Seems like the thing you hate most about the Harman curve is probably too much ear gain at the listening volumes you prefer, considering these are basically identical headphones before that band. I find it odd you chose "underwhelming" as a descriptor, I would think something like "overwhelming", "harsh", "bright", "sharp" would be more accurate considering the differences, assuming they were listened at matched volumes. Almost invariably, and also confirmed by a lot of audiometric data I've seen, most people and other established popular preference curves that happen to target less ear gain also target less upper treble/air as a preference, which isn't exactly reflected here.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Harman preference curve for headphones - am I the only one that doesn't like this curve?
- Thread starter Music1969
- Start date
I do like the idea of that, so I think that's a good approach. I think in practical terms it's not quite as easy to drill down to a personalised ideal target curve, because things like unit to unit variation combined with the idea/observation that two different models of headphone EQ'd to the same curve aren't likely to sound exactly the same.....then this means it's practically quite hard to drill down to a universal preferred target curve for yourself that is applicable across different headphone models, but I like the idea, and you can probably work out a ballpark target curve that is your favourite.
odyo
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2019
- Messages
- 636
- Likes
- 320
Yeah i find Harman Dark and mid forward.
The Stealth is a premiumly priced headphone. There are other headphones that track the target just as well, some even better. But their price is often 1/10th the price. Not for any arbitrary reason. But because of their materials used in construction, build quality, look, feel, durability, features, power handling, i can go on, etc.
They are "lesser headphones". And I'll say that forever. There is nothing childish about that. You made me sorry for engaging with you, as the only one that did. Fine, consider me unreasonable. I am content that about 36% here won't. (lol)
Last edited:
Flat, is a reference too. Lol
I assure you the blue graph doesn't reflect how the Ether C Flow sounds vs. the Stealth. Where is it even from?
Your comments about ear gain are appreciated and educational. But to equate the two headphones in question from 500 Hz down based on just this, and not experience that draws on how differences in attack/decay, group delay, diaphragm deveation from a piston, ringing, reflections and resonances from infront of and behind the diaphram, sound into and thru the pad, the angles all of that make entering the ear canal, much more, exemplifies the problem with comparing just FR graphs. And I'm just as guilty as anyone else in doing that.
Last edited:
Wow. I wouldn't know where to begin untangling every misconception you formed about me. Suffice to say, preference isnt correlated to price, no matter if which group to you belong to in the pie chart. You should feel free to enjoy all the perks of a premium product, and not care what someone on the internet says to that. It's just not relevant to the topic at hand. Moving on...
Feelas
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2020
- Messages
- 391
- Likes
- 317
Yes, but flat is a nonsensical reference since it won't sound flat to anyone on the planet due to multiple reasons. DF and FF curves are also a theoretical concept. Harman is at least an attempt on averaging something real. Moreso since perhaps nobody mixes to 'flat'.
The whole "I don't like Harman" issue seems like a big try-hard attempt on having an opinion about a on-issue which is fashionable for a few years now yet concerns pretty much nobody outside of some "scientific" bubbles, thus seeing these posts is extremely annoying.
The amusing part is that Harman is extremely straightforward with their marketing strategy and reasoning behind; somehow that itches people the wrong way.
Last edited:
solderdude
Grand Contributor
There is no such thing as 'flat' in headphones/speakers anyway.
One can measure a flattish response when measured in a certain way and depending on the measurement gear and used correction/target.
So there are basically different 'flats' as in 'neutral sound, not colored and when well recorded sounding very similar to reality.
Someone's 'flat' may be another's bassy, bass-shy, bright, sharp, muffled.
One can measure a flattish response when measured in a certain way and depending on the measurement gear and used correction/target.
So there are basically different 'flats' as in 'neutral sound, not colored and when well recorded sounding very similar to reality.
Someone's 'flat' may be another's bassy, bass-shy, bright, sharp, muffled.
Last edited:
James-F
Member
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2022
- Messages
- 34
- Likes
- 22
The closest will be calibrated near filed monitors in a treated studio room.
