BloodSugar00
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2008
- Posts
- 1,794
- Likes
- 12
Quote:
Very interesting insight there, thankyou! Does ''insertion loss'' just apply to IEM's and canalphones then (I assume this doesn't come into practice/have to have the technology adapted around in full-sized cans and earphones/buds)?
Originally Posted by p0wderh0und23 /img/forum/go_quote.gif And you just answered the reason why we do not post stuff. We have ZERO desire for the response curve to be flat, do you have any idea the level of crap that sounds like? Trust me I do, I've had some earphones made that were almost considered dead they were so flat lined. The music was distorted, colored in putrid ways and not enjoyable at all. A true "flat" response to the human ear, not the human eye would have a bump anywhere from 1.5-5k, most likely in the 3-5k range. This would be to compensate for what is called "insertion loss", this is what happens when you put something in your ear. So for anything to have a flat line (according to our eyes) it's not what the ear needs to product that sound. Also a freq curve for you can be totally different than it is for me. For example, we both go in for a hearing test. Let's say you have a 5db drop in the 250k range and I do not. This can make the pluck of a bass string sound totally different to both of us, even though we are using the same source, cable, amp and earphone. Also, a graph can and most likely would skew your opinion towards any source before you had time to hear it and learn it. The comparison should be based on the sound, not a silly line drawn on a piece of paper. Ok, I'll stop my soap box now. |
Very interesting insight there, thankyou! Does ''insertion loss'' just apply to IEM's and canalphones then (I assume this doesn't come into practice/have to have the technology adapted around in full-sized cans and earphones/buds)?