[RevinNerd]

I am aware that beats does not publish anything beyond their frequency response. Is there any way to obtain this information? I want to be able to have solid evidence against beats when someone approaches me about it.
 
Thanks,
Revin

 

[nonamodnar]

Your information will fall on deaf ears (pun intended). Just get a good headphone, a DAP and a quality music file that they like and let them audition. That's the best way to show them the light.
 

 

[RevinNerd]

Um... not what I was looking for. But thanks for the reply.
 

 

[syryanyang]

You think Beats fanboys would know anything about frequency response? Oh that's cute

 

[TwinQY]

Hopefully it's fun to flame people with a serious question just to make yourselves feel superior, guys.
 
I can do better for ya, OP, I can give you a frequency response graph instead.

 
CSD here as well

 
Have fun with that!

 

[sidejam]

Quote:

 

 
I may not know too much, but that looks like a mess...

 

[Taowolf51]

Here are some graphs for the Beats Tour:
www.innerfidelity.com/images/MonsterBeatsTour.pdf

 

[briskly]

At least the Studio Beats channels match nicely. They are very well matched in their mediocrity. They are better than what the average newbie has to say about them.

 

[RevinNerd]

Hey guys, umm... I'm pretty new to the audiophile world. Could someone explain how to read a frequency response graph? Thanks.
 

 

[Taowolf51]

The graph shows the loudness (emphasis) a headphone/speaker has for certain frequencies. Left to right is lows to highs. Flat is the most accurate, bumps in the low frequencies (left) means bass emphasis. Lots of up and down spikes in the highs is normal, most headphones have at least a little spiking. With headphones, what comes out of the headphone as flat may not be heard as flat because of the way it hits your ears and how close the driver is to your head. I don't know enough else to comment on how to compensate for that in graphs, however, though I do believe some graphs have already factored that in.
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/headphone-measurement-proceedures-frequency-response

 

[RevinNerd]

Wow... Your explanation was so much clearer than most on the web. Thank you so much!

 

[5370H55V]

I stumbled across this graph a while ago. It's tone is condescending and I can't verify its results are true, but I think this is what you're looking for:
 
 

 

[Johnsy11]

So according to the frequency response graph, it has a flat response (the flatter the better for this line) up until 1 KHz then they hit a mountain range. Expect more normal sounding bass and lower midrange, but other than that some higher frequencies will suffer. You want these frequencies to be as crisp as possible but with the large variations they don't look god for treble. Definitely the case is don't get overpriced earphones to do the job of standard ($25-$50) headphones. Usually you can expect the flatter the frequency response the lower the THD is and therefore the better the headphones will sound. Something else is the greater the frequency responce the flatter the line in the audible section should be and the better sound. I have noticed that is true in most cases i have encountered.

 

[bruh44]

bruh

 

[DrBobN]

LMAO, I wonder if they INTENTIONALLY reduced the female vocal frequencies, or if it was just a subconscious slap in the mouth.  Vocals are typically 300-3k Hz, typical male being 300-2k, female 1k-3k.  Al Green can hit 200 Hz and Moriah Carey can hit 3.4k.  Yep, I'm not buying these.