Hifiman, what are they thinking?

[imas69]

This is the best characterization of the Harman research I have ever read, congratulations!

Yeah, you can mock all you like but I know what I like without being told and I'm able to use my own ears to know what sounds good to me and i don't need to pay £1800 for a headphone to eq it, sound and music has way too many variables and headphones are without doubt genre specific, I feel sorry for you that you'll never listen to something that doesn't conform to a measurement that most of the multi million dollar headphone companies don't give 2 hoots about, I wonder how close the excellent £300 Sundara would be to the excellent £6000 Susvara with your ears or perhaps you could eq the Susvara to sound like it

 

[Jochen]

Plenty of designers may be employed to create products that are not for a general population. The reason is that brands have incentives for product differentiation. Concluding that this invalidates Harmans research really makes no sense.

Since Alex Grell also designed the HD 650, you could even call him a precursor of the Harman research results.

 

[Jochen]

Yeah, you can mock all you like but I know what I like without being told and I'm able to use my own ears to know what sounds good to me

This is on the one hand good, as ultimatievely you have to listen to a product, but on the other hand, the ears & the brain are easily fooled and not reliable at all

and i don't need to pay £1800 for a headphone to eq it,

Unfortunatley, there are few headphones that sound really good straight out of box. And the HD800 is really something special, it hit the market almost 15 years ago and is still at the top what soundstage is concerened. And since spatial properties are the second most important charactersitic of a headphone besides FR (which can be remedied with EQ), it is still the leading headphone, IMHO. It is extremely comfortable as well.

I wonder how close the excellent £300 Sundara would be to the excellent £6000 Susvara with your ears or perhaps you could eq the Susvara to sound like it

I wonder that too. As I said, Hifiman makes very good headphones (HE400, Sundara, XS), but also strange ones. That is what I don't really get. And often the stranger ones are more expensive. I would like to compare my Sundara (or my HD800) with the Susvara very much, but I am not willing to spend $6000 for this.

 

[isostasy]

Wow, things have been getting a bit wild recently on ASR. @Jochen thanks for that interesting video.

@moosso listening to sine sweeps is not a valid method of judging sound quality. Your ears and brain are not measuring instruments. https://www.reddit.com/r/oratory1990/comments/xl9l15/_/ipi8onp

No they haven't

You tell me that I didn't read the post properly but then you continue to talk about the very same thing that your first post is based on, an outdated experiment that was conducted using a few people with bog standard equipment, the audiophile world has moved on, perhaps you should do the same and not pretend that you know how something sounds until you've actually heard it

I'm really interested to hear more about this, could you elaborate?

 

[jonfitch]

By the way, Amir tested the FD5 and recommended it (when EQed to Harman). The FD3 has basically the same FR (just no Berryllium coated driver).

Crinacle seems to think the FD5 is C-tier garbage, although it seems like he's super sensitive to boosts in the 100-1K range and always complains about shouty sounding products.

 

[Jochen]

Crinacle seems to think the FD5 is C-tier garbage, although it seems like he's super sensitive to boosts in the 100-1K range and always complains about shouty sounding products.

Crinacle is a hobbyist who happens to have the biggest measurement database. His knowledge on audio related matters I would not like to even start to compare with Amir's, And furthermore, even if he were very competent and knowledable, there are always diffent opinons, even under expert's. Finally, consequentially this Hifiman $2000 flagship must be C-tier as well, according to Crinacle.

 

[moosso]

listening to sine sweeps is not a valid method of judging sound quality. Your ears and brain are not measuring instruments.

I also listening to songs I am familiar with when demo HP/IEMs.
The simple fact guys ignored is FR is different between different measurement rig, different artifical pinna and different person.
To get a rougly result of FR to yourself, you have to use tone generator, some in-ear mic works but it doesn't place at eardrum so the treble response after resonance point is inaccurate.
If you hear a 5K peak from a headphone, but you didn't hear a 5K peak from monitor speakers, then you need to EQ 5K down if you want it sound more like the speaker, and that 5K peak may or may not on the measurement result from GRAS or BK.
For speaker we have room correction, we will need something similar for HP/IEMs.
Works has been started, check On the Predictability of Hrtfs from Ear Shapes Using Deep Networks, and How to analyze your ear shape (360 Reality Audio).

I respect what Harman International did in the past decades, it give us the direction and improved many products on the market.
Because Harman we get HP/IEMs sound decently with affordable cost.
But it's not a perfect target, hell they even "upgrade" the target every few years.

No need, I have seen the graphs, they must sound very similar.

Be happy with what you have, if you have the super ability to image sound from measurement, and 4K peak and 6K peak sound "almost same" to you, then you can save much time and money.

