Dan Clark Stealth Review (State of the Art Headphone)

[milosz]

Why would ANYONE buy this if the LCD-X is multiple times cheaper, has less distortion, and can perfectly fit the Harman curve for FREE with EQ?

EQ can correct for amplitude response to a fair degree, but it CANNOT fix stored energy / ringing or group delay problems. If you need EQ then you likely have time domain problems too. Better to start without time domain problems to begin with.

 

[Robbo99999]

EQ can correct for amplitude response to a fair degree, but it CANNOT fix stored energy / ringing or group delay problems. If you need EQ then you likely have time domain problems too. Better to start without time domain problems to begin with.

Headphones are mostly minimum phase devices so they readily accept EQ. EQ fixes time domain issues as a side effect of fixing the frequency response.

 

[milosz]

Headphones are mostly minimum phase devices so they readily accept EQ. EQ fixes time domain issues as a side effect of fixing the frequency response.

How does EQ solve energy storage / ringing, praytell?

 

[NoteMakoti]

Why would ANYONE buy this if the LCD-X is multiple times cheaper, has less distortion, and can perfectly fit the Harman curve for FREE with EQ?

Having tried both, the Stealth is way more comfortable, and while sound is subjective I think it sounds better out of the box without EQ. Whether that's worth the eye-watering price is up to the buyer.

 

[Angenor]

Most people probably don't want to EQ.... I know for sure Id rather EQ my ears than spend time fiddling w/ EQ software....

You should give it a try, though, by all means. Using heaadphones/IEMs without EQ is, with maybe a handfull of exceptions, giving away so much fidelity, it is unbelievable.

 

[Robbo99999]

How does EQ solve energy storage / ringing, praytell?

Ringing is another way of saying there's a peak in the frequency response. The EQ diminishes the peak & reduces the ringing.

 

[staticV3]

Ringing is another way of saying there's a peak in the frequency response. The EQ diminishes the peak & reduces the ringing.

Actually, frequency response compensated decay measurements, like what Erin or Brent Butterworth on SSN are posting, can expose resonance frequencies where the driver is simply underdamped, which do not necessarily coincide with a peak in frequency response.

Since EQ cannot add damping, you're mostly stuck with this attribute, similar to a loudspeaker's radiation pattern.


Though in case of highly distinct, high-Q ringing, you may want to cut that frequency via EQ, sacrificing FR accuracy in the process:


That being said, there are ways to add active damping via sophisticated DSP, something that Dirac, Trinnov, and Devialet are exploring, among others surely.

Though AFAIK, in headphones and IEMs, ringing is not nearly common enough to warrant serious RnD for a similar technology. Not least due to the drastically lower Mmses involved.

 

[DualTriode]

Actually, frequency response compensated decay measurements, like what Erin or Brent Butterworth on SSN are posting, can expose resonance frequencies where the driver is simply underdamped, which do not necessarily coincide with a peak in frequency response.

There are more than a few posts lost in the weeds in this thread. (Off Topic)

Show us a Step Response or waterfall plot that shows what you are wanting to tell us, steady output response (Frequency Response) with peaks and or dips on the waterfall.

 

[staticV3]

Show us a Step Response or waterfall plot that shows what you are wanting to tell us, steady output response (Frequency Response) with peaks and or dips on the waterfall.

That is exactly what these are:


2D waterfall graphs with the DUT's frequency response corrected to flat.

 

[DualTriode]

That is exactly what these are:
View attachment 413689 View attachment 413690

2D waterfall graphs with the DUT's frequency response corrected to flat.

No No that is not it.

Show us the peaks and valleys in the decay as time clicks by. 3D not 2D.

Show us the waterfall.

 

[staticV3]

No No that is not it.

Show us the peaks and valleys in the decay as time clicks by. 3D not 2D.

Show us the waterfall.

Is is really so hard to read a color scale instead of the waterfall that you're used to?

The information contained within is identical.

That it's not presented in your preferred format does not make it less true.

It's like denying the contents of a contour directivity graph because it's not presented as a polar graph.

 

[DualTriode]

Is is really so hard to read a color scale instead of the waterfall that you're used to?

The information contained within is identical.

That it's not presented in your preferred format does not make it less true.

In a hurry to head out to watch the storm surf.

Not the same information.



This is the first waterfall plot that I clicked on.
Note the First curve at zero time is the FR.

Also note that every peak and trough in the FR has a corresponding peak and trough at each time interval of the decay.

There is none of what you are talking about.
Thanks Dt

 

[MRC01]

Ringing is another way of saying there's a peak in the frequency response.

Not necessarily. Ringing and FR peaks often do occur together, but they can occur independently. You can have a FR bump without ringing, and you can have ringing without a FR bump.

The EQ diminishes the peak & reduces the ringing.

Sure, when they do occur together, EQ reduces the energy fed into the resonance, which reduces the ringing. But the root cause of the resonance is physical attributes of materials, shapes, damping, etc. and EQ doesn't change that.

It's perhaps easier to see in reverse: consider a FR dip caused by a reflection null, the opposite of ringing. No amount of EQ will fix it because you're just pumping more energy that cancels against its own reflection. You have to eliminate the reflection null at the source, changing materials, shapes, damping, etc.

...

View attachment 413706

Note the First curve at zero time is the FR.
Also note that every peak and trough in the FR has a corresponding peak and trough at each time interval of the decay. ...

