[BenF]

I have finally got to play with my EARS a bit.
Before measuring my Pro 82s, I practiced with BossHifi B8:

As you can see B8 is pretty stable between 400Hz and 2000Hz - regardless of seal, the gorgeous mids will be the same for everyone.
Here are the averaged measurements:

I had doubts about both sides of EARS being calibrated equally well, so I measured both sides using the left mic, and calibrated using each side.
However, I still have my doubts about the calibration file that I was provided.

The dip from 2.5kHz to 6kHz, and the following rise to 8kHz, correspond a bit too closely with my HPN calibration file for the left side:
* Freq(Hz) SPL(dB) Phase(degrees)
2500.0 3.6 81.2
2650.0 4.4 87.8
2800.0 5.5 95.1
3000.0 7.5 103.6
3150.0 9.6 108.9
3350.0 12.9 110.3
3550.0 16.3 104.0
3750.0 19.3 91.9
4000.0 21.8 67.5
4250.0 22.9 37.9
4500.0 21.9 7.4
4750.0 19.1 -8.2
5000.0 17.3 -12.1
5300.0 16.7 -17.5
5600.0 15.3 -33.6
6000.0 11.3 -43.1
6300.0 9.0 -39.4
6700.0 7.1 -30.4
7100.0 6.1 -22.5
7500.0 5.5 -16.5
8000.0 5.2 -10.1

Similar drop and subsequent rise was recorded for Stax L300/L300LE:

What do you think? Is my EARS calibrated properly?

 

[BenF]

I'm going to measure some other headphones and see if it will approximate the measurements at Innerfidelity

 

[Humblepie]

The dip on the Stax L300 in the chart you provided BenF in the 3K-5K range and later in the 10K+ range does not match innerfidelty for the same headphone. There is a slight dip on the innerfidelty chart and elsewhere, but the one you provided is a bit more exaggerated.

 

[joshuadapitan]

Impressions on Pro 82 SQ Wise. Some of my observations with my first 2 days of use. Used sources for the initial impressions: Phonic Mixer, Cayin N3.

Easy to drive cans.

Yes, they are transparent, to the capabilities of the audio equipment. I tried plugging my Pro 82 on a phonic mixer and I could just hear some hiss on some instruments, which is helpful in setting up live audio.

The treble on Pro 82 really gets physical, like if you play guitar tracks, it feels like you are placing your ears near the guitar pickup.

Mids, despite being recessed, is clear.

Bass is tight, and could get physical once you do open the ports, but it would kinda make the bass sounds a little bit slower, masking some details. Opening the ports tends to mask some transients.

Bass boost switches makes the Takstar not just a fun headphone, but also a fun to use headphone. They should not call this PRO 82. This should be FUN 82.

 

[BenF]

I've decided to measure Fostex TH900 Mk2.

Both channels produce the same exact response up to 2.5Khz between the measurements, but there may be differences above.
You may think that the bass response doesn't depend on how you place the headphones on your head - and you'd be wrong.
The reason why the measurements are so consistent, is that I made sure that the headband is closed as much as possible
Here is a measurement of how not closing the headband may affect he sound:

Here is the average response of both channels:

Channel matching is great, usually within 2dB.

Let's take a look at Tyll's measurement (from https://www.innerfidelity.com/images/Fostex_Variants_Measurements.pdf):

it's easier to see the similarities, If I use zoom out to the same scale:

Up to 1kHz, they look almost identical.
In my measurement, the decline after 1kHz goes as deep as 11-12dB and ends at 3.7kHz
In Tyll's measurement, the decline after 1kHz goes 8-9dB deep an ends at 2.7kHz

In my measurement, the rise after the decline goes as high as 18dB and ends at 7.7kHz - this is the reason for both occasional sibilance and the airy presentation.
In Tyll's measurement, the rise after the decline goes as high as 9dB and ends at 8.2kHz - not nearly as steep.

As we've seen at https://www.head-fi.org/threads/tak...iscussion-thread.849965/page-78#post-14005821 even 4000$ headphones don't measure the same, so I'm not too surprised that a 1700$ couldn't do it either.