My point is I can see why people buy these "overpriced" items because they can sound good to a group of such people, and they have money.
Calling HP/IEMs trash that you never heard based on the inaccurate measurement is unfair.

Our great Amir has this phase in every review he wrote, give it a read.

Note: The measurements you are about to see are made using a standardized Gras 45C. Headphone measurements by definition are approximate and variable so don't be surprised if other measurements even if performed with the same fixtures as mine, differ in end results. Protocols vary such as headband pressure and averaging (which I don't do). As you will see, I confirm the approximate accuracy of the measurements using Equalization and listening tests. Ultimately headphone measurements are less exact than speakers mostly in bass and above a few kilohertz so keep that in mind as you read these tests. If you think you have an exact idea of a headphone performance, you are likely wrong!

 

[Jochen]

Be happy with what you have, if you have the super ability to image sound from measurement, and 4K peak and 6K peak sound "almost same" to you, then you can save much time and money.

neither of the IEMs has a 4kHz or 6kHz peak, is about 4.8kHz and 5.5kHz, according to the measurements. As I said above, peaky treble with a different flavour of roughnes.

My point is I can see why people buy these "overpriced" items because they can sound good to a group of such people, and they have money.

I can see it too, they are deluded and have no idea of the science behind it.

Calling HP/IEMs trash that you never heard based on the inaccurate measurement is unfair.

No, i did not say it's trash, I said that it not sounds better than a $99 IEM.

Our great Amir has this phase in every review he wrote, give it a read.

All this quotation referes mostly to over-ear headphones, or can you explain me, how to adjust the mentioned headband of an IEM? For these is the only variable the insertion depth (at least on the 711 coupler) and that is much less variable.

 

[FrantzM]

There is, rightly, a healthy debate as to whether any IEM/headphone is "worth" $2k. But FR alone isn't really enough to make such a determination. I think its crinacle who has a quote on the subject I really like, something to the effect of "you may really like chocolate ice cream, but there's no guarantee you'll like THAT chocolate ice cream."

So get vanilla (TCZ or other inexpensive with Low THD IEM) and add chocolate (or other things) to taste (A Qudelix 5K or other EQ hardware or software) ...

The sad reality for the informed, and reasonable is that the IEM debate is not far from over past $100.oo. Similar to what we see in DAC, electronics, in general. This can be unsettling after years of believing that, "everything makes a difference", even AC power cords or Ethernet cables

Peace.

 

[bodhi]

So get vanilla (TCZ or other inexpensive with Low THD IEM) and add chocolate (or other things) to taste (A Qudelix 5K or other EQ hardware or software) ...

The sad reality for the informed, and reasonable is that the IEM debate is not far from over past $100.oo. Similar to what we see in DAC, electronics, in general. This can be unsettling after years of believing that, "everything makes a difference", even AC power cords or Ethernet cables

Peace.

I've been thinking for a while that IEMs are just option to engage in subjectivist mindset for younger aka less affluent people.

With traditional speaker setups you have to spend thousands just to get a one that doesn't have clear compromises and upgrade paths, subjectivist stuff with cables and boutique electronics is for rich old people only. With IEMs you can order new phones, cables, amps and DACs from China every month, even with student's income.

 

[SuicideSquid]

• FR measured by a rig doesn't equal to what you actual hear, different rig or pinna can give pretty different result
• There is no absolute standard of FR for HP/IEMs, every people have different HRTF (check debates in this thread LOL)
• FR may be everything your eardrum perceived, but it's not everything your ear/body perceived

I agree about the first two but I'm not sure what you mean by the third. Can you clarify?

The only factors that affect the sound quality of headphones and IEMs are frequency response, distortion, and impedance/how difficult they are to drive (there are other relevant factors when considering whether you like or would purchase a set of headphones, such as aesthetics, build quality, and comfort). But where some people get lost in the weeds is assuming that the Harman curve = good, and that everyone will like the Harman curve. The Harman curve is based on an average measurement of preferences for multiple listeners, but each person has slightly different personal preferences, and each person will actually hear the frequency response of a given headphone or IEM slightly differently based on their own unique biology - the shape of their head, inner ear, etc.

Where the Harman curve is very useful is that it gives us a standard measurement by which to compare different headphones, and a standard point of reference for what most people, most of the time, are going to find pleasing. Personally, after listening to a few IEMs that closely track the curve, I find I like a little more midrange energy and a little less in the 5-8kHz range - but now that I know this, I can read those FR graphs and make a determination about whether a headphone is likely to sound good to me, and that's extremely useful.

