Master Complaint Thread About Headphone Measurements

[solderdude]

I found that somehow X-feed works best with HD800(S).
Have tinkered quite a while with analog X'feed but found I had to change settings depending on the recording and had to increase treble a bit.
In the end I gave up on X'feed and learned to listen to stereo through headphones as it is.

Head tracking (the cheaper kind) does not do anything for me when it comes to stereo imaging/deth. I just hear the treble shift a bit when moving the head but no revelations in depth or sound location, a gimmick.
Have not tried the more serious DSP though. The ones I did try always sounded 'not realistic' to me.

 

[Robbo99999]

I remember foobar2000's Crossfeed plugin ("component") being of the sort that felt like a mere slider between stereo and mono, thus compromising clarity, whereby it was only when I tried the linked bs2b (which albeit also incurs a volume level offset) that I finally got a then more convincing pushing of most of the image forward without much of the feeling of things getting congested, just that some sounds like panned trumpets or other higher-treble content would tend to remain close to my ears. Then proper HRTF DSP for me further maintains proper image coherence and separation compared to stock headphone sound, especially near the far pans, even not really stretching point sources when I move the virtual speakers further apart. If ever you have a chance to try out CroPaC + Reaper as linked.

Did you measure your HRTF with in-ear mics? Just wondering what the HRTF DSP is that you refer to.

 

[Robbo99999]

I found that somehow X-feed works best with HD800(S).
Have tinkered quite a while with analog X'feed but found I had to change settings depending on the recording and had to increase treble a bit.
In the end I gave up on X'feed and learned to listen to stereo through headphones as it is.

Head tracking (the cheaper kind) does not do anything for me when it comes to stereo imaging/deth. I just hear the treble shift a bit when moving the head but no revelations in depth or sound location, a gimmick.
Have not tried the more serious DSP though. The ones I did try always sounded 'not realistic' to me.

(It was with HD800 that I was trying it yesterday, along with my Harman EQ.)

 

[Mr. Haelscheir]

Did you measure your HRTF with in-ear mics? Just wondering what the HRTF DSP is that you refer to.

Yes. I had linked https://www.head-fi.org/threads/anyone-into-crossfeed.961533/post-18068536 (post #78) earlier, but had forgotten to direct folks to the second part of that post covering CroPaC and Reaper (the first part was a foobar2000 bs2b tutorial). That CroPaC tutorial assumes usage of the default SOFA file which I found worked well enough for my ears or to demonstrate its imaging capabilities. My personalized SOFA was obtained with the kit in https://www.earfish.eu/, just that it can take a while for them to get back to you since they work at a university. My latest findings with CroPaC are detailed in https://www.head-fi.org/threads/rec...-virtualization.890719/page-121#post-18027627 (post #1,812), whereby I am still working on a refinement possibly involving probe tube mics to remove the need for hearing threshold EQ as well as reduce latency.

 

[Robbo99999]

Yes. I had linked https://www.head-fi.org/threads/anyone-into-crossfeed.961533/post-18068536 (post #78) earlier, but had forgotten to direct folks to the second part of that post covering CroPaC and Reaper (the first part was a foobar2000 bs2b tutorial). That CroPaC tutorial assumes usage of the default SOFA file which I found worked well enough for my ears or to demonstrate its imaging capabilities. My personalized SOFA was obtained with the kit in https://www.earfish.eu/, just that it can take a while for them to get back to you since they work at a university. My latest findings with CroPaC are detailed in https://www.head-fi.org/threads/rec...-virtualization.890719/page-121#post-18027627 (post #1,812), whereby I am still working on a refinement possibly involving probe tube mics to remove the need for hearing threshold EQ as well as reduce latency.

I bookmarked the EarFish. Have you tried Impulcifier? This is all very involved that you've done, & indeed Impulcifier & also Smyth Realiser....I think this type of approach is really the next step in headphones, the future.

 

[Mr. Haelscheir]

I bookmarked the EarFish. Have you tried Impulcifier? This is all very involved that you've done, & indeed Impulcifier & also Smyth Realiser....I think this type of approach is really the next step in headphones, the future.

I have yet to try Impulcifier, but I am likely to skip over that into implementing a more direct way of capturing HRTF directions without any special SOFA standard normalization, precomputing measured headphone compensations and baking those into the HRTF file, and perhaps allowing selection of different impulse window lengths.

