You shouldn't use headphones, unless you want translatability issues or want to give the mastering guy extra work.
Care to elaborate? I mean, you shouldn't mix on headphones at all, but a timbrally neutral sounding mixing environment to not add to the circle of confusion sounds like a decent premise, doesn't it? Or are you talking about tracking headphones?
You use a translator? Maybe that's why I got hung up on some of your phrasing, because in one reply you pretty much said that the 3khz spike would be inaudible to anyone. That's why I replied to it in the manner I did. Because it wasn't phrased as a personal experience, but rather as a generalization.
It's such a shame too because I love how they look and they are very comfortable with excellent build quality...
I also appreciate his reviews, but felt I should point out a few points/elements I didn't agree with. I didn't put a like on his review because I disagreed with too many of various aspects of the review, but I do appreciate the fact he did the review. I think it's normal for people to point out elements that they disagree with. (Just to add perspective from another user here.)
I can find a more suitable HRTF feature for Z1R to continue discussing this topic with you, but it seems pointless now. After all, I don't need to "please" anyone by defending the Z1R. Keeping the content simple will prevent me from getting involved in controversies and will also save my time. I have decided to do so. But still appreciate your kindness.
I'm just saying it's ok for people to point out things they didn't agree with. To be honest I'd rather see you continue to do the occasional review on here rather than stopping doing them. I just mentioned some things that I thought could be improved/changed in the review, and also my view on what I thought of the headphone based on your measurements.
I welcome discussions with different opinions, but you may not have noticed some unpleasant sarcastic comments that occurred earlier.
It's up to you how much subjective listening experience stuff you put in your review, it is interesting to hear someone's experience with it, but of course you have to accept that some people might think it's strange you like a headphone if it measures badly, but if you do actually like the headphone you should say you like it, just you can't expect people to agree with you all the time - I guess that's the nature of the beast (Amir once in a while gives a good rating to a poor measuring headphone, that Stax one he measured recently.)
Thank you. Yes, I know. I shared my STAX data in that comment section. I have to say that evaluating headphones is much more difficult than evaluating ADDA. The same arguments happen all over the world because everyone's ear structure is different.
My view on the measurements.
I will use the 'compensated' ones as these look more intuitive (speaker, amp, DAC alike)
What I see here is about +5dB of 150Hz hump. Sure it could be +4dB or so using another target but this is too much of a hump.
I kind of agree with Dan Clark that a small hump (max 2dB or so) will give sound a bit of 'thump' or 'power' to the sound. Too much is just 'bloat'.
It is true one can get used to this and call it 'full sounding' but with proper recordings it will sound too 'fat'.
On the 3kHz peak. I disagree that this is like an ear resonance. It is waaaaayyy too narrow to be just that.
It may not be as obvious as it may look. Reason being it is narrow and preceded and followed by a dip. The way the hearing works the peak thus will not register as too loud and it will 'mask' the dips before and after the peak a little.
That said... in the 3kHz range there are mostly harmonics present and these have their fundamentals much lower. When different notes are played the harmonics around 3kHz will vary 8dB while the fundamentals are pretty constant. This will make some instruments sound a bit weird. Not necessarily 'bright' (which one would expect from a wider peak).
Due to the measurement method and target we can assume that in general there is some sharpness (8-15kHz) as that seems elevated. Sadly, because of the measurement method, we cannot say much about the treble quality. Different methods or trained ears will be needed.
This clearly will not be my headphone, also not with EQ as one cannot undo what this headphone does.
I can see a LOT of people liking this headphone because: It is SONY (reputation, deserved or not), or because of its looks or price (so it must be good) or because of the U shaped response (bass + tizz) that some desperately want. It may even sound great on some older rock recordings that lack bass.
Yep, the consensus here is that measurements are everything. Interpreting them by just eyeballing it or matching it to some 'averaged' target from specific test fixtures is not as clear cut as it seems to be.
Having measured, auditioned and heard well over 100 headphones and having been in this audio-electronics business (professionally and hobby wise) for over 30 years I will say that measurements of headphones (and speakers in rooms) are indicative at best and NOT hard science like DACs and amps despite some people insisting it is an exact science and the only truth.
Just block the haters. When I first started blocking other posters, I was worried I would just fall into an echo chamber. I value debate and discussion.
