Best bass headphones

[Tokyo_John]

It's a one dimensional problem. No need to invent degrees of freedom when a good solution exists in EQ provided you take into account non-FR related issues like distortion for your headphones.

It isn't one-dimensional. The degrees of freedom are frequency, phase, and amplitude. Some basics are covered in the video on his page (I have no association with the authors, just trying to share useful info for you to learn if you care to do so)...
https://www.sageaudio.com/blog/mastering/what-is-stereo-imaging.php

 

[Maki]

It isn't one-dimensional. The degrees of freedom are frequency, phase, and amplitude. Some basics are covered in the video on his page (I have no association with the authors, just trying to share useful info for you to learn if you care to do so)...
https://www.sageaudio.com/blog/mastering/what-is-stereo-imaging.php

Headphones' frequency responses are correlated with their phase response. See: this. Also, humans aren't generally sensitive to phase.
That leaves frequency and amplitude, which are described by frequency response. Moral of the story: EQ is a fine way to boost bass, provided the transducers are capable.

 

[Tokyo_John]

Headphones' frequency responses are correlated with their phase response. See: this. Also, humans aren't generally sensitive to phase.
That leaves frequency and amplitude, which are described by frequency response. Moral of the story: EQ is a fine way to boost bass, provided the transducers are capable.

You had better write to all of the audio engineers out there who work on stereo imaging, and tell them that their profession is based on a fiction. I'm sure they'll be glad to hear from you that they've wasted their lives.

 

[Robbo99999]

I think you guys are all arguing in circles & missing each other's points. I think what Tokyo_John is saying is that the mark of a good quality headphone and good EQ is that in well-produced music you can seperate and follow each of the elements within the music - you can follow the bass line and the rest of the instruments, i.e. it's not just an amorphous mass/impression, you can seperate out all the elements of the music. I've noticed in comparing headphones & different EQ's that if you get it right with headphone choice & EQ then you can seperate and follow all the different elements of the music - whereas bad EQ and/or bad headphones will blur it all together to a greater or lesser extent. I think that's all he's saying. (I'm not sure I agree with his preferred frequency response of the Ultrasone Edition 8, but that's a tangental argument).

 

[Doodski]

I think you guys are all arguing in circles & missing each other's points. I think what Tokyo_John is saying is that the mark of a good quality headphone and good EQ is that in well-produced music you can seperate and follow each of the elements within the music - you can follow the bass line and the rest of the instruments, i.e. it's not just an amorphous mass/impression, you can seperate out all the elements of the music. I've noticed in comparing headphones & different EQ's that if you get it right with headphone choice & EQ then you can seperate and follow all the different elements of the music - whereas bad EQ and/or bad headphones will blur it all together to a greater or lesser extent. I think that's all he's saying.

I thought they are debating phase relationships and what induces increasing degrees of them. I saw both sides arguing the point although @Maki is correct in that EQ use at the studio causes lotsa phase changes and additionally there is so much in the crossovers of speakers and in peripheral circuitry that it's a lost cause to even concern oneself with that.

 

[Maki]

I think you guys are all arguing in circles & missing each other's points. I think what Tokyo_John is saying is that the mark of a good quality headphone and good EQ is that in well-produced music you can seperate and follow each of the elements within the music - you can follow the bass line and the rest of the instruments, i.e. it's not just an amorphous mass/impression, you can seperate out all the elements of the music. I've noticed in comparing headphones & different EQ's that if you get it right with headphone choice & EQ then you can seperate and follow all the different elements of the music - whereas bad EQ and/or bad headphones will blur it all together to a greater or lesser extent. I think that's all he's saying.

Perhaps I should learn to be more charitable in my interpretations of others' posts instead of taking things literally - but yes, that is also something I've noticed and also why my wallet is so empty. On the other hand, for MAXIMUM bass - there's the JVC SZ2000s. They'll produce so much bass they can literally vibrate off your desk without hurting the mids and treble. That being said, the mids and treble are complete crap in the first place so hard to say.

