What headphones would you like Amir to measure next?

[maverickronin]

I wish Etymotic would make a multi-armature IEM.

And in the Shure/Westone form factor so it's actually comfortable an easy to wear OTG. A 2-way ER5SR would be amazing.

 

[Dreyfus]

With the consistency of all the GRAS setups I would not expect much value in measuring the same headphones over and over again. The results will be more or less the same as long as the selection of the pinna and coupler stay the same. To my knowledge Oratory, Crinacle and Amir use the latest KB5000/KB5001 pinna with the first and second bend. The "high res" RA0401/RA0402 couplers used by Crinacle, Head-Fi and maybe even Amir (depends on the configuration GRAS provided) has less resonance above 10 kHz but should otherwise be identical to the older RA0045 as specified. Afaik Oratory uses both the old and new one.

In so far we already have a lot of data to look at and compare with each other. If Amir wants to offer any benefit he should measure cans which have not been captured in this ecosystem, yet.

My suggestions:
- SIVGA SV series
- DT 990 Black Special Edition
- cans which can be "fixed" with 3rd party pads

 

[stevenswall]

And in the Shure/Westone form factor so it's actually comfortable an easy to wear OTG. A 2-way ER5SR would be amazing.

I'd say go for the XR rather than the SR. Flat bass almost sounds rolled off. As far as comfort, I like the size of Etymotic earphones and wear them over the top of the ear. If they were larger though, yeah, I'd prefer more rounded, ergonomic shapes.

 

[bobbooo]

The "high res" RA0401/RA0402 couplers used by Crinacle, Head-Fi and maybe even Amir (depends on the configuration GRAS provided) has less resonance above 10 kHz but should otherwise be identical to the older RA0045 as specified. Afaik Oratory uses both the old and new one.

Do you have a source for that? I thought Oratory just uses the RA0045 coupler. From that GRAS pdf you linked, the difference between that and the hi-res coupler is actually bigger than I thought (for in-ear headphones at least):

That's a significant 6dB difference at 10kHz, with potentially audible-level deviation going down to around 6kHz. This may be an issue for things like determining closeness to or EQing to the Harman target, which was developed using the RA0045 coupler. As for the benefits of Amir's measurements, extra data on unit variance is always useful, as is other data not publicly available on previously measured headphones such as (excess) group delay to determine non-minimum phase regions, and accurate THD/IMD measurements etc.

 

[Robbo99999]

Do you have a source for that? I thought Oratory just uses the RA0045 coupler. From that GRAS pdf you linked, the difference between that and the hi-res coupler is actually bigger than I thought (for in-ear headphones at least):

View attachment 90362

That's a significant 6dB difference at 10kHz. This may be an issue for things like determining closeness to or EQing to the Harman target, which was developed using the RA0045 coupler. As for the benefits of Amir's measurements, extra data on unit variance is always useful, as is other data not publicly available on previously measured headphones such as (excess) group delay to determine non-minimum phase regions, and accurate THD/IMD measurements etc.

I agree, and to add to that would be interesting to see such a graph for an over ear headphone to see if there are big differences.

 

[Dreyfus]

The findings vary with distance, angle and seal. IEM measurements are very picky due to the closed tube resonances.
Over ears are less of an issue because they do not ask for 100% airtight conditions and allow much more volume in front of the coupler.
Technically both the old and new version are within IEC spec until 10 kHz. Anything above is mostly subject to placement, anyway. You shouldn't overanalyze a limited system.

See this post for Oratory's comment on the GRAS couplers:
https://www.reddit.com/r/oratory1990/comments/ftmmem
In addition, see p. 5 of this paper:
https://www.grasacoustics.com/files/783-High-Resolution-Ear-Simulator.pdf
It shows the varying coupler resonances with different ear canal lengths for a closed system.

 

[Cahudson42]

$80 SHP9500. Is it the HP equivalent of a B652 Air? Or a Neumi?

