Blessing 3 - launch on April 10

[markanini]

Anybody who wants a tuning like the Blessing 3 with subdued subbass might wait also a little longer and get the Project Red, supposedly below $100View attachment 278724

I like reduced 3-6K, but Moondrop Lan exists for less.

 

[Soria Moria]

Ok, if you want to have it stated, I have a PhD in theoretical physics and some experience in data treatment, fitting and analysis.

But I prefer them for a good portion BECAUSE they are the most Harman compliant IEMs around.

Well, why not update with the cheap yet good Salnotes Zero?

I have a theoretical degree in theoretical physics.

 

[GaryH]

I have a PhD in theoretical physics

What was your thesis on exactly?

 

[isostasy]

@WilliamW I suggest you open an issue on the autoeq repo if you genuinely believe there is a mistake in the code jaakko has written to calculate the harman compliance rather than taking it out on everyone here. https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq/issues

I doubt it, you can try to make fun of me, I will nevertheless have a real PhD degree in theoretical physis. And you just as a joke on an audio forum

 

[markanini]

Yes... THAT's why we're doing this clearly. You sure got us there lol.

Currently any reference curve based on DF + slope should be treated as being in 'beta'. Thankfully it's anchored to DF and therefore backwards compatible with other slopes, but we haven't established the preference boundaries yet, hence the need to test. In an ideal world, we have a setup where the user can input the tilt they want and then see how the data shakes out for themselves. This is also precisely what Crin is suggesting in the interview we did with Dr. Sean Olive. Maybe instead of... making wild assumptions and allegations about our motivations you may want to consider thinking about what might contribute to a more positive dialogue for how the data gets represented. After all, the point is to figure out how to best make the data useful to people.

Since the tilt used for each graph changes, a prospective buyer with an idea of wanting a warmer, brighter or balanced set will have no use for the graph, or be misled. By this move I'm sorry to say the issues predicted by @GaryH have become reality. It's in plain sight.

 

[Resolve]

Thanks for responding. I get where you're coming from but, though I wouldn't go so far as Gary, I do think it's misleading, whatever your intention. For example, if you wanted to compare the B3 to the B2, why not just use a measurement of the B2? In your Truthear Hexa review you just used a smoothed measurement of the ThieAudio Monarch Mk.II which I thought was much more useful and at least transparent. Even better, find a consistently measuring, affordable IEM which many people own so know the sound of (could be found via a poll) Of course this could have issues, it could be seen as a way to promote 1 particular product unfairly. Otherwise it kinda does look like you're picking a tilt that best fits the measurement after you take it. I know I've been/am being quite critical, I hope you see it as somewhat positive as my concern is also how useful the data is.

I encourage folks to pay very close attention to what we're actually doing and make up your own mind, rather than trust the words of what... I can only really describe as outright conspiracy theory nonsense. I used individual products in the past because A) I thought it was interesting to see how things stacked up at different price points, and B) because I wasn't happy with the IE research, even though I understand why they made the assumptions they did. To be clear, I don't think using individual products as a reference point is a good idea (including the way reviewer targets are often devised). It's just that we needed to show data in relation to something. As an aside, let me be very clear about this: no proper reference curve should be determined by the preferences of a single individual reviewer - which is a position that certain people won't admit that we hold. And before anyone says "but wait, don't IEM reviewers on your team have their own targets?" - yes... yes they do. And that's a problem we're remedying, but it takes time to actually develop and importantly test something suitable.

The second thing I'll say to this is that we're not remotely opposed to having data be represented against a tilt that ends up making various expensive products look bad (many regularly do) - and there is a project in the works where users could choose how they want to view it. But more importantly, we're trying to settle on a default tilt that's most perceptually relevant, and one of our internal debates is whether its possible to use the same one for in-ear headphones as for over-ear headphones, and then just build different preference boundaries around them according to the outcomes of the research. So whether it's 8dB, 10dB, 12dB... as I've said before it's still up for debate. Hell, even just using flat DF with no slope and then representing the slope itself in compensated data is also still on the table, and that in fact would make most products look bad in raw graphs - although I find that more challenging for new people to understand. REW is the current limitation for representing this stuff in an ideal fashion, and this is also once again something we're working on.

So, I will concede that without the rest of that context, the "changing the slope to suit the product" idea may come out. But here's where this doesn't make sense to me... Do you think using a 12dB slope would make the B3 look... worse?

Here's the difference we're talking about:

You can understand why I find this kind of accusation to be... kind of hilarious.

 

[JJFUSA]

Can someone please explain to silly me or provide a link to the reliable source of information about the meaning of Tilt, 10dB Slope / 14 db Slope, etc. and most importantly Why to use modified targets instead of the regular DF target?

Please enlighten me a bit, as I really want to be able to understand everything you're talking about here guys, but I feel like I'm kinda missing the basic knowledge that you already possess.

 

[markanini]

But if the argument is that differences are so small between tilt rates, why did he bother adjusting the tilt for each product then? That's not for @GaryH or anyone else to explain, I'm pretty certain.

Can someone please explain to silly me or provide a link to the reliable source of information about the meaning of Tilt, 10dB Slope / 14 db Slope, etc. and most importantly Why to use modified targets instead of the regular DF target?

