[Gatepc]

I would say my current headphones are analytical (K702s) and I very much enjoy them! Hover I also can enjoy more laid back headphones like the HD650s etc so I don't know if I count. One thing that gets to me though are headphones that are too laid back they just don't sound involving. But to each their own.

 

[whitefang]

Quote:

Is this club exclusive to those who like crazy amounts of treble? Or is it detail oriented?

Analytical means it is what it is and there is no emphasis on any frequencies across the spectrum
However many people find treble fatiguing and preferred listen to something darker with slightly rolled off treble (or even heavily)
the majority of the headphones/earphone or amps tends to be dark..which makes some people to think that the flat/neutral sound is bright
 

 

[Ishcabible]

Quote:

Analytical means it is what it is and there is no emphasis on any frequencies across the spectrum
However many people find treble fatiguing and preferred listen to something darker with slightly rolled off treble (or even heavily)
the majority of the headphones/earphone or amps tends to be dark..which makes some people to think that the flat/neutral sound is bright
 

I always thought analytical was detail oriented if you take the definition of analyzing into account. I always called no emphasis neutral.

 

[Head Injury]

Quote:

Analytical means it is what it is and there is no emphasis on any frequencies across the spectrum
However many people find treble fatiguing and preferred listen to something darker with slightly rolled off treble (or even heavily)
the majority of the headphones/earphone or amps tends to be dark..which makes some people to think that the flat/neutral sound is bright

My understanding is the exact opposite. Almost all headphones are too bright, to improve perceived detail. Headphones are supposed to have shelved treble and upper mid-range, in order to mimic the damping effect air has in a room. A perfectly flat headphone isn't what audio is supposed to sound like.

 

[nikp]

Quote:

My understanding is the exact opposite. Almost all headphones are too bright, to improve perceived detail. Headphones are supposed to have shelved treble and upper mid-range, in order to mimic the damping effect air has in a room. A perfectly flat headphone isn't what audio is supposed to sound like.

In sound physics, a flat frequency graph is the most accurate sound reproduction - allowing you to hear the music as it is recorded. What audio is supposed to sound differs to everyone so analytical is not limited to neutrality/flatness. 
 

 

[Head Injury]

Quote:

In sound physics, a flat frequency graph is the most accurate sound reproduction - allowing you to hear the music as it is recorded. What audio is supposed to sound differs to everyone so analytical is not limited to neutrality/flatness. 

No, accurate sound reproduction is perceived flat response at the ear drum. Headphones bypass attenuation by the air, and they bypass the effect the outer ear has on sound waves. That's why they should conform to a desired HRTF.
 
Technically the most accurate headphone would analyze the shape of the outer ear, adjust its frequency response accordingly, and have a knob to adjust high frequency attenuation to mimic various distances from the sound "source". But that's too awesome for current tech 

 

[nikp]

Quote:

No, accurate sound reproduction is perceived flat response at the ear drum. Headphones bypass attenuation by the air, and they bypass the effect the outer ear has on sound waves. That's why they should conform to a desired HRTF.
 
Technically the most accurate headphone would analyze the shape of the outer ear, adjust its frequency response accordingly, and have a knob to adjust high frequency attenuation to mimic various distances from the sound "source". But that's too awesome for current tech 

Actually I was thinking of IEMs when I wrote the post. But yes, reality might/always be different to frequency graphs because other elements are involved.
 

 

[Uncle Erik]

No, accurate sound reproduction is perceived flat response at the ear drum. Headphones bypass attenuation by the air, and they bypass the effect the outer ear has on sound waves. That's why they should conform to a desired HRTF.
 
Technically the most accurate headphone would analyze the shape of the outer ear, adjust its frequency response accordingly, and have a knob to adjust high frequency attenuation to mimic various distances from the sound "source". But that's too awesome for current tech 

How about designing a prosthetic ear that slips over your own ear?

Make an outer ear impression, then use that to create an artificial outer ear that will change the way you hear headphones and speakers.

It could be done, but I don't imagine it would be much fun to wear a pair.

 

[Head Injury]

Quote:

How about designing a prosthetic ear that slips over your own ear?
Make an outer ear impression, then use that to create an artificial outer ear that will change the way you hear headphones and speakers.
It could be done, but I don't imagine it would be much fun to wear a pair.

Oh god, don't give businessmen any ideas.

 

[nikp]

 
Quote:

Oh god, don't give businessmen any ideas.

 but seriously no, they won't make any of that. It's like turning braces into this
.
 

 

[nikp]

So can anyone make a list of analytical iems for a start?

 

[Gatepc]

So can anyone make a list of analytical iems for a start?

Hifiman RE 272 were on the analytical side IMO.

 

[nikp]

I personally think the Westone 4 is quite analytical. What do you guys think?

 

[TheWuss]

Etymotics.

 

[aamefford]

Quote:

Etymotics.

Yup, ER4S for sure.  They turned out not to be for me, but a great, detailed iem.
 
As for my tastes, I like a bit of color and warmth - I really don't belong here...