 

[Robbo99999]

Crinacle has measured the K702 by the way (comparable GRAS 43AG rig to Oratory's):

With the consistency of all the GRAS setups I would not expect much value in measuring the same headphones over and over again. The results will be more or less the same as long as the selection of the pinna and coupler stay the same. To my knowledge Oratory, Crinacle and Amir use the latest KB5000/KB5001 pinna with the first and second bend. The "high res" RA0401/RA0402 couplers used by Crinacle, Head-Fi and maybe even Amir (depends on the configuration GRAS provided) has less resonance above 10 kHz but should otherwise be identical to the older RA0045 as specified. Afaik Oratory uses both the old and new one.

In so far we already have a lot of data to look at and compare with each other. If Amir wants to offer any benefit he should measure cans which have not been captured in this ecosystem, yet.

My suggestions:
- SIVGA SV series
- DT 990 Black Special Edition
- cans which can be "fixed" with 3rd party pads

Just as a quick mention, I've just done an EQ to the Harman Curve based on Crinicle's measurement of the K702 and it sounds terrible....muddy bass and in fact muddiness throughout frequency range in terms of lack of clarity & definition, also removal of spatial/imaging cues. I think there's something up with the measurement or his particular GRAS setup is not compatible with the current Harman Curve 2018 that we all know (we were discussing this point), his setup might need a new Target Curve or there is something wrong with the measurement or in his "recording chain". Following is the EQ I did using Crinicle's measurement, but I don't suggest anyone try the EQ because it didn't sound good, but this is more for curiosity or discussion purposes:

Yep, I'd like to see Amir measure the K702, as long as his gear is compatible with the published Headphone Harman Curve, which I'm sure he has said it is in recent headphone reviews.

 

[crinacle]

Just as a quick mention, I've just done an EQ to the Harman Curve based on Crinicle's measurement of the K702 and it sounds terrible....muddy bass and in fact muddiness throughout frequency range in terms of lack of clarity & definition, also removal of spatial/imaging cues. I think there's something up with the measurement or his particular GRAS setup is not compatible with the current Harman Curve 2018 that we all know (we were discussing this point), his setup might need a new Target Curve or there is something wrong with the measurement or in his "recording chain".

Yep, I'd like to see Amir measure the K702, as long as his gear is compatible with the published Headphone Harman Curve, which I'm sure he has said it is in recent headphone reviews.

My rig is compatible with Harman AE/OE 2018. I believe Harman switched to the "Hi-Res" couplers for that target.

A few explanations for the reason why the EQ may not have worked well for your particular set of headphones:

• Unit variation. Always a thing, you never know how your set could differ from the one I measured unless both have been measured.
• Pad wear, more significant than you may think.
• Possible measurement error (unlikely since I got the same results effectively 6 times, 3 per channel)
• You may not like the Harman Target (if you're describing muddiness, maybe decrease the bass boost or set the shelf to rise at 150Hz rather than 200Hz or something)

 

[Robbo99999]

My rig is compatible with Harman AE/OE 2018. I believe Harman switched to the "Hi-Res" couplers for that target.

Thanks for your input there, and sorry I knocked your measurement & setup, but there is something wrong somewhere. I know from experience EQ'ing my 3 different headphones (NAD HP50, HD600, K702) to the Harman Curve that I am indeed a Headphone Harman Curve fan, but doing the same thing using your measurement has destroyed the experience. I think there is somekind of a problem with the K702 you measured or something related to your measurement - that is indeed if we are ruling out your rig not being compatible with Harman AE/OE 2018. (I haven't tried doing EQ's using any of your other measurements, eg for my Sennheiser HD600, so I can't rule it out or in if there was something specifically wrong or not with the K702 measurement or some other problem "in the chain").

