This is a review and detailed measurements of the E-MU Teak closed back headphone. It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $500 with the removable cable that I tested.
I must say, as a woodworker, I have a soft spot for anything made out of wood with nice figure:
Even if you are not a woodworker, one adjustment of the headband puts a smile on your face. It moves in an out with a feeling of smoothness that is hard to describe, but easy to appreciate. Put them on your head and they just melt over you. It is not 100% comfortable due to rectangular opening of the cups but it is almost there.
Weight is average:
Cup dimensions are 59x33x24 mm (inside height, width and depth).
Note: The measurements you are about to see are made using a standardized Gras 45C. Headphone measurements by definition are approximate and variable so don't be surprised if other measurements even if performed with the same fixtures as mine, differ in end results. Protocols vary such as headband pressure and averaging (which I don't do). As you will see, I confirm the approximate accuracy of the measurements using Equalization and listening tests. Ultimately headphone measurements are less exact than speakers mostly in bass and above a few kilohertz so keep that in mind as you read these tests. If you think you have an exact idea of a headphone performance, you are likely wrong!
Fitment on the fixture was easy and good to my surprise.
E-MU Teak Measurements
Let's start with our usual frequency response measurements:
There are fair number of irregularities in the response but if you look past them, there is broad agreement with our preference curve in dashed blue. So overall tonality should be good sans the extra energy above 5 kHz which can make it sound bright. Relative graph for eq purposes shows the same:
I really like the extended bass response which we rarely see in headphones despite research indicating the listener desire and preference.
Distortion is typical in the way it rises in low frequencies:
Since we don't have to add much equalization for bass, I am not too worried about that. There is some peaking around 2.2 kHz which I wish was not there. Fortunately at lower SPL levels it barely registers.
Group delay shows the effect of some of those kinks in the response as likely being some secondary resonance or reflection:
Impedance is low and mostly flat:
Sensitivity is well above average which should make it easy to drive:
E-MU Teak Headphone Listening Tests and Equalization
At first blush, the overall tonality sounds right and combined with some spatial effects, you think you are there already. But after listening a bit more, I started to notice the extra brightness. So I brought out the EQ to see if the measurements back that or not:
I took a couple of peaks down as you see. The effect is subtle due to narrow correction. That lost a bit of spatial effects but I more than made up for it with the 3300 Hz increase. Indeed, there now was more than delightful amount of that. A bit of sub-pass boost and now you have a gorgeous sounding headphone! Very nice.
Conclusions
The E-MU Teak is beautiful to look at and hold. Objective performance out of box is near that as well. Add some EQ though and you wind up with a super nice sounding headphone with good spatial effects and superb dynamics and bass. It put a smile on my face on track after track that I played.
I am going to put the E-MU Teak on my recommendation list. With equalization, I am going to strongly recommend it.
Note: I read elsewhere that if you live in a dry place, the wooden cups can shrink so much that they can detach!
-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.
Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/
I must say, as a woodworker, I have a soft spot for anything made out of wood with nice figure:
Even if you are not a woodworker, one adjustment of the headband puts a smile on your face. It moves in an out with a feeling of smoothness that is hard to describe, but easy to appreciate. Put them on your head and they just melt over you. It is not 100% comfortable due to rectangular opening of the cups but it is almost there.
Weight is average:
Cup dimensions are 59x33x24 mm (inside height, width and depth).
Note: The measurements you are about to see are made using a standardized Gras 45C. Headphone measurements by definition are approximate and variable so don't be surprised if other measurements even if performed with the same fixtures as mine, differ in end results. Protocols vary such as headband pressure and averaging (which I don't do). As you will see, I confirm the approximate accuracy of the measurements using Equalization and listening tests. Ultimately headphone measurements are less exact than speakers mostly in bass and above a few kilohertz so keep that in mind as you read these tests. If you think you have an exact idea of a headphone performance, you are likely wrong!
Fitment on the fixture was easy and good to my surprise.
E-MU Teak Measurements
Let's start with our usual frequency response measurements:
There are fair number of irregularities in the response but if you look past them, there is broad agreement with our preference curve in dashed blue. So overall tonality should be good sans the extra energy above 5 kHz which can make it sound bright. Relative graph for eq purposes shows the same:
I really like the extended bass response which we rarely see in headphones despite research indicating the listener desire and preference.
Distortion is typical in the way it rises in low frequencies:
Since we don't have to add much equalization for bass, I am not too worried about that. There is some peaking around 2.2 kHz which I wish was not there. Fortunately at lower SPL levels it barely registers.
Group delay shows the effect of some of those kinks in the response as likely being some secondary resonance or reflection:
Impedance is low and mostly flat:
Sensitivity is well above average which should make it easy to drive:
E-MU Teak Headphone Listening Tests and Equalization
At first blush, the overall tonality sounds right and combined with some spatial effects, you think you are there already. But after listening a bit more, I started to notice the extra brightness. So I brought out the EQ to see if the measurements back that or not:
I took a couple of peaks down as you see. The effect is subtle due to narrow correction. That lost a bit of spatial effects but I more than made up for it with the 3300 Hz increase. Indeed, there now was more than delightful amount of that. A bit of sub-pass boost and now you have a gorgeous sounding headphone! Very nice.
Conclusions
The E-MU Teak is beautiful to look at and hold. Objective performance out of box is near that as well. Add some EQ though and you wind up with a super nice sounding headphone with good spatial effects and superb dynamics and bass. It put a smile on my face on track after track that I played.
I am going to put the E-MU Teak on my recommendation list. With equalization, I am going to strongly recommend it.
Note: I read elsewhere that if you live in a dry place, the wooden cups can shrink so much that they can detach!
-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.
Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/
I didn't really like it because I felt there was bass distortion and a resonant peak somewhere in the treble which makes it a bit hard to listen to. These impressions were back when I was still relatively inexperienced though (but with teenage ears)
