[jawang]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drubbing /img/forum/go_quote.gif So you couldn't hear much of a difference, so you would've liked tests to tell you what the differences were? What a crock. It not about being right or wrong, it's about what you like. Testing scientifically won't tell you anything about how a phone Sounds, that why you have ears. If I was to buy a set of phones because the FR says I should like them for bass, but my ears tell me they don't, then that is just dumb.

My point is, you ears might tell you one thing, but the next day they could tell you something different. Objective tests, on the other hand, are never wrong

On some days my music at home sounds amazing, other times it sounds boring, as if I'm just not in the mood for it. I'm sure you guys have experienced the same thing

 

[aristos_achaion]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jawang /img/forum/go_quote.gif with as LITTLE subjective bias as possible

You completely missed the point of Sherwood's argument. Subjectivity's the point, not the problem. Objective data's everywhere; it's easily obtained. Subjective judgments, such as emotional impact, comfort, and sheer likability, are things only your ear can decide, preferably untainted by the prejudice of objectivity.

 

[fuseboxx]

What if the headphones are able to pass difficult hearing tests and are able to reproduce sine wave/pink noise/etc well... but after you buy it, you find out that it doesn't reproduce the actual music you like to listen to in the way that you want it to?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jawang /img/forum/go_quote.gif On some days my music at home sounds amazing, other times it sounds boring, as if I'm just not in the mood for it. I'm sure you guys have experienced the same thing

In that case, even if you get headphones that pass the "objective tests", there will still be times when this will happen.

 

[Cankin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jawang /img/forum/go_quote.gif My point is, you ears might tell you one thing, but the next day they could tell you something different. Objective tests, on the other hand, are never wrong On some days my music at home sounds amazing, other times it sounds boring, as if I'm just not in the mood for it. I'm sure you guys have experienced the same thing

some useful resources here

Stereophile: Between the Ears: the art and science of measuring headphones

 

[jawang]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aristos_achaion /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm also a tea snob. Some tea people like having thermometers to test the water, making sure to get, say, Dragonwells at ~160 degrees F, and maybe red tea at exactly 195 degrees. I've trained myself to know when the water's right by the bubbles forming in my kettle and what the water feels like trickling down my finger. Maybe it's less scientific, but I think it's more rewarding.

That's a different scenerio entirely. Maybe you would use a thermometer and test your water if your tea cost you thousands of dollars (like high end headphones do)

 

[BIG POPPA]

If you have lo-fi gear what is the difference? If you have expensive gear you would be so knowledgeable on any concern before you dropped a dime. Take headphones home listen to them on your rig, if you don't like them, return them. What is the big deal? I listen to Headphones at mini meets. The Head-fiers there will give me more info than I need on the headphone I am listening to. I usually hookup the ones I like on my rig with my favorite music.

And I did get to demo the HD800 on my rig this weekend.

 

[aristos_achaion]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jawang /img/forum/go_quote.gif Objective tests, on the other hand, are never wrong

Objective tests can be wrong all the time; it all depends on how you interpret the data. If you approach headphones assuming that passing certain tests make a headphone "good", your correct data may well lead you to an incorrect conclusion when your fickle, subjective mind doesn't want the sound produced by those headphones.

You complain about your setup sometimes being "boring"...that's often cited as a complaint against neutral headphones, which is exactly what you're saying these objective tests establish. Maybe, instead of trying to find perfect headphones that measure up to someone else's standard, you need to find non-boring headphones for those days. Which may not pass those tests. In fact, probably won't.

 

[atothex]

Wow, I hardly ever flame anyone directly, but this thread is really pushing the envelope. Ignorance is forgivable, because we're all newbs at some point, but OP, you are devoid of logic.

 

[aristos_achaion]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jawang /img/forum/go_quote.gif That's a different scenerio entirely. Maybe you would use a thermometer and test your water if your tea cost you thousands of dollars (like high end headphones do)

Who says my tea doesn't cost me thousands of dollars? I think the most expensive tea I've ever had was a bit over $700 for a cake, but my budget's been a bit low (on account of being a student and, well, headphones). In fact, since tea's a consumable, there's an impetus to be more careful with the good stuff, since it'll only be around for a little while.

When I was a tea noob, drinking entirely "low-fi" teas, I used a thermometer and carefully measured out my leaves by the gram on a little scale. Now I'm more experienced, used to much better teas, and measure my water by experience and old chinese poetry, and eyeball the amounts of leaves. The key to enjoying the whole thing is to take yourself less seriously, to value your own judgment and not hold yourself to externally imposed standards. I've tried to carry over that attitude to headphones.