 

[crinacle]

Thanks for your input there, and sorry I knocked your measurement & setup, but there is something wrong somewhere. I know from experience EQ'ing 3 different headphones to the Harman Curve that I am indeed a Headphone Harman Curve fan, but doing the same thing using your measurement has destroyed the experience. I think there is somekind of a problem with the K702 you measured or something related to your measurement - that is indeed if we are ruling out your rig not being compatible with Harman AE/OE 2018. (I haven't tried doing EQ's using any of your other measurements, eg for my Sennheiser HD600, so I can't rule it out or in if there was something specifically wrong or not with the K702 measurement or some other problem "in the chain").

Sorry, I've made some post-publish edits on my post. Do take a look.

 

[Jimbob54]

The OG HD800.

I think he has the 800s to test, I'm pretty sure the 800 will be objectively "worse" based on other measurements

 

[Jimbob54]

Thanks for your input there, and sorry I knocked your measurement & setup, but there is something wrong somewhere. I know from experience EQ'ing my 3 different headphones (NAD HP50, HD600, K702) to the Harman Curve that I am indeed a Headphone Harman Curve fan, but doing the same thing using your measurement has destroyed the experience. I think there is somekind of a problem with the K702 you measured or something related to your measurement - that is indeed if we are ruling out your rig not being compatible with Harman AE/OE 2018. (I haven't tried doing EQ's using any of your other measurements, eg for my Sennheiser HD600, so I can't rule it out or in if there was something specifically wrong or not with the K702 measurement or some other problem "in the chain").

Interesting by your logic the reason has to be an issue at Crinacle's end. Not sure how much water that conclusion holds on the facts available.

 

[Robbo99999]

Sorry, I've made some post-publish edits on my post. Do take a look.

Yes, your EDIT does cover some of the points I highlighted. Unit variation, corresponding to me thinking there could have been something wrong with the K702 you measured. I do like the Harman Headphone Curve in all it's glory, so it's not that point that you brought up. In terms of pad wear, that's certainly a thing, but I'm not sure how that would explain that my current EQ for the K702 is great (& accurate sounding in comparison to my room & Harman EQ'd speakers) vs the EQ based on your measurement - I used an Innerfidelity measurement with a Target Curve that has been "calibrated" by Jaakopasanen to make Innerfidelity measurements more accurate (because they are 'wrong' in some ways) - he compared Innerfidelity measurements of a number of headphones to Oratory measurements of the same headphones to see where the differences lie in order to create a "Calibrated" Harman Target Curve that irons out the differences.

Interesting by your logic the reason has to be an issue at Crinacle's end. Not sure how much water that conclusion holds on the facts available.

Well, the point is I have built up a knowledge / "expertise" / understanding of the topic of headphones / Harman / some of the science around it / and how to EQ to those targets, so when I see an outlier amidst an otherwise good experience of EQ'ing headphones to the Harman Target, then I have to conclude that there is something wrong with the measurement. The simple point is that Harman EQ's I have for my 3 headphones all sound great and are really quite accurate to my room EQ'd & Harman EQ'd JBL 308 speakers, with the exception being the one from the Crinicle measurement, so there is something wrong with that measurement whether it be unit variation (something wrong with the K702 he measured) or something wrong with the measurement/process/equipment in some way including whether or not the Harman Curve is applicable to his kit (although Crinicle says it's applicable, but I can't really judge on that).

EDIT: I used VirtuixCAD to trace Crinicles measurements, exported the average left driver measurement to a text file, exported the average right driver measurement to a text file, sanity checked some of the exported data points vs Crinicle graphs to make sure it was accurate data, then opened up the two frequency responses in REW (sanity checked the data again), averaged the left & right driver curve into one curve, EQ'd that curve to the Harman Target as seen in my posted screenshot. So I think I've done that side of it properly unless I've missed something, but I don't think so.

