[vid]

  Until you hear one...
 
Nah $500 is a good spot for these imo. That's what I paid. I also think the HD800 should be about $700 south from its current standing, and that pretty much nothing but the 009 deserves a price above it, so take that as you will.
 
Conversely, I now place the DR-Z7 at about $250 at most. For some better metrics: AKG Q701 at $200 is good. Etymotic ER-4S is reasonable at $300 too.

 
The yamaha hp-1, measured in the same lot, came out better in terms of fidelity than the sansui, so I assume you'd put the yamas at 500 € or so as well. Yet I see them selling for less than 100 €, which I assume to mean that the sansui should also be less than 100 € to get your money's worth. Incidentally, the k 701 that I had was significantly on par with the sennheiser hd 530 that I have, which cost about 30 €. For that reason, I might even suggest that your prices would best be divided by 6 to get my prices.

 

[GREQ]

  The yamaha hp-1, measured in the same lot, came out better in terms of fidelity than the sansui, so I assume you'd put the yamas at 500 € or so as well. Yet I see them selling for less than 100 €, which I assume to mean that the sansui should also be less than 100 € to get your money's worth. Incidentally, the k 701 that I had was significantly on par with the sennheiser hd 530 that I have, which cost about 30 €. For that reason, I might even suggest that your prices would best be divided by 6 to get my prices.

None of the T50s & variants including the Sansui made a proper seal on the dummy head.
Most of the measurements are invalid and inaccurate. 
 
The HD530 can't touch any T50 variant with a barge pole.

 

[vid]

  None of the T50s & variants including the Sansui made a proper seal on the dummy head.
Most of the measurements are invalid and inaccurate. 
 
The HD530 can't touch any T50 variant with a barge pole.

 
I was under the assumption that the seal was bad. I've not said of the 530 vs anything other than the k 701, though - and the point was regarding takato's projections of price.

 

[takato14]

 
The yamaha hp-1, measured in the same lot, came out better in terms of fidelity than the sansui, so I assume you'd put the yamas at 500 € or so as well. Yet I see them selling for less than 100 €, which I assume to mean that the sansui should also be less than 100 € to get your money's worth. Incidentally, the k 701 that I had was significantly on par with the sennheiser hd 530 that I have, which cost about 30 €. For that reason, I might even suggest that your prices would best be divided by 6 to get my prices.

Better fidelity my ass. That impulse response is absolutely awful compared to the Sansuis, which are much cleaner in decay.
 
The distortion measurements are also comparable. The 90dB plots are very similar, with only a slight advantage on the HP-1. The T50 variants begin to freak out at 100dB because they only have a max input of 250mW, while the Yamahas are specced at over four times that. Not really fair to judge a headphone designed for critical listening based on power handling.
 
So yeah, really not sure where you're getting "better fidelity" from. Plus, I'm getting pretty sick of you trying to talk up the Yamaha planars as the best thing ever, especially in threads where it's not called for.

 

[vid]

No need for rudeness - I had my post deleted once when I referred to the buttocks region.
 
The yamaha has lower distortion; not by much, but if you're paying <100 vs >500 then you'd want this the other way around. The frequency response of the yamas is better controlled below 1 kHz - even with a poor fit, I wouldn't expect from a smooth response the roughness shown for the sansui. This suggests faster decay in the lower mids for the yama. Not a big difference, again, but again, you'd want it the other way around if you're paying six times more. Not much more can be said of the decay based on the impulse response in my opinion, as the poor fit applies equally to this as for the frequency graph.
 
As for calling something better than something else - I don't see a problem with that as long as there's reasoning behind it.

 

[GREQ]

Quote:

   The frequency response of the yamas is better controlled below 1 kHz - even with a poor fit.

Talking from personal experience or measurements?

 

[vid]

We were talking about tyll's latest measurements, weren't we?

 

[GREQ]

Any really, I'm just curious.
A lot of people say a lot of good things about the HP-1, but after the HP-3 and HP-2 I probably will pass on it anyway since I think I'm just not much a fan of the 'Yamaha' sound.

 

[takato14]

  No need for rudeness - I had my post deleted once when I referred to the buttocks region.
 