Tyll wrote: "Measurements show this headphone, and the preceding TH900, to be substantially different than the other headphones in this survey, mainly in having a large, wide bass bump, and having extra energy in the 4-8kHz area. I found both the TH900 and TH900mk2 abrasive and hard to the point of aural discomfort. These suck."
https://www.innerfidelity.com/conte...ening-tests-denon-ah-d5000-massdrop-fostex-th

That's a bit harsh. Th900 has exaggerated bass and treble, but it could be a perfect headphone for a basshead.
Tyll writes further: "Pads can make quite a difference, so I swapped the TH610 pads and.... My goodness, what a difference! I really didn't expect that much change. Doesn't quite get the tonality as good as the TH-X00 or Teak, but they're much closer than with the stock pads.
...
If you're a TH900 or TH900mk2 owner, do your ears a favor and get some TH610 earpads."

I agree with Tyll that TH610 pads improve the sound, but they only make a step in the right direction. Some day I'll post my measurements of Th900MK2 with my favorite pads - but not today.
I think I'm finally ready to measure some Pro 82s.

 

[BenF]

Finally, some Pro 82 measurements.
I've measured my beautiful Silver Pro 82 #2 - from the second batch (with 1.6m cable).
It was irreplaceable during my recent trip, so I decided to give it the honor of being first.

Before we move to actual measurements, I'd like to point out that Pro 82 is very sensitive to placement - moving it around can affect bass and high treble greatly:

In my measurements I tried to place the ear in the middle, but obviously that's hard to do.
Headband was fully closed, bass boost off.

Here are the 2 channels:

Channel balance is as good as on Fostex TH900Mk2, except for very low bass and very high treble.
Since these are the exact areas affected by placement, the differences are likely due to different placement, and not due to any difference in the drivers.

Now let's average the channels and compare with TH900Mk2:

How about that linearity?!
I didn't think that transparency can be measured, but that linearity is what's causing transparency for sure.
From 20Hz to 3100Hz, Pro 82 fluctuates within 6.5dB, while TH900Mk2 goes down 16.5dB...
If anyone knows of a headphone that measures this flat for that long - let me know!
Even my Stax L300 and L300LE didn't measure that well.

I used to think of Th900MK2 as a "mid-forward" headphone, but now I know that its warmth comes from the exaggerated bass, not from forward mids.
The mids on TH900Mk2 crash from 1kHz, and it's consistent in my and Tyll's measurements.
Mids on Pro 82 are almost dead flat!

That first peak at 4.6khz is what's causing occasional sibilance on TH900MK2.
Pro 82 is a healthy 6-10 dB lower through that climb - no sibilance here!

That second peak at 7.7kHz is probably what's giving TH900MK2 that airy presentation.
I wish Pro 82 would have it, but not if the first peak comes with it

For all the skeptics who were saying that comparing a 70$ headphone to a 1700$ headphone is insane - now you (hopefully) know better .
Comparison with Fostex TH-900MK2
Comparison with Fostex TH-900, Fostex TH-X00 Purpleheart, Sennheiser 800/6xx, Beyerdynamic T90 (by Ahmadfaizadnan)

Of course, we have to keep in mind that frequency response doesn't tell the whole story - it only shows the tonal balance and perhaps transparency.
The actual quality of the sound depends on other parameters too, such as impulse response - which I currently can't measure on EARS due to a REW limitation.

 

[Adide]

I've tried to be open minded for so long but this blatantly manipulating bias of yours can't be tolerated anymore.
You're measurements do not look good and in general you're twisting facts and numbers so that everything will point to your conclusion.

I don't care if you are financially compensated for what you do, conducting a social experiment of manipulation or just super-duper-over-hyped on these phones but people reading this thread should literally disregard all your posts in order to have an honest image of Pro 82.

You're now going to ignore list @BenF. Please do the same with me.

 

[Daize]

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/das...-and-impressions.711844/page-77#post-10722594 looks like it's a trend ...

 

[Chein]

Wow, talk about drama...
Yeah of course the 82Pro won't compete with expensive headphones, everybody knows that.
BenF just looks (really) passionate about these headphones, and when you are passionate about something you tend to overlook the negatives

 

[BenF]

I've tried to be open minded for so long but this blatantly manipulating bias of yours can't be tolerated anymore.
You're measurements do not look good and in general you're twisting facts and numbers so that everything will point to your conclusion.
...

I keep looking at the Pro 82 measurements, and can't see what exactly "doesn't look so good".
Is it the part where bass and mids are flat?
Is it the part where Pro 82 treble looks pretty much like TH900MK2's treble, if it was passed through "de-essing" to remove sibilance?
Is it something else?

