I have, all related to adhering to the Harmen curve and a subjective evaluation of what a good HP's measurements should look like....personally I think every reviewer should review a HP or any piece of gear from listening and sound before being allowed to see a mesurement chart...I also think here certainly the cost of a HP should also be kept from the review until the judgment is renderedChannel balance
Response smoothness
Bass extension
Harmonic distortion
Group delay
Impedance response
Sensitivity
Listening impressions
If you think that Harman target adherence is the only point of Amir's headphone reviews, then you should try actually reading one
-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
HIFIMAN Susvara Headphone Review
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
solderdude
Grand Contributor
That, however, is just your opinion.
The cost is an important aspect, why should one only post it at the bottom of the review ?
The Harman curve is kind of a standard (there are other targets and other test fixtures too) and any reviewer is free to choose their preferred reference.
What would be the advantage of listening first, then writing the review (and not changing one's opinion about it any more) and then measure it and not link measurements to perceived sound.
No matter how one twists and turns this... the review can only be written when one has all the data.
Certainly when measurements are the key point and EQ suggestions are included towards a used target.
So best case could be: calibrate the ears with a known reference, listen to the headphone, make notes, measure the crap out of it, gather all the data, listen again, play with EQ, make up ones mind about it (including VFM) and write the article including the reviewers findings/opinion.
The cost is an important aspect, why should one only post it at the bottom of the review ?
The Harman curve is kind of a standard (there are other targets and other test fixtures too) and any reviewer is free to choose their preferred reference.
What would be the advantage of listening first, then writing the review (and not changing one's opinion about it any more) and then measure it and not link measurements to perceived sound.
No matter how one twists and turns this... the review can only be written when one has all the data.
Certainly when measurements are the key point and EQ suggestions are included towards a used target.
So best case could be: calibrate the ears with a known reference, listen to the headphone, make notes, measure the crap out of it, gather all the data, listen again, play with EQ, make up ones mind about it (including VFM) and write the article including the reviewers findings/opinion.
Grobbelboy
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2022
- Messages
- 101
- Likes
- 261
As soon as you've discovered which personal deviations from the Harman curve you prefer, measurements are more valuable than whatever a reviewer with his/her specific HRTF thinks. Why would you put so much trust in that?
So much trouble for possibly giving some esoteric headfi fan favorites a chance or to at least try to have an explanation for an unfavorable review. Based on the measurements and many listening experiences in this thread from people who don't buy the hype (including mine), nothing would have saved the Susvara from getting a sad panther.
the advantage would be to do away with the built in bias of the measurements....once certain people see a measurement they do not like they automatically assume it will not sound good...perhaps some such people might find they actually like the sound out of HP's or other gear not matching the measurements they think proper?....price here is also important because we seem to have a kind of reverse snobbery here where if something is expensive it is automatically assumed to be a waste of money and often mocked...the proper way to review would be to be given HP's to listen to without price point or measurements and to simply have reviewers say good or bad and then find out the price or measurements and then comment on them
I trust my ears and nothing else...if I like one HP over another I could care less what measurements say
Believe me when it comes to tonality.
You can be like 80% sure how headphone will sound (tonallywise) just looking at the graph. Rest has to be validated by listening tests - which amir do.
So if I see crappy FR response (no it must not fully follow harman curve) I already know if I even want to try to listen that crap.
Last edited:
solderdude
Grand Contributor
Why would measurements build in a bias in a review when there are measurements and a subjective review ?
Yep, some will. Regardless of the price b.t.w.
I actually like the sound of the Susvara.
I would never buy it because it is heavily overpriced
Price is always important. If an item is $ 60.- or $ 6000 is a good reason to read the review.
A 'perfect' measuring headphone that is reviewed and only after you read it is $ 10k is a waste of reading time.
When you see the price first you can make up your mind if this is something for you or not.
Why is that proper ?
What is wrong with knowing the price of a reviewed item ?
What is wrong with seeing aspects of technical performance ?
Why would a subjective opinion of some reviewer have more value ?
Why can't one know what it costs and how it technically performs ?
When you want to know how a headphone sounds you are going to have to listen to it. Period.
I actually agree you can tell a lot about tonality from the graph. But it's also true that people often read too much into a single set of measurements.
Amir's Nan-7 review; Nan-7 is modelled after the Susvara and has a similar jagged FR:
Listening impressions:
And that's before EQ.
Conclusion
Human Bass
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2018
- Messages
- 888
- Likes
- 1,003
Allmanfan is right, every info we obtain creates expectations and biases, it is inevitable.
Biases by knowing the price is well documented in the wine world. Checking a graph beforehand is even bigger, especially if the person compares to some "ideal" response.
As someone who heard a considerable amount of stuff, I really dont care about the FR meeting a certain target, what I care is to avoid annoying peaks and that proposed sound signature "makes sense".
Biases by knowing the price is well documented in the wine world. Checking a graph beforehand is even bigger, especially if the person compares to some "ideal" response.
As someone who heard a considerable amount of stuff, I really dont care about the FR meeting a certain target, what I care is to avoid annoying peaks and that proposed sound signature "makes sense".
Don't see you point. Yes nan-7 looks strange when you look at very small level.I actually agree you can tell a lot about tonality from the graph. But it's also true that people often read too much into a single set of measurements.
Amir's Nan-7 review; Nan-7 is modelled after the Susvara and has a similar jagged FR:
Listening impressions:
And that's before EQ.
Conclusion
But tendency is still harmanish, so it sounds just like that.
I had opportunity to listen to nan. Even without graph I know how it will measure, not in details- but that's not needed.
One more time looking at FR is like 80% how the headphone will sound tonallywise.
