Dan Clark headphones - subjectivists find them "dead" and "flat"

[dfuller]

So, a common complaint about DCA headphones among subjectivists is that they are "dynamically flat" and "dead".

I know, I know, subjectivists unreliable, can't measure, yadda yadda. This is a consistent thing, across different communities, with different people, all having the same experience.

But what in the measurements could cause that perception? Maybe people interpret nonlinear distortion on transients as "dynamics"? Maybe people want some in-headphone reflection? I'm asking because I'm genuinely curious, and I'd prefer to avoid the glib "look at the measurements they're great" posts.

 

[solderdude]

look at the measurements they're great !

They conform to a test fixture with a certain target.
Here's the thing that is obvious from all the research on this.
Not all people have the same preference and even the ones that fit in the 60% 'prefers the Harman target' have some tolerance and there is preference there too,
Add to that the fact that these headphones are very seal sensitive and you get a good mix of people that may not like what they hear and might even hear that in a similar way.
People fork out quite a bit of cash on these things and expect 'perfect sound forever' ... ermm .. perfect tonality.
Surprise ... that may not be true for everyone.

The non linear distortion is NOT a thing for these headphones so only seal and tonal preference and perhaps even owners 'expecting' pure perfection and then finding out it isn't for them... start looking online and find more people that don't like it and 'hear' similar things.

What would also be interesting is to find out how many DCA headphone owners are perfectly happy with the sound.
In general the most vocal people are the ones that don't like it and super-duper fan boys.

It's a bit like the HD650 story. Many love it others all claim 'veils' etc. where others don't hear a veil.

 

[dfuller]

The non linear distortion is NOT a thing for these headphones so only seal and tonal preference and perhaps even owners 'expecting' pure perfection and then finding out it isn't for them... start looking online and find more people that don't like it and 'hear' similar things.

What I'm hypothesizing is that the lack of any nonlinear distortion might be related.

It's fairly well understood that part of what our brain interprets as "volume" is the actual character of the audio, i.e. the amount of harmonic and other spurious content. It's not an uncommon trick to increase perceived loudness at mastering by intentionally adding harmonic distortion.

It's a bit like the HD650 story. Many love it others all claim 'veils' etc. where others don't hear a veil.

On this, I think it's really that the 6X0 line is riding that fine line between "warm end of neutral" and "not enough top end/lacking detail". As you say, the "target" is not as clear as you would initially think.

 

[listener650]

So, a common complaint about DCA headphones among subjectivists is that they are "dynamically flat" and "dead".

I know, I know, subjectivists unreliable, can't measure, yadda yadda. This is a consistent thing, across different communities, with different people, all having the same experience.

But what in the measurements could cause that perception? Maybe people interpret nonlinear distortion on transients as "dynamics"? Maybe people want some in-headphone reflection? I'm asking because I'm genuinely curious, and I'd prefer to avoid the glib "look at the measurements they're great" posts.

This is one area where I feel Dan's past efforts to figure this out (eg. the "Slam" case study he talked about at CanJam one year) to be a miss.

IMO it's to do with two things:

1) Many audiophiles prefer less bass/more treble than the Harman(ish) curve targeted by Dan for his modern headphone designs, which means the most current DCA headphones that have generous bass shelves and well-controlled treble resonances may sound a bit too bass-forward/dark for these listeners, lacking a bit of the intensity that audiophiles (perhaps erroneously) expect.

2) Due to the aforementioned control of treble resonances, my conjecture is that the on-head response of AMTS-equipped DCA headphones is dominated by dips, and this means that even for people who do prefer, for example, a Harman-level bass shelf and midrange shape, the treble response will on average trend towards the darker side, causing the front end of transients of drums to sound a bit softened.

To be clear, measurement data on GRAS/B&K measurement fixtures is not sufficient to characterize the latter; only measurements from microphones in real ears may illustrate this, and I hope to do some testing on this in the future.

 

[Philbo King]

My subjectivist take:
If I like how it sounds then it's ok. If I don't like it I add EQ. If that doesn't help I sell it. For the record I've never sold any audio gear for that reason.

 

[solderdude]

What I'm hypothesizing is that the lack of any nonlinear distortion might be related.

If that were the case this would be happening with all headphones that are low in distortion.

The trick used in studio's is per instrument and involves many many percent of distortion that helps with the instrument to create a 'sound' they are after.
The same trick does not work on the total sound and is why music sounds crap when running it through a guitar /speaker-amp with some of its effects engaged.

It is probably tonal related mixed with preference and possibly the occasional seal problems as well as expectations raised by reviews that promise perfect sound.
Humans are funny this way.

 

[Jiraya369]

look at the measurements they're great !

They conform to a test fixture with a certain target.
Here's the thing that is obvious from all the research on this.
Not all people have the same preference and even the ones that fit in the 60% 'prefers the Harman target' have some tolerance and there is preference there too,
Add to that the fact that these headphones are very seal sensitive and you get a good mix of people that may not like what they hear and might even hear that in a similar way.
People fork out quite a bit of cash on these things and expect 'perfect sound forever' ... ermm .. perfect tonality.
Surprise ... that may not be true for everyone.

The non linear distortion is NOT a thing for these headphones so only seal and tonal preference and perhaps even owners 'expecting' pure perfection and then finding out it isn't for them... start looking online and find more people that don't like it and 'hear' similar things.

What would also be interesting is to find out how many DCA headphone owners are perfectly happy with the sound.
In general the most vocal people are the ones that don't like it and super-duper fan boys.

