What would be an objectivist bang for your buck?

[Samudra1825]

If you care only for frequency response and audible distortion (and perhaps good seal), what can get you (with eq) to harman target with not much distortion for cheap? Here I don't have audio store to audition audio gear to so I'm just blind buying my way thru lmao and I want to test the audiophile claim of technicality and whatnot to see if it actually exist for me. Obviously I can't blind test them since they weight different, clamp different, pad material different but if sighted test can satisfy me than I'll take it, it's a hobby afterall. Also what other metric in your opinion relates to sound quality?

 

[Jimbob54]

If you care only for frequency response and audible distortion (and perhaps good seal), what can get you (with eq) to harman target with not much distortion for cheap? Here I don't have audio store to audition audio gear to so I'm just blind buying my way thru lmao and I want to test the audiophile claim of technicality and whatnot to see if it actually exist for me. Obviously I can't blind test them since they weight different, clamp different, pad material different but if sighted test can satisfy me than I'll take it, it's a hobby afterall. Also what other metric in your opinion relates to sound quality?

Something from the Hifiman 400 range should get you pretty much there but beware of their notorious qc issues.

 

[Raindog123]

Something from the Hifiman 400 range should get you pretty much there but beware of their notorious qc issues.

Do they still have QC issues or is it a thing of the past? (I have a 400i 2020 for over a year and it goes strong. Are there many recent complaints?)

 

[Jimbob54]

Do they still have it or is it a thing of the past? (I have a 400i 2020 for over a year and it goes strong. Are there many recent complaints?)

See the xs /ananda threads. Still a thing. One person had 3 pairs of 6se direct from them none of which were channel matched worth a damn.

 

[MayaTlab]

If you care only for frequency response and audible distortion (and perhaps good seal), what can get you (with eq) to harman target with not much distortion for cheap?

That is an excellent question for which I don't think there is a straightforward answer. I have yet to be quite certain what the Harman target is supposed to sound like exactly, although I think I can approximate it reasonably well.

You're faced with two main problems I think :
- sample variation
- headphones "coupling" with your own head in a way that inconsistently deviates from how they'd measure on an ear simulator. Leakage is the most well documented issue but I don't think it is the only one.

Something I found interesting to alleviate these concerns is to average how several headphones measure on my own head with in-ear mics, either a collection of headphones EQed to the Harman target according to third party presets (performed with different samples), or designed to hit the Harman target from the get go (a few of Harman's own headphones for example). But even then there are some divergences between various averages. Quite importantly : not a single pair of headphones I've ever measured with in-ear mics on my head comes sufficiently close to these averages, even after EQ to the target according to third party presets, that I'd consider the residual difference inaudible.

For the most part, the Harman target was tested against alternative curves on fairly large, fully open dynamic headphones (HD 518, HD800, a modded K712), with one exception I believe (LCD-2 in an early article). I have no experience with any of these except the HD800, but that was a long time ago. For various reasons it's this kind of headphones I'd be looking into first and foremost to try to get a sense of what the Harman target is meant to sound like.

 

[staticV3]

The Sony MH755, EQed to my own target, is my personal bang for the buck king.
Frequency response out of the box is poor, but distortion is low, comfort and fitment is great for me, and they cost like $5 when I bought them.
Nowadays they're harder to get and you have to watch out for fakes.
I genuinely prefer them over my EQed HD600.


Here's my target vs Harman IE2019v2. It's Crinacle's IEF Neutral plus the Monarch MKII's bass response. Sounds much more "correct" to my ears.

 

[Samudra1825]

thanks for the responses!

That is an excellent question for which I don't think there is a straightforward answer. I have yet to be quite certain what the Harman target is supposed to sound like exactly, although I think I can approximate it reasonably well.

You're faced with two main problems I think :
- sample variation
- headphones "coupling" with your own head in a way that inconsistently deviates from how they'd measure on an ear simulator. Leakage is the most well documented issue but I don't think it is the only one.

Something I found interesting to alleviate these concerns is to average how several headphones measure on my own head with in-ear mics, either a collection of headphones EQed to the Harman target according to third party presets (performed with different samples), or designed to hit the Harman target from the get go (a few of Harman's own headphones for example). But even then there are some divergences between various averages. Quite importantly : not a single pair of headphones I've ever measured with in-ear mics on my head comes sufficiently close to these averages, even after EQ to the target according to third party presets, that I'd consider the residual difference inaudible.

