Diffuse field equalized headphones recommendation

Discussion in 'Headphones' started by Darsus, Dec 9, 2015.

  1. purr1n

    purr1n Finding his inner redneck

    Staff Member Friend BWC
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2015
    Likes Received:
    49,497
    Dislikes Received:
    81
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Antarctica
    Oh good. I guessed right. That was the HD600 measurement, so I definitely think I guessed right. I'm glad I could name a curve after you. Naming a curve after myself... yeck. I couldn't do that. Then again, I'm not a academic.
     
  2. Darsus

    Darsus Insatiable bowels - Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2015
    Likes Received:
    78
    Dislikes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Sounds pretty much like Sennheiser HD215, such an underrated headphone for that purposes.

    Not ideal, but possible. Pulled some really decent mixes on them. I planned on buying studio monitors, but since I can't use them at home, there is no point. Sometime in the future, for now, redirecting that money to headphones.
     
  3. briskly

    briskly Friend

    Friend
    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Likes Received:
    59
    Dislikes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    New York
    LOL

    Even if I did post the charts, I personally don't care about the target curves. I just happened to think it would be information that someone would be interested in seeing. I have my preference and I know well enough to how to get to it.
     
  4. Hands

    Hands Overzealous Auto Flusher - Measurbator

    Staff Member Friend MZR
    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2015
    Likes Received:
    8,895
    Dislikes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Colorado
    Home Page:
    Ah, crap, I wasn't looking close enough and didn't even notice that was the HD600, not 650! So, I guess based on my HD600 experience, that curve would be near perfect for me. You know me so well. *tears up a little*
     
  5. purr1n

    purr1n Finding his inner redneck

    Staff Member Friend BWC
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2015
    Likes Received:
    49,497
    Dislikes Received:
    81
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Antarctica
    I actually think that our personal target curves are the same, just that you are more sensitive to deviations from the curve, especially with upper mids and treble peaks, than I am.
    Moral of the story: Target curves are a game of dicksmanship.
     
    Darsus likes this.
  6. Darsus

    Darsus Insatiable bowels - Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2015
    Likes Received:
    78
    Dislikes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    The problem is I can't try many models here before buying/ordering, or return them if unsatisfied. So I'm highly dependant on response graphs and reviews, and it drives me nuts when listening expirience is totally different. Buying Samson SR850 (Superlux HD668b) was one of the worst mistakes. I can't undestand why people hipe them that much, especially for studio use. On the other hand, KSC75s are amazing, right what I saw/heard about them.
     
  7. Hands

    Hands Overzealous Auto Flusher - Measurbator

    Staff Member Friend MZR
    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2015
    Likes Received:
    8,895
    Dislikes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Colorado
    Home Page:
    Yeah. Our main differences would come down more to source and amp, though mostly when I'm thinking long-term listening on my end. And mostly for headphones. Speakers I am less sensitive to, fatigue or annoyance wise, with deviations and source/amps.
     
  8. Lurker

    Lurker Almost "Made"

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2015
    Likes Received:
    106
    Dislikes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    33
    Dearest Savior, please allow me to add that the HD800 is not diffuse field equalized. Rather it was Loudness Diffuse Field Equalized.

    Some backtracking:
    Old 580 was tuned after the old diffuse field -> put a dummy head in the middle of a diffuse field (flat speakers positioned in a circle so you can't tell which direction sound is coming from) all in an anechoic chamber and run a sweep.
    This target was deemed as faulty as the dummy head doesn't even come close to the human preception of sound.

    Therefore Beyerdynamic decided to use actual humans and put in ear microphones in their earcanals. Like above they were positioned in a diffuse field but the room wasn't anechoic. This was repeated with several testsubjects and then averaged.
    This was a better solution than the above but the need for averaging made it rather inaccurate. DT880 seems to be tuned after this target except the 8khz peak from the crinkle membrane.

    This is were Sennheisers superiority in R&D comes into play.
    Because the Tonmeisters were smart, they dumbed all the faulty electronics in the recording chain by not recording anything.

    Like Beyer they used human testsubjects and put them in a diffuse field.
    The difference and here the loudness factor comes into play is that the test was run in an anechoic room and instead of playing a frequency sweep they played a neutral noise signal wich varied in loudness.

    After the noise was played through the speakers, they put the headphone on playing the same noise.
    The participant than had to tell if the noise sounded similar to the noise they heard coming from the speakers.

    They only had 2 options:
    1. Headphone sounds like speaker
    2. Headphone does not sound like speaker

    If the subject was to choose option two, the headphone was equalized wich was followed by a reputation of the test
    The equalization were the subject chose option 1 then was measured and the target evaluated.
    Only giving the participant 2 options and a neutral signal (with music you only get the mess Olive Welti estimated) + no recording makes this method superbly accurate.
    Because Sennheiser engineers know what they're doigng HD800 comes shockingly close to this target... Except the 6khz peak which you can actually see on their own charts wich are, say it with me:

    LOUDNESS DIFFUSE FIELD EQUALIZED *imagine a bright light*

    This also explains the joke: "Sennheiser took Beyers soundsignature"
    The two targets are similar but LDF equalized headphones offer an even broader presentation close to speakers since the human percetpion of listening to speakers was fully taken into account and not just the ear resonances like the beyer/german rundfunk target.
     
    TheBarnard, Priidik, SKiring and 3 others like this.
  9. Darsus

    Darsus Insatiable bowels - Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2015
    Likes Received:
    78
    Dislikes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    @Lurker

    This is awesome! Thanks for the info.

    It came up on my mind, but always ignored to ask, why they just don't get certain amount of good, trained engineers in a perfectly isolated room and tweak headphones in comparation to speakers at same SPL until they sound the same? It turns out they did. Tho that 6khz peak seems enormus. I haven't heard them yet, has anyone compared them to flat studio monitors and what are your impressions?
     
  10. briskly

    briskly Friend

    Friend
    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Likes Received:
    59
    Dislikes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    New York
    Do you have any evidence of this? This would run quite counter to some of the publications I know of that describe how to measure these things.
     
  11. NoStream

    NoStream Acquaintance

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2015
    Likes Received:
    61
    Dislikes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Oakland, CA
    I have two flat-EQed sets of speakers - one farfield, one studio monitors. The 800s are noticeably brighter, due to the 6k peak. The 6x0's come very close, and probably the closest I've heard. UERMs are, unsurprisingly, also very close.
     
    Psalmanazar and Darsus like this.
  12. purr1n

    purr1n Finding his inner redneck

    Staff Member Friend BWC
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2015
    Likes Received:
    49,497
    Dislikes Received:
    81
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Antarctica
    Diffuse Field, Loudness Diffused Field, Loudness Diffused Saints, Latter Day Saints, Mormons, Sean Olive, Sean Bean, Game of Thrones, Welti, Welt from Spitwad, Golden Shower Target, etc.

    And therefore the moral of the story: Target curves are a game of dicksmanship.*

    *Over reliance on scientific models, AES papers, German overthinking and over-complexity (think Tiger I tank in WW2, Porsche with electronic touch button parking brake, or VW emissions tricks). PhDs, G.R.A.S., etc. when they could have just gotten Bob Katz or Hands to tune it for them. I'd take the Hands-Wunder Curve target over any of those academically or scientifically arrived curves.

    Don't you guys get it? All these scientists and academics making and relying on these targets are morons who don't listen to music and most certainly don't have trained ears.

    LOL, he's probably making it up or synthesized this tale from second or third-hand information he's gotten from Head-Fi.

    More seriously, references and citations to Beyer's and Sennheiser's processes would be appreciated. Might be an interesting read how Beyer fucked up most of their headphones and Sennheiser fucked up the HD800, and HD700 even more.
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2015
  13. Darsus

    Darsus Insatiable bowels - Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2015
    Likes Received:
    78
    Dislikes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Interesting, that's what Solderdude told me too, including DT250-250. Thanks.
     
  14. purr1n

    purr1n Finding his inner redneck

    Staff Member Friend BWC
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2015
    Likes Received:
    49,497
    Dislikes Received:
    81
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Antarctica
    My speakers are EQ'd according to the B&K curve (to be taken at listening position). I haven't heard DT-250-250, but HD600 and Paradox sound closest to my speakers. UERM is slightly leaner.
     
    Darsus likes this.
  15. Lurker

    Lurker Almost "Made"

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2015
    Likes Received:
    106
    Dislikes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    33
    Here is a nice summary http://www.hifi-forum.de/viewthread-42-24.html

    Translation (not made with google translate):

    Diffusefieldequalization
    From Beyerdynamic's support I received the folllowing info regarding the dt990 Pro: The Beyerdynamic dt990 Pro uitlizes a passive diffusefieldequalization, the acoustic frequency response of the headphone is already logically linearized.
    To achieve this, several tests with multiple individuals who carried a special measurement microphone in their earcanal were made to incorporate the different earshapes into the linearization.
    The participants were treated with sound in an echo chamber with a diffuse spread of sound, therefore the term "Diffusefieldequalization".
    In regards to this the DT990 Pro was optimized to follow the averaged frequency response of the test subjects.
    This procedure of diffusefieldmeasurement was developed by the Institut für Rundfunktechnik (IRT) in Munich in colaboration with Beyerdynamic))).
    https://www.irt.de/IRT/FuE/as/index.htm
    This measurement of specific values is specified in the Norm IEC 268-7.


    http://www.sennheiser.de writes:
    Diffusefield
    The proliferation of sound in a "normal" room. Due to reflections from walls etc. a soundfield accures in the whole room. The sound "diffuses".
    A diffusefieldequalized pressurereceiver (alt. translation: microphone) is attuned in a way that the frequency response is flat for a diffuse (all-around) sound incidence.
    For frontal sound incidence the pressure build up infront of the membrane causes a rise in the higher registers of the frequencyresponse.


    Loudnessdiffusefieldequalization
    In an an anechoic ("acoustically dead") measurement room several loudspeakers radiate a noise signal independently.
    In the middle of the measurement room the soundwaves collide and form a "diffusefield" in which it is no longer possible to tell which direction the sound is coming from. In a terce interval this noise varies, turning in sequence from the loudspeaker to the headphone that is to be measured.
    A big number of testsubjects assesses the difference in loudness between the spatial noise and the noise that is being played back from the headphones.
    The intended state is the same perception of loudness between diffusefield and headphone.
    In application this shows a much more spatial impression and a more refined front-back-location (out of head location).
    Simply put: There is a impression that the sound is being played back outside the head, not limited to the room between the ears.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I hope this helped in understanding the difference between measurement techniques.
    I think LDF is the perfect way for having an objective assessment of the human sound perception. Every testsubject hears the exact same signal coming from the speakers, they only have to compare speaker to headphone. Having multiple subjects only confirms this rule while keeping effects of potential listening fatigue and therefore a false target to a minimum.

    You are very free to disagree as am I to disagree with things like "vinyl is better, the Yggdrasil cures cancer and toilett humor is funny"

    Btw. the golden schlong awarded HD650 is loudness diffuse field equalized (Source: The German manual). However, it was tuned in way that so called "audiophiles" can listen to Leona Lewis for 5 hours at 100db spl without feeling any form of fatigue (< that was a little exagerated).
    Unlike the 650 (not580) the 800 always has been marketed as a reference (not tracking) headphone that can certainly replace studio monitors.
    It bypasses roomacoustics while offering a comparable degree of stereo imaging to speakers with better transparency. It resembels listening to speakers in an anechoic chamber closely at a decent price. + it can be regarded as objectively flat (+-3db).
    Heres a video of a guy comparing the two for mixing.

    You may like the low-fi sound reproduction of the 650, which is totally fine (I myself have it on my head right now) but you seem to not unterstand the intention behind products like the the hd800.

    Thank you very much for reading.
     
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2015
  16. lm4der

    lm4der A very good sport - Friend

    Friend
    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2015
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    Dislikes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    I'm not sure I follow these last two points - Are you saying that you feel like the HD650 is low-fi? Or what do you mean by this description?

    The "intention behind products like the hd800" - I'm not sure I follow, what is the intention with these products, in contrast to the intention of others?

    Just looking for clarification, thanks!
     
  17. Ash1412

    Ash1412 Friend

    Friend
    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2015
    Likes Received:
    485
    Dislikes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I think what he means by "low-fi" is colored-sounding, as the HD650 is a little bit dark.
    Likewise, the "intention behind products like the HD800" probably means to be as monitor-like or as neutral as possible, which is utter nonsense since the HD800 is without a doubt bright.
     
  18. lm4der

    lm4der A very good sport - Friend

    Friend
    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2015
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    Dislikes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Ahh yeah, that tracks, thanks.

    Hmm, so the HD800 "can be regarded as objectively flat"? I think I see Marv's point - As far as I know, there is no consensus on what constitutes objectively flat for headphone FR (although speakers seem to have better consensus), so quoting a certain compensation curve as "objectively flat", well, at this point... I just don't think that exists. Also, I'm not sure we know Senn's intentions with their development methodologies, and even if we did the question remains as to whether it was achieved.
     
  19. purr1n

    purr1n Finding his inner redneck

    Staff Member Friend BWC
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2015
    Likes Received:
    49,497
    Dislikes Received:
    81
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Antarctica
    1. Strange. First you say "Except the 6khz peak which you can actually see on their own charts" and now you say "objectively flat". (Let's not even go to the extents via smoothing and averaging that Sennheiser has gone to hide that nasty peak on their own graphs.)
    2. So the intention of the HD800 is to mimic flat speakers in a environment no normal person listens to music in (anechoic chamber)? Sounds like those Germans outsmarting themselves again. (Tiger I tank, VW emissions, Porsche push-button parking brake, etc.)
    3. Who gives a shit what the intention is if marginally bright recordings that sound OK on UERMs (voiced after the bright NS10s) sound un-listenable on the HD800s. At this point, I'd trust Alex the Russian more than anyone at Sennheiser who voiced the HD800.
    4. + it can be regarded as objectively flat (+-3db)...
      And therefore the moral of the story: Target curves are a game of dicksmanship.
    Yes, say it: "Target curves are a game of dicksmanship."
    Repeat after me: "Target curves are a game of dicksmanship."
     
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2015
  20. ultrabike

    ultrabike Measurbator - Admin

    Staff Member Friend MZR
    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2015
    Likes Received:
    8,421
    Dislikes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Irvine CA
    "Target curves are a game of dicksmanship."

    IMO, yes.
     

Share This Page