[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bilavideo /img/forum/go_quote.gif First, calling this guy a noob is disrespectful and as irrelevant as calling me "an old timer." Second, I never claimed that the SR60 was "more balanced" than either the PS1000 or the KSC75. All you did was pick up a misstatement, made by someone else, and swallow it whole. The graph I brought up for discussion compared the bottom four headphones in the Prestige series (except for the iGrado). It said nothing about the 325, or the woodies, or the PS-1000, let alone the KSC75. If you're going to make sweeping criticisms, the least you can do is follow the plot.

He was actually calling me the old timer and you the noob, presumably based on our join dates. I was the one that made the statement about the SR60 being more balanced (but God knows I still don't like the sound of it).

Quote:

You should know. Some of your comments are the definition of "mass information." You criticize as "absurd" the claim that "many, or 25-50% of the people . . . will prefer KSC75 over PS1000," but did anyone actually make such a claim? It must be fun to invent claims to criticize. But again, that's just absurd.

I did say many, but I have to admit him quoting percentages did leave a sour taste in my mouth . . . many isn't really an empirical number by any standing.

Quote:

I wouldn't know as I've never heard either headphone, nor did I come here to suggest as much. But your criticism of me, as if I'd made such a claim, is, well, absurd.

Once again, it's aimed at me. Either way it's rather unlikeable of him.

 

[chesebert]

(1) noob was in quotes. It's noob-like for OP to make an argument regarding the sound quality of a pair of headphones by appealing to the Headroom FR graphs. OP should know better.

(2) If OP wants to use frequency response graphs to prove some point about an entry level headphone, at least make sure the measurements were done correctly.

NOT once have I said objective measurements were useless, bad, not needed, etc. I have kept on repeating the same argument over the past 3 pages - using headroom frequency response graphs to draw any conclusion about the sound/sound quality (other than "it works") of a pair of headphones is just plain stupid.

Replying to this thread is like constantly banging my head against a moving wall.

FYI "not good" != "bad" it could mean "just ok"; "mediocre"; "average" among other similar meanings.

 

[Edoardo]

Well, I must tell you that more than once I've found the HeadRoom graphs very useful and loyal to my impression.

BTW, frequency response isn't everything.

Frequency response does not mean fidelity, nor precision, nor headstage.

And, in any case, we shall not like headphones with a flatter frequency response: What? the HR FR graph says that AKG k702 should sound flatter than my Grados while their sound is so boring!!! well, if you like that sound, it's nobody's fault.

 

[Drubbing]

This is why Head fi has gone to the dogs; idiots bitching about a frickin graph, to score meaningless points off each other in a bid for the upper hand in over-analysis of audio knowledge, when you could be listening to music on your damn headphones instead.

 

[Mink]

*deleted*

 

[purrin]

Looking at the headroom frequency graphs, they do indicate that the SR-60s may have a similar balance to the rest of the Grado line-up (hence a partial explanation of the Grado house sound). The little bit of a bass bump compared to the others might have to do with the comfy SR-60 pads which places the ear closer to the measuring mic.

So yes, the FR graphs do have something to say. But in terms of sound signature, I personally find that a cumulative spectral delay graph across frequencies of interest (or across the entire spectrum) say much more than FR. Think of the CSD as a frequency response over time (which shows how fast and how smoothly the drivers get moving and come to a stop, overshoot, rebound, etc. Another important measurement is harmonic distortion (but as long as this is within reason, it's not so critical - in fact some people find certain types of HD nice sounding, i.e. Ribbon tweeters have a ton of harmonic distortion.)

see these links for fun (and yes, if you know how to read them, they do tell a good story about how each driver sounds)

Zaph|Audio

and the linear distortion graphs here:

Midrange test data

Also from the headroom FR graphs, you can see that Grados have a f'up FR from high mid to treble. This kind of tells you they don't sound very smooth up top. Which is very true compared to the Denons or Senns. I haven't measured the non-linear (i.e., harmonic distortion) of the Grados, but I'm betting it's quite high for the lower end ones and gets better as we move up the line. However, I would also bet that the linear distortion of the Grados is quite good - a CSD would show fast rise times with maybe a little bit of overshoot with a quick decay, especially with the bass. This linear distortion of course measuring better as we go up the Grado line. From this driver behavior (CSD graph) along with the FR graph, we can largely deduce the Grado house sound.

 

[purrin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bilavideo /img/forum/go_quote.gif No offense intended but it irks me that you would have to "hope" that your opinion would still count if you "only have 50 posts on head-fi."

It was not directed toward you

I apolgize for any "irking"

I automatically put general disclaimers such as that when I see words like noob. There is absolutely no reason for name calling here. It's funny because I've tried to post stuff that would educate folks (not necessarily just you) about measurement techniques other than FR, but yet most of this tread has descended into pointless back and forth argument and disrespect. Time to close this thread.

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chesebert /img/forum/go_quote.gif (1) noob was in quotes. It's noob-like for OP to make an argument regarding the sound quality of a pair of headphones by appealing to the Headroom FR graphs. OP should know better.

Oh, so we should judge sound quality based on your ears, your brain, and your interpretations of what those two give you combined.

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

Quote:

(2) If OP wants to use frequency response graphs to prove some point about an entry level headphone, at least make sure the measurements were done correctly.

Do you have evidence they weren't? If you're accusing Headroom of NOT measuring them properly you better make it clear now, with evidence. Otherwise I think you break the defamation rule.

