Status Audio CB-1 Headphone Review

[amirm]

This is a review, listening tests, EQ and detailed measurements of the Status Audio CB-1 headphone. It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $79.

For its price, this is an attractive look. Alas, the cups are small cutting off the top of my ear. They also wear quite hot. Otherwise they are light and comfortable to wear.

The small cups made measurements extremely challenging. Smallest variations would cause huge change in channel matching and bass output. So if you were glasses and or can't get a good seal, this is not a headphone for you.

Status Audio CB-1 Measurements
Per above, this is the best I could get with the target of matching levels as opposed to most bass output (although it is fairly optimized for that as well):

Compliance is not great with our target and there are a lot of kinks in the response indicating resonances. Correcting for them at micro level will be impossible but one can do better with coarser filters using the variations from our target:

Distortion is kind of manageable at 94 dBSPL sans the resonances that exist in lower treble:

Group delay shows the same kinks we saw in frequency response:

Impedance is flat and low:

Combined with high sensitivity the CB-1 should be an easy headphone to drive:

Status Audio CB-1 Listening Tests and EQ
At first blush, the sound was not offensive but lacked what I call the "hi-fi factor." So I started to add a few filters from the frequency response measurements:

The difference was dramatic especially after you listened to the EQed version. Going back felt like you had a 3-way speaker that had its woofer and tweeter turned off! I was impressed by its handling of deep bass with no hint of distortion. While response was very good, I continue to feel like the highs were a bit grungy. Mind you, post EQ they were more open and detail was increased but I just couldn't bring myself to praise highs. This may be due to me being biased by distortion measurements however.

Conclusions
Measurements show a flawed headphone implementation. It is not clear what target they were going after (they claim reference grade for studio use). And what is there has a lot of glitches. This is also reflected in distortions where our hearing is more sensitive. As usual though, equalization performs miracles taking a bland headphone experience to very high levels of fidelity and enjoyment. Assuming the comfort is OK with you, then the EQed version does the job and pretty well.

I can't recommend the Status Audio CB-1 due to rough and non-compliant response out of the box. While EQ helps a ton, it doesn't do anything for me as far as comfort so can't recommend it even then.

---------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

 

[IAmAlwaysSerious]

Do you actually hear that peak around 5.7khz if you run a sweep with these headphones on your ears?

 

[nerdemoji]

Its very...Okay, I guess

 

[amirm]

Do you actually hear that peak around 5.7khz if you run a sweep with these headphones on your ears?

What do you mean hear it? Of course it is audible. If you mean if its level is right, a listening test like this is not valid as our hearing sensitivity is not linear.

 

[GWolfman]

While EQ helps a ton, it doesn't do anything for me as far as comfort so can't recommend it even then.

Even the best of headphones would hardly get used if they didn’t feel comfortable. Unfortunately we already know people will listen to rusty tin cans (i.e., sound bad) as long as they feel nice, just look at Amzn reviews.

 

[shuppatsu]

I bought these for $30 direct from Status during a promotion on recommendation from a guy I follow on Twitter. Oops. The sound quality is “ok,” but nothing to write home about. The build quality is execrable. There isn’t a joint on the thing that doesn’t creak. They creak every time you move your head.

They haven’t broken, and I haven’t been very careful with them. If they didn’t creak, I’d be happier. But despite not having much clamp force, they are pretty uncomfortable as well. They don’t play nice with my glasses, and the pads are too thin to accommodate my ears.

I still use them with my PS4. Playing games I’m much less likely to notice the creaking. They’re ok for that purpose, but they do not bring me joy, and they never did.

 

[Maiky76]

This is a review, listening tests, EQ and detailed measurements of the Status Audio CB-1 headphone. It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $79.
View attachment 301055
For its price, this is an attractive look. Alas, the cups are small cutting off the top of my ear. They also wear quite hot. Otherwise they are light and comfortable to wear.

The small cups made measurements extremely challenging. Smallest variations would cause huge change in channel matching and bass output. So if you were glasses and or can't get a good seal, this is not a headphone for you.

Status Audio CB-1 Measurements
Per above, this is the best I could get with the target of matching levels as opposed to most bass output (although it is fairly optimized for that as well):
View attachment 301056

Compliance is not great with our target and there are a lot of kinks in the response indicating resonances. Correcting for them at micro level will be impossible but one can do better with coarser filters using the variations from our target:

View attachment 301057

Distortion is kind of manageable at 94 dBSPL sans the resonances that exist in lower treble:
View attachment 301058

Group delay shows the same kinks we saw in frequency response:
View attachment 301059

Impedance is flat and low:
View attachment 301060
Combined with high sensitivity the CB-1 should be an easy headphone to drive:
View attachment 301062

Status Audio CB-1 Listening Tests and EQ
At first blush, the sound was not offensive but lacked what I call the "hi-fi factor." So I started to add a few filters from the frequency response measurements:

View attachment 301064

The difference was dramatic especially after you listened to the EQed version. Going back felt like you had a 3-way speaker that had its woofer and tweeter turned off! I was impressed by its handling of deep bass with no hint of distortion. While response was very good, I continue to feel like the highs were a bit grungy. Mind you, post EQ they were more open and detail was increased but I just couldn't bring myself to praise highs. This may be due to me being biased by distortion measurements however.

