Dan Clark Stealth Review (State of the Art Headphone)

[tifune]

EDIT #3: if you're not so critical re measured distortion, then there are plenty of headphones that can meet the DCA Stealth in terms of frequency response, so long as you EQ them. In my experience with my various headphones, my favourite headphones are not the ones with the least distortion, even after EQ - there's a soundstage quality that is unquantifiable in measurements which brings the K702 and HD560s to the front of my preference......so it might be wise to temper the importance of measured distortion, however I've not listened to the DCA Stealth so I'm not sure what I'm missing from that point of view, just I know that measured distortion is not the most important variable.....I'd list it like this in order of importance:
1) Frequency Response after EQ
2) Inherent soundstage ability of the headphone
3) Good Channel Matching through the whole frequency range
4) Distortion measurements (with the proviso that they're not pathetically bad).

Lots to read about here, thanks! I figured there would be no shortage of open backs that can compete - for me the big seller is this performance in a closed-back. For a lot of people, myself included, open backs are rarely practical. If the Stealth is as comfortable and snug as the Aeon's, and sounds as good as it measures, I can literally sell all my other over-ears. ZMF Verite Closed seems to be what most people are comparing to the Stealth, but I've never heard it and I haven't found a try-and-buy seller (yet).

 

[preload]

I must have missed it. Where do we see the correlation between measurements and subjective impressions? AFAIK, there were no objective measurements linking the subjective spatial qualities of the Stealth.

The objective measurements are in the original post. The attempts to correlate what is heard vs the measurements is present throughout this thread. Perhaps it's not in a format you're accustomed to.

 

[ExquirentibusVeritatem]

The objective measurements are in the original post. The attempts to correlate what is heard vs the measurements is present throughout this thread. Perhaps it's not in a format you're accustomed to.

Possibly. Please point out the graph that correlates the spatial qualities of the Stealth. Is it FR, FR deviation, THD, absolute distortion, group delay, impulse response, impedance, or sensitivity?

Thanks in advance

 

[preload]

Possibly. Please point out the graph that correlates the spatial qualities of the Stealth. Is it FR, FR deviation, THD, absolute distortion, group delay, impulse response, impedance, or sensitivity?

Thanks in advance

Why "spatial" qualities? You might be looking for a different thread. IIRC you made a statement that listening impressions don't belong in a science forum.

 

[Robbo99999]

Possibly. Please point out the graph that correlates the spatial qualities of the Stealth. Is it FR, FR deviation, THD, absolute distortion, group delay, impulse response, impedance, or sensitivity?

Thanks in advance

You're right, there's no indication beyond the fact that the Harman Curve is filled out in the mids & treble, there's no other indications that can point to spatial/soundstage qualities in the measurements. Measured frequency response is part of it (the filled out mids & treble), but it's not everything that characterises soundstage capabilities of a headphone. It's still an unknown quantity that relies on subjective listening & reports re soundstage - yet this is a very important aspect & should be included (indeed as it is currently being done so in the reviews).

 

[Robbo99999]

Lots to read about here, thanks! I figured there would be no shortage of open backs that can compete - for me the big seller is this performance in a closed-back. For a lot of people, myself included, open backs are rarely practical. If the Stealth is as comfortable and snug as the Aeon's, and sounds as good as it measures, I can literally sell all my other over-ears. ZMF Verite Closed seems to be what most people are comparing to the Stealth, but I've never heard it and I haven't found a try-and-buy seller (yet).

Ah, ok, closed backs, in that case I don't have a comparitive headphone for you. I really only think the HE6se is a worthy competitor (which is open back) when just looking at the measurements.

 

[Dro]

Fun fact: I cannot hear sound stage. Whenever I try to pinpoint sounds in 2D around my head, they come out in the same spot, regardless of whether I listen with an HD800 or IEMs, as long as channel balance is sufficiently good. Sure the HD800 without EQ sounds really nice and airy, but that does not change were I locate sounds.

 

[Robbo99999]

Fun fact: I cannot hear sound stage. Whenever I try to pinpoint sounds in 2D around my head, they come out in the same spot, regardless of whether I listen with an HD800 or IEMs, as long as channel balance is sufficiently good. Sure the HD800 without EQ sounds really nice and airy, but that does not change were I locate sounds.

