The transient response can be deduced from the impulse response which can be obtained from the Fourier transform of the magnitude and phase response. Room EQ Wizard makes it pretty easy to retrieve that transient response or go the other way and calculate the magnitude and phase from a direct impulse response measurement.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?).
They are actual measurements of the voltage on a driver and the SPL (excursion) of the transducer, assuming there is no compression, is real.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?).
Yep, average 85dB is quite loud. 85dB peaks are not and that's what we listen to so one should measure at that peak level in order to ensure that lower levels are O.K. too.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.
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.
When measuring at lower SPL you run into noise floors of the mic (test fixture) and surrounding sounds.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...
They are actual measurements of the voltage on a driver and the SPL (excursion) of the transducer, assuming there is no compression, is real.
Music consists mostly of transients.
Low frequencies require larger excursions to reach the same SPL. For 20kHz to be reproduced at say 100dB SPL a much smaller excursion is needed.
To reproduce a square-wave of say 1kHz increasingly smaller amounts of higher frequencies are needed so when a headphone can reproduce 20kHz at say 110dB SPL and also can do 1kHz at 100dB SPL more 'speed' is not needed.
Here is the impulse response for MDR-7506
![]()
Below the step response for Sennheiser HD580 Precision.
![]()
One can also measure the a square-wave (40Hz and 440Hz) and needle (impulse) response
![]()
Below the Hifiman HE400SE:
![]()
Yep, average 85dB is quite loud. 85dB peaks are not and that's what we listen to so one should measure at that peak level in order to ensure that lower levels are O.K. too.
Given the distortion plots of the red even at 114dB there is no hint of distortion in the bass so there is no dynamic compression. The FR at 114dB thus is the same as at 70dB SPL.
When measuring at lower SPL you run into noise floors of the mic (test fixture) and surrounding sounds.
One can measure the FR at many different levels if the the distortion plots indicate there is compression (increased odd harm. distortion at higher SPL).
Not many people do this or publish that.
Due to its impedance it is highly likely the Red will sound incorrect from higher output impedance sources.
Most interfaces have a too high output resistance and some studio gear may also have that. The reason for that is usually that the headphone out of such devices is often an afterthought and just an op-amp with some 'safety' resistors in the output.
It is also the reason why the bass boost using an in-line resistor works.
The rest of the measurements do not suggest tonal changes caused by level differences.
Differences can come from equal loudness contours and could come from a too high output impedance from the source is is connected to. But this is not level dependent.
IMHO Harman bass is too much bass boost for critical listening. It is fine for listening to music while commuting or enjoying bass-light recordings or listening at low listening levels.
Just my personal opinion.
A nice compact overview presentation of the currently still existing limitations and problems when measuring, listening and evaluating headphones:
I think it's probably true that a single line on a graph does not totally explain a headphone's performance for any given individual, but the core "problem" remains of "what you going do about it". That single line on a graph (GRAS frequency response) is a pretty strong predictor of preference, and to go beyond that in terms of providing useful information to prospective buyers would mean research/studies/listening testing to prove that other repackaged information from different measurements (whatever they may be) is proven useful. So the various ideas are largely theoretical at the moment, it would now be down to whoever to do the work to prove the various mechanisms & effects & somehow package that information in reviews to make it useful for prospective buyers.And to follow on from above, here’s the talk by Blaine that Andrew refers to in above video
Good video by Blaine giving a talk at the recent CanJam regarding the variability of headphone/iem measurements and how that relates to a clusterf*ck of misinterpretation regarding the known data
(With occasional interruptions and clarifications courtesy of Oratory)
TLDR/TLDW - Headphone data does not currently portray the range of potential sources of variation perception between listeners
Instead of searching for headphones that match your specific requirements out of the box, why not use EQ to make any headphone suitable?I am interested in learning about specific headphones that are light with the bass frequency. I am one of those individuals who prefer MUCH LESS amount of bass. Full disclosure, I have a ski-slope audiogram, with a great ability to hear the bass but not the high frequency. I am hard of hearing and find that most headphones emphasize too much bass for my preference. I have preferred AKG 701/702 over the currently popular AKG 371 that follows the Harman curves. Thanks in advance.
I have done that in the past, with ASUS equalizer setup...which is the best for me. But I want to use a headphones without having to rely on an equalizerInstead of searching for headphones that match your specific requirements out of the box, why not use EQ to make any headphone suitable?
With EQ, you can dial in your preferred sound signature precisely, often completely for free.
How about trying Oratory's Optimum Hifi Target Curve. It has no bass shelf, just linear extension. It's probably a bit misleadingly titled because I really don't think it should normally be considered "optimum", but in your case you might like it given it has no bass shelf. Following is an example of the HD560s EQ'd to Oratory's Optimum Hifi target:I am interested in learning about specific headphones that are light with the bass frequency. I am one of those individuals who prefer MUCH LESS amount of bass. Full disclosure, I have a ski-slope audiogram, with a great ability to hear the bass but not the high frequency. I am hard of hearing and find that most headphones emphasize too much bass for my preference. I have preferred AKG 701/702 over the currently popular AKG 371 that follows the Harman curves. Thanks in advance.
This is going off-topic… Sorry!I have done that in the past, with ASUS equalizer setup...which is the best for me. But I want to use a headphones without having to rely on an equalizer
That's understandable but hear this, getting bass correctly equalized is MUCH easier than fiddling with the higher frequencies. As per above post, the K702 can have linear extension with just two simple negative filters that won't mess up with phases or have to deal with weird cup resonances.I have done that in the past, with ASUS equalizer setup...which is the best for me. But I want to use a headphones without having to rely on an equalizer
Thanks for pointing out various ways to get what I want. I agree that the open headphones worked better for me, after having tried several closed headphones that amplify the bass, disrupting the overall spectrum of sounds. A good example of the extreme basshead was JVC's HA-RX900 headphones. WOW...avoiding that one!That's understandable but hear this, getting bass correctly equalized is MUCH easier than fiddling with the higher frequencies. As per above post, the K702 can have linear extension with just two simple negative filters that won't mess up with phases or have to deal with weird cup resonances.
If you're still set on getting a decent sounding headphone out of the box though, I'd stray you towards most of the open ear models and away from the closed ones like the K361. Getting a bass shelf or even linear bass is easier with a chamber for the waves to bounce back from, so most open-eared headphones "linearity" it's most often a inefficiency turned into feature.
In this context, I'd recommend you seek out the open-eared planars recommended in ASR from Hifiman, like the Sundara or the HE400se
View attachment 405924View attachment 405925
In an even more unorthodox approach, considering your ski-slope audiograms, and assuming you don't have tinnitus or anything inducing high frequency hyperacusis, you can try to "compensate" your hear loss with artificially bright and vocal centric headphones like the oval Hifimans such as the Anandas and Edition XS's (or even, on the cheaper side, the Moondrop Para):
View attachment 405927
In an ending note, Sai's squig.link has a plethora of headphones measured AND targets like the old Harmans (that lean into the brigther spectrum), Linear Harman, optimum hifi etc, and even Diffuse Field, which is the target your AKGs are based around (bright leaning and very vocal forward).
I started to measure these early on. It is a bit of pain and hard to characterize with odd shaped pads. I just didn't enjoy doing it so gave up.@amirm One measurement that I would absolutely love to see in more reviews (and one you used to include sometimes) is the physical size of headphone ear pads.
Understandable, but if you ever decide to start again it would be highly appreciated! Also IEM nozzle measurements, which should be much easier as they're nearly always round.I started to measure these early on. It is a bit of pain and hard to characterize with odd shaped pads. I just didn't enjoy doing it so gave up.![]()