• 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!

Best sounding full-size closed-back...

xykreinov

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 16, 2019
Messages
424
Likes
678
Overall, stock, the Status CB-1 is king. Not only are they pretty close to the Harman target stock, they also are just comfortable to listen to for long periods. They're somehow tuned against causing listener fatigue, and it works.
My vintage DT770 600ohm are more detailed, but cause listener fatigue, which ends up muddying things once I'm hours in. However, for highly critical work, they are an excellent choice. Not many cans are as neutral or responsive to eq.
 
OP
Asylum Seeker

Asylum Seeker

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2020
Messages
414
Likes
295
Location
Guatemala
Harman is over-rated, IMO.
 

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
15,891
Likes
35,912
Location
The Neitherlands
Some people prefer added lows others don't, some like even more bass and others prefer it in between.
Use an equalizer and you can adjust the tonal balance to your liking.

That's what we call preference and is what the Harman curve is all about (added lows)
 
OP
Asylum Seeker

Asylum Seeker

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2020
Messages
414
Likes
295
Location
Guatemala
Headphone manufacturers have increasingly sought to replicate it so people have latched on to the idea that it is the ideal. It is not. It is a preference, not an absolute. For my tastes it is too dark as evidenced on the K371 and MOONDROP Starfield.
 

xykreinov

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 16, 2019
Messages
424
Likes
678
Headphone manufacturers have increasingly sought to replicate it so people have latched on to the idea that it is the ideal. It is not. It is a preference, not an absolute. For my tastes it is too dark as evidenced on the K371 and MOONDROP Starfield.
First off, just because a headphone is explicitly attempting to match the Harman target closely doesn't mean it is particularly superior at such. I notice your setup includes the DT770. Well, despite being made many years before the establishment of the Harman target, the stock DT770 actually is pretty close to the Harman target- only 1db farther away from matching the target than the K371.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/npqrz9dqdda292x/Beyerdynamic DT770 (new earpads).pdf?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/9ftqm1c13xjcqgv/AKG K371.pdf?dl=0
So, hypothetically, if you say you you prefer the sound of the DT770 to the K371 because you don't like the sound of the Harman target, you're being disingenuous.
Secondly, it's part preference, part absolute. Everyone's ears are shaped differently and will respond differently. However, more of it is objective than not. As @solderdude pointed out, bass preference varies quite a bit: This is especially pertinent in your case since you don't like how "dark" the target sounds.
However, no other part of the spectrum varies as greatly as that in preference. So, I recommend trying out EQ-ing to the target again as a starting point, and using smooth low-pass filters to dial it in to your liking.
 

thewas

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
6,747
Likes
16,186
First off, just because a headphone is explicitly attempting to match the Harman target closely doesn't mean it is particularly superior at such. I notice your setup includes the DT770. Well, despite being made many years before the establishment of the Harman target, the stock DT770 actually is pretty close to the Harman target- only 1db farther away from matching the target than the K371.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/npqrz9dqdda292x/Beyerdynamic DT770 (new earpads).pdf?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/9ftqm1c13xjcqgv/AKG K371.pdf?dl=0
Are they? I see very different stock responses of both:

1589671815592.png
vs.
1589671873437.png
 
OP
Asylum Seeker

Asylum Seeker

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2020
Messages
414
Likes
295
Location
Guatemala
First off, just because a headphone is explicitly attempting to match the Harman target closely doesn't mean it is particularly superior at such. I notice your setup includes the DT770. Well, despite being made many years before the establishment of the Harman target, the stock DT770 actually is pretty close to the Harman target- only 1db farther away from matching the target than the K371.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/npqrz9dqdda292x/Beyerdynamic DT770 (new earpads).pdf?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/9ftqm1c13xjcqgv/AKG K371.pdf?dl=0
So, hypothetically, if you say you you prefer the sound of the DT770 to the K371 because you don't like the sound of the Harman target, you're being disingenuous.
Secondly, it's part preference, part absolute. Everyone's ears are shaped differently and will respond differently. However, more of it is objective than not. As @solderdude pointed out, bass preference varies quite a bit: This is especially pertinent in your case since you don't like how "dark" the target sounds.
However, no other part of the spectrum varies as greatly as that in preference. So, I recommend trying out EQ-ing to the target again as a starting point, and using smooth low-pass filters to dial it in to your liking.
You are getting away from my point. That point is that now that people know and hear about Harman, specially from manufacturers who tout it, people think it is the ideal. It is not.