Oh well, that's unfortunate, it's the deciding quality for me re headphones....if there was no differentiation in that aspect then it would be quite an uninspiring affair listening to headphones. There are stark and marked differences in headphones regarding that property within the headphones that I own. You might be a prime candidate for investing in Smyth Realiser, or trying the DIY approach of Impulcifier Project on github (https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/Impulcifer) in order to inject an element of that into your experience. I admit it would expand that aspect for me if I did the same, but I'm satisfied enough with the soundstage properties of my best headphones in that regard (for now) when combined with the Harman Curve.

 

[ExquirentibusVeritatem]

Why "spatial" qualities? You might be looking for a different thread. IIRC you made a statement that listening impressions don't belong in a science forum.

Spatial qualities is included in the listening impressions of this headphone. If there are no measurements that correlate to this, it seems strange to include it when other reviewers have been called out for including terms like soundstage, micro and macrodynamics. I'm just hoping for a more standardized review so that when I'm comparing different headphones, it is easily discernable how each headphone is rated objectively. If we want more subjective impressions, there are plenty of other places to find that.

 

[Dro]

Oh well, that's unfortunate, it's the deciding quality for me re headphones....if there was no differentiation in that aspect then it would be quite an uninspiring affair listening to headphones. There are stark and marked differences in headphones regarding that property within the headphones that I own. You might be a prime candidate for investing in Smyth Realiser, or trying the DIY approach of Impulcifier Project on github (https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/Impulcifer) in order to inject an element of that into your experience. I admit it would expand that aspect for me if I did the same, but I'm satisfied enough with the soundstage properties of my best headphones in that regard (for now) when combined with the Harman Curve.

Why, it's great. I do hear in stereo and binaural audio gives me virtually unlimited soundstage. It's just that there are no esoteric differences in soundstage for music to chase after, because it all sounds fine to me already.

 

[Robbo99999]

Spatial qualities is included in the listening impressions of this headphone. If there are no measurements that correlate to this, it seems strange to include it when other reviewers have been called out for including terms like soundstage, micro and macrodynamics. I'm just hoping for a more standardized review so that when I'm comparing different headphones, it is easily discernable how each headphone is rated objectively. If we want more subjective impressions, there are plenty of other places to find that.

(Spatial soundstage observations should be included in the listening review, the listening review is subjective anyway as we all hear headphones slightly differently which is far less of a problem when it comes to speaker listening.....soundstage observations should definitely be included even if we don't have measurements to describe it).

 

[Robbo99999]

Why, it's great. I do hear in stereo and binaural audio gives me virtually unlimited soundstage. It's just that there are no esoteric differences in soundstage for music to chase after, because it all sounds fine to me already.

There are differences though, at least for some people, so you're bound to be missing out on some of that flavour if you're not experiencing differences between headphones in that regard. That's why if you don't experience those differences I think you owe it to yourself to try Smyth Realiser or Impulcifier to inject a massive dose of that.

EDIT: it sounds like your HRTF is probably a long way off what is included within the Harman Curve (which could be related to you earlier wanting to bring down 3kHz on the DCA Stealth response), so you're probably getting zero of those soundstage effects......so Impulcifier or Smyth Realiser would totally cure that aspect.

 

[Sean Olive]

This is a classic argument that unfortunately is wrong. As I explained in my video, subjective reviewers are notoriously unreliable in their assessment of sound. From the peer reviewed research cited in my video:

View attachment 149613

As you see, the rate worse than sales people at audio stores. They simply can't give consistent scores (to speakers in this case) because of lack of training and understanding of how to evaluate sound.

Once reliability is lost, then the opinion loses value.

Back to taste argument, that is flawed because most of us have similar tastes when tested blind:

View attachment 149614

Now make the test sighted and all of a sudden an Abyss Headphone may be "better" than X. Have me review something and give it high marks and the other reviewer may want on principal to say, "well, it isn't that good."