Please enlighten me a bit, as I really want to be able to understand everything you're talking about here guys, but I feel like I'm kinda missing the basic knowledge that you already possess.

DF+slope is an effort to recreate the bass increasing effect of a flat speakers in real listening rooms. DF alone would represent a fully reflective room, which are used for some academic research. Real listening rooms in contrast have a mix of reflection and absorption.

A separate discussion would cover if DF+slope succeeds in doing what Harman does, providing a reference for headphone playback of content created for speakers. But you asked for a simple explanation.

 

[Matias]

Can someone please explain to silly me or provide a link to the reliable source of information about the meaning of Tilt, 10dB Slope / 14 db Slope, etc. and most importantly Why to use modified targets instead of the regular DF target?

Please enlighten me a bit, as I really want to be able to understand everything you're talking about here guys, but I feel like I'm kinda missing the basic knowledge that you already possess.

That is what I know and have been clarified about this subject.

"Sloped neutral" target curves for headphones and IEMs?

Some days ago I was reading reviews of headphones and IEMs, and their frequency responses compared against a "neutral" target curve, and that got me thinking... Contrary to a "preference" target curve, a "neutral" target curve, as far as I know, is defined by using a head (+torso?) simulator...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Resolve]

But if the argument is that differences are so small between tilt rates, why did he bother adjusting the tilt for each product then? That's not for @GaryH or anyone else to explain, I'm pretty certain.

A 2dB tilt difference across the spectrum isn't massive, but it's still perceptually relevant. The argument is rather that the alternative of a 12dB slope doesn't exactly make the product look any worse, and therefore not a great 'smoking gun' for the intended narrative here. But the change in tilt has been explained multiple times now, including simply the fact that Crin's 4620 data was posted with a 10dB tilt and my post was in response to that with RA0402 data. I figured it made sense to post it with the same tilt.

But you can use anything from 6dB to 14dB and have it still make sense, it just depends which segment you prefer the data to be represented against.


Edit: If this still doesn't make sense to you, I'd ask that you at least let us get to a point where we no longer have to rely on REW for data representation. Squiglink is great, but we're not going to be using it for our database.

 

[JJFUSA]

But if the argument is that differences are so small between tilt rates, why did he bother adjusting the tilt for each product then? That's not for @GaryH or anyone else to explain, I'm pretty certain.


DF+slope is an effort to recreate the bass increasing effect of a flat speakers in real listening rooms. DF alone would represent a fully reflective room, which are used for some academic research. Real listening rooms in contrast have a mix of reflection and absorption.

A separate discussion would cover if DF+slope succeeds in doing what Harman does, providing a reference for headphone playback of content created for speakers. But you asked for a simple explanation.

Now I understand it, thanks a lot, it's simple and does make sense to me.

 

[JJFUSA]

That is what I know and have been clarified about this subject.

"Sloped neutral" target curves for headphones and IEMs?

Some days ago I was reading reviews of headphones and IEMs, and their frequency responses compared against a "neutral" target curve, and that got me thinking... Contrary to a "preference" target curve, a "neutral" target curve, as far as I know, is defined by using a head (+torso?) simulator...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Excellent, very good read, thank you very much, there is always something new to learn indeed.

 

[markanini]

A 2dB tilt difference across the spectrum isn't massive, but it's still perceptually relevant. The argument is rather that the alternative of a 12dB slope doesn't exactly make the product look any worse, and therefore not a great 'smoking gun' for the intended narrative here. But the change in tilt has been explained multiple times now, including simply the fact that Crin's 4620 data was posted with a 10dB tilt and my post was in response to that with RA0402 data. I figured it made sense to post it with the same tilt.

But you can use anything from 6dB to 14dB and have it still make sense, it just depends which segment you prefer the data to be represented against.

This context wasn't stated, maybe some in your circle got the connection, I can see how blind spots occur. The perceived audacity of an objectivists framing should hopefully not trap you into giving off Pious aura. I usually appreciate guys like you and Crinacle being upfront, unlike many reviewers that don't disclose their commercial connections. Having a good reputation attracts sycophantic attention and it's human to let things go to you head some times, I've thought you handled this well overall.

 

[JJFUSA]

MOONDROP Blessing 3 In-Ear Monitors Review:

MOONDROP Blessing 3 In-Ear Monitors Review

MOONDROP's long awaited Blessing 3 IEMs are finally here! The new set uses a 2 DD/4 BA hybrid driver configuration, including a rarely seen dual dynamic driver setup in a horizontally-opposed configuration, inside shells boasting improved ergonomics and aesthetics to try to once again define the...

www.techpowerup.com

 

[JJFUSA]

Timmy (Gizaudio) Blessing 3 review:

 

[JJFUSA]

So if anyone wants a cheaper Blessing 3 with a great planar technical / details Dunu Talos ($200) is the best option, Talos is tuned closer to DF:

 

[GaryH]

Yes... THAT's why we're doing this clearly. You sure got us there lol.

 

[markanini]

Imagine seeing animated enthusiasm about not escaping the circle of confusion.