??Yeah, that happens by accident from time to time and I hate it when it does.
I was talking about the metal bars of the grill. What were you talking about?
??Yeah, that happens by accident from time to time and I hate it when it does.
Same. I touch them by accident when wearing the headphones sometimes, and they make a very irritating sound.??
I was talking about the metal bars of the grill. What were you talking about?
this was my simple Mod.Same. I touch them by accident when wearing the headphones sometimes, and they make a very irritating sound.
Yes, it looks like it is the slope that makes the difference, however I am not so sure if it is the 10K trough that is the issue here. Amir did not fill that hole either. I think since you both did not fill that, and Amir put less bass, his slope came out to be flatter. Nonetheless, a win is a winAll correct.
However, the "machine" achieves a better compliance with the target.
It has to do with the regression slope i.e. the machine fully compensates for the LF while the trough at 10kHz remains untouched producing a steeper slope resulting in a marginally lower score.
Anyways the scores are close enough to make no difference but the subjective impressions are likely to be different...
Let me show you how to achieve a better score:
Just remove 2dB from the LF compensation of the first EQ, et voila!
Score: with less bass than the target (the only change) 92.4 from 89.8.
View attachment 361493
Yeah, I noticed I could interpret it in two waysI guess my post lacked clarity
That was exactly @InfiniteJester his point.
He used my plots which were not done on an industry standard fixture and at a lower SPL.
Hence my post of the HE400SE measurements done by Amir under equal circumstances showing what InfiniteJester stated that not all hifiman have such (high) distortion.
I beg to differ. The distortion was quite audible to me, that's why I tried to fix it, well couldn't completely. Another reason why all egg-shaped Hifimans have similar distortion patterns, could be the egg-shaped earcups and the grills Hifiman employs, you know . . ., the common denominator!. All of these egg-shaped Hifiman's distortion measurements look poor, right? This cannot be a coincidence but rather a measurement error. Because when you do not wear them and just hold and crank the volume, it sounds terrible, and you only hear nothing but distortion, rattle, etc. But the moment you wear them, the distortion is gone,
I have measured the Edition XS, Sundaras, Audeze LCD XCs and LCD Xs on my humble rig, all are single driver planar headphones. The Audeze's were practically distortion free, Sundara's not too bad, and the EDXS's had similar distortion patterns to Anandas, albeit a little higher in frequency if memory serves.That distortion measurement could be a measurement error of the rig due to a single driver's measurements with a poor fit. I have very large headphones collection from Audeze to Focal, Sennheiser, IEMS, Audio Technica, AKG, etc., and Hifiman's egg-shaped headphones are the only ones that sound awful when you just hold them without wearing them. For example, Sundaras are pretty fine, and HE400SE is fine just holding them. I don't know the reason; it could be the design, but there is nothing wrong with case distortion. The nanometer diaphragm is thinner than your peeling skin after a sunbathe.
Don't get me wrong, the Sundaras sounded pretty good, the EDXS's were wonderful, for the money, I can not pick a better sounding headphone. Very enjoyable, with an out of head imagery, loved them.The spatial quality is also very good for the price. Most open-backs have similar-looking measurements in group delay compared to closed-backs and IEMs.
With EQ, the Ananda Nano becomes a monster. I can crank them up to unbearable high volumes with no issue on my RME, Topping, SMSL, and SPL amp rigs. While I am writing this, I'm actually wearing them just to make sure.
I beg to differ. The distortion was quite audible to me, that's why I tried to fix it, well couldn't completely. Another reason why all egg-shaped Hifimans have similar distortion patterns, could be the egg-shaped earcups and the grills Hifiman employs, you know . . ., the common denominator!
I have measured the Edition XS, Sundaras, Audeze LCD XCs and LCD Xs on my humble rig, all are single driver planar headphones. The Audeze's were practically distortion free, Sundara's not too bad, and the EDXS's had similar distortion patterns to Anandas, albeit a little higher in frequency if memory serves.
Don't get me wrong, the Sundaras sounded pretty good, the EDXS's were wonderful, for the money, I can not pick a better sounding headphone. Very enjoyable, with an out of head imagery, loved them.
The only thing was, that bit of screechy hardness to the sound. I did manage to fix the problem somewhat, but not fully.
I was just checking the RTINGS measurements. WHD Looks similar to me against Audeze. I am not sure what these guys are doing wrong. Less than 0.1%.
View attachment 361536
Ananda vs. HE400SE
View attachment 361537
rtings have explanations for their methodology directly on their own website.Weighted harmonic distortion almost seems to be a made up thing. Have you seen that distortion is usually lower at higher volumes in their graphs? How is that even possible?
It happens again
View attachment 361538
and again...
View attachment 361539
and again...
View attachment 361540
Until someone explains to me why their "overall amount of harmonic distortion produced by the headphones at 90dB SPL" is consistently higher than their "overall amount of harmonic distortion produced by the headphones at 100dB SPL", my trust in their distortion measurements is 0.
That's right, I got similar results.
rtings have explanations for their methodology directly on their own website.
Why do we have to explain it to you?
They apply weighting to their distortion measurements and thus the lower frequencies are given less weight because they are less audible.
That will work with pure sines but in the case of full range drivers having a lot of bass distortion modulates the mids and highs (due to compression) so the WHD is not totally honest.
That said, there will be no weighting around 3kHz so the numbers should be the same in that part of the frequency range.
The discrepancy between Rtings and other measurements (at 100dB) is rather big so most likely the method used differs as well.
Possibly the resonances in that area have something to do with the higher reported distortion by Amir and me (and we use different methods as well)
Mind boggles!Thank you. I understand all of that. The only thing that I cannot comprehend is how their system indicates less distortion at higher volumes.