Objective headphone rankings

[platimn]

Okay, in the visual science field it is very easy to evaluate the objective output of display technologies, yet one can brook opinions about how such devices will present to the human eye, a subjective instrument, and, furthermore, the human mind. In audio "science" it doesn't seem so simple. Frankly most opinions and reviews seem to be plagued with FUD, purchase bias, and lack of replication.

That being said, when one is presented with a volume of data as opposed to various remarks, isn't it scientific to give more credence to data over just a collection of thoughts and feelings?

Please explain to me why the PSB M4U 8 isn't objectively the best headphone in the world according to the ranking given here:
https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq/blob/master/results/RANKING.md#over-ear-headphones

 

[solderdude]

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...t-ratings-suck-an-analysis.24743/#post-837635

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...sed-on-harman-target-curve.14200/#post-434051

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/headphone-measurements.16940/#post-546593

 

[platimn]

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...t-ratings-suck-an-analysis.24743/#post-837635

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...sed-on-harman-target-curve.14200/#post-434051

Thanks. I've made a few searches through the forum before posting and had come across your exact words prior. They don't answer the question however... Most people have not heard the PSB M4U 8, most people who have heard such luminaries as the HD 800, etc. have bought the product at significant cost with whatever money they scrounged up... according to the reviews and opinions of others who have done the same and certain authorities who were granted the "privilege" of reviewing the product... The question remains, is the PSB M4U 8 not objectively a better headphone? Why dismiss the data... for nothing?

 

[solderdude]

FR is important but there are also other aspects such as distortion, cone break-up, resonances, compression at higher SPL.
FR irregularities can be solved with EQ (of course there is EQ and EQ)

The rankings are based on specific measurements and targets and generated numbers as well as slopes etc.
Needless to say that a HP with rating of 40 will most likely not sound as good as one of 80 or 90.
a HP with a rating of 97 does not necessarily sound better than the one rated at 95 for instance.
The rating system is not that exact.

When numbers are close together it is more moot than hard science.

 

[platimn]

Very nice! But then the data still suggests that these headphones in the 90-100 range must sound better to at least a plurality of listeners than headphones in the 80-90 range, right? e.g. the PSB M4U 8, Sennheiser PC38X, HD 600 vs. the Orpheus 2, HD 800S, and Beats Pro. Most people would throw the preference curve out with the bathwater given such a comparison. But is it really wrong? So is the curve garbage? Or do we say they measured wrong - obviously?

 

[buz]

With a eq'ed HD800s on my head and a HD600 (needs new pads tho) next to me: FR is not everything. While I do not get this music in front of my feeling with the HD800s that some gush over, it definitely feels more spacious.

Same story with IEM, I love both my Blessing 2 and my WF-1000xm3 (they get more use than the HD800s for sure) but they happen in my head.

 

[Zim]

Very nice! But then the data still suggests that these headphones in the 90-100 range must sound better to at least a plurality of listeners than headphones in the 80-90 range, right? e.g. the PSB M4U 8, Sennheiser PC38X, HD 600 vs. the Orpheus 2, HD 800S, and Beats Pro. Most people would throw the preference curve out with the bathwater given such a comparison. But is it really wrong? So is the curve garbage? Or do we say they measured wrong - obviously?

The data/ranking on the list indicates what’s better at achieving the Harman curve, but not what headphones sound better than the other. Two different things.

The curve isn’t garbage but a preference at the end of the day. If you like the Harman curve, great. That list works for you. If not, that list is irrelevant.

As solderdude said, there are other aspects to be considered and can be read as data.

 

[cany89]

@platimn Senn. HD600 (which I have) is probably one of the closest to the Harman curve. There are many others that are close to that curve. But FR is just one side of the story.

Let's say you get HD800 - by this comparison, it's inferior btw - and EQ it to Harman curve. Now when you listen to them both you will probably throw away your HD600 and never look back. More detail, wider soundstage, it's absolutely a solid upgrade over HD600. There are more tech guys here that can tell exactly what's really important and what's not. With my limited info, all I can say is overall SQ is not equal to FR. Even your personal preferences are also important. I do like the Harman curve but with 1-2 dB less bass for example...

 

[solderdude]

Senn. HD600 (which I have) is probably one of the closest to the Harman curve.

Only true between 100Hz and 8kHz on a standard test fixture. Its why it gets a high rating. Few and small wiggles in that part of the FR range.
At 30Hz it is 10dB 'off'.

I do like the Harman curve but with 1-2 dB less bass for example...

Even with 1-2dB less subbass boost the HD600 is still 8dB below the Harman Curve.