 

[LevityProject]

Just searched about the diffuse field and found this: (declaration that I am no expert nor with a ton of knowledge about the plots)
View attachment 99576
https://forum.hifiguides.com/t/grap...n-ear-over-ear-and-harman-linear-in-room/9270

it seems the Harman Linear in room is a response measured at ear drum level with dummy head mics in a treated room and anechoic chamber neutral speaker, while the green and orange are their target curve for in ear and over ear phones.

to me the big players for neutralish sounding headphones are aiming at the linear in room curve which is like 8-12db lower than the target curve bass and with a 4db boost around 3khz, so shall we compare the measured headphone curve to that and make some comments on subject llstening section to both tunings?

This graph is the clearest representation of the Harman curve that I've come across. Good find! I've applied the "over-ear curve" to my neutrally tuned over-ear headphones and have been pleasantly surprised. It's now making sense to me how this curve is a huge help for both mixing and mastering ... if it's implemented thoughtfully into an engineer's workflow.

 

[Chagall]

This graph is the clearest representation of the Harman curve that I've come across. Good find! I've applied the "over-ear curve" to my neutrally tuned over-ear headphones and have been pleasantly surprised. It's now making sense to me how this curve is a huge help for both mixing and mastering ... if it's implemented thoughtfully into an engineer's workflow.

Did you find your headphone freq. response and then applied the corrections needed to get the Harman tuning?
Out of curiosity what is clear about that graph that wasn't clear on any other?

 

[LevityProject]

Did you find your headphone freq. response and then applied the corrections needed to get the Harman tuning?
Out of curiosity what is clear about that graph that wasn't clear on any other?

That is exactly what I did

I have custom tuned headphones. They are a very flat line of response

That Harman graph shows the boosts and cuts needed for a (supposedly or close enough) linear base . No other graph shows this that I've seen.

What I'm hearing so far from playing with these gentle curves is good to the point of I'm questioning my entire career path in knowing anything about audio

... But it's definitive to me. I've been doing a lot of things backwards, and I didn't realize it until I saw this curve and connected a bunch of dots that I didn't think even existed ... That's all I've got for now. But this changes a lot for me.

 

[Chagall]

That is exactly what I did

I have custom tuned headphones. They are a very flat line of response

Oh, ok! If you have a flat line response then the correction curve will look like Harman target. But the flat-line response for headphones isn't neutral, it's the opposite. There needs to be a boost in the presence area and a bass shelf (it's debatable how much of a boost but it needs to be there). That's what confused me when you said you applied over-ear curve to neutrally tuned headphones. Harman target response is what most people find preferable and neutral comparing it with speakers in-room average.


e.g. HD800S

apply EQ curve

to get Harman target response

 

[musicreo]

My personalized SOFA was obtained with the kit in https://www.earfish.eu/, just that it can take a while for them to get back to you since they work at a university.

What kind of microphones are used in the kit?

 

[LevityProject]

I was (hopefully somewhat healthily) skeptical about the measurements and gear reviews here at first. But I took a relatively small risk and picked up a pair of 7hz Zeros for less than $30 on amazon. HOLY CRAP! THEY ARE AWESOME!! Best IEMs I've ever heard without any tuning.

And it shows me without a doubt that headphones which conform to the Harman curve are what sounds the best. I'm interested now in Headphones that comply smoothly with that curve, without resonances.

Anyhow, The 7hz are a no-contest! They have way better tuning out of the box than everything (I think everything?) made by Beyerdynamic, and the reviews show this. I'm not comparing apples to apples (Beyerdynamics make over ear, not IEMS) but the point of that is I was told to never mix on IEMs. The 7hz Zeros seriously put this conventional thought to the test.

now, when I put on the Zeros, I immediately heard a sharp resonance. I checked the review (becasue I have a terrible memory for most things), and sure enough there's a spike around 14khz. It wasn't grating to me, but it was there and over time I'd become annoyed with it. but it's nothing that a high shelf couldn't fit at 11k while on stage, or a precision cut for studio use. I also noticed a lack of extreme low bass.

But honestly, that's not a lot to gripe about. I opened it new out of the box and started listening. Overall, wow.

In comparison, I almost can't comprehend the number of gripes I have with my much more expensive Beyeryndamic DT990s when they aren't tuned. If it wasn't for their soundstage (which is pretty subtle, but noticeable when I A/B against closed-back headphones and IEMs) I'd rid myself of them for good. But they're the only openbacks I currently own, and that's about to change ...

