• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). There are daily reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Beyerdynamic DT150 Review (Closed Back Headphone)

Rate this headphone:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 15 18.1%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 44 53.0%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 21 25.3%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 3 3.6%

  • Total voters
    83
Joined
Jan 21, 2022
Messages
27
Likes
12
I went with something like this. I went by ear in the treble range like suggested by Dr Zingo. It's much more dynamic and lively without being "boosted".

Capture d’écran, le 2022-02-27 à 18.27.19.png


I also did the imbalance mod by using a bit of electrical tape. It's invisible.

I'll go with that until I upgrade to the Dan Clark Audio I'm looking at right now ! ;)

Best wishes,
 

Thomas_A

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 20, 2019
Messages
1,672
Likes
1,124
Location
Sweden
See these as relevant to the other measurements (horizontal line is audible flat) measurement made by Sonarworks.
Not measured on an industry standard rig but that's not necessarily a bad thing. It just means that the plots aren't 1:1 comparable to Harman compensated measurements. One can use these as Tyll's plots relative to each other. Sonarworks EQ's to them.
To person A this sounds fine to person B it may not.

DT150:
View attachment 189620

DT 250/80:
View attachment 189622

DT250/250:
View attachment 189621

My DT150 (horizontal line = audible flat, non industry standard):
fr-dt150-stock.png


Amirs (Harman compensated industry standard) DT150:
index.php



My DT250-250 measurement: Seeing how close my cheap-ass measurement of the DT150 is to an expensive industry standard measurement it is pretty safe to assume, the very similar construction, DT250 will measure about similar to this.
fr-dt250.png

You can extrapolate DT250/80 from the measurement above from the Sonarworks differences.

Is it possible for you to plot DT-150 with EDT100T together with the AKG371 and secondly with the DT250?
 

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
11,670
Likes
25,986
Location
The Neitherlands
When applying eq to headphones, I find measurements useful in the lower frequencies but go wholly by ear (using a descending sine sweep) in the treble. Comparing your measurements to Amir's, they match nicely in the lower frequencies but at 10 kHz one has a peak and the other a trough. Since the wavelength at that frequency is 3.4 cm, I suspect the distance to the transducer and possibly the shape of the ear canal has such a big influence that few generalizations can be made.
In my experience, a "rough" treble typically means that you have three or four peaks above 5kHz in the headphone and little else.

Above 8kHz Amirs measurements are determined by the fake pinna, mine and Sonarworks are are not. The dip at 10kHz is seen in all Amirs measurements and a known 'artifact' of this particular measurement fixture.
 

Thomas_A

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 20, 2019
Messages
1,672
Likes
1,124
Location
Sweden

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
11,670
Likes
25,986
Location
The Neitherlands
That's most likely the response of your ear, not so much that of the headphone.
 

Robbo99999

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
3,897
Likes
3,384
Location
UK
Could be, but it swapping L-R follows the HP and not my ears.
You can also listen to sweeps on your speakers if they're quite close to anechoically flat, to rule out any natural variation/patterns you have in your hearing re localised peaks & dips.....I've got a strong peak between 8-12kHz for some reason in my hearing! I get roughly the same peak in my various headphones in that area. (You wouldn't EQ out those natural variations in your headphone EQ's)
 

Thomas_A

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 20, 2019
Messages
1,672
Likes
1,124
Location
Sweden
You can also listen to sweeps on your speakers if they're quite close to anechoically flat, to rule out any natural variation/patterns you have in your hearing re localised peaks & dips.....I've got a strong peak between 8-12kHz for some reason in my hearing! (You wouldn't EQ out those natural variations in your headphone EQ's)

Yes I’ve done quite some listening to my speakers and hearing tests. My left ear is less sensitive to high frequencies and the left ear canal is noticable smaller than the right.
 

Robbo99999

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
3,897
Likes
3,384
Location
UK
Yes I’ve done quite some listening to my speakers and hearing tests. My left ear is less sensitive to high frequencies and the left ear canal is noticable smaller than the right.
Cool, you seem to be in a good position to know whether what you're hearing in headphones is due to the headphone or due to your natural hearing variation.
 

DrZingo

Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2022
Messages
41
Likes
73
Location
Sweden
Above 8kHz Amirs measurements are determined by the fake pinna, mine and Sonarworks are are not. The dip at 10kHz is seen in all Amirs measurements and a known 'artifact' of this particular measurement fixture.
That's interesting. I'm sure this has been debated to death here, but it's not entirely clear to me why it would be better to measure at the bottom of a synthetic ear. At least with over-ear and on-ear headphones, what you would like to achieve is surely a sound wave hitting the ear in the same way sound from more remote sources does. Any filtering from the outer ear and ear canal should already be factored in by the auditary cortex, it seems to me. I realise this is the reason for the shape of the Harman curve (it basically being the reverse of this factoring-in, and thus considered to correspond to a flat frequency curve hitting the ear) but this seems overly complicated to me. It also introduces a source of variation/error since people's ears vary in size and depth from the standard ear used in the measurements. Maybe someone here can enlighten me...
 

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
11,670
Likes
25,986
Location
The Neitherlands
That's interesting. I'm sure this has been debated to death here, but it's not entirely clear to me why it would be better to measure at the bottom of a synthetic ear.