Obviously, he won't be able to answer now, but if anyone sees a real problem in Pro 82's measurements - please point it out. Seriously.

...You're now going to ignore list @BenF. Please do the same with me.

Ask - and you shall receive.
Unfortunately, this is not the last time he'll be posting in this thread - people who don't own Pro 82 seem to have very negative opinions of it, and feel obligated to share them again and again and again...

 

[OscarPaz]

I had doubts about both sides of EARS being calibrated equally well, so I measured both sides using the left mic, and calibrated using each side.
However, I still have my doubts about the calibration file that I was provided.

What do you think? Is my EARS calibrated properly?

Measuring headphones is certainly no easy task... I can't help much with it (have no experience whatsoever) and I think you already tried to average some things out and minimize potential measurement biases... But, shouldn't you contact miniDSP to ask about possible variations in their calibration files?

Here are the 2 channels:

@BenF, this looks a bit counterintuitive to me, at least in the low frequency range. The plot does suggest the mids have some good presence wrt the bass, and that's not what my ears tell. My Pro 82 are from the first batch, old version, so that might explain it... Will you measure those as well?
The lows-to-mids transition in the plot doesn't seem to approach the behavior in the graph provided by Takstar either (added by you to this thread), here:

In any case, I really appreciate the effort (because it's hard and takes time) and think that having more measurements to compare with is always favorable.

 

[Roderick]

I just placed an order for Black pro82. I've been follow this thread since The beginning and decided it is about the time I found out for myself how I like The pro82's.

 

[BenF]

...@BenF, this looks a bit counterintuitive to me, at least in the low frequency range. The plot does suggest the mids have some good presence wrt the bass, and that's not what my ears tell. My Pro 82 are from the first batch, old version, so that might explain it... Will you measure those as well?

We know that there have been some physical changes to Pro 82, but have they been tuned differently? We don't know that for sure. I will measure 5 Pro 82s - 2 from the first batch, and 3 from the new one.
Due to the small sample size, we may see the differences between different Pro 82 specimens overshadow the difference between different batches (if it exists).

I initially heard Pro 82s mids as slightly recessed too, but not anymore. Probably because at that time I was more used to mid-forward phones (B8), and compared to those, Pro 82's mids sound recessed.
When you think about it, it's not the right name for them - just because the mids aren't "forward", doesn't mean they are recessed. Neutral is what they are.

Anyway, you will find out soon enough with your new silver ones
BTW, I'm done with buying black Pro 82s - it's silver or nothing from now on. I want headphones that both sound and look great.
Black Pro 82 are too inconspicuous - good looking for sure, but silvers are striking.

 

[BenF]

Wow, talk about drama...
Yeah of course the 82Pro won't compete with expensive headphones, everybody knows that.

Who's "everybody"? And when did "everybody" listen to Pro 82?

BenF just looks (really) passionate about these headphones, and when you are passionate about something you tend to overlook the negatives

If you have bought Pro 82 and had a negative experience with it - please post your impressions.

 

[BenF]

The lows-to-mids transition in the plot doesn't seem to approach the behavior in the graph provided by Takstar either (added by you to this thread), here:

You are right. Takstar's own measurement of Pro 82 looks different from mine, but they do look a lot like another measurement I made.
Take a look at this (apologize for my graphical skills):

Pro 82's bass starts rising at 300HZ, while TH900MK2's bass starts rising at 400Hz
Pro 82's mids crash at 1.1kHz, while TH900MK2's mids crash at 1kHz.
Also, the whole area between the boosted bass and crashing mids is a lot flatter on Pro 82.

Other than that - the similarities are astounding.
The boosted bass is dead flat down to 20Hz on both.
The mids crash 11-12dBs up to 3.7kHz.
The treble rises about 19 dB up to 7.7kHz.

There was a lot of speculation in this thread on whom Takstar was trying to rip off - Sony or Audio-Technica (based purely on the looks).
Turns out, the "victim" is Fostex!
Takstar was trying to make a portable version of TH900MK2 - with great success!
Luckily for us, they had a recent revision of TH900Mk2 - same as mine (serial number #106xx). This revision sounds and measures better than the older revision Tyll has measured.

I don't know if my two Pro 82s from the first batch will measure that close to TH900MK2, but the sample Takstar measured before releasing Pro 82 sure did.
This can't be coincidence, the graphs are way too similar - Takstar was clearly trying to copy the TH900MK2 sounds, without copying it's design and driver.
It all makes sense now.