The Etymotic Target (R.I.P. Harman)

[restorer-john]

It is a game of "how close can it be matched to the reference curve?" that always ends up in a self re-inforcing loop of confirmation bias at the subjective listening part. Given how randomly distributed the headphone behaviours are, that's a source of endless infotainment.

The ultimate circle of confusion if you ask me.

 

[tecnogadget]

And in fact who ensures or determines that the live sound is really something good? I for example would not imagine even for 1 second to go to a Live Event outdoors with PA systems of very high decibels, without my hearing protectors EtyPlugs ER20-XS or even better my Flare Audio "Isolate Mini", I feel that in addition to protecting my hearing I hear more clearly and faithfully the event. If I take them off, besides piercing my ears, more than once I have heard distortions of all kinds, either from the equipment or from late reflections, and the effect is absolutely detrimental, and with the protectors (which in turn are an acoustic filter) the tonal balance is substantially more pleasing.

So there I have left another variable to consider and help lighting the torches haha.

 

[Sharur]

I'll give you this to ponder:
For the lower frequencies the body itself also 'inputs' additional info into the brain.
We thus not only hear with the ears but also the body (lowest frequencies)
Remove that input (headphones) while keeping the pressure at ear drum level the same and the headphone will 'sound' more bass shy.
This isn't something registered by HATS but is by the human body.

The Etymotic target differs because it bypasses all outer ear effects and partly the ear canal effects.
Thus to arrive at 'audibly correct' sound the target of the HATS used (or other fixture) needs to be different from targets designed for on and over ear headphones (that also are not interacting similarly) and speakers which also interact differently.

https://rinchoi.blogspot.com/2014/02/stax-ed-1-monitor-legacy-from-past.html
Stax made a hard EQ box for a headphone version of etymotic's target

 

[Sharur]

@tecnogadget my proposed test is very simple. You cannot bring back the perception of bass in the chest with a bass boost. This idea is fundamentally flawed so any statements about the "timbre" of Harman target being the same as flat speakers in a treated room is nonsense and utterly unprovable. Instead use pure sine waves.

1. Have anechoically flat speakers in a well treated room.
2. https://www.szynalski.com/tone-generator/ set the volume of tone generator to 10% of your listening volume.
3. Get a pair of headphones and do the same.
4. Blind EQ the headphones to the sound of the flat speakers in a treated room reproduced at the eardrum.
5. Determine the FR after adjustment and compare to target curves.

 

[Jimbob54]

Indeed. When it comes to headphones reviews (and speakers to a lesser extent, because there are other parameters), the site feels like "tone matching review". It is a game of "how close can it be matched to the reference curve?" that always ends up in a self re-inforcing loop of confirmation bias at the subjective listening part. Given how randomly distributed the headphone behaviours are, that's a source of endless infotainment.
AFAIC, I can enjoy both Pablo Casals and Tiesto, in a different way, with wildly different EQs.

Agree, but there is a danger here in assuming all dodgy behaviours /FR in headphones are the intentional result of some artistic endeavour on the part of the designer /mfr. That's certainly what some of them would have us believe (looking at Abyss and others). Ultimately I think folks should listen to hp stock, listen to a known eq and probably adjust one towards the other to taste. Not a fan of folks saying "this headphone will sound like crap because of the FR chart, look at how wiggly it is"

 

[solderdude]

Determine the FR after adjustment

And that is the difficult part. Determined how, on which equipment under which circumstances at which SPL and using which type of correction for the measurement error. How would the used measurement gear relate to your hearing ?

Headphone measurement isn't an exact science when it come to relating to perceived sound.
It can be in relation to a specific standard.
The question then is which standard to pick and the reasoning behind it or plot different standards (more work).

As it is now the Harman curve makes the most sense when one wants to enjoy music but that is merely a guideline and nothing else.

The question is how different are the compensated measurements including targets when compared to perceived sound signatures when both are EQ'ed to the same target, the IEM's are properly inserted and headphones properly seated.

Chances are the end result is closely the same (except for expected bass response differences due to different goals).

The correction + target curves may lead to similar tonal balance and need to be very different because of the used measurement method.

 

[restorer-john]

Agree, but there is a danger here in assuming all dodgy behaviours /FR in headphones are the intentional result of some artistic endeavour on the part of the designer /mfr. That's certainly what some of them would have us believe (looking at Abyss and others).

This is a good point for sure, like they "designed" and "intended" certain FR aberrations when it was totally the opposite.

 

[Sharur]

And that is the difficult part. Determined how, on which equipment under which circumstances at which SPL and using which type of correction for the measurement error. How would the used measurement gear relate to your hearing ?

Any anechoically flat full range stereo loudspeakers down to 30 Hz and a pair of headphones randomly EQ'd to crap. SPL can be determined just by whats comfortable for now because we don't know if someone finds preferred SPL on speakers and headphones to be the same.

