Why Closed Back Headphones Sound Worse Than Open Back

[Nouvraught]

Tale me, do you really believe, that someone who can afford a HD820s, can't read a frequency response? That's not your every day people who buy headphones like that . I wouldn't worry about it...

If they could read it they wouldn't buy it. If they bought it then they don't realize the massive amount of coloration throughout the response. If they want to experience what massive amounts of discoloration sounds like then they are entry level to audio and just want fancy looking headphones.

 

[Opalius]

If they could read it they wouldn't buy it. If they bought it then they don't realize the massive amount of coloration throughout the response. If they want to experience what massive amounts of discoloration sounds like then they are entry level to audio and just want fancy looking headphones.

That's a bold statement.

 

[HipHopScribe]

If they could read it they wouldn't buy it. If they bought it then they don't realize the massive amount of coloration throughout the response. If they want to experience what massive amounts of discoloration sounds like then they are entry level to audio and just want fancy looking headphones.

Or they simply prefer the coloration presented by HD820, which is perfectly fine and acceptable, not everyone likes the same sonic presentation

 

[Opalius]

If they could read it they wouldn't buy it. If they bought it then they don't realize the massive amount of coloration throughout the response. If they want to experience what massive amounts of discoloration sounds like then they are entry level to audio and just want fancy looking headphones.

But here is the thing. My DT990,.. they are good, - but they also make både record ed songs sound like crap. My HD650's make både recordings sound normal, - even good. Is the HD650 vailed? Yep.. but does it have it's place? Yes it does.

 

[bagwell359]

Just to interject a side angle. Many HiFiMan and other planars ring and ring a lot. FR graphs are nearly useless for hunting them down. For instance a popular model here is the HE-500. A HE-500 that has max FR EQ from a digital parametric (10 band) does NOT sound nearly as complete as one where you correct the major ringing issue (see waterfall plots) or even add 1 or 2 more ringing freq corrections and farm out the 1-2 db narrow Q FR choices which are barely an issue.

To be clear, FR graphs tell you about as much as a dead skunks skeleton do compared to the whole thing.

 

[9fF3pZAQMj]

Just to interject a side angle. Many HiFiMan and other planars ring and ring a lot. FR graphs are nearly useless for hunting them down. For instance a popular model here is the HE-500. A HE-500 that has max FR EQ from a digital parametric (10 band) does NOT sound nearly as complete as one where you correct the major ringing issue (see waterfall plots) or even add 1 or 2 more ringing freq corrections and farm out the 1-2 db narrow Q FR choices which are barely an issue.

To be clear, FR graphs tell you about as much as a dead skunks skeleton do compared to the whole thing.

Do you have any more linked info on this? Not much info I could find, interested to read more.

 

[Mimic]

Personally I prefer closed due to isolation. It doesn't matter how good the sound is when I can hear nonsense bleed through. Open back does not provide this, and as a result will take a lesser preferential in my buying decisions. Quality is +/- for me, but actual usage trumps my end decision.

 

[bagwell359]

Do you have any more linked info on this? Not much info I could find, interested to read more.

At the 4 letter site its been mentioned and also DIY-A****-H*****.

The issue with getting definitive on this is that waterfall plots and FR plots address different things. You could perhaps totally solve one or the other by a certain collection of settings. But no way you can max both at the same time. When they do bump up in say the HE-500 the listener has to decide where one issue is 100% dominant, 55% dominant, or what- and how to set for that - and I promise there really isn't a correct setting, just what strikes you as best compromise. Matters of incoming A/C, humidity, headaches, cups not adjusted to preferred settings - etc. might also play a factor, not to mention source material.