 

[LevityProject]

Oh, ok! If you have a flat line response then the correction curve will look like Harman target. But the flat-line response for headphones isn't neutral, it's the opposite. There needs to be a boost in the presence area and a bass shelf (it's debatable how much of a boost but it needs to be there). That's what confused me when you said you applied over-ear curve to neutrally tuned headphones. Harman target response is what most people find preferable and neutral comparing it with speakers in-room average.

I hadn't realized that Sonarworks correction included a Harmon curve. I'm glad it does though! Now that I've had some conversations, done some reading, and understand more about this, it changes everything about how I perceive headphone tuning and what makes a pair of headphones sound good. I'm starting to think that the old adage to "never mix on headphones" was more a function of headphones not conforming to a Harmon Curve than it did to just the idea of mixing on headphones

 

[markanini]

I was (hopefully somewhat healthily) skeptical about the measurements and gear reviews here at first. But I took a relatively small risk and picked up a pair of 7hz Zeros for less than $30 on amazon. HOLY CRAP! THEY ARE AWESOME!! Best IEMs I've ever heard without any tuning.

And it shows me without a doubt that headphones which conform to the Harman curve are what sounds the best. I'm interested now in Headphones that comply smoothly with that curve, without resonances.

Anyhow, The 7hz are a no-contest! They have way better tuning out of the box than everything (I think everything?) made by Beyerdynamic, and the reviews show this. I'm not comparing apples to apples (Beyerdynamics make over ear, not IEMS) but the point of that is I was told to never mix on IEMs. The 7hz Zeros seriously put this conventional thought to the test.

now, when I put on the Zeros, I immediately heard a sharp resonance. I checked the review (becasue I have a terrible memory for most things), and sure enough there's a spike around 14khz. It wasn't grating to me, but it was there and over time I'd become annoyed with it. but it's nothing that a high shelf couldn't fit at 11k while on stage, or a precision cut for studio use. I also noticed a lack of extreme low bass.

But honestly, that's not a lot to gripe about. I opened it new out of the box and started listening. Overall, wow.

In comparison, I almost can't comprehend the number of gripes I have with my much more expensive Beyeryndamic DT990s when they aren't tuned. If it wasn't for their soundstage (which is pretty subtle, but noticeable when I A/B against closed-back headphones and IEMs) I'd rid myself of them for good. But they're the only openbacks I currently own, and that's about to change ...

I agree with your impressions of 7Hz Zero as well as your intuition to adjust the treble with a shelf filter. The caveat with graphs is that they are made at a standardized insertion depth, and you can't reliably know your personal insertion point. Because of that you can't reliably determine where peaks and dips in the treble are. Other than that, graphs can be useful for comparing overall treble energy between different sets.

This is a difference graph between an IEM at the standard insertion point vs. a few millimeters deeper:

 

[CedarX]

And it shows me without a doubt that headphones which conform to the Harman curve are what sounds the best.

The caveat with graphs is that they are made at a standardized insertion depth, and you can't reliably know your personal insertion point.

The other caveat is that the Harman curve is what sounds the best for most… but not necessarily for a particular individual.

Harman’s in-ear 2019 target for IEMs is also more “controversial” than its over-the-ear equivalent.

 

[Mr. Haelscheir]

What kind of microphones are used in the kit?

See https://www.head-fi.org/threads/mez...eadphone-official-thread.959445/post-17743502 (post #5,152) and https://www.farnell.com/datasheets/1653468.pdf. These mics have surprisingly low distortion, but at least my pair were poorly matched, and the right one's bass response wasn't as stable as the left's over time.

 

[byazici]

I would also like to complain... as the name of the thread urges me to... about Amir not putting out as many reviews as Z Reviews! Hell, the guy basically shits reviews almost every day. Hey Amir! What's wrong with you? Pick up your shit and let's go! You're getting slow in your old age, can you even hear above 10k?

Of course, just kidding...

I would still like to see the review for the Topping A50 III, no matter what Roland68 says

 

[scolfaro]

Please post all generic (non review specific) complaints, comments, etc. in this thread.

95db is entirely absurd to get a feel for the response, I listen to music (also because I do it professionally) from 75-85db, and I stay around 85 only when tired or finishing something, going above that only for very brief moments. The response of the Truthear Zero Reds is one that seems to be absolutely skewed for that reason, on normal listening levels the bass was overwhelming for me. I get it going for hotter for distortion measurements, but frequency response, not at all, 85db is sane, anything above is just hearing loss waiting to happen, and therefore doesn't represent how the headphones react day to day.