 

[Thomas_A]

@tecnogadget my proposed test is very simple. You cannot bring back the perception of bass in the chest with a bass boost. This idea is fundamentally flawed so any statements about the "timbre" of Harman target being the same as flat speakers in a treated room is nonsense and utterly unprovable. Instead use pure sine waves.

1. Have anechoically flat speakers in a well treated room.
2. https://www.szynalski.com/tone-generator/ set the volume of tone generator to 10% of your listening volume.
3. Get a pair of headphones and do the same.
4. Blind EQ the headphones to the sound of the flat speakers in a treated room reproduced at the eardrum.
5. Determine the FR after adjustment and compare to target curves.

It has already been done. Steady-state tones will not be flat in a well-treated room using "flat" speakers.

Regarding the tactile sensing adding perceived bass, you are wrong.

https://mvoid-group.com/good-vibrations-phenomenon-of-structure-borne-sound/

 

[Sharur]

Regarding the tactile sensing adding perceived bass, you are wrong.

Can you feel bass in your chest using Harman target headphones? Simple Yes or No.

 

[restorer-john]

As it is now the Harman curve makes the most sense when one wants to enjoy music but that is merely a guideline and nothing else.

Most sense? To exactly which particular part of the population? An arbitrary, plucked out the air, ficticious group of individuals from exactly how many decades ago? They gave them a bass and treble control- and that's it? Incredible. Tell me, I misread the entire thing.

It's a BS result and the so-called "preference curve", derived from a limited set of individuals, limited controls and variations, along with constrained controllable variables and, at the end of it all, driven by corporate direction, desire for profit, is just a self serving mess.

Until ASR and all its denizens stop mindlessly salivating at the high altar of Harman, Toole, et al. and start actually independently thinking, questioning and testing for themselves, this fiasco of misinformation and corporate brainwashing will continue.

Music live does not remotely sound like the "Harman Curve". Not even close. It's a horrible, bass heavy, treble rich, super bright equivalent of the smiley curve on a 1/3 octave graphic EQ from the 1980s...

 

[Thomas_A]

Can you feel bass in your chest using Harman target headphones? Simple Yes or No.

No. What is known is that when you have vibrations, you will decrease the level of the bass presented. Without the tactile vibrations, you will increase SPL in the bass.

 

[Sharur]

Agree, but there is a danger here in assuming all dodgy behaviours /FR in headphones are the intentional result of some artistic endeavour on the part of the designer /mfr. That's certainly what some of them would have us believe (looking at Abyss and others). Ultimately I think folks should listen to hp stock, listen to a known eq and probably adjust one towards the other to taste. Not a fan of folks saying "this headphone will sound like crap because of the FR chart, look at how wiggly it is"

imo a headphone is broken if it needs EQ to sound good.

 

[Sharur]

No. What is known is that when you have vibrations, you will decrease the level of the bass presented. Without the tactile vibrations, you will increase SPL in the bass.

If Harman target accurately replicates the perception of anechoically flat speakers in a treated room, why have 82% of professional mixing engineers voted for flat bass? Harman target should be the dream of any mixing engineer, no? https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...onal-mixing-engineers-only.26450/#post-904692
Harman advocates instead make excuses when the target leads to thin sounding mixes saying that headphones should not be used for mixing. A bit contradictory, no?

 

[Thomas_A]

If Harman target accurately replicates the perception of anechoically flat speakers in a treated room, why have 82% of professional mixing engineers voted for flat bass? Harman target should be the dream of any mixing engineer, no? https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...onal-mixing-engineers-only.26450/#post-904692

Do you think the control room is anechoic to DC?

 

[Sharur]

Do you thing the control room is anechoic to DC?

What does DC mean? Flat on-axis? If so, no.

 

[Thomas_A]

What does DC mean? Flat on-axis? If so, no.

DC=0 Hz.

So if not, why should they aim for headphones that sound tonally different than the control room?

 

[tecnogadget]

Can you feel bass in your chest using Harman target headphones? Simple Yes or No.

I wouldn’t consider the chest bass feeling as “timbre or tone”. Whatever your ears pick up down to 20Hz will constitute information of such timbre-tonal balance, after that what you feel in your chest because of pressurization and subsonic content from subwoofer or buttkicker, call it an “extra” feature.

imo a headphone is broken if it needs EQ to sound good.

Thats quite variable. Because it depends of the definition every individual has for “to sound good”. For some people that means literally it just sounds good mesning it won’t hurt your ears, and somebody else could say “to sounds good” for the most accurate and precise sound reproduction available.

 

[Jimbob54]

imo a headphone is broken if it needs EQ to sound good.

Ah, well, there again lies a problem. If some folks like (for example) the DT990 stock and others find it a horrid mess , who decides it is broken? Which is why some agreed benchmark for "decent" is needed. Like it or not, Harman is as good as anyone has got to that. Buyer beware anything that deviates significantly from that as there is a chance you will not like it. This is why , as he has explained many times, @amirm shows that target and partly issues recommendations on that basis.

 

[restorer-john]

Like it or not, Harman is as good as anyone has got to that.

According to exactly who? That's the problem.