• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Headphone measurements

bobbooo

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 30, 2019
Messages
1,350
Likes
1,700
#21
AutoEQ has a ranking table based on Harman's predicted preference rating, calculated from Oratory1990 and Crinacle's industry standard measurements. I like how it breaks down the preference rating parameters into individual columns too, with the 'slope' column particularly useful (> 0 being brighter sounding, < 0 darker, and ~0 indicating a neutral overall tonal balance).
 

Objectivist01

Active Member
Joined
May 24, 2020
Messages
244
Likes
76
#22
If you don't like the look of measurements and can't afford it, you wouldn't audition it, would you? You really want to pick this tussle up again?

Did you even read what I said? Or do you just want to prove how clever you are saying the lcd x doesn't measure well and is overpriced and you wisely gave it a pass when you auditioned it? Also, and I will say again, after eq the lcd x can be a very good headphone OBJECTIVELY.
With that logic any headphones can be improved by adding a eq to make it flat?
 

JohnYang1997

Major Contributor
Technical Expert
Manufacturer
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
5,048
Likes
8,558
Location
China
#23
With that logic any headphones can be improved by adding a eq to make it flat?
Sure 100%
But you will need to consider limitations. Some requires large amount of gain (lcd x is actually one of them) some only needs little dip at some frequencies.
Also some peaks can change with positioning so impossible to eq.
 

Jimbob54

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
4,110
Likes
3,872
#24
With that logic any headphones can be improved by adding a eq to make it flat?
No, these can. But some will distort, especially if you try and lift the bass too much.

At least this time round you've dropped the ludicrous "scam" and "snake oil" accusations about audeze. Let's just leave it that we agree they don't measure well out of the box and they are overpriced.
 

Jimbob54

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
4,110
Likes
3,872
#25
No, these can. But some will distort, especially if you try and lift the bass too much.

At least this time round you've dropped the ludicrous "scam" and "snake oil" accusations about audeze. Let's just leave it that we agree they don't measure well out of the box and they are overpriced.
Actually, the test here isn't to flat, the test here is to the relevant Harman Curve. The lcd x with that huge dip would fail as stock against any eq curve though. Doesn't mean it can't be improved with eq.
 

bobbooo

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 30, 2019
Messages
1,350
Likes
1,700
#26
after eq the lcd x can be a very good headphone OBJECTIVELY
Due to its huge notch around 4 kHz likely caused by an internal earcup reflection and cancellation, resulting in excess group delay at that frequency, this notch cannot be effectively EQed out, so even after EQ the LCD-X is not objectively as good as most other headphones. This can be seen by Oratory's post-EQ preference rating of just 82/100, as he takes EQ issues caused by such non-minimum phase behaviour (as well as distortion) into account. In contrast, most headphones with his EQ score very close to 100. The LCD-X is a relatively poor headphone, even after EQ, at an exorbitant price.
 
Last edited:

Jimbob54

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
4,110
Likes
3,872
#28
Due to its huge notch around 4 kHz likely caused by an internal earcup reflection and cancellation, resulting in excess group delay at that frequency, this notch cannot be effectively EQed out, so even after EQ the LCD-X is not objectively as good as most other headphones. This can be seen by Oratory's post-EQ preference rating of just 82/100, as he takes EQ issues caused by such non-minimum phase behaviour (as well as distortion) into account. In contrast, most headphones with his EQ score very close to 100. The LCD-X is a relatively poor headphone, even after EQ.
Fair enough, it is not an objectively good headphone before or after eq.
 

KeithPhantom

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
May 8, 2020
Messages
372
Likes
274
#29
The problem with ranking is how subjective even the control (target curves) is, not being at least close to absolute when it comes to population preference. This makes all correlation testing (an objective way to determine preference if other factors are correct) nearly impossible.
 

bobbooo

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 30, 2019
Messages
1,350
Likes
1,700
#30
The problem with ranking is how subjective even the control (target curves) is, not being at least close to absolute when it comes to population preference. This makes all correlation testing (an objective way to determine preference if other factors are correct) nearly impossible.
Honestly, I don't really care about population preference. The Harman target is the closest we have to what a good speaker in a good room sounds like through a pair of headphones, so gets you closest to what the audio engineer heard when signing off the final master of the track you're listening to. In my opinion that should be the aim, and the baseline frequency response headphones should target. Any differences in preference from listeners would then be confined to preferences of the music (including the choices of the mixing and mastering engineers), not the headphones, and can be adjusted to taste using tone controls / EQ for your own music. The conflation of music preference and accurate audio reproduction is what causes so much of the confusion and disagreement around these targets. Due to the circle of confusion Harman used the former to confirm the latter, but accurate audio reproduction should be the ultimate aim.
 

KeithPhantom

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
May 8, 2020
Messages
372
Likes
274
#31
. The Harman target is the closest we have to what a good speaker in a good room sounds like through a pair of headphones, so gets you closest to what the audio engineer heard when signing off the final master of the track you're listening to.
The Harman curve and the perception of sound coming from the on-axis response of a theoretically perfect speaker placed in a reasonable well-treated room are cannot be related to causation, but some correlation may exist. Remember that Harman is the mean perception of bias-infused (whether is psychological or physiological) subjects to the preference of sound and the comparation to a reasonable ideal room. In other words, it is the mean interpretation of subjective opinions over a topic that cannot be fully objective. It is better than the theoretically perfect DF and FF, but it isn't a God's send.
 

bobbooo

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 30, 2019
Messages
1,350
Likes
1,700
#32
The Harman curve and the perception of sound coming from the on-axis response of a theoretically perfect speaker placed in a reasonable well-treated room are cannot be related to causation, but some correlation may exist. Remember that Harman is the mean perception of bias-infused (whether is psychological or physiological) subjects to the preference of sound and the comparation to a reasonable ideal room. In other words, it is the mean interpretation of subjective opinions over a topic that cannot be fully objective. It is better than the theoretically perfect DF and FF, but it isn't a God's send.
That's why I said it's the closest we have to accurate audio reproduction of the final master as heard by the audio engineer. It's not perfect mainly due to the ridiculous reluctance of the audio industry to adopt standards, which results in the circle of confusion. It uses preference as a proxy for accurate audio reproduction, due to this lack of standardization and so circle of confusion. Being on average the target most preferred it has the best chance of being least disruptive to the audio industry and consumers in becoming a de facto standard.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom