Why are Dan Clark not recommended so much?

[MayaTlab]

I still don't know what you mean here. I have already post the "ear simulator" measurements. What else are you asking me to do?

My apologies, I thought my response was clear enough. Sticking microphones in your ears is what I suggest indeed, if you want to alleviate @Keith_W 's concerns that what you experienced is actually coherent with what you measured on the ear simulator and that foreknowledge of the measurements on the latter aren't influencing your impressions. It's just a more objective way to address that concern than listening tests, and quite easy to perform at lower frequencies.

 

[Keith_W]

What's the alternative? Someone's pure subjective opinion with no protocol or reference?

1. Listen before doing measurements.
2. Not advocating throwing out the baby with the bath water here. The measurements are very important (thank you for doing this!). I consider all those subjective reviews to be light entertainment only. My comment was not directed at you specifically, more towards some on ASR who think that the headphone measurements are everything you need to know about the performance of the headphone. As you yourself indicate in every headphone review, this is not the case.

I have indicated elsewhere that I don't think the DCA Stealths that I own sound very good out of the box. I bought them without hearing them. Why don't I like them? There are a few plausible explanations:

1. The measurements were incorrect. I don't think so, because your measurements are similar to other published measurements, or
2. I have a hearing deficiency. This has been excluded - I had normal audiometry with hearing up to 16khz about 2 years ago (of course, that may have changed!)
3. I don't like the Harman curve, or
4. my HRTF imposes a non-Harman modification to the output of the headphone.

The only way to tell between (3) and (4) is to acquire a pair of in-ear microphones and measure what they are doing on my head - something I haven't gotten around to doing yet. In the meantime I have subjectively EQ'ed the headphone to my taste, and it's working well.

In the meantime, I know that my friends and myself are susceptible to expectation bias from knowledge of the FR curve. I recently completed a set of corrections to my loudspeaker and deliberately left everything above 400Hz uncorrected. I know there was a broad Q dip between 3-4kHz of about -5dB. Everyone who has heard this filter (but has not seen the FR curve) thinks it sounds perfectly linear. They think it sounds linear because they thought that I would correct everything to linear. I think I can hear a hollowing out of the sound around that area. I decided to keep that filter because I actually prefer the way it sounds to the other filter (where I have actually corrected it to linear). I haven't figured out why I don't subjectively prefer the other linear filter yet. Might be a certain kind of subjective bias (e.g. burn in phenomenon), might be an error I made with Acourate when I was making the filter, I don't know. Something to do.

 

[Nkam]

That is waving one's hand in the air. Take noise. I don't care what distortion our headphone has. If there is noise, you will hear it. And noise is a major component of SINAD when it gets over 100 to 110 dB.

Second, acoustic measurements don't lend themselves to very accurate THD measurements. There is environmental noise which raises the best case measurement of distortion in speakers/headphones. Still, I have managed to measure SINAD of 85+ dB:

And this is at 94 dBSPL. Reduce the volume and it will sink even lower (assuming we could measure it).

Regardless, no one is twisting your arm to get high SINAD gear. They are there to give you the knowledge. What you do with it is your business.

Amir

is there a good Dan Clark open headphone for under $1000?
or any other headphone for that matter.

I am definitely hearing distortion on the ‘ famed’ Sennheiser HD600.
in the higher registers as well.

it must be from its weak driver because that is what I am (of course) subjectively hearing. It’s a weak sound. No weight.

much obliged

 

[Blockader]

I find subjective impressions almost totally useless. I am not against them because subjective impressions can reveal something that some basic measurement methods can't.
There are several reasons why subjective impressions may not be reliable, one of which is that hearing is not the most dominant sense especially compared to seeing:

As an audio enthusiast, if something measures very well but the community doesn't receive it well, I would like to understand why. While the community often embraces beliefs that lack credibility, there are instances when the reasons behind their dislike of a *well measuring* product are valid and align well with scientific evidence. (of course that's because we didn't measure everything, not pointing any fingers here.)

That been said, I think before measuring, listening should come first.

 

[amirm]

1. Listen before doing measurements.

I hear you but what you are saying has no basis as far as generating reliable results. It is key to remember that research for headphones/speakers is never done with one sample. The only way to get reliable data is to compare at least 3 different headphones/speakers, if not 4 or 5. The reason is that we have no idea what correct sound is by itself. It is only when we compare different speakers/headphones that we get calibrated on which sounds good, and which does not.

If a headphone/speaker has too much highs, how do you know that is not the correct tonality? You would only know that if you compared it to other products and majority of them didn't sound that way.

Let me better quantify this for you. I often listen to a speaker/headphone and think, hey this sounds pretty good even though measurements said it shouldn't. In that regard, measurements are not biasing me at all. But here is the kicker: I develop an EQ and do an AB for each region where neutrality is not produced. I am always amazed how much better the speaker/headphone is with these filters. So much so that I wonder how I thought it sounded good before EQ! This is why I keep saying equalization is key to subjective evaluation of speakers/headphones especially since it can be performed blind. And doing this requires knowing measurements.

