Headphone Dynamics

[solderdude]

Are you simply dropping the higher volume level lines down to compare them?

Yes they are overlaid so the 95dB is shifted -5dB and the 60dB is shifted upwards 30dB ... etc.so they can be compared exactly.

Are you stating when someone is discussing dynamic levels they are actually talking about frequency response at different volume levels for sweeps?

They are simply talking about frequency response deviations. Not level related.
Those deviations (from reality) give the impression they hear more (or less) 'dynamics' except they are not related to actual dynamics, the latter being the difference between loud and softer signals.
Aside from some not so well designed headphones all of them are 'linear' in dynamics. 40dB SPL is reproduced as 40dB and 100dB is reproduced as 100dB.

 

[jdjung]

Yes they are overlaid so the 95dB is shifted -5dB and the 60dB is shifted upwards 30dB ... etc.so they can be compared exactly.



They are simply talking about frequency response deviations. Not level related.
Those deviations (from reality) give the impression they hear more (or less) 'dynamics' except they are not related to actual dynamics, the latter being the difference between loud and softer signals.
Aside from some not so well designed headphones all of them are 'linear' in dynamics. 40dB SPL is reproduced as 40dB and 100dB is reproduced as 100dB.

I played the cello in the orchestra for 15 years and still do. When my conductor says we need more dynamic range he means our pianissimo are not soft enough or are fortes are not loud enough, or both. This was why I was thinking when someone said headphones don't have good dynamic range, believed they meant the sound was being compressed.

So why is it that people say some Dan Clark headphones lack dynamic range?

 

[solderdude]

When my conductor says we need more dynamic range he means our pianissimo are not soft enough or are fortes are not loud enough, or both.

That is the correct definition for dynamic range.

Audiophiles/audiophools often make up their own (flowery) language and sometimes mis-use words in the proces.

The first question is whether or not that really is the case or that some people can't drive it loud enough or they do not have a good seal.
It could also be that Harman tonality (it is a bit U shaped) and does not have an upper midrange emphasis
Who knows what people hear and how they 'tie' that to 'dynamic range' ?

In any case, the lack of distortion in the stealth makes it very clear that there is nothing wrong with the real dynamic range (as in the actual technical naming).
These headphones are closed front volume so prone to incorrect tonality when the seal is not perfect.

I never heard nor measured one so cannot say if I would find them lacking in dynamics. The plots above would be indicative of lacking 'punch' when the seal is not perfect.

 

[usern]

When I compare the Focal Clear MG and the Hifiman HE-500, Sennheiser HD600, or basically any other headphone I have, the Clear MG always comes out on top with the most hard hitting and quick response. It feels like the sound is more violently being pushed into your ears, like the sound is somehow being pushed faster and harder. It's not just one part of the frequency response, every part of the mix pops out more, whether that's the bass, mids, or treble

Maybe He-500 and HD600 pads absorb more vibrations. Are Focal Clear MG pads relatively stiff? If they carry vibrations from bass frequencies better, then yes, you can actually feel the bass more than with He-500 and HD600. What is quick response?

I also want to know what the reason is behind "dynamics". Andrew Park over at The Headphone Show also calls this phenomenon "macro-contrast".

Yeah this use of the term dynamics and "macro-contrast" is nonsense.

 

[Guess it]

Sorry to revive an old thread

Asking essentially if there's more to headphones than fr is a big question that no one should feel sick of asking or answering.

Not necessarily. There's some evidence that the static pressure in the ear canal (which is influenced by headphone/IEM front volume venting holes) affects the response of the auditory system (which will not be the same with the mics in a HATS):

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3015033/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4103952/

When you already naturally have a perspective it's very easy to assume your model of it is not flawed despite resting on a mountain of peoples failed and successful presumptions you didn't have to make.

 

[MRC01]

I too perceive headphones as being less dynamic than loudspeakers. Even clean linear headphones like the HD-600 and Audeze LCD-2F. My wife has age related HF attenuation and complains about high dynamic range sound because when it gets quiet she can't hear HF as well which makes dialog harder to discern. For example a quiet scene where actors whisper dialog, I have to tell her what they're saying, or turn up the volume.