For the most part, the Harman target was tested against alternative curves on fairly large, fully open dynamic headphones (HD 518, HD800, a modded K712), with one exception I believe (LCD-2 in an early article). I have no experience with any of these except the HD800, but that was a long time ago. For various reasons it's this kind of headphones I'd be looking into first and foremost to try to get a sense of what the Harman target is meant to sound like.

interesting, and yeah I'm eyeing for the k371 since that's supposedly tuned to harman target by harman. I wish I have the money to try HD800 tho

The Sony MH755, EQed to my own target, is my personal bang for the buck king.
Frequency response out of the box is poor, but distortion is low, comfort and fitment is great for me, and they cost like $5 when I bought them.
Nowadays they're harder to get and you have to watch out for fakes.
I genuinely prefer them over my EQed HD600.
View attachment 210615 View attachment 210617 View attachment 210618

Here's my target vs Harman IE2019v2. It's Crinacle's IEF Neutral plus the Monarch MKII's bass response. Sounds much more "correct" to my ears.
View attachment 210619

My ears feel uncomfortable using IEMs for a long time so I'm looking for headphones specifically. Also interesting that I also feel like harman IE2019v2 sounds too shouty to my ears as well just like crin and you!

 

[Ilkless]

Dan Clark Audio. The rare boutique brand with the full package of build quality, materials, attention to detail, ergonomics, comfort and technical performance. Some have a more elevated bass like the Aeon 2 Noire but if you wear glasses, the loss of seal actually helps to moderate the boost. So it always sounds deep without being overwhelming.

 

[MayaTlab]

interesting, and yeah I'm eyeing for the k371 since that's supposedly tuned to harman target by harman. I wish I have the money to try HD800 tho

That is a really bad idea if you want to be certain that what you'll experience is the Harman target. That design is far too sensitive to coupling issues, and it isn't just a question of leakage.

An illustration of the issue of knowing what the Harman target is supposed to sound like : https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...-noise-cancelling-headphone.25609/post-995729

It's fairly easy to know with headphones like the AirPods Max how the Harman target is supposed to sound like (and how it's supposed measure like with various in-ear mics, on my own head) below 800Hz. It's a lot harder past that frequency.

If I average several headphones, either after EQing them to the Harman target according to third party presets, or by using Harman's own headphones, how should I go exactly ? Because, at least with the rather small sample size that I can muster up, there isn't a superb agreement past 1kHz or so (and at lower frequencies, but that's just because Harman's passive headphones behave poorly in terms of leakage).

Using blocked ear canal entrance microphones (which may introduce inaccuracies above 1.5kHz or so, but less so when dealing with averages of several headphones), here's what happens when I average the following headphones, after averaging their R and L channels, with the number of samples used :
A) EQed to Harman target according to Oratory's presets : HD560S x1 + HD58X x1 + HD650 x1 + HE400SE x1 + K371 x1 + Hi-X65 x2 + AirPods Max x1
B) EQed to Harman target according to Oratory's presets, but using only large, open over-ears with fewer coupling issues (particularly the open dynamics) : HD560S x1 + HD58 x1 + HD650 x1 + HE400SE x1
C) Harman's own headphones : K371 x1 + 710BT x1
D) Harman's own headphones : Mark Levinson 5909 x2, with ANC turned off (to be noted here is that it seems that I experienced a bit of leakage with these, but pressing against the pads didn't improve the response that much : https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...se-use-of-the-harman-curve.29633/post-1087051)
Alongside a rough idea of what I seem to prefer, although because of the inaccuracies of blocked ear canal entrance microphones, it's to be expected that individual headphones may "wiggle" around that target by up to a dB past 1.5kHz or so.

Please consider that the absolute values should not be compared at all with measurements performed at the drum reference point (ear simulator). Only compare the traces in this graph against each others.

So, above 1kHz, which average is closer to the intent of the Harman target ? I have no idea.

In-ear, in situ measurements aren't a superb way to check for manufacturing quality, but below 800Hz or so they can be quite reliable to measure the delivered channel matching. This is the problem with the K371, against these averages, showing the R and L channels independently (please mind the different scale) :

Quite a poor behaviour, in contrast to how these three other headphones behaved, after EQing them to the target :

TLDR : if you want to experience what the Harman target sounds like, do not buy any of Harman's own, passive closed back headphones for a start. You could be lucky and experience them exactly as intended, but you have zero guarantee of it.

What you should buy, honestly, I don't know. Passive, fully open closed backs like the HD650 are quite resistant to leakage and behave very linearly under pad compression up to 3kHz or so, meaning that I think these might be a pretty good start to get an approximation of what it sounds like up to 3kHz, but above that, I'm not certain at all (given how sensitive to pad ageing and how it deforms the pinna, the HD650 might not actually be a great choice in that range).

 

[Samudra1825]

That is a really bad idea if you want to be certain that what you'll experience is the Harman target. That design is far too sensitive to coupling issues, and it isn't just a question of leakage.