I know this is not intuitive but keep in mind that audio as an architecture is broken. We have no standards for tonality when music is produced. We have to deal with this impossible problem. Research deals with it using N-way comparisons per above. I deal with using filtering. I know of no other solution.

 

[amirm]

is there a good Dan Clark open headphone for under $1000?

I have not tested any of his open-backs in that price range.

 

[MaxwellsEq]

More than 3 decades ago, some of the first European directives for sound/noise at work came into effect. I wanted to come up with a solution to deal with this for headphones in studios. I borrowed a sound meter from our research team and the flat plate used for headphone measurements. It was then I discovered that it's almost impossible to reliably measure headphones in order to determine compliance with legal SPLs.

Things have come along way in the last 30+ years, but that experience taught me that headphone measuring will always be challenging and I admire anyone who does their best to produce reliable results.

 

[Dazerdoreal]

Dan Clark has a high entry hurdle. They dont have a popular mid-fi headphone like the Sundara, the 6XX, the 612 or the 770 which might give you appetite to check out the more expensive ones.

 

[Talisman]

For normal people "X sound good to a real person" is more trustworthy than "X sound good to a machine".
The actual challenge is show them Harman Papers to prove "X sound good to a machine" is idential to "X sound good to you", and convince them their ears (HRTF, FR Inconsistency) doesn't matter.

This only indicates that you don't fully understand the function of the measurements.
The measurements don't tell you what you should like more or what the machine "likes", they give you an objective tool for evaluating the audio performance of the devices.
Whether you like smile EQ, or second order harmonic distortion, measurements can tell you which products have what you're looking for.
The harman curve is simply an EQ curve that has been found to be more pleasing to most people in some studies. But if you like a totally different equalization you should also look at the distortion, the sensitivity, the impedance and understand if that headphone will sound good after the equalization.
Relying on what "someone" likes instead of interpreting measurements is like driving in a car and orienting yourself with clouds instead of using GPS.

 

[Yuhasz01]

I see hifiman being ‘ promoted’ so much , while well measuring Dan Clark are not

why is that?


thanks

Different business model in regards to marketing costs. Means nothing

 

[Yuhasz01]

Don’t know. I just got some HD600’s and meh

boring
not good timbre

I mean it’s ok. nothing special

“Articulate “ assessment of a headphone. Trolling type of comment here.

 

[Yuhasz01]

Amir

is there a good Dan Clark open headphone for under $1000?
or any other headphone for that matter.

I am definitely hearing distortion on the ‘ famed’ Sennheiser HD600.
in the higher registers as well.

it must be from its weak driver because that is what I am (of course) subjectively hearing. It’s a weak sound. No weight.

much obliged

Listen to other headphones then yourself.

 

[moosso]

Whether you like smile EQ, or second order harmonic distortion, measurements can tell you which products have what you're looking for.

I Agree this is the correct way to use measurement data.

Relying on what "someone" likes instead of interpreting measurements is like driving in a car and orienting yourself with clouds instead of using GPS.

Well I also read subjective reviews about food, movie, and cars, should I only care about measurements of them?

This is more like a marketing issue which manufacturers have to face, they need to convince customers that "Frequency Response is everything" and "X has Harman Frequency Response which is the best" without letting customers aware they can get it by EQ for free. Or they can use all those audiophile terms to make customer happy, get the easy money from them.
I did measured all my Headphone, IEM and Speakers these years (just for myself), I think I have enough experience to understand the value of DCA Stealth and Expanse scientifically, I don't think most people will spend time to learn these, they only want something to enjoy the music.

 

[Bow_Wazoo]

I see hifiman being ‘ promoted’ so much , while well measuring Dan Clark are not

why is that?


thanks

Because DCA is ultimately overhyped here (just like ZMF in other forums).
Hifiman, on the other hand, has a best bang for buck product in every price range. For real. Not on paper.

 

[Talisman]

.
Well I also read subjective reviews about food, movie, and cars, should I only care about measurements of them?

Certainly not for Movies or Food (mq about food there would be something to say...)
In general, art is not measured by standard parameters, like music, but music reproduction has nothing to do with art, it is pure science.
In the same way, instead of looking at the technical specifications of a television, and for the measurements of its panel, would you prefer someone to say that with that television it really seemed to them that those clouds had consistency in the sky, and that the sea was as blue as ever, and that Cameron Diaz's skin finally looked real as it had never been on a TV.... ?

 

[Blockader]

I Agree this is the correct way to use measurement data.

Well I also read subjective reviews about food, movie, and cars, should I only care about measurements of them?