Feelas
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2020
- Messages
- 391
- Likes
- 317
Which will (when angled 45 or 60 deg from listener) in the end resemble Harman since we're calibrating towards objectively (aka measurement-mic) flat, not ear-flat, due to HRTF & ear resonances, pinna boost (etc.) we arrive at boosted midrange and usually some bass-shelf due to natural treble loss with distance.
Room curves going downwards are just an approximation of natural physics of sound sources in a higher distance, not any kind of conspiracy to get us addicted to bass.
FYI a dead room is not necessarily a well-treated room; this is much more complex.
solderdude
Grand Contributor
The question is calibrated to what target (at which listening position, toe in and width) with what calibrating equipment and will every studio (State of the art to small home) perform the same calibration.
James-F
Member
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2022
- Messages
- 34
- Likes
- 22
Alright first narrow it down to the average of Abbey Road studio control rooms 2 & 3 with the near field monitors at the desk sweet spot.
Or better yet, measure several historically known studio control rooms to have an understanding how certain frequencies are affected.
I don't think Harman's listening room (a big home theater) is the be-all-end-all reference music listening environment, unless you specifically want that sound as reference.
Or better yet, measure several historically known studio control rooms to have an understanding how certain frequencies are affected.
I don't think Harman's listening room (a big home theater) is the be-all-end-all reference music listening environment, unless you specifically want that sound as reference.
solderdude
Grand Contributor
But nobody has a studio control room in their living room. At best they have a decent stereo or some flashy looking HT setup.
So mixing/mastering should be done with that consumer group in mind.
Fortunately when using near field monitors in a studio it is easy to apply a target curve to ensure music sounds good in the home of the consumer.
2 near field Genelecs/Neumanns next to the computer monitor in a small office/bedroom/corner of a room is hardly the same as what was heard in a studio.
The listening level, very likely, also wasn't the same either.
As long as one does not have the same speakers/acoustics/listening position/conditioned room as the studio has where the recordings were mixed/mastered (so many other studios as well) the idea that headphones/speakers should sound like that in the studio is merely an 'ideal idea'.
So mixing/mastering should be done with that consumer group in mind.
Fortunately when using near field monitors in a studio it is easy to apply a target curve to ensure music sounds good in the home of the consumer.
2 near field Genelecs/Neumanns next to the computer monitor in a small office/bedroom/corner of a room is hardly the same as what was heard in a studio.
The listening level, very likely, also wasn't the same either.
As long as one does not have the same speakers/acoustics/listening position/conditioned room as the studio has where the recordings were mixed/mastered (so many other studios as well) the idea that headphones/speakers should sound like that in the studio is merely an 'ideal idea'.
Personal insults will not be tolerated. Please demonstrate Respect and dignity towards everyone. More so towards those whom you disagree. This approach may create the environment required to achieve mutual understanding. Please and thank you for your assistance.
Fair enough.
For sure, there are better and worse ways to address logical fallacies and self-contradictions. I've been socialized in a typical way to point out someones behavior when it starts looking abusive. For instance when multiple people offering help get brushed off along with displays of willfull ignorance. Very different from attempting to insult someone for holding a different opinion. That requires the other person holding a different opinion in the first place. My post history proves otherwise. Insulting someone who assumes something bad about you is...well, what's the appeal when it's that easy?
I didn't have a chance to catch @m8o's last reply. His previous replies were not exactly friendly I hope he didn't say anything too crazy.
Last edited:
It’s called a “‘’Preference Score” for a reason. It’s not a reference score, although it is used in that fashion. While many prefer this FR shape, enough to quantify it as a general preference. We also need to recognize that there will be those who do not find it to be their preference. The science says that a majority of people should like this sound FR shape, but leaves room for those whom fall outside the margins. I think we can make room for some arguments that it is not 100% perfect for everyone and every situation. Above all let’s try to maintain civility here. Agree to disagree and move on. Remember to enjoy the music. That’s why we are all here! 
Last edited:
Similar threads