Two, the DT770 has several versions. DT770 I believe was closer to Diffuse Field than to a target that did not exist when it was first made. Finally and crucially, a cursory listen reveals that it is brighter, sparklier than the K371 and MOONDROP Starfield which are rather darker. I am not being disingenuous. I am telling you the following:
1. Harman is now treated with reverance as gospel. It ain't. It is one of several targets.
2. To my ears the DT770 sounds better and brighter than the K371, whatever targets they both are.
3. If K371 and Starfield are Harman, then Harman is too dark for my tastes. The DT770, however, is not dark or veiled.

K371 is on the sale block and in storage. DT770 Pro 250 Ohm remains a keeper eight years on and sits in my bedside table drawer.
 

xykreinov

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 16, 2019
Messages
424
Likes
678
Are they? I see very different stock responses of both:

View attachment 63876 vs. View attachment 63878
They look very different. However, that's not what is relevant in my using them as an example. The difference in deviation from the Harman target between them is only 1dB. More importantly, the difference in preference rating is only 5. With this data in mind, it isn't sensible to say you differ the K371 to the DT770 because the K371 is closer to the Harman target. For, both headphones are virtually just as close to it.
You are getting away from my point. That point is that now that people know and hear about Harman, specially from manufacturers who tout it, people think it is the ideal. It is not.

Two, the DT770 has several versions. DT770 I believe was closer to Diffuse Field than to a target that did not exist when it was first made. Finally and crucially, a cursory listen reveals that it is brighter, sparklier than the K371 and MOONDROP Starfield which are rather darker. I am not being disingenuous. I am telling you the following:
1. Harman is now treated with reverance as gospel. It ain't. It is one of several targets.
2. To my ears the DT770 sounds better and brighter than the K371, whatever targets they both are.
3. If K371 and Starfield are Harman, then Harman is too dark for my tastes. The DT770, however, is not dark or veiled.

And please, don't make unsolicited suggestions about EQing. K371 is on the sale block. Heck, most all of my IEMs at a fraction of the cost have a more enjoyable sound. DT770 Pro 250 Ohm remains a keeper eight years on.
>You are getting away from my point. That point is that now that people know and hear about Harman, specially from manufacturers who tout it, people think it is the ideal. It is not.
We know what the ideal is for a speaker: flat. That has been the scientific consensus for decades. However, what hasn't been known for as long is what the ideal is for headphones. The Harman target is the closest to flat speakers in a treated room. Going into why that is and why such is particularly ideal would take a long time. As has been already stated and proven (by Harman themselves), the Harman target isn't an end-all be-all and never will be- seeing as how much peoples' preference in the bass region varies compared to other regions. However, it is the best baseline available right now.
>Two, the DT770 has several versions. DT770 I believe was closer to Diffuse Field than to a target that did not exist when it was first made.
Right. I explicitly acknowledged that the DT770 was tuned long before the Harman target was conceived. However, just because one may be tuned to the Diffuse Field doesn't inherently mean it's far away from the Harman target as well. As I proved with my giving the measurements from orratory1990, the DT770 happen to be very close to the Harman target. A preference rating as high as 84 is not common. Many cans can only be EQed to that, let alone acoustically tuned.
>Harman is now treated with reverance as gospel. It ain't. It is one of several targets.
Stating other targets exist doesn't disprove the findings of Harman.
>To my ears the DT770 sounds better and brighter than the K371, whatever targets they both are
If that is the case, my point was that has nothing to do with the K371 explicitly attempting to have a frequency response matching the Harman target. Even though the DT770 was tuned to a different ideal, its frequency response still happens to be close to the Harman target; essentially as close as the K371. So, by saying you differ the K371, you are not saying you differ the Harman target.
>If K371 and Starfield are Harman, then Harman is too dark for my tastes. The DT770, however, is not dark or veiled.
As explained, the DT770 is basically "as Harman" as the K371.
>And please, don't make unsolicited suggestions about EQing. K371 is on the sale block. Heck, most all of my IEMs at a fraction of the cost have a more enjoyable sound. DT770 Pro 250 Ohm remains a keeper eight years on
What do you have against EQing, exactly? Using Innerfidelity's measurements and a recently made target compensated for orratory1990's measurements, I EQed my DT770 and they sound phenomenal. By eliminating its bloated low-to-mid bass suckout, they are a lot less fatiguing on the ears for the same analytical sound. Oh, and they remain a keeper decades on =P
 