Your graph is a good example of how FR response and ringing often do occur together. It doesn't imply that they always occur together. Here's an example measured in my own listening room. You can see that the FR curve (in the back) and the decay/ringing do not move together in lock-step. Sometimes one goes up while the other goes down. I put the cursor at such a point: the FR is rising while the decay/ringing is dropping.

 

[cowsgomoo2002]

Why would ANYONE buy this if the LCD-X is multiple times cheaper, has less distortion, and can perfectly fit the Harman curve for FREE with EQ?

To start, the LCD-X is 50% heavier and I dislike how Audeze's headbands feel

However I think that there's little reason to get the Stealth now with the E3 and Noire X existing

 

[Robbo99999]

@staticV3 / @MRC01 - that's all interesting and I don't profess that I have no gaps in my knowledge, but in headphones the way the I see it there's only frequency response and distortion that are influential, and EQ can fix the frequency response in headphones. All talk of damping / ringing I'm not convinced that they're particularly important considerations in relation to frequency response & distortion. I'm not convinced. Here on ASR we measure frequency response & distortion because other things are secondary, and whenever I've read stuff over on Oratory's website he also seems to be an advocate frequency response & distortion. Things like waterfall diagram are superfluous and you can see the information in the frequency response anyway. With headphones once you fix the frequency response you're also fixing the time domain. I think we're making a mountain out of a molehill here.

On a practical level praps the only time that frequency response & distortion are not the only issue is when the headphone has some strange resonances of the cups that might show up as some strange buzzing at different frequencies which wouldn't necessarily show up in normal distortion testing. I think I had something similar with my HE400SE when I was measuring it on my miniDSP EARS at the max volume that my miniDSP EARS will allow and I began to hear some strange buzzing from the headphone (whilst it was being measured) that didn't obviously show up in the normal distortion results, but I did notice a couple of long long long & very very narrow peaks continue on in the waterfall somewhere in the 200-600Hz zone, can't remember exactly where, so that's the only practical time where I've thought headphones are about more than just frequency response & distortion, but mostly it's not an issue (& not an issue with my HE400SE either because I don't listen anywhere near those volumes), but it was strange. I'll put in a couple of thumbnails for interest, seems like they were there at 94dB too eventhough I didn't hear the buzzing, but I did hear it at 100dB, so to be honest I'm not even sure that those long narrow decay peaks at 160Hz & 250Hz were even what I was hearing as strange buzzing when it was being measured. So in this paragraph I'm just supposing, I'm not sure on this.

 

[DualTriode]

Your graph is a good example of how FR response and ringing often do occur together. It doesn't imply that they always occur together. Here's an example measured in my own listening room. You can see that the FR curve (in the back) and the decay/ringing do not move together in lock-step. Sometimes one goes up while the other goes down. I put the cursor at such a point: the FR is rising while the decay/ringing is dropping.

I am afraid that you have become tangled in the weeds.

Your plot shows room response out to 500ms.

If you gate your measurement at 5ms all that mind expanding clutter disappears.

Thanks DT

 

[MRC01]

I am afraid that you have become tangled in the weeds.
Your plot shows room response out to 500ms.
If you gate your measurement at 5ms all that mind expanding clutter disappears.

Sure, because then you'd only see the first 5 ms of decay. In that time, sound only travels 5.5 feet, so you won't see the ringing caused by the room.

 

[MRC01]

... On a practical level praps the only time that frequency response & distortion are not the only issue is when the headphone has some strange resonances of the cups that might show up as some strange buzzing at different frequencies which wouldn't necessarily show up in normal distortion testing. I think I had something similar with my HE400SE when I was measuring it on my miniDSP EARS at the max volume that my miniDSP EARS will allow and I began to hear some strange buzzing from the headphone (whilst it was being measured) that didn't obviously show up in the normal distortion results, but I did notice a couple of long long long & very very narrow peaks continue on in the waterfall somewhere in the 200-600Hz zone, can't remember exactly where, so that's the only practical time where I've thought headphones are about more than just frequency response & distortion, but mostly it's not an issue (& not an issue with my HE400SE either because I don't listen anywhere near those volumes), but it was strange.

Yes I believe this is where CSD applies with headphones. The cups are often sized around 2" to 3" inside which is the wavelength of around 4 to 7 kHz, and the half-wavelength of 2 to 4 kHz. So any reflections that develop in the cup might be expected to show ringing around 2 to 7 kHz, a rough calculation. And many of the headphones Amir measures do show reflections in this range - and they don't always show corresponding FR fluctuations.

 

[DualTriode]

Sure, because then you'd only see the first 5 ms of decay. In that time, sound only travels 5.5 feet, so you won't see the ringing caused by the room.

So there you have it.

We are talking about the driver.

You are talking about your room.

Thanks for the update.

Thanks DT

@Robbo99999, You are exactly correct.

 

[Robbo99999]

So there you have it.

We are talking about the driver.

You are talking about your room.

Thanks for the update.

Thanks DT

@Robbo99999, You are exactly correct.

(Correct in the first paragraph or the later paragraph where I talk about waterfalls and the strange buzzing of my HE400SE when it was being measured at "max volume" on my miniDSP EARS? - I edited my post after you initially liked it, so you might not have read it all)