@ObjectiveSubjectivist it's very similar to the Susvara on a macro level as well. Has the exact same 1-3kHz recess that Amir always complains about and did with both. Personally I feel adds soundstage and reduces "shout", making a headphone easier to listen to, and I prefer it. Other than that both are very close to Harman everywhere outside the bass. Susvara is actually closer to Harman in that region, so if you think the Nan-7 was good it's even better.
Gets even closer if you put the same pads on both, I'd say this is into the ballpark of unit variation. It's actually closer than Amir managed to measure the two channels.
The Nan-7 does have a little bass rise, which I appreciate; the new Susvara unveiled likely will have this as well; that is one of the effects you get from taking the grill off many Hifimen, including the HE6SE (Susvara is descended from the HE6 line). Both are well below Harman so if you want Harman bass you need to EQ it up there either way, it's just a matter of how much. Amir measured virtually zero distortion even at 114dB in the bass so you should be able to go mad there if you want full Harman bass.
Gets even closer if you put the same pads on both, I'd say this is into the ballpark of unit variation. It's actually closer than Amir managed to measure the two channels.
The Nan-7 does have a little bass rise, which I appreciate; the new Susvara unveiled likely will have this as well; that is one of the effects you get from taking the grill off many Hifimen, including the HE6SE (Susvara is descended from the HE6 line). Both are well below Harman so if you want Harman bass you need to EQ it up there either way, it's just a matter of how much. Amir measured virtually zero distortion even at 114dB in the bass so you should be able to go mad there if you want full Harman bass.
The Susvara OG already has enough bass for me. If the unveiled is more than that I would certainly not prefer it over the OG. The unveiled is looking more and more like from the Arya Stealth to Arya Organic tuning where they bump the bass and treble at the cost of even thinner midrange to my HRTF (another reason why my personal preference is on the outside of the Harman curve)
I dont get you. Really stop. You are fighting with the windmills.
Producing ton of text for bo reasons.
Have a nice day, im out
I took this to be suggesting that the Susvara has a "crappy FR response" (as you posted this on the Susvara thread). But it has a FR response virtually identical in every way to the Nan-7, which Amir admitted sounded great despite the graph, and it turns out you seem to think sounded good too.
There seems to be some cognitive dissonance here if one of these headphones is great and the other is "crappy" and you can tell which is crappy and which is great from these graphs. You're better at reading the tea leaves than I am.
Susvara the one I listened ()actually listened it couple of times but it was long time ago to remember) had some serious problems with lower treble/upper midrange. It could be seen on FR graph. Resonances I could easily hear that. Some people call it romantic.... To me it was lack clarity in this region and just annoying sandy sound.I took this to be suggesting that the Susvara has a "crappy FR response" (as you posted this on the Susvara thread). But it has a FR response virtually identical in every way to the Nan-7, which Amir admitted sounded great despite the graph, and it turns out you seem to think sounded good too.
There seems to be some cognitive dissonance here if one of these headphones is great and the other is "crappy" and you can tell which is crappy and which is great from these graphs. You're better at reading the tea leaves than I am.
With nan you could also see this. But I did not hear that - probably because interaction with my ear was a bit different or something else.
Still tonality wise they were very close.
As I said looking at FR tells a lot about headphone. Feel free to look for magic dust if you will.
Hope it will help you.
ps. what I heard with nan was more of an "exciting" sound. Hard to put in words I believe some people call it more slamy/faster. Also probably because of resonances - but it was not annoying as it was with susvara.
This is what @Resolve is mentioning about FR to your eardrums. While the FR of Nan-7 and Susvara are very similar on the measurement rig, the FR between the two will deviate a lot more or similar to the measuring rig to an individual's ear drums. Could be that there's an FR peak to your eardrums with the Sus causing that scratchy/sandy sonic sensation that doesn't occur to others so others perceive the Susvara as highly resolving, natural and super smooth, highly engaging, non-fatiguing. What you're describing with the Nan-7 is exactly how I perceive the Susvara: exciting, slammy, fast, ultra-clear, 10/10 resolution, lifelike and all that flowery subjective descriptions on head-fi.
Thank god you didn't said that my chain was not up to the task of driving Susvara... - which believe me. Even by head-fi snobbery standards.
I'm still not sure what's your point. You don't want to have jaggy FR as it indicates problems - sometimes it could be heard sometimes not, but at the end we are here for hifi right?
Ps. If you enjoyed them im glad you did. They are good headphones, but really nothing to rave about. But I understand, price and tales do the magic.
Ps2. I Iike their openness, their acoustic impedance must be low kinda similar like hd800 and other egg shaped hifimans.
Last edited:
Has nothing to do with the audio chain which to me is extremely subtle to almost impossible to distinguish consistently even when comparing to tube amps and solid state amps.
One can just speculate if the jaggy FR is even audible with respect to that individual's HRTF and FR to the eardrum. But I definitely agree that 80% of the FR curve, you can predict to a some degree how a headphone will sound tonally for sure! IME, it's even more predictable with IEMs than headphones as you eliminate a lot of ear anatomy in the factor
If you know the price and the measurements you start out with all sorts of biases...if you are a typical person here and it is expensive you say it is a rip off...if it has a graph that doesnt comport with the harman curve you might well say it is not going to be to your liking etc...let me say again I do not have any problem with anyones preferences period...different people like different sounds and presentations...my issue is with those who tell me a popular well reviewed headphone is actually garbage because of a graph....if reviewers would put aside biases and simply listen and report we would get much better reviews....in fact some people hear might just find they have egg on their face if they enjoyed headphones that didnt have graphs that comport to their preconceived notions...my favorite comment from early in this thread came from a person who asserted that he was happy with the review of the susvara because now he knew his 33 dollar IEM was better than the susvara
Similar threads
