All headphones can score a perfect 100/100 with EQ.It means a computer program generated 'a number' based on 'a measurement'.
Before is without EQ, after means with the suggested EQ applied to a perfectly seated headphone on a standard fixture.
Do note the Stealth (which is about the best one he ever measured) and complies to Harman standard 'only' scores 88/100 while the cheap HD560S is 94/100
It gets even better for HD560S owners... after EQ that one scores 100/100 and the Stealth, with EQ scores 95/100
The Expanse is even 'worse' (only 84/100) but with EQ can rival the HD560S (with EQ).
Go figure...
Yep, it shouldn't yet many seem to do this.It should not be seem as a stamp of quality in my opinion
Yet, the Stealth only reaches 95/100 with EQ ... somehow.All headphones can score a perfect 100/100 with EQ.
only with this particular EQ that oratory created. Not with EQ generally.Yet, the Stealth only reaches 95/100 with EQ ... somehow.
Fostex has 104/100
still looking for a list of all headphones for sorting
Theoretically 114 is possible based on the original preference rating formula. In the newer graphs however, Oratory is using the formula that is normalized to 100. Here is an example:Fostex has 104/100
still looking for a list of all headphones for sorting
Both Expanse and Stealth deviate from the target less then HD560S, but they score a bit lower because of their warmer than neutral tilt. That and probably the medium Q deviations of HD560S is not "sensed" by the formula. In any case, 88 and 94 are more or less the same thing given that the "sensitivity" of the scoring system is ±6.7 anyway - all of them are Excellent out of the box, Expanse and Stealth "more" Excellent if you like a warmer tuning and sub-bass, HD560S is "more" Excellent if you don't.It means a computer program generated 'a number' based on 'a measurement'.
Before is without EQ, after means with the suggested EQ applied to a perfectly seated headphone on a standard fixture.
Do note the Stealth (which is about the best one he ever measured) and complies to Harman standard 'only' scores 88/100 while the cheap HD560S is 94/100
It gets even better for HD560S owners... after EQ that one scores 100/100 and the Stealth, with EQ scores 95/100
The Expanse is even 'worse' (only 84/100) but with EQ can rival the HD560S (with EQ).
Go figure...
You can find it here:Cannot find the rating-list xx/100
Please, can anyone give me the link therefore?
And one should never buy these horrors regardless of score ..You can find it here:
AutoEq/results/RANKING.md at master · jaakkopasanen/AutoEq
Automatic headphone equalization from frequency responses - jaakkopasanen/AutoEqgithub.com
You should not take it too seriously, though.
A headphone with a score below 60 should be avoided without EQ unless you have a very specific taste, but you will not necessarily prefer a headphone with a score of 95 over a score of 90 or even 80.
Why not? It measures great.And one should never buy these horrors regardless of score ..
That might be a nod to HD800 or the electrical motor.Aside from +5dB 7kHz sharpness peak that is.
In fairness, leaving aside the ludicrous mouth visor nonsense the HP themselves arent too bad looking and in that particular mode measure well but are around $700/ £550.Why not? It measures great.
View attachment 340081
Mouth piece is optional I think. And it looks better on a blonde girlIn fairness, leaving aside the ludicrous mouth visor nonsense the HP themselves arent too bad looking and in that particular mode measure well but are around $700/ £550.
Ha, that's insane! What's the deal with the mouth guard thing, is that somehow a mic in there, but I don't understand why you'd want a design like that??And one should never buy these horrors regardless of score ..
Well that's a bit better! And yes I've seen worse measuring headphones!Mouth piece is optional I think. And it looks better on a blonde girl
View attachment 340084
Joking aside, I'd say not a bad first attempt from a company that manufacturers vacuum cleaners. We have seen headphone manufacturers do worse
There is also a "neutral" EQ preset with less bass boost and a more moderate lower/mid treble. Personally, I would prefer this for sure.Aside from +5dB 7kHz sharpness peak that is.