The reasoning is that the ear takes up space (and a substantial amount) as well as it is directional and the ear canal is kind of a 'spring' at certain frequencies.

At least with over-ear and on-ear headphones, what you would like to achieve is surely a sound wave hitting the ear in the same way sound from more remote sources does.

I agree but the ear occupying space makes some changes.

Any filtering from the outer ear and ear canal should already be factored in by the auditary cortex, it seems to me.

yes but mostly for sounds coming from the front but also sounds from all around where with headphones it just comes from the sides.

I realise this is the reason for the shape of the Harman curve (it basically being the reverse of this factoring-in, and thus considered to correspond to a flat frequency curve hitting the ear) but this seems overly complicated to me.

That 'curve' is very heavily 'smoothed' and in no way is accurate above 6-8kHz for all headphones. What it does provide is some average for the particular rig used by Harman at the time which had a different pinna from current industry standards.

The beauty of having a standard (that is not the same for any HATS nor config) is that someone else can replicate the measurement when they have the same (very expensive) config. It goes lame above 6kHz when measured on other standard HATS (+ the Harman curve is basically wrong to use, not only above 6kHz)
Note most users claim accuracy till 8kHz or 10kHz but when judging measurements from research one could say the accuracy for all headphones ends around 6kHz (where some headphones might be measured correctly up to 9kHz or with certain HATS configs maybe up to 10kHz.

It also introduces a source of variation/error since people's ears vary in size and depth from the standard ear used in the measurements.

Yes, it does. What one sees on the graphs is what is measured and above 6kHz could be very different from your mine or other HATS. But it is what it is and when one paid > 20k for a measurement rig this is kind of hard to swallow.
Also flatbeds without pinna are not correct above 1kHz (also angle dependent) but above 6kHz can be more indicative for what comes out of the driver but depends on many factors.
 

DrZingo

Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2022
Messages
41
Likes
73
Location
Sweden
Thanks for the informative reply. Hmmm - considering how well Amir's Harman-adjusted graph follows your flatbed measurements it seems to me as if, at least with these headphones, we're mainly talking about filtering up to about 5-6 kHz after which all bets appear to be off anyway. I still suspect the reason for the wild behaviour at higher frequencies has a lot to do with the wavelength being comparable to the size of the setup, with reinforcements and cancellations in the measuring chamber. I don't know how one would get around it though. Could one e.g. measure higher frequencies close to the headphone completely in the open somehow, i.e. without any head or flatbed at all, just a headphone and a microphone...?
 

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
11,670
Likes
25,986
Location
The Neitherlands
Sadly above 6kHz there are all kinds of things (resonances) at play so accuracy is not really possible. I believe the pinna-less method is slightly better at showing actual response for higher frequencies which I am interested in as sibilance and sharpness are residing there and bother me the most.
So I look at HATS + my own measurements to get an idea of response over the entire range and look at seal issues for the lower frequency range.

Sadly no headphone measurement is accurate. Regardless of the used method and how much it costs.
 

Thomas_A

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 20, 2019
Messages
1,672
Likes
1,124
Location
Sweden
Sadly above 6kHz there are all kinds of things (resonances) at play so accuracy is not really possible. I believe the pinna-less method is slightly better at showing actual response for higher frequencies which I am interested in as sibilance and sharpness are residing there and bother me the most.
So I look at HATS + my own measurements to get an idea of response over the entire range and look at seal issues for the lower frequency range.

Sadly no headphone measurement is accurate. Regardless of the used method and how much it costs.
Accuracy will both relate to resolution limits and method-specific errors. Listening sweeps and fixed tones, comparing different headphones (and speakers) and measurements gives a good idea. When there is weak bass, there is weak low frequency tones. When there are HF peaks, they are audible as fierce peaks in sine sweeps. When there are ups and downs in frequency response, there are audible ups and downs. Etc.

Your measurement of the DT150/EDT100T match very well what I hear. Also, the measured weak bass of HD600 match very well what I hear as well as well as the subdued treble of the BOSE QC25/QC35. The Apple AirPods Pro sounds a bit unnatural in the voice range.

So despite both resolution limits and method-specific errors I think both yours and Amirs measurements comply with listening impressions quite well. One need just to know how to read the graphs.
 

Thomas_A

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 20, 2019
Messages
1,672
Likes
1,124
Location
Sweden
With kind support with raw data from #solderdude and Amirs data on the DT150 I used the difference signal from DT150 original pads and EDT100T pads and used the file as an EQ file on Amirs measurements. This is only a predicted response but could be a reasonable result from the D150/EDT100T pads:

EDT100T.png
 

bouncingboffin

New Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2022
Messages
2
Likes
3
The booming bass is definitely a thing, I changed the cups and tamed it. The design is ever so comfortable, I can wear them all day and my ears aren't smoking, nor is my head feeling squashed and I don't feel the need to keep my head dead still and I don't need to keep adjusting them. I guess my ears have retuned themselves to the DT-150 after over 20 years of pummelling. I bought my first pair for studio use from Raper & Wayman (if anyone can remember those guys) and they've been all over the world and still sound good. I know they're nowhere near the best headphone, but they're comfortable, durable and can deliver eardrum shattering performance when paired with a decent HP amp, I'd be interested in something similar but with a more linear top end (whilst I can still hear it)
 
Top Bottom