Joe Bloggs
Sponsor: HiByMember of the Trade: EFO Technologies Co, YanYin TechnologyHis Porta Corda walked the Green Mile
Weird...wonder if that's accurate....over 10ms+ decay in the lower midrange and below? Maybe I don't know how to read graphs.
An inherent flaw of these cumulative spectral decay graphs is that they are based on the raw measured frequency response of the earphones and are greatly influenced by this frequency response. For example, big long decay in the bass for any earphones with elevated bass response according to raw measurements. Treble peaks that almost always turn into ridges running down the graph. (Though not really in this case, for some reason). At my suggestion, xnor once applied minimum phase EQ to cancel out the effects of frequency response on a CSD plot of a pair of (unknown, but reportedly not really HiFi) earphones. That discussion ran from p. 49 to p.51 in this thread: http://www.head-fi.org/t/566929/headphone-csd-waterfall-plots/720#post_8475205
The discussion can be summed up in two graphs. One the raw CSD:
One the same CSD compensated with a minimum phase EQ filter to cancel out the effects of frequency response:
When compensated, the result was hardly recognizable as a CSD plot, almost all the "ringing" and "decay" was gone, this showed that (pulling a number out of my ass) 90% of all the ringing and decay you see in usual CSD plots are simply the direct result of the earphones' frequency response and not really indicative of any time domain aberrations inherent in the driver / housing...
And until compensated CSD plots become the norm, I wouldn't look into CSD plots for any insight into the sound of any headphones...
Stay updated on HiBy at their facebook, website or email (icons below).
Stay updated on HiBy at their sponsor profile on Head-Fi.
|