solderdude
Grand Contributor
I suggest to use EQ instead and listen to music in a candle lit room... that'll fool your brain a lot better than thinking an old technology can actually do that.I am very much looking for that 'tube warmth'
I suggest to use EQ instead and listen to music in a candle lit room... that'll fool your brain a lot better than thinking an old technology can actually do that.I am very much looking for that 'tube warmth'
You will end up with VERY different measurements and will have to compensate both to a similar target. I assume Harman or want to have a go with other targets as well ?
How are you planning to calibrate the FP ?
Panning to do seal measurements too ? When you do they won't follow Harman anymore.
In the end you will have 2 FP measurements. One made acc. to a standard and one not adhering to any standard using a mic that was not intended to be used that way.
Why not buy the 4128/5128 and see what you can do with that![]()
I want to see and learn about what is going on inside the headphone ear cup without putting my ear in there. Step response, frequency response, waterfall and such. I would like to do this without all the stuff about personal ears being different and head transfer function.
Your assessment is immensely helpful to me. I own a well-regarded headphone model that remains almost completely unused. That's not due to poor performance - I just find the soundscape to be uninvolving. So, I've been considering an upgrade. My problem is that I've listened to classical music for years through good-quality loudspeakers, and orchestral/choral/organ music sounds too diminished over headphones. The Dan Clark Audio Expanse seem superb on paper, but this is not the first time I've read that they have a "dead room" aspect. (I'm also at a loss to understand why $4,000 headphones would have an artificial 100Hz-300Hz bass boost intentionally dialed in, which most owners would want to remove immediately with equalization, in conformance with the Harmon curve). That's not the type of performance I've been hoping to find. I should probably face reality and admit that when I wish to hear music reproduced with an impact similar to loudspeakers, I'm probably asking too much of any headphone...The Expanse sounds like a studio monitor with bass boost, in a room with no reflections.
I'm also at a loss to understand why $4,000 headphones would have an artificial 100Hz-300Hz bass boost intentionally dialed in, which most owners would want to remove immediately with equalization, in conformance with the Harmon curve).
I'd argue most people who are interested in buying a $4K headphone are not used to distorted, bloated bass from headphones. In any case, if I remember correctly I think the point Dan Clark made was that he felt the elevated bass is matching live performances of bass guitars and kick drums and such better.Because most people are used to distorted bloated bass from Headphone with dynamic drivers. To compensate for the "lack" of bass (the absence of distortion) there is that bass boost.
In general paying for tuning makes no sense in my opinion in an age in which tuning can be easily manipulated by equalization software. Even if that bump is the best thing that has ever happened in sound reproduction, I do not need Expanse to experience that. I can tune it with a simple filter on the EQ and Bob's my uncle. I suspect this is one of the reasons why it is so hard to get headphone manufacturers to ditch their "house curves" and agree on a standardized tonality - you can not create much of a "unique selling proposition" out of something everybody can reproduce at home I suppose, and the Circle of Confusion continues unfortunately, at least for head speakers.Thanks. That's intriguing information about Dan Clark's preferred frequency response curve. Speaking for myself (and perhaps a few other potential buyers) I'll say that I'm not exactly enthusiastic about paying $4,000 to experience the unique frequency bump that gives the greatest personal pleasure to Dan Clark's ears. I also wonder if that bass boost succeeds in improving the sonics for all types of music. But those are just my individual concerns (and as I mentioned earlier, I've been listening to music over loudspeakers almost exclusively for so long that It's likely I have unreasonable expectations about the performance characteristics of any headphone model).
Hi, I have a RME ADI-2 DAC connected to my Expanse using Hart Audio 1/4".Absolutely, Amir did his review with the RME ADI-2 Pro and report a level of -6 on the volume with plenty of headroom. You should be good to go with the Expanse and RME pairing as that is what Amir used. The Expanse is rated at 23 ohm impedance by Amir and the RME spec says 3.4 watts in balanced with 32 ohms so you are more than good.
Do you have something reducing input volume to the RME somewhere? Preamp adjustment for EQ? Loudness normalisation/ replay gain? Volume slider in your player/ source device?Hi, I have a RME ADI-2 DAC connected to my Expanse using Hart Audio 1/4".
I have the RME set to HIGH.
this setup does not go to an extremely high volume for my ears. Sure it's loud when maxed out but nothing like my Topping A70Pro.
do I have something wrong?
(love having bass and treble controls on the DAC)