALC, MLC) - here we get the same analog data as in case 3-c and further processing goes the same way.
If case 3-c would hold true,
I) we would have sound level adjustment possibility for digital input too;
II) Sennhieser would not suggest always to use digital input, but only in cases when external DAC is not so good as one from TR 1x5 (SNR values from specification for analog and digital input also says about it).
III) There could be possibility to use ALC for digital input (good feature btw.).
So it looks like it is not the case we have.
Please correct me where I am wrong and point me where I am correct.
Q4) If one looks upon the very first page of manual for RS 1x0 and RS 1x5 models one can see in pictures that 1x5 models do have more curved holder "springs", I mean ear pads have bigger angle between them. It looks firmer in TR holder, but IMO it is not good for head. Someone also writes that 1x5 version has much more pressure to head then 1x0. I just do not understand why it is done so (comparing to 1x0 models)... For my mom bigger pressure is a big disadvantage. For Hi-Fi phones one might not wear them for whole day, but for TV usage it could be the case. One even can fall asleep accidentally with phones on, how would he feel after waking up? People with good health might not pay much attention to it (which IMO is unwise), but my mom has a headache after such ones - I bought her once phones she could not use. I might understand it if the phones would be made for sport. I do like how Sennhieser phones sound in general, especially good ones and give a big and sincere credit to engineers’ hard work, but I would like to ask them in the particular case - why?
Q5) In my wild dreams
Question @everyone who possesses 1x5 models:
- How much maximal time could you spend wearing them?
- How pressure to head is compared to HD-650 (which I have, so can get an impression comparing to it)?
Many thanks to Rosmadi Mahmood and everybody in advance!
Hello Rosmadi Mahmood,
I have read the whole this thread and still have some questions I would like to ask you to kindly answer. Below are mostly my guesses and common logic conclusions, could you be please so kind to point where I am right and where I am wrong?
Q1) Is analog ALC in 180 and 185 models the same? If not what is a difference?
They are not the same. While both ALCs are designed not to overload the ADC at high analog audio signal levels, the RS 185's ALC is superior to the RS 180's. The RS 185's ALC circuit gives the best possible dynamic range for the audio signal without clipping or distorting the signal.
Q2) Data which is transmitted via RF band in models RS 1x0 (like RS 170 etc.) and 1x5 (like RS 175 etc.) is digital: "MSK Digital" and "8-FSK Digital" format accordingly. User mark2410 had gave us very good and useful review for RS 185, I am thankful to him. He supposed (and not only he) that there is an internal DAC in 1x5 models. Maybe the statement was based upon a price, maybe he has another information source, I do not know, I could not find any official information concerning to it.
Do models 1x5 (like RS 175 etc.) really have a DAC?
Q3) If they have a DAC, why it is needed?
Yes. Due to the RF transmission of digital uncompressed audio data, a DAC is needed inside the headphone to convert the digital audio to analog audio.
If there would be an internal DAC within, then processing for digital input would rather go like this:
c) digital input data --> DAC --> analog data (like setting sound level, ALC, MLC) --> ADC --> digital data --> processing of digital data (maybe bass boost, surround modes in 175, balance control in 185, balance control, speech clarity etc. in 195) --> Sennhieser (not Kleer’s) digital data processing --> transmitting digital data over RF --> RF read by phones and Sennhieser (not Kleer’s) digital data reverse processing/decoding --> phone’s DAC --> phone’s amplifier.
d) analog input data --> analog data processing (like setting sound level, ALC, MLC) - here we get the same analog data as in case 3-c and further processing goes the same way.
C) Digital audio processing with different features dependent on the variant.
If case 3-c would hold true,
I) we would have sound level adjustment possibility for digital input too;
There is, only MLC is reserved for analog input.
II) Sennhieser would not suggest always to use digital input, but only in cases when external DAC is not so good as one from TR 1x5 (SNR values from specification for analog and digital input also says about it).
We recommend digital input if available as for a lot of cases and users, this is the better and more convenient connection.
III) There could be possibility to use ALC for digital input (good feature btw.).
So it looks like it is not the case we have.
ALC is not implemented for digital as such is already levelled quite well. Analog input differs widely depending on content and source.
Please correct me where I am wrong and point me where I am correct.
Q4) If one looks upon the very first page of manual for RS 1x0 and RS 1x5 models one can see in pictures that 1x5 models do have more curved holder "springs", I mean ear pads have bigger angle between them. It looks firmer in TR holder, but IMO it is not good for head. Someone also writes that 1x5 version has much more pressure to head then 1x0. I just do not understand why it is done so (comparing to 1x0 models)... For my mom bigger pressure is a big disadvantage. For Hi-Fi phones one might not wear them for whole day, but for TV usage it could be the case. One even can fall asleep accidentally with phones on, how would he feel after waking up? People with good health might not pay much attention to it (which IMO is unwise), but my mom has a headache after such ones - I bought her once phones she could not use. I might understand it if the phones would be made for sport. I do like how Sennhieser phones sound in general, especially good ones and give a big and sincere credit to engineers’ hard work, but I would like to ask them in the particular case - why?
We need to ensure a good seal especially for closed type headphones. Over the years, we found that sound leakage tends to happen at the lower portion of the ear near to the neck and jaw, where the facial profile can differ drastically. We try to compensate this by having a more 'curved' or bigger angle for RS 1X5. However, this means that for some customers with a more 'squarish' face, they might experience higher pressure at the lower portion.
It is a challenge to achieve a good balance between comfort and acoustic requirements; and we are trying our best to satisfy the majority of customers while at the same time providing the best sound experience possible.