Hemicrusher

Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2018
Messages
94
Likes
47
I got nothing other than I use EQ settings to closer match Harmon with my ATH-M50X's. I really like them EQ'd that way. Got some DT770's on the way and curious how they sound.
 

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
15,891
Likes
35,912
Location
The Neitherlands
K371 vs DT770 Pro (250)

k371-vs-dt770-pro-250.png

It is obvious @Asylum Seeker loves a +5dB treble peak and the bass a bit dis-attached (see dip at 200Hz)
A matter of preference not accuracy.
Nothing wrong with preference.
 
Last edited:

xykreinov

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 16, 2019
Messages
424
Likes
678
K371 vs DT770 Pro (250)

k371-vs-dt770-pro-250.png

It is obvious @Asylum Seeker loves a +5dB treble peak and the bass a bit dis-attached (see dip at 200Hz)
A matter of preference not accuracy.
Nothing wrong with preference.
Nice graph.
That coincides with my point that his distaste for the K371 isn't indicative of a distaste for the Harman target, since the DT770 is just as close to matching the target as the K371. So, as you said, it's a matter of preference, not accuracy.
 

ZolaIII

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
4,069
Likes
2,409
Nice graph.
That coincides with my point that his distaste for the K371 isn't indicative of a distaste for the Harman target, since the DT770 is just as close to matching the target as the K371. So, as you said, it's a matter of preference, not accuracy.
It's all preference Including Harman target, you want accuracy that would be totally flat to 0 dB.
I don't want flat; I want flat bass which is tight and fast while going as low as possible, a 1 dB mids boost & a bit of the sparkle in highs but not to much nor going to much high. Call that a preference.
 
Last edited:

xykreinov

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 16, 2019
Messages
424
Likes
678
It's all preference Including Harman target, you want accuracy that would be totally flat to 0 dB.
I don't want flat; I want flat bass which is tight and fast while going as low as possible, a 1 dB mids boost & a bit of the sparkle in highs but not to much nor going to much high. Call that a preference.
No, flat is not accurate when it comes to headphones. This is primarily due to how certain parts of your ears change the sound when the transducers are right outside of them.
The Harman target attempts to make headphones sound most like speakers possessing a flat frequency response in a treated room.
This is why virtually no headphones, let alone good ones, have flat frequency response graphs. Speakers not tuned flat sound like garbage- this has been known for decades. However, what hasn't been as concrete for as long is how to make headphones sound like flat speakers. Such is what all the frequency response targets in good faith attempt to accomplish.
 

