Is posting on this site for you all about getting "one-ups" on people? Come on. This isn't an "argument" to be won. It really is a conversation as you say, but are too disingenuous to admit, which is a shame. There is no conversation to be had. I'm guessing this is a trend with you as I have seen this done in other posts. You strawman people, misquote them, misread their posts, etc. simply to argue. And I say that not because I have bothered to research prior posts, but because it was something that was quite conspicuous. At least it was to me. If you want to keep going down that road then fine, do so on your own. Its not about winning wars, we are here to have a simple roundtable discussion.
For me I want to know as this can be useful as there may be a reason to EQ out the intrinsic boost in bass. Getting back to my point is that some people find the Harman curve has too much bass, and, I wanted to know if there was merit to that argument, and there is. That's how science works. We repeat the experiment to the best of our abilities to see if the result is repeatable. My perception was to actually perceive that bass boost initially in the headphone as potentially excessive. Many others have had this comment as well. By actually ignoring people like you, and putting out some anecdotal observations, I got the answer I wanted, from Sean who was kind enough to reply. There is indeed likely some boost built into the headphone if its on the Harman target. And remember, my comparisons were done with a headphone that was already on the Harman target. Its hard to segregate these things out, and listener preferences and experience play into it. Harman research says it, my own experiences are the same, and quantifying something subjective is damn near impossible. Saying I'm wrong is as wrong as dismissing those who say the Harman target is excessive in the bass region. No two people will experience things the same. But the point remains in that the Harman curve has been widely adopted across the industry, but not everyone accepts it. This is, of course, to be expected since its based on double-blind testing. There will be a distribution with some users falling outside of the norm. Doesn't mean the Harman research is wrong, but there will be places where it may not apply or there will be deviations, and as with anything, this information is good to know rather than just adopting something as orthodoxy. In science we need to maintain lines of inquiry for the process to work as intended.