[Bern2]

The HD800+Z1R combo is absolutely awesome.

This is the pairing I have been using lately as well....but I've been using Sonarworks with the HD800. Away from the main gear....been using AQ Nighthawk or the B&W P7 wireless.

 

[beowulf]

This is the pairing I have been using lately as well....but I've been using Sonarworks with the HD800. Away from the main gear....been using AQ Nighthawk or the B&W P7 wireless.

Yes, but how do we combine them all in a single model? I'm tired of all this swapping. Can we get a Z1R/HD800 hybrid (800 umodded, no SDR sh@#, no S, just pure 800)

Just the two, mixed. Fusing in a nice hybrid. That's worth a dozen Utopias. Perhaps even a couple HE-1.
How to mix these two in a single product. Hmm. That would be a proper engineering achievement. I'd share my suggestion on how to do it, but... too hard.

 

[Marc Lian]

Fundamentally, the Harman curve tells us that they have confidence that a high number of listeners will prefer the Harman curve. The Harman curve research is based fundamentally on individual listener preferences. And most important of all, fundamentally, where listener preferences diverged from what Harman defined as "totally neutral", those preferences were incorporated into the curve - notably bass and treble distortions to match listener preferences.

The Harman Target is based on the fact that when perfectly flat speakers (measured in an anechoic chamber) are in a standard room they are perceived to have increased lows and rolled off highs as a result of room gain. It is not some curve that listeners magically plucked from the air, it is the effect of the room altering the sound of speakers. In blind tests, when given a choice between totally flat response and room gain response people just felt that the room gain response sounded more natural and pleasing.

 

[nanaholic]

The Harman Target is based on the fact that when perfectly flat speakers (measured in an anechoic chamber) are in a standard room they are perceived to have increased lows and rolled off highs as a result of room gain. It is not some curve that listeners magically plucked from the air, it is the effect of the room altering the sound of speakers. In blind tests, when given a choice between totally flat response and room gain response people just felt that the room gain response sounded more natural and pleasing.

So in the end you actually didn't say anything that contradicts anything he said - that the Harman Curve is fundamentally a subjective preference that they have confidence that the majority of the people will prefer.

 

[Marc Lian]

So in the end you actually didn't say anything that contradicts anything he said - that the Harman Curve is fundamentally a subjective preference that they have confidence that the majority of the people will prefer.

Somehow I got the idea that he thought the Harman curve was derived from listener preference, when it is based on an actual effect that we experience everyday (which is room gain).

Regardless, I'm curious, you do understand that whenever a pair of speakers are placed within a room the Harman curve is in effect? I only ask because many people easily forget that whenever we place speakers in a room we listen with the Harman curve on whether we want it or not.

About the tests and research with listeners, it's no surprise to me that people would deem it most natural, unless you've only ever listened to speakers in an anechoic chambers all your life.

 

[F700]

This is the pairing I have been using lately as well....but I've been using Sonarworks with the HD800. Away from the main gear....been using AQ Nighthawk or the B&W P7 wireless.

The same here. HD800S, Z1R and LCD-X (velour pads) allow me to find the perfect match depending on my mood and the music style I am listening to. Not being an expert, a sound engineer or even having the skill to describe sound or sound characteristics as others do, I think that this polemic about the FR of Z1R seems quite emotional. FR-graph is something useful, no doubt about it. But before "analyzing" FR-graph, it would be maybe better to have an extended time listening to the headphone itself. Music has to be felt and if you're getting goosebumps listening to your music with cans having an awful FR-graph, well, who cares? After having followed Tyll since years, I found that changing his mind about the Mr.Speaker Ether C Flow some months ago was "bizarre". I had the impression he seemed very embarrassed while doing his apologies-video. It's just a feeling, I might be wrong. If so, my apologies to him. Now, with the Z1R, well, they may be slightly overpriced (what's not today?), but the bashing, yes they have been bashed from Tyll and some of his aficionados in the comments, is suspect in my opinion. Consequently, I doubt a bit about the sincerity and the objectivity of Tyll and his reviews (but not about the measurements, I can't comment on that). I just hope he didn't decide to favor some brands against financial retribution or something going in that direction. It would be sad.

 

[Kamil21]

Perhaps, I have a different preference than most.
For example: mikazuki no mai (dance of the crescent moon); zenkoku tai kai (national finals version) . When drums are struck, i like the impact. When the trumpet solo passage arrives, it conveyed the feelings of a young girl in love (otome no kokoro). The trumpet solo has to convey the gentle longings of a young girl and that passage is very hard to pull it off.
On the z1r, it conveyed those feelings. Bass is there. Treble is not overly bright. It's like the engineers have found a good balance point, true to the Japanese sensibility and aesthetic. Combine that with great workmanship by the shokunin (artisans), it's easy to like the z1r.
How about Louis Armstrong what a wonderful world? I could hear his "throaty"" voice sounding slightly different from each word he sang. The z1r did not miss the subtle nuances.
Lindsay Stirling: crystallize. Violins can be piercing to my ears on the wrong type of gear. But z1r didn't make me stop listening to this piece of music.
Let's not forget the female jazz vocals. Sweet. Mesmerizing. Intoxicating. Beautiful. Long thick blonde hair. Beautiful eyes with long eyelashes. Red ruby lips. Oops... Sorry. Got carried away.
Why don't you try the above titles with your favorite hp and see if you get the same sentiments.
Its something that the z1r has got that made owners like it for what it is.

And this is the major difference between Tyll's Z1R review and others. Unlike other reviews he refers in here less to the music and more to the sounds of the instruments. Nothing wrong with that, as different reviewers look out for different things in headphones.

Like movie, art and car critics, what's important is that we find a critic whose tastes work for you and go with it.

 

[headr]

The Harman Target is based on the fact that when perfectly flat speakers (measured in an anechoic chamber) are in a standard room they are perceived to have increased lows and rolled off highs as a result of room gain. It is not some curve that listeners magically plucked from the air, it is the effect of the room altering the sound of speakers. In blind tests, when given a choice between totally flat response and room gain response people just felt that the room gain response sounded more natural and pleasing.

A lot of things are being confused here. Speaker measurements, Harman curve for speakers, Harman curve for headphones, and so on.

The Harman curve is fundamentally based on listener preferences. I don't know why people are so resistant to this idea, as it is called out clearly in the research. The curve is defined by what people preferred. It seems many people are not basing their opinions here regarding the actual research, but rather what they wish the research said. How very unscientific of you.

As to speakers measured in an anechoic chamber, it seems to me you couldn't pick a worse baseline measurement for audio reproduction, as it doesn't meet any criteria. An artist could not possible intent their listeners to listen in an anechoic chamber, a sound engineer does not mix in an anechoic chamber, a listener does not listen in an anechoic chamber. How many listeners even know how music sounds inside an anechoic chamber? I'd guess under 1% of listeners. Perhaps even 1% of artists themselves. So if we are trying to say that accuracy implies an artist's intention, an anechoic chamber is irrelevant.

As such, there is a very real basis for attacking the fundamental definition of neutral in the Harman studies.

That said, even if we assume such a baseline, people's taste differed from a totally flat response in Harman's research. This is also explicitly called out in the research. People didn't like acoustics that generated a flat response, even when room corrected for a totally flat response. This is the basis for the Harman curve - people preferred something different.

Now here is where the sleight of hand comes in, and marketing takes over. Harman wants to redefine this Harman curve as what natural means, because they want to say, that the curve fixes inherent problems in the speakers and the room to give a totally "natural" presentation. You can see how this is a rather loaded assumption, because they already knew how to correct the room for a totally flat response - and that isn't what people liked.

I encourage people to read the following as well (pay particular attention to the figure on page 17, which shows Harman curve deviating from a room corrected flat response): http://www.aes.org/tmpFiles/elib/20170625/17839.pdf

Finally, Dr. Olive's research showed that in the context of headphones, people preferred yet another Harman curve which deviated itself from the speaker Harman curve which, to remind you, deviated itself from how a totally flat frequency response was defined (again, if you are paying attention, we are using the dubious assumption that the anechoic chamber is the ultimate ideal for flat and neutral).

In short, by making the jump from "the Harman curve encapsulated listener preferences" to literally "the Harman curve is the objective standard for natural sound for all people everywhere" is a rather large leap that would please Harman's marketing department very much.

Point being, if you truly want to be objective and scientific, limit yourself to what the actual science is saying. Any statement that presupposes the Harman curve as a target is a subjective value determination.

"I subjectivity choose the Harman target for headphones as my accuracy target, because I subjectively believe that preference consensus to the target threshold of 87% of listeners is enough to define said accuracy target".

It's subjectivity all the way down folks.

 

[Whitigir]

That is why Z1R has been selling very well it was aimed at the majority and not the minor niche audiophile kind. Could Sony have done it ? Yeah, they did, but they are not aiming for it anymore

 

[headr]

The reality is, that artists exist in the ecosystem and environment they produce for.

I had some further thoughts on this point.

People seem to want to define broadly three concepts.

First, the concept artist intent. People who place importance on measurement seem to have this very rigid definition of what an artist could possibly intend to do. An artist's intent is fixed, rigid. A singular vision for how music sounds. An artist does not care about the differences, and subjective preferences of their listeners. They don't recognize them. An artist does not care about the different ways to experience music, in different rooms, with headphones, in an amphitheater. In this "ideal world", the artist rejects all dynamics concerning experience and preference in lieu of a singular unrelenting uncompromising vision. No, in this world, there is one way to experience the music, and that means a very specific thing.

Second, is the concept of listener preferences, the manner in which individuals enjoy consuming music.

Finally, the concept of accuracy, which in this ideal world is held up as king. It is the concept of using an audio reproduction device to exactly down to the smallest detail reproduce exactly the artist's rigid intent.