It's a bit like the HD650 story. Many love it others all claim 'veils' etc. where others don't hear a veil.

each and every post i see from my headphone GOAT is so detail rich, nuanced and informative.

 

[Jiraya369]

This is one area where I feel Dan's past efforts to figure this out (eg. the "Slam" case study he talked about at CanJam one year) to be a miss.

IMO it's to do with two things:

1) Many audiophiles prefer less bass/more treble than the Harman(ish) curve targeted by Dan for his modern headphone designs, which means the most current DCA headphones that have generous bass shelves and well-controlled treble resonances may sound a bit too bass-forward/dark for these listeners, lacking a bit of the intensity that audiophiles (perhaps erroneously) expect.

2) Due to the aforementioned control of treble resonances, my conjecture is that the on-head response of AMTS-equipped DCA headphones is dominated by dips, and this means that even for people who do prefer, for example, a Harman-level bass shelf and midrange shape, the treble response will on average trend towards the darker side, causing the front end of transients of drums to sound a bit softened.

To be clear, measurement data on GRAS/B&K measurement fixtures is not sufficient to characterize the latter; only measurements from microphones in real ears may illustrate this, and I hope to do some testing on this in the future.

besides, the person's hrtf could also play a factor

imagine if they anatomically prefer a certain sound, have been used to treble rich/"detailed" presentations AND have preconceived biases

all these add up and make it easy to understand why they hate on it so much.

 

[amirm]

So, a common complaint about DCA headphones among subjectivists is that they are "dynamically flat" and "dead".

They have copied this from same people saying the same thing about everything measuring excellently from amplifiers to DACs. It is incredibly easy to hear such a perception once preprogrammed this way.

FYI, as far as I know, DCA has been very successful with these headphones. So whoever these people are, they are not translating to a lot of volume.

 

[Mocie]

I honestly see more complaints about pad QoL and seal issues than the sound itself. I would assume most people know what they're getting into sound wise with a DCA headphone - they've been pretty clear about the Harman tuning, so complaints on that front aren't what I've really seen.

Less people seem high on their open backs, but the consensus seems to be the E3 is the TOTL closed-back with very little competition.

 

[IsaacOscar]

I'm too poor to try the Dan Clarks, but I've tried the Truthear x Crinacle Zero, which is allegedly also harman compliant. And they do indeed sound flat/hollow to me compared to my noemal head/earphones. In particular, I like it to sound like the music is all around me, and not just in the middle of my head (I think that's the best way to describe).

In fact every pair of headphones and earphones I've tried sound flat compared to my Sennheiser HD 558.

After playing with EQ and looking at frequency response graphs, Ironically, I think the region from 200–1600Hz should be flat in order to sound the way I like (as opposed to the Harmanish curve).

The rest of the Harman curves (the high base and treble) however does seem nice to me.

 

[ObjectiveSubjectivist]

To me Stealths we're the best headphones period.

The insane clarity was not math by anything. Just pure music.

Only problem was seal... And the price.

 

[Bow_Wazoo]

So, a common complaint about DCA headphones among subjectivists is that they are "dynamically flat" and "dead".

I really enjoyed the DCA Noire X. When I first heard it, I thought: 'Wow, finally a dynamic and lively-sounding DCA with metamaterial.'

However, when I listened to it in a side-by-side comparison with the Arya (EQ'd to HT), that impression shifted: in direct comparison, the DCA sounded flat and lifeless.
Or let’s just say, it felt more like a studio monitor.

 

[pablolie]

Main complaint I read was occasional build quality issues, not sound.

 

[jimmyjames8]

Main complaint I read was occasional build quality issues, not sound.

Build quality issues with $1000 plus headphones?

 

[DVDdoug]

I ignore subjective reviews.. They COULD be useful IF you know the reviewer's preferences/biases AND if you trust the particular reviewer. But most of us here don't even fully-trust our own ears in uncontrolled-sighted listening tests. Amir includes casual listening in his tests but he backs-up his impressions with measurements.

Also... "Flat" frequency response is usually desirable (but not with headphones) and many listeners prefer an acoustically "dead" or "studio like" listening space. Of course, "lively or "dead" acoustics don't apply to headphones either. So... Who know what they are talking about? Most of the terminology used in subjective reviews is undefined and useless.

 

[DVDdoug]

Build quality issues with $1000 plus headphones?

There have been some reported problems but it looks like Dan Clark takes more care to resolve problems than most manufacturers.

 

[HalSF]

The adjectival word cloud of subjectivist audio consensus and crowd wisdom means less and less to me the farther down the hi-fi road I go. You can see the naked emptiness of these replicating critical tropes and memes in exaggerated form when someone asks AI about product sound quality and the chatbot returns the slop strip-minded from a zillion subjective takes like a murmuration of starlings swirling around the sky.

 

[dfuller]

The adjectival word cloud of subjectivist audio consensus and crowd wisdom means less and less to me the farther down the hi-fi road I go. You can see the naked emptiness of these replicating critical tropes and memes in exaggerated form when someone asks AI about product sound quality and the chatbot returns the slop strip-minded from a zillion subjective takes like a murmuration of starlings swirling around the sky.

See, this is the kind of stuff I wanted to avoid in this thread. Glib comments and all. A repeatedly perceived phenomenon for something as impactful to the actual sound as the transducer stage is worth investigating.

 

[Marc v E]

I usually fix subjective reviews by recommending a cable. It fixes everything, apparently.

On a more serious note: try them yourself, and see what you think. After measuring great, there's nothing more to do than that and compare them to a few others.