I suspect pads because when I put some pressure on the pads the center image is getting a spot on but the moment I let go, it's getting off the track.
When pressing pads the NTH100 behaves in a fairly linear fashion up to a few kHz :
https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...ew-rode-nth-100-headphones.32296/post-1146373
(I get similar results).
The measurements show that the channel matching is pretty much perfect. It can be an issue of weight distribution as well. I'm gonna try to find a solution.
I usually prefer to refrain from showing channel matching with my in-ear mics as my own head is asymmetrical, but for headphones that behave in such a way (very good seatings to seatings consistency, linear behaviour under pad compression that's similar to a pair of open dynamics such as the HD650, similar behaviour to such open headphones when subjected to the load of the ear canal, as tested ceteris paribus with in concha mics and earplugs), I have less foibles about it, at least up to a few kHz and with blocked ear canal entrance mics.
All the following made with
in-ear, blocked ear canal entrance microphones. Please note that for these mics :
- absolute values are not representative of the FR at my own eardrum. Above a few kHz in particular please note that what looks like peaks or dips may not be an actual peak or dip.
- the mics are calibrated and compensated against a UMIK-1. They're stereo mics, but I've checked that using the same mic for both ears produces the same results once they're calibrated and compensated.
- they should not be compared with other measurements ! Only with themselves.
For a start I get really decent seating to seatings variation with these, here five seatings (headphones completely removed and put back on again between measurements) for the right channel for one of the samples :
A better way to represent this is to use the first trace, use it as a reference, flattened to "zero", and then only show the difference between it and the four other traces :
This is one of the best behaved closed back that I've measured on my head in that regard so far, even more so as I really made no efforts whatsoever to be consistent. That makes them easy to measure in situ with decent precision. Combined with the linear behaviour under pad compression and the lack of sharp resonances / nulls for most of the range that's what drew me to these in the first place. Should have been an interesting pair for EQ purposes if it weren't for what follows.
For a start, sample variation might be a bit of a problem IMO.
All the following graphs show the three samples configured with the cable on the left hand side, and the rubber stopper on the right (as I would normally use these).
They're averages of five seatings.
Traces are not normalised.
On the left side, with this configuration, it turned out fairly decent :
On the right hand side on the other hand :
Now you'll probably ask : well, since this is the side where I've put the rubber stop, it must be the cause of the variance, right ?
Answer : unfortunately no. I've tried for each of these various combinations (cable on the right hand side, no rubber stopper, swapping the rubber stopper between sample, etc.) and while it did change the response quite a bit, in terms of channel matching and sample variation it only shifted the problems around. The above is representative of the overall problem.
If I show the difference between the R and L channels (which I'll limit to 5kHz only because of my asymmetrical head, and that is a stretch, for other headphones types, such as some ANC headphones, I'd rather only compare the delivered channel matching up to 1kHz or so, but I'm making an exception here because of these headphones' coupling behaviour), I get this, compared with a pair of HD58X :
The "AM" sample wasn't that bad. For the "SV1", the plateau around 2kHz and above was quite noticeable. The last one, "SV2", is just crap.
For the latter I noticed that if I removed and reinserted the pads (always firmly pressing on them to make certain that all the locking pins are in place), so, not changing anything, just the act of removing them and putting them back on, the channel matching would shift around, as if the pads' retention mechanism wasn't able to ensure a consistent seal / coupling between itself and the housing :
Really problematic find here.
In general the whole venting scheme of that design seems problematic.
So, this has all been a little bit annoying, as it compromises to me their EQ potential.