An illustration of the issue of knowing what the Harman target is supposed to sound like : https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...-noise-cancelling-headphone.25609/post-995729

It's fairly easy to know with headphones like the AirPods Max how the Harman target is supposed to sound like (and how it's supposed measure like with various in-ear mics, on my own head) below 800Hz. It's a lot harder past that frequency.

If I average several headphones, either after EQing them to the Harman target according to third party presets, or by using Harman's own headphones, how should I go exactly ? Because, at least with the rather small sample size that I can muster up, there isn't a superb agreement past 1kHz or so (and at lower frequencies, but that's just because Harman's passive headphones behave poorly in terms of leakage).

Using blocked ear canal entrance microphones (which may introduce inaccuracies above 1.5kHz or so, but less so when dealing with averages of several headphones), here's what happens when I average the following headphones, after averaging their R and L channels, with the number of samples used :
A) EQed to Harman target according to Oratory's presets : HD560S x1 + HD58X x1 + HD650 x1 + HE400SE x1 + K371 x1 + Hi-X65 x2 + AirPods Max x1
B) EQed to Harman target according to Oratory's presets, but using only large, open over-ears with fewer coupling issues (particularly the open dynamics) : HD560S x1 + HD58 x1 + HD650 x1 + HE400SE x1
C) Harman's own headphones : K371 x1 + 710BT x1
D) Harman's own headphones : Mark Levinson 5909 x2, with ANC turned off (to be noted here is that it seems that I experienced a bit of leakage with these, but pressing against the pads didn't improve the response that much : https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...se-use-of-the-harman-curve.29633/post-1087051)
Alongside a rough idea of what I seem to prefer, although because of the inaccuracies of blocked ear canal entrance microphones, it's to be expected that individual headphones may "wiggle" around that target by up to a dB past 1.5kHz or so.

Please consider that the absolute values should not be compared at all with measurements performed at the drum reference point (ear simulator). Only compare the traces in this graph against each others.

View attachment 210711

So, above 1kHz, which average is closer to the intent of the Harman target ? I have no idea.

In-ear, in situ measurements aren't a superb way to check for manufacturing quality, but below 800Hz or so they can be quite reliable to measure the delivered channel matching. This is the problem with the K371, against these averages, showing the R and L channels independently (please mind the different scale) :

View attachment 210712

Quite a poor behaviour, in contrast to how these three other headphones behaved, after EQing them to the target :

View attachment 210714

TLDR : if you want to experience what the Harman target sounds like, do not buy any of Harman's own, passive closed back headphones for a start. You could be lucky and experience them exactly as intended, but you have zero guarantee of it.

What you should buy, honestly, I don't know. Passive, fully open closed backs like the HD650 are quite resistant to leakage and behave very linearly under pad compression up to 3kHz or so, meaning that I think these might be a pretty good start to get an approximation of what it sounds like up to 3kHz, but above that, I'm not certain at all (given how sensitive to pad ageing and how it deforms the pinna, the HD650 might not actually be a great choice in that range).

thank you, this is eye opening

 

[Ambient384]

Etymotic ER3SE for the $150 area blows away my ER2SE I have. Has zero issues outputting that 12db max for IEM Harman bass.

 

[ADU]

Also what other metric in your opinion relates to sound quality?

This has already been discussed elsewhere, but there are many other factors you can look at when considering a headphone's sound quality, including things like driver symmetry and angle, cumulative spectral decay, impulse response, impedance/damping factor, sensitivity/loudness, efficiency, phase, group delay, isolation or openness, cross-feed, bass/treble extension, cup depth, driver size/displacement, pinna interaction, resonant frequency, consistency, etc..

 

[ADU]

Answering your other question about objectivist preferences is more difficult, since I'm neither a dyed in the wool objectivist or subjectivist.

If you believe that frequency response and distortion are the only things that matter though, then just about any headphone with titanium or better drivers that more or less approximates the measured in-ear response of neutral loudspeakers in a typical room should be adequate.

 

[ADU]

I prefer headphones that are higher in impedance and lower in sensitivity as well, because they have better electrical damping, and are less prone to source-based noise. And I like headphones with a nice clean impulse response, good driver matching/symmetry, and good extension in the bass and treble.

I also prefer angled drivers and headphones that are more open than closed. I have used mostly closed headphones though (with flat drivers), for their privacy and also bass extension.

YMMV on all the above.

 

[PabloT]

Etymotic ER3SE for the $150 area blows away my ER2SE I have. Has zero issues outputting that 12db max for IEM Harman bass.

Objectively, they are not better. ER2 has lower distortion AFAIK.

 

[phoenixdogfan]

Here's an idea. Get a pair of phones, then buy a pair of binaural mics. Run the sine wave through the phones you want to use while wearing them and having the binaural mics in ear to measure where they deviate from the Harman curve on your own head, and do your eq on the basis of those measured deviations.