Back to the 500, the biggest FR issue is in the 1750-1825 Hz area - probably a 1.6 db setting with a Q of 8.0. The biggest ringing issue? 8250 - 9250 Hz (both this and FR given are ranges, exact place is variable per headphone - by a bit). The center of my FR issue is 1740 Hz, and the ringing @ 9840 Hz. If you chase down all spots it rings at, that 9840 is maybe 80% of the total changes of those 3 spots. So just the one setting does almost all the good. The FR setting at 1740 is maybe 50% of the 8 spots on the FR side that change, the 2nd is the low bass boost (maybe 20% of the impact). So from the minimalist side you are really talking 3 settings doing most of the good. But by using just an FR only data input you just walked past the #1 or #2 key setting for the can. Of course when you "remove" ringing you are also removing music. So far I haven't seen a setting where you can get rid of all the nasty ringing w/o harming the music.. Even at the settings I use I'm losing some music, but fatiguing un musical stuff get tossed too. A recipe for an experienced user, not a dictate to follow. Much like going from leather and metal bare bones furniture to plush densely padded items. More unmusical reflections vs a cushier warm sound - best choice is somewhere in between.

Every object in the physical world has resonant frequencies - so other technologies do have these problems - in on average less notable manner than planars. So this is the ripest place to look (plus I'm a planar guy - so its basically in my face all the time).

 

[Nouvraught]

Frequency response shows you tonality problems. and the exact amount of emphasis to all regions from 20hz to 20khz. on a good rig anyway. It tells you most everything you need to know as the problems are so apparent and easy to spot that it easily disqualifies the majority of headphones due to their horrendous performance. Do you need experience and preferences and know how to read a response? Yes. Can most people do that? Nope. So it is useless to them. Doesn't mean it's useless to me and many other people.

 

[bagwell359]

Personally I prefer closed due to isolation. It doesn't matter how good the sound is when I can hear nonsense bleed through. Open back does not provide this, and as a result will take a lesser preferential in my buying decisions. Quality is +/- for me, but actual usage trumps my end decision.

Turn off the TV, close the windows, and get rid of those annoying family members !!! Then it'll be a crypt. Seriously, I understand mate.

 

[Nouvraught]

i know many people who choose to use dynamic microphones and closed back headphones to isolate the sound at the expense of sound quality. Some people just need to focus i guess... i personally like the more real sound of condensers and open sound of headphones.

 

[Ciggavelli]

It's because sounds reflect off the ear cup with closed-back headphones. With open headphones there's substantially less reflection.

 

[bagwell359]

Frequency response shows you tonality problems. and the exact amount of emphasis to all regions from 20hz to 20khz. on a good rig anyway. It tells you most everything you need to know as the problems are so apparent and easy to spot that it easily disqualifies the majority of headphones due to their horrendous performance. Do you need experience and preferences and know how to read a response? Yes. Can most people do that? Nope. So it is useless to them. Doesn't mean it's useless to me and many other people.

Set aside ringing for a moment. Do you know what woofer speaker Q is? Headphones certainly have Q as well, although its not tested or published that I've seen.

Just because an Arya between 10-100 Hz might look very similar to a HE-6 6 screw on the same frequencies doesn't mean the bass sounds the same, because the site if full of people that will tell you, they are not the same no amount of EQ twiddling is every going to make them the same.

What about the headstage of the venerated HD-600 vs the also venerated HD-800S? The HD-600 on SS amps has a very indistinct headstage. As long as the 800S is driven properly it's extolled as miraculous in that department. Want to show us how the FR chart explains that.

Beware of the man of one measurement - reduction of a complex system to one rule set is absurd.

BTW, what's with the junk adjustments the new heroes of the EQ do with bass? They use POPULARITY and CRAPPY average rooms as a guide? That's not absolute, that's certainly not music - just an outgrowth of the bass-head invasion which hopefully will end, leaving us again with music.

 

[Nouvraught]

This is honestly a very good review discussing the problems of the hd820


even mentions ndh20 having better more controlled bass which is true for a closed back headphone. treble is trash on ndh20 though, lol. people sometimes don't give zreviews credit when he makes some good videos.

 

[Achlys]

Just to interject a side angle. Many HiFiMan and other planars ring and ring a lot. FR graphs are nearly useless for hunting them down. For instance a popular model here is the HE-500. A HE-500 that has max FR EQ from a digital parametric (10 band) does NOT sound nearly as complete as one where you correct the major ringing issue (see waterfall plots) or even add 1 or 2 more ringing freq corrections and farm out the 1-2 db narrow Q FR choices which are barely an issue.

To be clear, FR graphs tell you about as much as a dead skunks skeleton do compared to the whole thing.

false. smooth FR = no ringing