Bottom line, you have to put most of your faith in measurements, not someone's "taste." For what is left -- subjective observations -- they need to still be grounded. They can't be random assessments that have no ability to be proven or disproven. Headphone has or doesn't have "slam?" Who says? On what basis? If you next paycheck depended on that, can you prove it? Answer is no. Heck no.

If you are here, in this forum, this is what we advocate. Don't put your trust in opinions that are made to fill space and produce youtube minutes. Ask for proofs. Ask for science to back them. Don't just give in to lay arguments, as popular as they may be.

Just to be clear: the F-statistic of a listener includes a ratio of two components: discrimination and reliability. The numerator is the discrimination and the reliability or error variance is the bottom part.

If a listener gave all loudspeakers 5's every trial they would have perfect reliability but zero discrimination making them a poor listener. Ideally, you want a listener to have both. So the bars shown in the graph above represent the ratio of discrimination and reliability -- not just reliability. That's why I call it a performance metric. The spread of loudspeaker ratings provide a metric of good discrimination among the listeners and the size of the 95% confidence intervals provide a good measure of how reliable they are -- although the confidence intervals will get smaller as the number of listeners in the group increases -- all things being equal.

 

[Chyżwar]

Not necessarily a problem with mastering or EQ. In this type of music the recorded guitar/bass usually have lot of energy in that particular area, it's probably the sound the artists have dialed in on their amps.

Unfortunately, this is a problem with mastering. And the Fear Inoculum is even worse. Very sloppy mastering. Definitely not the best album to listen to with "high end", very detailed headphones.

 

[Kyle / MrHeeHo]

Fun fact: I cannot hear sound stage. Whenever I try to pinpoint sounds in 2D around my head, they come out in the same spot, regardless of whether I listen with an HD800 or IEMs, as long as channel balance is sufficiently good. Sure the HD800 without EQ sounds really nice and airy, but that does not change were I locate sounds.

I've found I have the same issue, or I just don't know what audiophiles mean by "soundstage" in the first place. I can usually tell if I'm listening to IEMs or headphones because IEMs sound like they're coming from a smaller source but I've never been able to hear the supposed spatial qualities audiophiles talk about, IEMs and headphones always sound like I'm listening to speakers right next to my ears. Idk how much that is influenced by being physically aware of the size of the source due to ear insertion/pad pressing against my head though

 

[tusing]

Just got an update on my order.

@Dan Clark - Could you please elaborate on what is going on? Scientific consensus is that burn-in doesn't have an effect, so how will it fix any unit inconsistencies?

 

[Dan Clark]

Just got an update on my order.

View attachment 150831

@Dan Clark - Could you please elaborate on what is going on? Scientific consensus is that burn-in doesn't have an effect, so how will it fix any unit inconsistencies?

i assume they meant “consistent with,” but I didn’t write this and am not sure. It certainly makes no sense to me as writ… lol

We note burn in is over in 100 hours which is consistent with what we post for our other planars. But Stealth changes very little and very quickly, it’s a minor decrease in THD and smoothing of little 1db ripples in response up top.

 

[preload]

Spatial qualities is included in the listening impressions of this headphone. If there are no measurements that correlate to this, it seems strange to include it when other reviewers have been called out for including terms like soundstage, micro and macrodynamics. I'm just hoping for a more standardized review so that when I'm comparing different headphones, it is easily discernable how each headphone is rated objectively. If we want more subjective impressions, there are plenty of other places to find that.

I have no idea what point you’re trying to make now.

 

[Wolvebain]

How difficult or easy are these to drive/power?

I see in the product page on DCA, there are connected to a chord mojo. With that or a DAP (4.4 balanced out of a LPGP, for example) be able to drive these comfortably and with authority?

 

[muslhead]

How difficult or easy are these to drive/power?

I see in the product page on DCA, there are connected to a chord mojo. With that or a DAP (4.4 balanced out of a LPGP, for example) be able to drive these comfortably and with authority?

I am interested in the answer to this.
Amirs review and comments "You need a beefy headphone amplifier to drive the Stealth: " and "I was fine using my RME ADI-2 DAC so it doesn't have to be crazy power" provides little help to zero in on the answer to this question. It seems to be contradictory and includes very subjective wording since its not specified what levels he listened at nor what settings the RME was using during listening