When she listens on headphones, this problem disappears. I thought it was because she was playing the headphones louder than the speakers, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Yesterday, I tried something new. I use a DEQ2496 for parametric EQ, so tried a feature I had not tried before: its dynamic range compressor. I enabled it with a moderate-heavy amount of compression, e.g. gain applied to quiet sounds with a smooth curve to avoid clipping. Playing through the loudspeakers, perceptually I could hear that the compressed sound on the speakers was much closer to the heaphones without compression, and she could hear the quiet parts much better.

I understand that good headphones are linear, just like good speakers. And people tend to play headphones louder than they do speakers. So in theory that explains what's happening. But my real-world experiment yesterday has me questioning whether this theory tells the whole story.

 

[GaryH]

Headphones reduce ambient noise reaching the ears, that probably explains it.

 

[MRC01]

Headphones reduce ambient noise reaching the ears, that probably explains it.

Not in this case, extremely quiet basement listening room, and acoustically treated.

 

[GaryH]

That won't stop ambient noise from your own small movements, breathing etc.

 

[MRC01]

That won't stop ambient noise from your own small movements, breathing etc.

Sure, but I'm comparing with open back headphones that have, what, 2 dB of ambient noise attenuation? And we're talking about differences of 15 dB in terms of compression.

 

[GaryH]

Which headphones exactly? And where are you getting these numbers from?

 

[MRC01]

Headphones mentioned above. The numbers come from specifications, and from the compression settings I used in the DEQ2496.

 

[GaryH]

The HD600 and LCDs have ambient noise attenuation up to ~10 dB (perceptually around half as loud) in the mid-treble (near where our hearing is most sensitive) according to Rtings' measurements.

 

[jdjung]

Are you listening with different formats, i.e. Atmos vs stereo when going to your speakers? My experience is when listening on a Atmos system on lower volume, dialog is harder to hear then switching to stereo, depending on the source. I know some DSP active speakers such as the Iloud Micros, will cap out the lower frequencies at a lower volume from the other frequencies causing compression at higher volume. (Ctrl F SPL Testing) LINK Are you listening wirelessly/Bluetooth to your headphones? Are the speakers you are using very directional? Also, the great thing about headphones is you also don't have to worry about phase cancellation from left and right channels.

 

[MRC01]

Are you listening with different formats, i.e. Atmos vs stereo when going to your speakers?

No, just stereo.

Are you listening wirelessly/Bluetooth to your headphones?

No, same preamp driving headphones & power amp, no DSP applied.

Are the speakers you are using very directional?

Moderately, they are Magnepan 3.6/R. But we're in the sweet spot and they measure linear response and very low distortion at the listener position (this is an acoustically treated room). The ribbon tweeter is from 1700 Hz up and has wide, even dispersion. Frequencies below 1700 Hz are more directional due to panel size & sound wavelength. Perceptually, the speakers have greater clarity than the headphones, and also greater dynamic range.

 

[solderdude]

Probably to do with direct and reflected sound and impact to the body (at louder levels) which is missing in headphones.

There is no compression going on in headphones so that dynamic range should be realistic (assuming correct EQ)

 

[MRC01]

Probably to do with direct and reflected sound and impact to the body (at louder levels) which is missing in headphones.

Sounds plausible. I also wonder if it has something to do with the headphone sealing against the ear.

 

[Xii-Nyth]

I played the cello in the orchestra for 15 years and still do. When my conductor says we need more dynamic range he means our pianissimo are not soft enough or are fortes are not loud enough, or both. This was why I was thinking when someone said headphones don't have good dynamic range, believed they meant the sound was being compressed.

So why is it that people say some Dan Clark headphones lack dynamic range?

I think its because dca headphones make vibrations in the air, not the headphones, so you dont feel the bass physically in your ear etc.
I can resolve the deep beats in the mw2 (2009) multiplayer menu on my aeons and hear the details in it, but they sound more powerful on my old hyper x cloud ii headset.
imo its a flaw, but youtube audiophile jargon prevents any real conversation about it.

this would also be effected by bad seal as tehy are mostly closed backs and these earpads have a rounding out issue, but I have glasses anyways myself