This is more like a marketing issue which manufacturers have to face, they need to convince customers that "Frequency Response is everything" and "X has Harman Frequency Response which is the best" without letting customers aware they can get it by EQ for free. Or they can use all those audiophile terms to make customer happy, get the easy money from them.
I did measured all my Headphone, IEM and Speakers these years (just for myself), I think I have enough experience to understand the value of DCA Stealth and Expanse scientifically, I don't think most people will spend time to learn these, they only want something to enjoy the music.

Music is reproduced through speakers or headphones, which have their own transfer function that introduces their unique sound characteristics to the incoming signal. This is why we measure speakers but don't measure apples in the same way we do audio devices. Unlike an apple, which is an original and unique entity with no transfer function, speakers and other sound reproduction devices require measurement to assess how they sound. They transfer something from input to output and they add their own characteristic while doing that, that's also what measurements exactly tell us. While you can measure the chemical properties of an apple, it is not the same as measuring the performance of speakers or digital-to-analog converters (DACs), We do not measure how much aluminum is inside a dacs chassis. On the other hand, that's exactly what we do while measuring an apple. Comparing the measurement of a sound reproduction device to measuring an apple is akin to drawing a parallel between two fundamentally different evaluation processes.

To illustrate further, consider following a recipe by a renowned chef like Marco Pierre White using the ingredients you have at home. Your interpretation of the recipe will taste different from the chef's version. The disparity between the original recipe and your reproduction is similar to what we measure in headphones and speakers. Additionally, the complex nature of human hearing minimizes the influence of subjective preference in sound reproduction.

Therefore, using the same analogy, if you claim that your reproduction of Marco Pierre White's recipe tastes as good as his and demand the same price, it is reasonable for others to ask for proof. Measurements serve as the evidence in this case. If your measurements are robust enough to demonstrate the quality of your reproduction, then people may be willing to pay a premium similar to what they would pay for a world-class chef. Of course you can think that your recipe is different than his but also taste better! Reproducing a signal different different than its original can cause auditory masking and make the difference of the timbre between reflections and direct sound bigger which is something human hearing dislikes greatly. That's one of the factors that make sound reproduction different than gastronomy.

tl;dr: Measurements matter because music we listen is a reproduction. Movie, Car, Food... these are not something that is reproduced through a device. (The movie itself isn't but watching a movie at home is)

 

[moosso]

tl;dr: Measurements matter because music we listen is a reproduction. Movie, Car, Food... these are not something that is reproduced through a device. (The movie itself isn't but watching a movie at home is)

Man I'm sorry to waste your time for typing these.
What you say it's true when we treat playing audio as scientific research.
For most people with zero to minimum knowledge about audio science, what they want is something sound "subjectively good" not something sound "objectively correct", and they care what other people think.
Like there is noway I can convince my friends to buy something expensive but sound correct on the paper, they will buy whatever they like.

Back to the topic, which group will get that $4000 DCA Headphones?

• People trust subjective opinion more: many subjective review about DCA Stealth is a bit negative (no dynamics), so unlikely
• People trust objective measurement more but know about EQ: they will get cheaper models and EQ, then believe it sound as Harman as DCA Stealth
• People trust objective measurement, understand FR and HRTF variance which mean they can't really EQ cheaper models to have the same sound quality as DCA Stealth, and find out DCA Stealth has decent response to themself, and of course rich

Group 1 is the majority, Group 2 is small but rising, Group 3 is rare.
That's the difficulty I think about their marketing.

 

[ThatGuyYouKnow]

Because DCA is ultimately overhyped here (just like ZMF in other forums).
Hifiman, on the other hand, has a best bang for buck product in every price range. For real. Not on paper.

I guess I should give HiFiMan another chance at some point. What I tried from them indicated relatively poor build quality and generally anemic sound. It gave me a false impression that dynamic drivers are always the way to go.

 

[markanini]

I guess I should give HiFiMan another chance at some point. What I tried from them indicated relatively poor build quality and generally anemic sound. It gave me a false impression that dynamic drivers are always the way to go.

At least you accepted your impressions. Some people let the hype cloud their judgement.

 

[Nkam]

Well there is a ton of hype around headphones and headphone gear.
I mean it’s kind of the future.

Marketers know that millennials and younger generations are gamers, and unfortunately live in smaller homes, condos , apartments and so they are a HUGE headphone market.

this is why we have seen and will see an even larger surge in headphones and related gear.
this is also why there is a TON of garbage of over priced, sh$tty measuring headphones and gear being peddled.
Not to mention everyone and their mother have YouTube ‘ reviews’. Which are basically the new infomercial.

So the older these newer generations become, the more discretional income they have and why are being targeted for all of these products.

So keep your eyes open. I’m seeing a ton of super badly measuring products that are being peddled to the younger crowd just so you can be ‘ the cool kid on the block’

well thats my contribution as an older guy here.