The low bass is where Harman curve is the most deviant from other targets.

But yes, the HD600 is a good headphone, just a bit lean on the low bass.

 

[cany89]

Only true between 100Hz and 8kHz on a standard test fixture. Its why it gets a high rating. Few and small wiggles in that part of the FR range.
At 30Hz it is 10dB 'off'.


Even with 1-2dB less subbass boost the HD600 is still 8dB below the Harman Curve.

The low bass is where Harman curve is the most deviant from other targets.

But yes, the HD600 is a good headphone, just a bit lean on the low bass.

True. I can’t even compare HD600 to LCD-2 when it comes to bass region. And when I EQ both to appr. same target on bass region, they still sound very different. (Planar vs dynamic…)

 

[ziddy76]

No one has mentioned this headphone definitely has some sort of DSP? I'm guessing that's why it creates a pretty FR graph that Sean Olive is orgasming over.

But I do like Solderdude's response.

TBH I dunno why 100% of all AKG and JBL new headphones don't have a built in DSP to conform to this FR curve to perfection. Why even bother with headphone design? Be like Apple, make the cheapest pretty looking headphone possible and just use a DSP to tune it whatever you think than average sample of 250 people would like.

????

 

[Jimbob54]

Okay, in the visual science field it is very easy to evaluate the objective output of display technologies, yet one can brook opinions about how such devices will present to the human eye, a subjective instrument, and, furthermore, the human mind. In audio "science" it doesn't seem so simple. Frankly most opinions and reviews seem to be plagued with FUD, purchase bias, and lack of replication.

That being said, when one is presented with a volume of data as opposed to various remarks, isn't it scientific to give more credence to data over just a collection of thoughts and feelings?

Please explain to me why the PSB M4U 8 isn't objectively the best headphone in the world according to the ranking given here:
https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq/blob/master/results/RANKING.md#over-ear-headphones

Im wary of preference scores. Check out Oratory's Samsung Galaxy Buds+ results, why does it score only 77 before EQ given the measured FR ? But also, I own them and they sound terrible without EQ.

Also , the PSB with or without ANC on?

 

[jae]

Im wary of preference scores. Check out Oratory's Samsung Galaxy Buds+ results, why does it score only 77 before EQ given the measured FR ? But also, I own them and they sound terrible without EQ.

Also , the PSB with or without ANC on?

Are you sure you are not confusing the buds results with the buds plus? The adherence score implements band-specific weightings. Larger deviations in "important" regions that are more contributory to sound preference will result in a greater loss of points.

 

[Jimbob54]

Are you sure you are not confusing the buds results with the buds plus? The adherence score implements band-specific weightings. Larger deviations in "important" regions that are more contributory to sound preference will result in a greater loss of points.

Nope https://www.dropbox.com/s/zdeudwzb955jrqw/Samsung SM-R175 Galaxy Buds+.pdf?dl=0

Pretty much perfect until the 10k drop which I think is par for the course

 

[jae]

Nope https://www.dropbox.com/s/zdeudwzb955jrqw/Samsung SM-R175 Galaxy Buds+.pdf?dl=0

Pretty much perfect until the 10k drop which I think is par for the course

Hmmm

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/j...Galaxy Buds Plus/Samsung Galaxy Buds Plus.png

Different revision? Different product?

 

[Jimbob54]

Hmmm

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/j...Galaxy Buds Plus/Samsung Galaxy Buds Plus.png

Different revision? Different product?

Saw that too and wondered the same. Note that auto eq chart is from rtings measurements when oratory is usually preferred.

My point being, let's not blindly look at preference ratings or FR charts without a sense check. The oratory pdf does not make sense.

 

[platimn]

BTW I got the PSB M4U 8 and it is excellent. Idk about the best in the world but it is up there with the HD 600 (well-amped) in the DSP modes (bluetooth, powered). In fact the bass is much better.

 

[KeithPhantom]

I am going to give you my opinion. I have both the LCD-X and the HD 800S, both EQd to the same target (Harman). They have a similar 'tonality', but do not sound the same, and this is most obvious in the bass frequencies. Even though both are EQd to follow the same target, the LCD-X has more perceptual bass for some reason, and to get the same result from the HD 800S I need to further boost beyond what the EQ setting tells me. The LCD-X scores something like 94/100 in preference ranking while the HD 800S scores 100/100 (both after EQ), but I am not listening rap or hip-hop on my HD 800S, because even though they do bass well, it does not have the same 'impact' as the LCD-X, even after EQ. Both the uncanny separation of the HD 800S and how excellent it is with other genres makes me keep it with the LCD-X taking care of the more bassy genres.