Q5) In my wild dreams
Some customer may prefer a higher pressure to feel more secure while some do not. Also, we need to balance the pressure for the headphones to be tight enough so as to allow the customer to move around and not letting it slide or drop off.
If we present a value to a regular customer, it may not necessarily be helpful as he may not be able to judge the difference between 6N and 4N, for example. The best way for the customer is still to try it in a store before purchasing. Nevertheless, we thank you for this suggestion and we'll consider to include it for our future launches.
Hi @fairwind
Please see our response in blue below:
Quote:
Q1) Is analog ALC in 180 and 185 models the same? If not what is a difference?
They are not the same. While both ALCs are designed not to overload the ADC at high analog audio signal levels, the RS 185's ALC is superior to the RS 180's. The RS 185's ALC circuit gives the best possible dynamic range for the audio signal without clipping or distorting the signal.
That’s a good news to know! Because many people might use analog input too.
Q2) Do models 1x5 (like RS 175 etc.) really have a DAC?
Q3) If they have a DAC, why it is needed?
Yes. Due to the RF transmission of digital uncompressed audio data, a DAC is needed inside the headphone to convert the digital audio to analog audio.
A DAC is needed not only inside headphones of new 1x5 models, but in old 1x0 models too which do not have a digital input, so I and user mark2410 were both speaking not about it. So I see that my logic was correct
There is, only MLC is reserved for analog input.
Actually, I meant MLC in my post, sorry for the misspelled definition.
III) There could be possibility to use ALC for digital input (good feature btw.).
So it looks like it is not the case we have.
ALC is not implemented for digital as such is already levelled quite well. Analog input differs widely depending on content and source.
In theory digital input should be leveled well, but according to my personal experience it is not always the case for digital TV broadcasts for example where commercials are mixed with movies.
Q4) If one looks upon the very first page of manual for RS 1x0 and RS 1x5 models one can see in pictures that 1x5 models do have more curved holder "springs", I mean ear pads have bigger angle between them. It looks firmer in TR holder, but IMO it is not good for head. Someone also writes that 1x5 version has much more pressure to head then 1x0. I just do not understand why it is done so (comparing to 1x0 models)... For my mom bigger pressure is a big disadvantage. For Hi-Fi phones one might not wear them for whole day, but for TV usage it could be the case. One even can fall asleep accidentally with phones on, how would he feel after waking up? People with good health might not pay much attention to it (which IMO is unwise), but my mom has a headache after such ones - I bought her once phones she could not use. I might understand it if the phones would be made for sport. I do like how Sennhieser phones sound in general, especially good ones and give a big and sincere credit to engineers’ hard work, but I would like to ask them in the particular case - why? We need to ensure a good seal especially for closed type headphones. Over the years, we found that sound leakage tends to happen at the lower portion of the ear near to the neck and jaw, where the facial profile can differ drastically. We try to compensate this by having a more 'curved' or bigger angle for RS 1X5. However, this means that for some customers with a more 'squarish' face, they might experience higher pressure at the lower portion.
IMO bigger angle is Ok, because it is adjusted to head anyway, but bigger pressure is not Ok.
Here is my idea: try to use “foam with memory effect” within ear pads instead of common foam. “Foam with memory effect” is used mostly in mattresses now to “wrap” body with more equal pressure making more comfortable feeling. Is it not what everybody wants to have in headphones? The new material would give you a better sound isolation but with less total pressure to a listener head. I do not need a patent - you can have itjust create comfortable phones in return! I am sure new material might has a bit different acoustic properties, but the difficulty IMO is surmountable.
It is a challenge to achieve a good balance between comfort and acoustic requirements; and we are trying our best to satisfy the majority of customers while at the same time providing the best sound experience possible.
Yes that is indeed a challenge and I am totally agree with you here, but please listen to my logic below.
a) Open phones like 180, 185 models suffer much less from the problem. What here could be done: either use not so tight holder for new 185 open model only, or at least not discontinue old 180 model which is not so tight. Even majority can read reviews and impressions from minority, so IMO both groups would be better treated with proper respect giving them a possibility of choice (again, I mean discontinuing 180 model here).
b) Some people write about “not so comfortable” leather ear pads in 175 and 195 models comparing to velour ear pads of 185 model, so ones have to put up with worse isolation and, as an effect, worse bass sound but more comfort velour ear pads, while other ones have to put up with worse comfort but more true sound with leather ear pads. This might mean too much pressure issue too. Keywords here are “have to put up” which indicates to a clear possibility for potential improvement.
c) Just as another proposal, research team can try to wear the phones for a long time like a whole day etc. and find out for themselves what it feels like. I also sometimes tend to offer other people “what is better for them”, but do not do it myself. But I aware of this my problem and I am working on it immediately correcting myself when I notice it. If the proposal is too cruel then you could use the method for defaulters only
Q5) In my wild dreams
Some customer may prefer a higher pressure to feel more secure while some do not. Also, we need to balance the pressure for the headphones to be tight enough so as to allow the customer to move around and not letting it slide or drop off.
If we present a value to a regular customer, it may not necessarily be helpful as he may not be able to judge the difference between 6N and 4N, for example. The best way for the customer is still to try it in a store before purchasing. Nevertheless, we thank you for this suggestion and we'll consider to include it for our future launches.
Yes!
In the beginning IMO, customers would not know what to do with the new characteristic. But here is a quite possible scenario for further development of things: “minority” would check and compare the values on themselves and write their impressions in reviews and etc., “majority” would accustom to the specification and will learn how to apply it to personal preferences.
.gif)