 

[jawang]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aristos_achaion /img/forum/go_quote.gif Objective tests can be wrong all the time; it all depends on how you interpret the data. If you approach headphones assuming that passing certain tests make a headphone "good", your correct data may well lead you to an incorrect conclusion when your fickle, subjective mind doesn't want the sound produced by those headphones. You complain about your setup sometimes being "boring"...that's often cited as a complaint against neutral headphones, which is exactly what you're saying these objective tests establish. Maybe, instead of trying to find perfect headphones that measure up to someone else's standard, you need to find non-boring headphones for those days. Which may not pass those tests. In fact, probably won't.

the "boring"ness that I mentioned has nothing to do with my gear. on some days (it happens) I just don't feel like listening to music. an exaggerated example would be the morning after an all-nighter

how would objective tests favor neutral gear? If I am bass oriented, I should use tests that focus on bass response. If I want a specific attribute (soundstage, presence, etc.) I should test that specific attribute and ensure that I get the quality I am looking for.

 

[spaceconvoy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drubbing /img/forum/go_quote.gif I can only assume you're trying to be funny, because that's the dumbest thing I've heard.

Haha, I agree

Quote:

Originally Posted by jawang /img/forum/go_quote.gif That's a bad comparison. Appearance, personal preference, and other subjective things are important when buying a car for personal use. Straight, linear performance isn't the clear cut factor for most consumers. Headphones should (hopefully) only be evaluated based on performance. ... Buying hi-fi headphones is equivalent to buying a race car. Peformance should be the primary concern, so performance is what should be tested, not subjective preference.

Dude, you are from Mars. If you want your headphones to win a frequency race, then by all means, listen to sine waves. But the whole point is to listen to music, right?

Sounds like you're one of those guys who just needs to collect 'the best' of everything, and doesn't even know how to enjoy it.

 

[RushNerd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jawang /img/forum/go_quote.gif this has been a pet peeve of mine for a while. I've always thought it was strange how some people can go out, listen to their favorite music on a rig, then buy the gear simply because they liked what they heard. music perception is one of the most subjective things possible. especially, when there is a potential placebo effect from the visual impact of new gear. even listening to the same song twice in a row with the same setup can yield different overall impressions. mood, alertness, physical state, mental state, etc. can all affect how good music sounds to you... this doesn't sound like a good source for testing high end gear so why do people listen to music when trying out expensive headphones? I mean, if I had money for something like an HD800 I would go to a demoing store with some boring ass sources, mostly difficult hearing tests. for example, i'd probably have a bunch of sin waves on a random playlist (to check frequency response and to see if I could hear the largest frequency ranges consistently) and some random playlists with various frequency samples at different bitrates (to see if I could hear the higher bitrates consistently). then fill out the rest of my playlist with specific bass, mid, high, etc. samples to evaluate sound signature as scientifically as possible maybe even lug along an oscilloscope if I had one. or better yet, a high quality ear microphone + laptop so I could perform some legit tests

For reference. Or at least if your able to pick your source(songs).

Even when all the scientific tests are done a great way to get an impression and feel for a pair of headphones is listen to a very familiar song, preferably one that's fairly complex(layers) and well recorded. Not to say all people are using their headphones for just music, but most consumers, even audiophiles don't need more then their own perception to make a sound judgment and evaluation on a set of cans.

throughly testing a pair of cans may turn up that they are not very accurate or not flat at all, but these aren't necessarily reasons to dismiss the product. Unless your going specifically for neutrality, it's up to your taste preference on sound.



I'm an avid computer overclocker, we tweak every single variable possible in the pursuit of more speed. We also run tests (some scientific some benchmarks) and you can run those tests till the dogs go home, but all it's usually for is GAMES. Your system may look great on paper, but it's Crysis run that's going to be what everyone wants to see.

Bottom line, numbers are numbers, results are results, and furthermore satisfaction is left up to oneself.

 

[jawang]

Quote:

Originally Posted by spaceconvoy /img/forum/go_quote.gif Dude, you are from Mars. If you want your headphones to win a frequency race, then by all means, listen to sine waves. But the whole point is to listen to music, right? Sounds like you're one of those guys who just needs to collect 'the best' of everything, and doesn't even know how to enjoy it.

I can "enjoy" music out of 5 dollar ipod earphones. If I was completely broke and had no other choice, I would still listen to those crappy earphones as opposed to hearing no music at all. The whole point of upgrading is to improve your experience.

why do people hate bose? because theyre overpriced right?

how would you feel if you spent 2000 dollars on a rig and then a week later, after hearing more music, you realize that your old 500 dollar setup sounds better?

returning is not always an option. the actual difference between two high end headphones is not a huge night/day thing. if you arent careful, your placebo effects can easily last longer than the return period

 

[moonboy403]

So I suppose that you're saying if headphone A measures better than headphone B then everyone will pick headphone A because of these measurements?

 

[tvrboy]

Maybe I'm just not enough of an audiophile to realize that the way a product actually performs is pointless.