BTW, I was prompted to write it like this because this is a compaint thread, besides that gripe I must say I search for Amir posts all the time when looking for new headphones or IEMs. Some EQs posted at the end of the reviews are also great (not all though ). So yeah, level down to where people stay without losing their hearing and everything else is great.

 

[solderdude]

95db is entirely absurd to get a feel for the response,

No it isn't.
There is even something to be said for measuring low bass at 114dB SPL and mids up to 104dB SPL.
Note that peak SPL is not the same as average SPL and certainly not the same as the 'average noise SPL' charts in dBA.

I listen to music (also because I do it professionally) from 75-85db, and I stay around 85 only when tired or finishing something,

Listening to 'all evening relaxing levels' in other words soft level I measure peaks 87dB peaks, with DR12 song = 75dB average.
Listening to more 'active' listening levels (during the day trying to evaluate sound quality) I measure 102dB peaks
Listening to loud levels that are 'tolerable' for a minute or so I measure 114dB peaks with DR17 recording = 97dB average.

This is with a fast peak meter at an actual headphone.
One must realize that this peak SPL is spread over the audible range and impulse like but ... the driver does have to make the excursion to reproduce that.

going above that only for very brief moments. The response of the Truthear Zero Reds is one that seems to be absolutely skewed for that reason, on normal listening levels the bass was overwhelming for me.

It would be for me too... don't like shoving things in my ears so do not use IEM's measured to some standard.
This is also SPL dependent (equal loudness contours)

I get it going for hotter for distortion measurements, but frequency response, not at all, 85db is sane, anything above is just hearing loss waiting to happen, and therefore doesn't represent how the headphones react day to day.

Frequency response, in some headphones is SPL dependent and may differ up to a few dB between 70 and 100dB SPL and as that is dynamic it may skew tonality in a strange way. This has to do with the excursion which of course is higher at lower frequencies but as other frequencies are superposed on lower frequencies the amplitude of those are also 'modulated' (creating side bands).
Thieaudio Ghost FR measured at different SPL (from 10Hz to 2kHz as above that nothing changes) overlaid to 90dB SPL sweep.
60dB, 70dB, 80dB, 90dB and 100dB

Not many reviewers actually measure that or report it.

 

[scolfaro]

No it isn't.
There is even something to be said for measuring low bass at 114dB SPL and mids up to 104dB SPL.
Note that peak SPL is not the same as average SPL and certainly not the same as the 'average noise SPL' charts in dBA.


Listening to 'all evening relaxing levels' in other words soft level I measure peaks 87dB peaks, with DR12 song = 75dB average.
Listening to more 'active' listening levels (during the day trying to evaluate sound quality) I measure 102dB peaks
Listening to loud levels that are 'tolerable' for a minute or so I measure 114dB peaks with DR17 recording = 97dB average.

This is with a fast peak meter at an actual headphone.

I don't agree with your assessment here, because if what we wanted was to single out response to "peak" levels, we would be looking into transient response (I don't know if there's an objective measurement for this, is there?).

Since what we're looking for are best "average" response representation, then it makes sense to use the most "average" of levels, which is also the level defaulted to by most mastering engineers to judge a master, and that is hovering around 85db.

Actually, averaging 85db is already quite loud, and louder than most people I worked with monitor for long periods, 85db is a level to raise up to as you work, then back down to "rest." We're talking about a level that's safe for 8 hours a day and may cause hearing loss (still average, so the fluctuations are implied, but nonetheless represented in this average). Talking about a constant sweep of frequencies for a response, a sweep of 85db should represent that average appropriately.

Frequency response, in some headphones is SPL dependent and may differ up to a few dB between 70 and 100dB SPL and as that is dynamic it may skew tonality in a strange way. This has to do with the excursion which of course is higher at lower frequencies but as other frequencies are superposed on lower frequencies the amplitude of those are also 'modulated' (creating side bands).
Thieaudio Ghost FR measured at different SPL (from 10Hz to 2kHz as above that nothing changes) overlaid to 90dB SPL sweep.
60dB, 70dB, 80dB, 90dB and 100dB

Not many reviewers actually measure that or report it.

That's exactly my point... I didn't measure the Reds, but I heard this over the course of a few days, and it's kind of reasonable to assume that that happened in a very similar manner even if the headphones depicted are different.

Considering both that the test results Amir posted had nothing to do with what I heard, and the differing resistance values on the bass response of the iem's, I assume in your graph that the lines at 90 and 100db would've been closer to Amir's measurement, and since I rarely go much past the purple 80db line, I'm stuck with a "bloated" experience in real life, nothing like the loud tests...