ZolaIII

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
4,069
Likes
2,409
No, flat is not accurate when it comes to headphones. This is primarily due to how certain parts of your ears change the sound when the transducers are right outside of them.
The Harman target attempts to make headphones sound most like speakers possessing a flat frequency response in a treated room.
This is why virtually no headphones, let alone good ones, have flat frequency response graphs. Speakers not tuned flat sound like garbage- this has been known for decades. However, what hasn't been as concrete for as long is how to make headphones sound like flat speakers. Such is what all the frequency response targets in good faith attempt to accomplish.
I am 40 and for me Harman curve is a garbage, around 3 bB boost in highs is enough for my ears, everything above that is bright.
 

xykreinov

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 16, 2019
Messages
424
Likes
678
I am 40 and for me Harman curve is a garbage, around 3 bB boost in highs is enough for my ears, everything above that is bright.
Well, my goal wasn't to sell you the Harman target as something for you to tune to precisely. Rather, to point out that flat is not a faithful tuning for headphones.
Your ears are your ears- what makes headphones sound like flat speakers to them is different than others. However, the Harman target is a good baseline since it sounds close to flat speakers to most people in testing. Harman themselves pointed out how 3k-5khz and especially 0-200hz are more variable in preference than any other region on the spectrum. So, it can often be fruitful to use the target as a starting point and subsequently dial it to your liking with high-pass and low-pass filters.
 

thewas

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
6,747
Likes
16,186
They look very different. However, that's not what is relevant in my using them as an example. The difference in deviation from the Harman target between them is only 1dB. More importantly, the difference in preference rating is only 5. With this data in mind, it isn't sensible to say you differ the K371 to the DT770 because the K371 is closer to the Harman target. For, both headphones are virtually just as close to it.
They not only look very different but without EQ they also sound very different.
The 1 dB difference in deviation from the Harman target is the average which doesn't really tell much soundwise like for example the typical Beyer peak that can be quite annoying.
 

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
15,891
Likes
35,912
Location
The Neitherlands
This is primarily due to how certain parts of your ears change the sound when the transducers are right outside of them.

I think part of this is true between 1kHz and 20kHz but not for below 1kHz.
The lift in the lows is based on
A: preference of test subjects while determining the tonal balance
B: trying to mimic the bass boost one gets when playing a flat speaker in an average listening room.
C: the missing tactile feel (for lowest frequency body sensations are weighed in by the brain)
D: In some cases listening to headphones is done at lower than 80dB SPL average so there is loss of lows due to equal contour loudness effects.

Some or all of the above is why people prefer some extra bass and that is incorporated in the Harman target which is based on listening experiences. Not everyone listens at the same SPL or has the correct 'reference' in mind or have a different preference.
This is why some prefer the Harman target and others like less or even more bass.

As for the sound changing around the ears (actually when hitting the ear drum) this happens with sounds from headphones as well as speakers.
The only differences are the angles and speakers being more of a point source where headphone drivers, being close to the ear are relatively big 'walls' emitting sound (so not a point source)

The tonal change is the difference between sounds coming from the front and sounds coming from the side. There are differences which are individually different due to Pinna shapes and above 2kHz even age or 'damage' dependent.
The brain takes care of that though it knows how reality sounds and uses that as a reference.
The same is true for sounds coming from the sides.

Then there is the channel separation and how the brain handles that.

You can't compare speakers to headphones. Different horses for different coarses. Sure one can try to emulate but it will never be the same.
It's a matter of letting the brain get used to it or use DSP to try to emulate. And this too will vary individually.
 
Last edited:

ZolaIII

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
4,069
Likes
2,409
Well, my goal wasn't to sell you the Harman target as something for you to tune to precisely. Rather, to point out that flat is not a faithful tuning for headphones.
Your ears are your ears- what makes headphones sound like flat speakers to them is different than others. However, the Harman target is a good baseline since it sounds close to flat speakers to most people in testing. Harman themselves pointed out how 3k-5khz and especially 0-200hz are more variable in preference than any other region on the spectrum. So, it can often be fruitful to use the target as a starting point and subsequently dial it to your liking with high-pass and low-pass filters.
Anything which will cross over mids is garbage, mids account for 60% of information in audio and only reason to want some boost in highs in my case is my age.
 
Top Bottom