MRC01
Major Contributor
When it comes to headphones, neutral is in the ear/brain (or HRTF) of the beholder.
But my point is that distortion around 1% is audible and still does matter.
It's true but unless they actually compared to flat studio monitors in treated room they are in the dark. The preference is trained/ affected, not all if have anything to do with hrtf difference.When it comes to headphones, neutral is in the ear/brain (or HRTF) of the beholder.
I notice! Especially with high quality recordings of female voice, like this one: https://www.amazon.com/Eva-Zaicik-Venez-chere-ombre/dp/B07KZKCDJN... The Grado SR225e is like 5% in the treble yet nobody notices ...
Good speakers and headphones should be below 1% in this range.
This video demonstrates pretty clearly that not all distortion sounds alike.It's disingenuous to describe the sound of a bass guitar as 23% THD. If you mean the sum of all harmonics has 23% of the amplitude of the fundamental (12.8 dB lower), then it's incorrect to call it distortion. Those harmonics aren't distortion, they're the timbre of the instrument. Some acoustic instruments (like flute in its bottom octave) can have the 1st harmonic stronger than the fundamental. Shall we call it more than 100% distortion? Of course not. It is the natural live sound of the instrument, which by definition is completely free of distortion. Distortion would be any CHANGE in the frequencies from this natural sound, introduced during recording or playback.
That complex timbre of the natural instrument can mask THD added by recording & playback. Some instruments have a more pure tone with weaker naturally occurring harmonics (like flute in its top octave, and some female vocalists, especially with ancient music which has perfect intervals and no vibrato). These sounds can make it easier to hear distortion added by recording & playback. The opposite extreme can also work: complex natural sounds (like large acoustic ensembles) can trigger higher distortion levels from recording & playback, making that distortion easier to hear. Similar to a multi-tone test signal.
In short, distortion sensitivity depends quite a bit on the type of music. It would be much harder to hear in Led Zeppelin than in Eva Zaicik. And listener training also makes a big difference -- learning what distortion sounds like, how to identify it during critical listening.
That's true. When I run Room EQ Wizard frequency sweeps, I can see the difference in distortion measurements using different mics. The Rode NT1A shows lower distortion than the UMIK-1, but less flat FR.A lot of these distortion graphs are unreliable since they mix the distortion from the microphone with that of the headphone. Measurements mikes are rated to produce 1 to 3% distortion over their full SPL. ...
I can show you have to put together a cal file that REW would use for the NT1A. You'll not be able to fix the lower 200 hz altogether, but the rest of it can be evened out.That's true. When I run Room EQ Wizard frequency sweeps, I can see the difference in distortion measurements using different mics. The Rode NT1A shows lower distortion than the UMIK-1, but less flat FR.
I hacked a custom calibration file for the NT1A by starting with Rode's product info graph, then tweaking to match the response to the UMIK-1 which has a factory calibration. Is that what you did too? It ain't perfect, but good within a couple of dB, which is all I really need.I can show you have to put together a cal file that REW would use for the NT1A. ...
Yes, but there is an easy way vs just eyeballing if that is what you are doing.I hacked a custom calibration file for the NT1A by starting with Rode's product info graph, then tweaking to match the response to the UMIK-1 which has a factory calibration. Is that what you did too? It ain't perfect, but good within a couple of dB, which is all I really need.
Well this microphone doesn't need too much correction. I found two different plots. They didn't vary by much from each other so if this one isn't perfect it shouldn't be too far off. This one was said to be a free field measurement in one location. The other from a pistonic microphone calibrator. Usually the graphs you see are from pistonic calibrators.I have a superlux ecm999. I suppose to let it measurd to get an custom correction file.
Thanx for sure i will give it a try. I will post the new measurments graphs with and without the calibration file.Well this microphone doesn't need too much correction. I found two different plots. They didn't vary by much from each other so if this one isn't perfect it shouldn't be too far off. This one was said to be a free field measurement in one location. The other from a pistonic microphone calibrator. Usually the graphs you see are from pistonic calibrators.
View attachment 29948