 

[Robbo99999]

I thought they are debating phase relationships and what induces increasing degrees of them. I saw both sides arguing the point although @Maki is correct in that EQ use at the studio causes lotsa phase changes and additionally there is so much in the crossovers of speakers and in peripheral circuitry that it's a lost cause to even concern oneself with that.

That's what it developed into, but it started out with a post related to what I'm saying.....https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/best-bass-headphones.15747/post-697727. They then went off on various tangents and "microdetail-arguments" trying to disprove each other's posts, I'm just intervening to bring them back on track, and I think they've missed each others points.

 

[threni]

I think you guys are all arguing in circles & missing each other's points. I think what Tokyo_John is saying is that the mark of a good quality headphone and good EQ is that in well-produced music you can seperate and follow each of the elements within the music - you can follow the bass line and the rest of the instruments, i.e. it's not just an amorphous mass/impression, you can seperate out all the elements of the music. I've noticed in comparing headphones & different EQ's that if you get it right with headphone choice & EQ then you can seperate and follow all the different elements of the music - whereas bad EQ and/or bad headphones will blur it all together to a greater or lesser extent. I think that's all he's saying. (I'm not sure I agree with his preferred frequency response of the Ultrasone Edition 8, but that's a tangental argument).

No, he was talking about tracks, not instruments. No-one can dispute that with good headphones you can follow individual instruments.

 

[Robbo99999]

No, he was talking about tracks, not instruments. No-one can dispute that with good headphones you can follow individual instruments.

I think that's what he meant by tracks though (by extension).

 

[Jimbob54]

Admittedly the Edition 10, not the 8, but always bears repeating ....

Edition 8 looks (like most cans) a bit shy of the mark in the bottom end

https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/Au...n_over-ear_2018/Ultrasone Edition 8/README.md

 

[threni]

I think that's what he meant by tracks though (by extension).

Well...I spelt it out quite comprehensively with examples in case that's what he meant but he seemed quite adamant that he meant tracks.

 

[ZööZ]

Admittedly the Edition 10, not the 8, but always bears repeating ....

Edition 8 looks (like most cans) a bit shy of the mark in the bottom end

https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq/blob/b4722274e8c2a17eb0673a5e5af50e6305ff0895/results/innerfidelity/innerfidelity_harman_over-ear_2018/Ultrasone Edition 8/README.md

WTF is happening to him? do they sound so bad or are his expressions intended to convey pleasure and or bang for buck?

 

[Jimbob54]

WTF is happening to him? do they sound so bad or are his expressions intended to convey pleasure and or bang for buck?

Are we watching the same video?

 

[ZööZ]

Are we watching the same video?

I guess... All that I can be sure about him is that he is exhausted, from pain or pleasure that is the bit which is unclear, funny as hell either way.

 

[solderdude]

Here's the answer:

 

[solderdude]

Edition 8 looks (like most cans) a bit shy of the mark in the bottom end

Most Ultrasones are lifted in the lows. I don't think the ed8 is bass (nor treble peak) shy.

 

[ZööZ]

Here's the answer:

View attachment 116766

Looks alot like this... Soooo pain I guess

 

[Jimbob54]

Most Ultrasones are lifted in the lows. I don't think the ed8 is bass (nor treble peak) shy.

View attachment 116768

I was getting that from possibly misreading the graph on jaako's site (which I think for these took the RAA measurements).

Shy compared to Harman, I meant

EDIT @solderdude is your chart and this one even showing the same measurements ? (Looks like this one is from Tyll's Innerfidelity, not RAA)- or is there something in the interpretation I am missing? This shows -7dB down at 30h, RAA shows 3-5dB up?- why the massive gulf in the 2?

 

[solderdude]

The plot isn't showing the same thing but yes 15dB at 7kHz is about the worst I have ever seen.
It's twice as bad as Beyerdynamic treble.

 

[Jimbob54]

The plot isn't showing the same thing but yes 15dB at 7kHz is about the worst I have ever seen.
It's twice as bad as Beyerdynamic treble.

Mt. Ultrabeyerzone