Quote:

NOT once have I said objective measurements were useless

Yeah you did actually:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Post 25 OP, stop posting nonsense. HR FR graphs are useless.

What do you call that?

Quote:

I have kept on repeating the same argument over the past 3 pages - using headroom frequency response graphs to draw any conclusion about the sound/sound quality (other than "it works") of a pair of headphones is just plain stupid.

Once again, you're going to need to clarify this. Measurements can and do tell a lot about headphones. Whether you like them is another thing entirely.

Quote:

Replying to this thread is like constantly banging my head against a moving wall.

Oxymoron?

Quote:

FYI "not good" != "bad" it could mean "just ok"; "mediocre"; "average" among other similar meanings.

Honestly your comment threw me, because you said they are "good for the money", but "not good". Kind of sounds like a contradiction leading towards the conclusion that they are actually undesirable, even more so when you included the ibuds as an example.


I agree with purrin though, this thread has run its course. People are going to believe what they want to believe here no matter what anyone says or does.

 

[mypasswordis]

Bilavideo and Shike, it's useless arguing against people who don't listen to reason. I have experienced this many times here.

Tons of people complain about a slight bump in the HD800's frequency response at 6kHz which they only discovered after the graph was posted and when there's a 10dB spike at 7kHz on a PS1000 all of a sudden the FR graphs are completely useless.

 

[jp_zer0]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shike /img/forum/go_quote.gif Oh, so we should judge sound quality based on your ears, your brain, and your interpretations of what those two give you combined. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Do you have evidence they weren't? If you're accusing Headroom of NOT measuring them properly you better make it clear now, with evidence. Otherwise I think you break the defamation rule. Yeah you did actually: What do you call that? Once again, you're going to need to clarify this. Measurements can and do tell a lot about headphones. Whether you like them is another thing entirely. Oxymoron? Honestly your comment threw me, because you said they are "good for the money", but "not good". Kind of sounds like a contradiction leading towards the conclusion that they are actually undesirable, even more so when you included the ibuds as an example. I agree with purrin though, this thread has run its course. People are going to believe what they want to believe here no matter what anyone says or does.

That was very painful to read. You keep misinterpreting him, but that wouldn't be as much of a problem if you weren't so needlessly antagonistic and arrogant.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mypasswordis /img/forum/go_quote.gif Bilavideo and Shike, it's useless arguing against people who don't listen to reason. I have experienced this many times here. Tons of people complain about a slight bump in the HD800's frequency response at 6kHz which they only discovered after the graph was posted and when there's a 10dB spike at 7kHz on a PS1000 all of a sudden the FR graphs are completely useless.

Some more needless antagonism and sophistry.

 

[mypasswordis]

So instead of using factual statements to prove my argument wrong, you decide to name-call. Yep, this is just like almost every other thread here.

 

[Bilavideo]

If the graphs say nothing, those who believe this are free to stop banging their head - or any other appendage - against a moving wall and simply go where they can find fresh adventures. I came here to talk about what the graphs mean. If they are meaningless, one need not engage in the discussion, but having registered one's disagreement, to continue to do so (and with a nasty tone) is really unproductive. If those who have nothing to contribute here will simply find another sandbox, the discussion can continue.

 

[jp_zer0]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mypasswordis /img/forum/go_quote.gif So instead of using factual statements to prove my argument wrong, you decide to name-call. Yep, this is just like almost every other thread here.

I didn't call you by any names whatsoever and I don't even know what your argument is. Not sure what you're trying to pull here.

 

[jp_zer0]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bilavideo /img/forum/go_quote.gif If the graphs say nothing, those who believe this are free to stop banging their head - or any other appendage - against a moving wall and simply go where they can find fresh adventures. I came here to talk about what the graphs mean. If they are meaningless, one need not engage in the discussion, but having registered one's disagreement, to continue to do so (and with a nasty tone) is really unproductive. If those who have nothing to contribute here will simply find another sandbox, the discussion can continue.

Not sure why the graph-agnostics should be ipso facto banned from the discussion. I would think it is extremely relevant to the discussion that the graphs may be irrelevant to SQ.

(Sorry for the double post, doesn't seem like I can fix it.)

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jp_zer0 /img/forum/go_quote.gif That was very painful to read. You keep misinterpreting him, but that wouldn't be as much of a problem if you weren't so needlessly antagonistic and arrogant.

I haven't misrepresented what he's said at all. He's saying going to Headroom's measurements for an idea of sound quality is "stupid". Yet without measurement how would we have something objective?

He keeps saying "Headroom's" graphs are worthless, and seems to be making an accusation that they aren't accurate. Either that, or that FR graphs in general are useless, which of course is a direct contradiction to his latest statement so seems to be unlikely. This means the burden of proof is upon him for evidence or he has broken the defamation rule of this forum.

Plain and simple, his argument keeps on changing when it's most convenient for him and tries shifting blame around -- which isn't working very well for him honestly.

Lastly, if you want antagonistic and arrogant I suggest you read his first few posts in this thread filled with sarcasm and a condescending attitude towards the OP.

Quote:

Not sure why the graph-agnostics should be ipso facto banned from the discussion. I would think it is extremely relevant to the discussion that the graphs may be irrelevant to SQ. (Sorry for the double post, doesn't seem like I can fix it.)

The same reason DBT is banned from the tweaks section.


PS:

Block quotes are worthless. So if you're going to try and point out a section where I misrepresented him make sure it's identifiable in your complaint.