 

[ADU]

Here's an idea. Get a pair of phones, then buy a pair of binaural mics. Run the sine wave through the phones you want to use while wearing them and having the binaural mics in ear to measure where they deviate from the Harman curve on your own head, and do your eq on the basis of those measured deviations.

Won't work. Harman's target was developed using their own proprietary pinna, measured at the simulated eardrum of a GRAS rig.

I won't try to address the question of using binaural mics for something like this, since I'm not that familiar with the technology.

 

[Ambient384]

Objectively, they are not better. ER2 has lower distortion AFAIK.

The ER4SR/ER3SE are <0.5%, It the ER4XR/ER3XR that reaches 0.98 ~ 1.6% at 1KHz. I still remember having a ER4SR that was <0.38% at 1KHz while back.

https://imgur.com/COMR8Qi

 

[PabloT]

The ER4SR/ER3SE are <0.5%, It the ER4XR/ER3XR that reaches 0.98 ~ 1.6% at 1KHz. I still remember having a ER4SR that was <0.38% at 1KHz while back.

https://imgur.com/COMR8Qi

Where is this measurement from and what was the decibel level used for the test?
Such large discrepancy seems unlikely IMO.
If you had measurements for any of the ER2s from that same source it could clear things up.
It's my understanding that armature balanced drivers have generally higher distortion that their dynamic counterparts. A similar discussion in the forum suggests that ER2s produce lower distortion, and their distortion is mostly even order as opposed to the ER3s and ER4s.

Etymotic ER2 vs balanced armature

I searched whole internet for measurements and everything seems to point to the ER2 being superior to the ER3 and ER4. The frequency response between them are very small and it would be trivial easy to EQ ER2 to have frequency response as ER4. The distortion is far superior on the dynamic driver...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[ADU]

Here's an idea. Get a pair of phones, then buy a pair of binaural mics. Run the sine wave through the phones you want to use while wearing them and having the binaural mics in ear to measure where they deviate from the Harman curve on your own head, and do your eq on the basis of those measured deviations.

There are other methods of using in-ear mics to accomplish something similar to what you're suggesting, phoenixdogfan.

If you own or know someone with some decent speakers, you can measure their in-ear response at the best listening position in the room, and use that as a target for your headphone's in-ear response, measured with the same in-ear mic. It's not something I've personally done, but I'm sure MayaTlab and others here can give some advice on the best in-ear mics to use for this kind of thing.

You could also measure the in-ear response of some other good headphones, and use that as your target for equalizing other headphones. This is more or less the approach I've been using for my DT-770's. I use the in-ear headphone measurements made by other reputable graphers for this though, rather than doing my own. Oratory1990's graphing tool has been one of the most useful tools for this, in part because he includes Diffuse Field as one of the compensation options...

Oratory Grapher Headphones

Plot frequency response measurements from our database using Oratory Grapher Headphones

headphonedatabase.com

I like the flexibility of Ora's interface, because it allows you to compare the responses of up to 5 headphones at once. And to view the curves either in raw form, or with compensation. Or both at the same time, if you prefer. And you have alot of control in how you can align or match up the different headphone curves.

If I want to compare the Diffuse Field responses of several headphones, these are the kind of settings I might use for something like that...

Raw-Compensation Offset: 0 dB
Include Raw: No
Include Compensated: Yes
Target Response: Diffuse Field
Custom Match: Yes
Match Range: Yes
Matching Frequency: 500 Hz to 1000 Hz

As indicated above, I usually like to match up the curves somewhere in the middle of the audible frequency range, generally somewhere around 500, 633, or 1k Hz. If you turn the "Match Range" option off, you can use one specific frequency for this. But I often just use a range of 500 to 1k Hz.

The "Target Response" setting controls the compensation or correction of the curves. There are different forms of compensation that you can use. And the main purpose of doing this is to remove some of the ear's resonant effects on the headphone's raw frequency response. Especially around 3 kHz, where there is usually a substantial peak of about 10 dB in the raw response, due to resonances in the ear canal and concha.

I normally use the Diffuse Field compensation option, because it gives a general idea of how the headphone's frequency response would compare to the diffuse sound power response of a loudspeaker, on a spinorama graph. Ora also includes the 2018 Harman target and his own Optimum HiFi curve as other options though, which have different uses. I rarely use either one of these though, and stick mostly with the Diffuse Field, or just the Raw measurements when comparing the response of different headphones.

Crinacle and Rtings have similar tools for doing this kind of thing as well btw. And there are probably some other ways of comparing different headphone curves in Room EQ Wizard, if you want to use ASR's headphone graphs, for example. I haven't used REW though. And do all of my EQ-ing (and custom plotting of headphone curves) using just Equalizer APO's Configuration Editor.