Conclusions
Measurements show a flawed headphone implementation. It is not clear what target they were going after (they claim reference grade for studio use). And what is there has a lot of glitches. This is also reflected in distortions where our hearing is more sensitive. As usual though, equalization performs miracles taking a bland headphone experience to very high levels of fidelity and enjoyment. Assuming the comfort is OK with you, then the EQed version does the job and pretty well.

I can't recommend the Status Audio CB-1 due to rough and non-compliant response out of the box. While EQ helps a ton, it doesn't do anything for me as far as comfort so can't recommend it even then.

---------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

Here are some thoughts about the EQ.


Notes about the EQ design:

• The average L/R is used to calculate the score.
• The resolution is 12 points per octave interpolated from the raw data (provided by @amirm)
• A Genetic Algorithm is used to optimize the EQ.
• The EQ Score is designed to MAXIMIZE the Score WHILE fitting the Harman target curve (and other constrains) with a fixed complexity.
  This will avoid weird results if one only optimizes for the Score.
  It will probably flatten the Error regression doing so, the tonal balance should be therefore more neutral.
• The EQs are starting point and may require tuning (certainly at LF and maybe at HF).
• The range around and above 10kHz is usually not EQed unless smooth enough to do so.
• I am using PEQ (PK) as from my experience the definition is more consistent across different DSP/platform implementations than shelves.
• With some HP/amp combo, the boosts and preamp gain (loss of Dynamic range) need to be carefully considered to avoid issues with, amongst other things, too low a Max SPL or damaging your device. You have beed warned.
• Not all units of the same product are made equal. The EQ is based on the measurements of a single unit. YMMV with regards to the very unit you are trying this EQ on.
• I sometimes use variations of the Harman curve for some reasons. See rational here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...pro-review-headphone.28244/page-5#post-989169
• https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...pro-review-headphone.28244/page-6#post-992119
• NOTE: the score then calculated is not comparable to the scores derived from the default Harman target curve if not otherwise noted.

OK L/R match.

I have generated one EQ, the APO config file is attached.

Score no EQ: 60.5
Score Amirm: 64.8
Score with EQ: 97.2

Status Audio CB1 APO Score Full EQ Flat@HF 96000Hz
July242023-143711

Preamp: -9 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 20.38 Hz Gain 9.00 dB Q 1.00
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 181.65 Hz Gain -4.48 dB Q 0.93
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 395.32 Hz Gain 1.71 dB Q 1.67
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 1145.52 Hz Gain -5.87 dB Q 1.12
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 2910.15 Hz Gain 3.11 dB Q 1.07
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 5651.92 Hz Gain -6.85 dB Q 5.89
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 8703.99 Hz Gain 5.00 dB Q 1.38

 

[MiqaFox]

These were my main headphones for many years (music and gaming). Used for multiple hours per day. I can't see that I understand the comfort complaints, but I guess everybody's head is different.

Build is nothing amazing but fairly durable IME. What I will note is that both headband and pads are in faux leather, which eventually wear down. By the end I started noticing crackling sounds, though I'm not certain that they were the cause.

Sounds decent, but better with EQ, as most headphones do.

 

[IAmAlwaysSerious]

If you mean if its level is right, a listening test like this is not valid as our hearing sensitivity is not linear.

I suppose I'm just worried that it might not be audible, and then it might not be worth EQ'ing.

If it is audible, then we should definitely EQ that part.

 

[IAtaman]

Check this out, looks like little Russian Dolls of Distortion®

 

[Robbo99999]

The biggest problem with this headphone is probably the small cups that Amir couldn't fit his ears inside, so that's a no-go for a start if you want this headphone - you'd have to measure your ears and compare that with the internal diameter of the ear cups to see if they fit (so you'd have to find measurements of the internal cup size first). The frequency response is pretty uninspiring, but relatively fixable with EQ by the looks of it, just about ok, but yeah check your ears can fit into the cups first!

 

[N0t@hc]

Looks like a renamed version of my old sony mdr-v700dj...

 

[solderdude]

Measured one too:

Of course my measurement is not to Harman target so bass looks different but should differ only 2 or 3dB at 30Hz.
I suspect some small seal leakage was at play here.
Below the seal plot.

 

[amirm]

Yeh, I could get more bass out of one cup but then other would go way lower. So I opted for highest bass when the two matched. It was very hard.

 

[Nathan Raymond]

Looks like a renamed version of my old sony mdr-v700dj...

View attachment 301227

The aesthetics were cloned by Somic, yes. Status Audio's OEM for the CB-1 is Somic, specifically the Somic V1:

https://www.somic-elec.com/somic-v1...-headset-original-headset-from-china_p40.html