To the OP's original issues with Hifiman, I have two thoughts:

1. I don't think it's necessary to ever spend $2k+ on a headphone or IEM to get either an "objectively" accurate pair, or a pair that deviates from accurate to be pleasing to you.

2. Hifiman are a company that markets products to audiophiles and headphone enthusiasts, a demographic that is notorious for having more money than sense. I don't blame them for offering some headphones and IEMs to that segment of the market - they're trying to make money.

 

[Jochen]

I agree about the first two but I'm not sure what you mean by the third. Can you clarify?

The only factors that affect the sound quality of headphones and IEMs are frequency response, distortion, and impedance/how difficult they are to drive (there are other relevant factors when considering whether you like or would purchase a set of headphones, such as aesthetics, build quality, and comfort). But where some people get lost in the weeds is assuming that the Harman curve = good, and that everyone will like the Harman curve. The Harman curve is based on an average measurement of preferences for multiple listeners, but each person has slightly different personal preferences, and each person will actually hear the frequency response of a given headphone or IEM slightly differently based on their own unique biology - the shape of their head, inner ear, etc.

Where the Harman curve is very useful is that it gives us a standard measurement by which to compare different headphones, and a standard point of reference for what most people, most of the time, are going to find pleasing. Personally, after listening to a few IEMs that closely track the curve, I find I like a little more midrange energy and a little less in the 5-8kHz range - but now that I know this, I can read those FR graphs and make a determination about whether a headphone is likely to sound good to me, and that's extremely useful.

This thread is NOT about Harman compliance, this is not the argument here. I said it already many times, do I really need to repeat it again?

To the OP's original issues with Hifiman, I have two thoughts:

1. I don't think it's necessary to ever spend $2k+ on a headphone or IEM to get either an "objectively" accurate pair, or a pair that deviates from accurate to be pleasing to you.

For IEMs, surely not (maximum would be $520 for the Variations, no EQ necessary).

2. Hifiman are a company that markets products to audiophiles and headphone enthusiasts, a demographic that is notorious for having more money than sense. I don't blame them for offering some headphones and IEMs to that segment of the market - they're trying to make money.

Hifiman makes so many good headphones in the entrance level segment, like HE400, Sundara, XS, etc, so I don't get it that often the more expensive ones are even worse.

 

[Keith_W]

The only factors that affect the sound quality of headphones and IEMs are frequency response [...]

To be clear, this is frequency response at the eardrum. It is not the same as measured frequency response. I do not want to sound like a subjectivist here, but this is an example of something we can't measure. Well, you can, but you would have to do it for everybody and no two would be exactly alike.

 

[SuicideSquid]

This thread is NOT about Harman compliance, this is not the argument here. I said it already many times, do I really need to repeat it again?

I was not responding to you, I was responding to the post I quoted, but the discussion of harman compliance is relevant to a discussion about what makes a good headphone. If you want to make a thread about headphone cost and whether $2,000 is ever justified, you're going to get a conversation about frequency response and the harman curve.

Hifiman makes so many good headphones in the entrance level segment, like HE400, Sundara, XS, etc, so I don't get it that often the more expensive ones are even worse.

Different priorities for a different market segment. They're not targeting people who read reviews that put weight on objective measurements.

To be clear, this is frequency response at the eardrum. It is not the same as measured frequency response. I do not want to sound like a subjectivist here, but this is an example of something we can't measure. Well, you can, but you would have to do it for everybody and no two would be exactly alike.

I encourage you to read the remainder of the post that you quoted where I discussed the difference between perceived and measured response and how measured response is still useful, even though perceived FR will vary from person to person.

 

[Keith_W]

I encourage you to read the remainder of the post that you quoted where I discussed the difference between perceived and measured response and how measured response is still useful, even though perceived FR will vary from person to person.

I did read the rest of your post and I agreed with it Sorry my intention was not clear, I wanted to expand on your point and not criticize you.

 

[m8o]

And then there is the new closed studio headphone Audivina,as well $2000, with the frequency repsonse also shown below. I guess that can be described as wonky.

My two cents noone asked for (lol) regarding what I heard vs what I see is accurately described as wonky in the measurement...

As a man with highly affected hearing from loud music pushing 60 I appreciated the high frequency peaky boost of this. I also tend to say rather than a V tuning, I like a W tuning. Which this sort of has, with some serious deficiencies in the bass seen on the graph. But with the few minutes I listened at CANJAM NYC I didn't pick that up and was pretty happy with it. However I seen now I was probably being wowed by what I'll call an overboosted fatness in the upper audible region a subwoofer gives you, and suspect I would have recognized the over attenuation in low lows and the midbass if I was listening to the melodies and subtle nuances of my favorite songs and albums et al.