 

[Jimbob54]

Yes, your EDIT does cover some of the points I highlighted. Unit variation, corresponding to me thinking there could have been something wrong with the K702 you measured. I do like the Harman Headphone Curve in all it's glory, so it's not that point that you brought up. In terms of pad wear, that's certainly a thing, but I'm not sure how that would explain that my current EQ for the K702 is great (& accurate sounding in comparison to my room & Harman EQ'd speakers) vs the EQ based on your measurement - I used an Innerfidelity measurement with a Target Curve that has been "calibrated" by Jaakopasanen to make Innerfidelity measurements more accurate (because they are 'wrong' in some ways) - he compared Innerfidelity measurements of a number of headphones to Oratory measurements of the same headphones to see where the differences lie in order to create a "Calibrated" Harman Target Curve that irons out the differences.

Well, the point is I have built up a knowledge / "expertise" / understanding of the topic of headphones / Harman / some of the science around it / and how to EQ to those targets, so when I see an outlier amidst an otherwise good experience of EQ'ing headphones to the Harman Target, then I have to conclude that there is something wrong with the measurement. The simple point is that Harman EQ's I have for my 3 headphones all sound great and are really quite accurate to my room EQ'd & Harman EQ'd JBL 308 speakers, with the exception being the one from the Crinicle measurement, so there is something wrong with that measurement whether it be unit variation (something wrong with the K702 he measured) or something wrong with the measurement/process/equipment in some way including whether or not the Harman Curve is applicable to his kit (although Crinicle says it's applicable, but I can't really judge on that).

3 (three) headphones. I'm not saying you are wrong. I'm saying your logic doesn't hold water.

 

[Robbo99999]

3 (three) headphones. I'm not saying you are wrong. I'm saying your logic doesn't hold water.

lol, and I'm saying you don't really understand this topic based on my experience of your previous interactions on these types of topics in the past.

 

[Robbo99999]

P.S. Sorry for coming across as a bit arrogant in some of my recent posts in this thread. I suppose I'm quite certain in my points, but I apologise for some of the arrogance. Continue on with the "What Headphones would you like Amir to Measure" topic of this thread, sorry for my part in the tangents.

 

[Jimbob54]

lol, and I'm saying you don't really understand this topic based on my experience of your previous interactions on these types of topics in the past.

I'm happy in my limited understanding. Just lose some of the hubris. Telling a guy who has measured hundreds of headphones that either something was wrong with his set of headphones or his kit because YOUR set didn't sound right to you when you used the eq from his measurements is illogical. Perhaps your unit /seal /eq is the one not in line?

 

[Nango]

Yes that would be very interesting. I have my suspicions that all of those have similar performing drivers and the main differentiator of their frequency response is down to their differing pads (swapping pads between them and remeasuring would determine this). For example, here I've overlaid measurements of the Deva (orange curve) and the Sundara (thin green curve):

These are very similar frequency responses, and I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the Sundara and Deva pads are very similar, both using the same materials on the same surfaces. The only difference being the Deva pad’s slightly oval shaped inner ring that is not perforated like the Sundara’s, which could at least partially explain the minimal differences seen in the frequency responses above. If any of this could be confirmed it would give consumers a potentially cheaper way of achieving a desired frequency response - just buy the cheapest HifiMan planar (the HE4XX) and buy and swap in another model's pads separately to upgrade the sound (if it indeed turns out this would be an upgrade).

Similar if not equal findings here for freq response Sundara vs. Ananda vs. Susvara:
https://diyaudioheaven.wordpress.com/headphones/measurements/hifiman/sundara/

 

[Nango]

AKG K702, because it's cheap and has excellent soundstage & imaging and to such a degree that it is the only headphone that sounds like speakers rather than headphones to me, with EQ you can turn it into a real beast. I like it better than my HD600 and NAD HP50. K702 is also a popular headphone, so there should be some good interest in the review as well as a lot of value for the creation of EQ's from the measurement, as it is a headphone that has not been measured by Oratory. I think K702 is a real gem once EQ'd, and given my experience with a few headphones I think it would be very hard to beat....it's a poor man's HD800s in my opinion whilst probably starting off with a better stock frequency response than the HD800s is my guess from measurements I've seen of the HD800s.

How do you EQ the K702 pls?