In such an ideal world as defined by the Ministry of Truth above, listener preferences which deviate from experiencing the rigid uncompromising intent of the above artist are given the double plus ungood label of "wrong". If any of their audio equipment deviates in any way from the narrow scope of artist intent as defined above, that equipment is given the equally double plus ungood label of "flawed". Gasp - what if the artist never intended for listeners to use headphones in the first place? By definition in this ideal world that would be flawed, and those listeners wrong!

Now, if this doesn't sound like an ideal world to you, you aren't alone, but I digress. Let us assume for a moment that the above situation actually represents the ideal we all should be striving for.

Imagine in this world, a rebel company called Zony released a headphone which sounded different from all other headphones, called the A9R. The Zony A9R broke convention in this ideal world, instead of having a H shaped frequency response, it had a P shaped frequency response. And unbelievably, the people really enjoyed it!

Blasphemy! Sacrilege!

Perhaps it didn't sound very good with all genres of music, but perhaps it caused immense enjoyment with a handful of genres of music that were popular at the time.

Despite the Ministry of Truth's vain attempts to limit the dangerous spread of individuals choosing to enjoy themselves using their headphones, imagine in this fictional ideal world, that the Zony A9R (and derivatives copying the P shaped frequency response) actually became somewhat ubiquitous among music listeners in this world.

What is an artist to do?

The artist must now create music knowing that the P shaped heathens have taken over. Artists in those genres who the P shape doesn't sound good, they must now remaster their music to sound better on the P shaped audio equipment, because that is the equipment being used to consume their music. But what is this double plus ungood contradiction? Music is now being mastered to a standard which deviates from our previous concepts of the artist's intent! What is the Ministry of Truth meant to do?!?

The point of this long winded diatribe is simply this:

Enjoyment is always at the heart of music. Enjoyment always drives decisions up the chain, including the artist's intent. Enjoyment is the fundamental pillar around which all of audio reproduction rotates. It is the gravity, the center, the only truth that matters.

Life is short. We are all given too few years on this earth to kick around and listen to our music. No matter how old or young you are, you probably aren't going to get enough time to listen to all the music you want before you kick the bucket. So enjoy yourself.

 

[nanaholic]

Regardless, I'm curious, you do understand that whenever a pair of speakers are placed within a room the Harman curve is in effect? I only ask because many people easily forget that whenever we place speakers in a room we listen with the Harman curve on whether we want it or not.

How Harman came to the Harman Curve is that they found that a FR flat speaker arranged in a certain arrangement and measured at a certain placement will have a slightly boosted bass and a slightly recessed treble due to acoustic effects, skipping a few steps the tl;dr is that they averaged out the subjective value of the bass boost/treble recess as preferred by listeners to come to the Harman Target Curve. A pair of speakers placed in a room doesn't actually display the Harman Curve, especially if that pair of speakers does not measure flat FR like the speakers used in the experiment.

Also the other take away of the Harman Curve is that if you compensate the acoustic effects to get a flat FR to arrive at the ear drum, people don't actually like it as much as the one that has the acoustic effects on the FR.

So again, nothing said contradicts the fact that the Harman Curve has a huge dose of subjective preference build into it.

 

[Slaphead]

I've been following this "debacle", here and elsewhere, for quite a bit now, and really you guys have simply confirmed that I AM RIGHT in doing what I've done all along. And that is:-

Listen to what what you enjoy, and not what you've been told to enjoy by some loud idiot on a small internet site.

Personally I'm going to check these out next weekend as from what everybody has said these may well have a tonal balance that's right up my street.

 

[nc8000]

Yep that is the best plan if possible

 

[gto88]

I see there are so may comments about Z1R measurement, but seems no one mentioned about Sony's measurement.
Maybe Sony didn't release their measurement, but those concerned about the measurement from Ty'll and Jude, have
you thought that Sony must have better measurement gear and better controlled chamber to do all the research and
when they release the product will it be not under their control to release as they intended?
I see there are many TOTL headphone have 10K peak, why is this one bad to have it?
Measurement is just one of the "data" of the headphone, At end of the day, every one has to decide if one like it or not.
Just my 2 cents, and I enjoy my Z1R very very much, have no 10k peak issue at all, maybe I am deaf at 10K, and I
only pay attention to music instead of FR.

 

[F700]

I've been following this "debacle", here and elsewhere, for quite a bit now, and really you guys have simply confirmed that I AM RIGHT in doing what I've done all along. And that is:-

Listen to what what you enjoy, and not what you've been told to enjoy by some loud idiot on a small internet site.

Personally I'm going to check these out next weekend as from what everybody has said these may well have a tonal balance that's right up my street.

You're welcome to visit me if you want to have a listening session with the Z1R. I am living near the Zurich airport and it would be a pleasure to organize a mini-meeting with another audio enthusiast like you. Please check my profile and PM me in case of interest.