The yamaha has lower distortion; not by much, but if you're paying <100 vs >500 then you'd want this the other way around. The frequency response of the yamas is better controlled below 1 kHz - even with a poor fit, I wouldn't expect from a smooth response the roughness shown for the sansui. This suggests faster decay in the lower mids for the yama. Not a big difference, again, but again, you'd want it the other way around if you're paying six times more. Not much more can be said of the decay based on the impulse response in my opinion, as the poor fit applies equally to this as for the frequency graph.
 
As for calling something better than something else - I don't see a problem with that as long as there's reasoning behind it.

Stop. That is not how measurements work.
 
Measurements do not lie. The impulse response shows less ringing, there's less ringing. The Sansuis are cleaner, end of story.
 
Ringing is the mortal enemy of high fidelity. You can have the smoothest response in the world, the best square waves in the world, and it won't mean anything if the decay is subpar. It will sound worse. This is why the SS-100 is on a higher level than the Yamahas, even with a poor seal. If this is what the dummy head hears, you're gonna hear something pretty damn similar. I have heard both and the Yamahas sound congested, dark, and cupped in comparison. 

 

[vid]

The impulse response is the frequency response is the decay. If you wave off the frequency response, you wave off the impulse response.
 
The small soundstage and lack of subbass on some models aren't for everyone. Apart from those, the sound of the yamas is largely malleable.

 

[takato14]

  The impulse response is the frequency response is the decay. If you wave off the frequency response, you wave off the impulse response.
 
The small soundstage and lack of subbass on some models aren't for everyone. Apart from those, the sound of the yamas is largely malleable.

Fine. Assuming this entire measurement sheet is correct, I would still take the Sansuis based on measurements alone. The Impulse response is aeons ahead of the Yamahas, which indicates a massive difference in overall fidelity. Another thing you also have to remember is that Tyll's measurement sheets do not include distortion in the frequency response. Take the DR-Z7:
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/SonyDRZ7.pdf
 
It measures like this on Tyll's rig, but on a friend's rig measures almost completely flat (+-1dB) from 20 to 1k. The reason? The 2nd/even order bass distortion is there to thicken things up and provide warmth. I'll show you these plots in PM if you'd like, but not here as I was asked not to post them publicly. He measured the SS-100 as well, and it exhibited the same effect, but with an even flatter response than the Z7. 

 

[vid]

  Fine. Assuming this entire measurement sheet is correct, I would still take the Sansuis based on measurements alone. The Impulse response is aeons ahead of the Yamahas, which indicates a massive difference in overall fidelity. Another thing you also have to remember is that Tyll's measurement sheets do not include distortion in the frequency response. Take the DR-Z7:
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/SonyDRZ7.pdf
 
It measures like this on Tyll's rig, but on a friend's rig measures almost completely flat (+-1dB) from 20 to 1k. The reason? The 2nd/even order bass distortion is there to thicken things up and provide warmth. I'll show you these plots in PM if you'd like, but not here as I was asked not to post them publicly. He measured the SS-100 as well, and it exhibited the same effect, but with an even flatter response than the Z7. 

 
If you did take the sansuis as shown, you'd be listening to the world's tinniest $500 headphones. And if you did measure them with a proper seal - assuming that's what the problem was here - you'd be looking at a different impulse response.
 
My take on why the sony measure different on that guy's rig than on tyll's: (a) not the same dummy head, and (b) different compensation curves. Just guessing.

 

[GREQ]

Would a new measurement with extra silicone rings to help seal the dummy head be invalid? 
Did Tyll have an opinion on this?
 
I just think that if he's trying to provide a good public resource, invalid measurements by poor seal should not even be published.

All it does it create negative karma.

 

[vid]

Yeah, bit unfortunate that the fit issues haven't been easily solvable, and also, I wonder whether the measurement sheet should have some room for remarks in these cases.

 

[takato14]

By the way, Kabeer's Aiwas actually do have their stock pads, but they're different than the other T50 variants. They're much less flat, but they are also slightly decayed and cracked. 
 

 
This might explain a few things.
 
Also, I've added a bit more dampening to the SS-100's cups and gained some low end clarity. Sounds very similar to the Etymotic ER-4S I have on hand, but with a bit more upper midrange and treble (less peaks, more fleshed out) on the Sansuis as well as slightly better transients on the Etys. I'm tempted to try restuffing the stock earpads to see if I can improve the bass seal without ruining the good ear-side acoustics... but maybe it'd be best to try other pads first. I'm interested in what HiFiMAN Focus-A pads would do for them, but I'm not sure if they'll fit.