[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/g/ - Technology

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 59 KB, 640x480, CreekOBH11b.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
22369439 No.22369439 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe] [rbt]

I'm looking to get a headphone amp for my DT 880s

Any recommendations?

I was thinking the Cute Beyond or the Creek OBH-11

Budget is around $200.

>> No.22369450


>> No.22369501

If you can save up an extra $50 on top of that $200, you can get a Schiit Asgard.

>> No.22369667


get this instead - http://www.jdslabs.com/item.php?fetchitem=O2Full


>> No.22370386


>> No.22370438
File: 107 KB, 316x470, 1319913706216.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Schiit Asgard

>> No.22370441

The Shit Asgard is well... shit.

This guy knows it, however if you're not really into DIY, then
E7. If you still don't have enough output, get the E9 too
(however, 10 ohm output impedance)

>> No.22370454


Took long enough for someone to take the bait.

>> No.22370494

Relays on new units. Problem solved.

>> No.22370498


>> No.22370522

>implying I would still buy a product from a company that denied the original problem, then later marketed it as a 'feature'

>> No.22370526

With all this amp nonsense, it raises a question for me as I use my home theatre amp to power my Technics RPDH1200's (50ohms)
I can't seem to find the impedance range that most stereo amplifiers operate with.
For example, my Onkyo TX SR508 seems to have nothing of the sort to tell me.

>> No.22370540
File: 65 KB, 694x530, 1326855168906.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I see you, RAP !ST, you dumb motherfucker.

>> No.22370546
File: 27 KB, 310x310, 1291589706855.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>Not getting a tube amp

>> No.22370565


Even though it' s not nonsense, you are right that some manucfacturers don't post info abouth tueir= amps

>> No.22370571


>> No.22370582
File: 31 KB, 480x360, 1327028587757.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>soft clipping, signal distorting bullshit

>> No.22370593

I know it's not nonsense.
>Plug my cans into iPod, phone, MP3 player etc
>Sounds like absolute shit

>> No.22370622
File: 32 KB, 469x458, 1275817709899.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Signal distortion

It's called having a "warm sound" you imbecile.

>> No.22370630

>First celebration for International Woman's Day

>> No.22370644
File: 100 KB, 1419x393, D1-Tech_V01.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


Audioengine D1. $169.


>> No.22370651

>Warm sound
>not distortion
Confirmed for not knowing shit about sound

>> No.22370669
File: 72 KB, 640x480, 1237868922675.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Doesn't have a tube amp
>Thinks he knows shit about audio equipment

What's the matter, too poor?

>> No.22370670
File: 12 KB, 300x300, 1326701892268.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>another layer of coloration is a good thing!

>> No.22370681

>implying there isn't an amp in there

>> No.22370684
File: 460 KB, 2592x1944, 1326335472067.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

/g/ whats a good amp for 100$ or under that would work well with a computer?

>> No.22370689


>warm sound

That is called an augmented mid range without increasing harmonic distortion.

With tubes you get both.

>> No.22370704

>Tube amps are preferred in the guitar amp world
>So they must be good when reproducing sound as close to recording as possible

>> No.22370712

What's that, tubefags?

>> No.22370723

Fiio E11. it's an awesome DAC/Amp so you bypass the shitty onboard sound/soundcard, and it amps very well

>> No.22370746

E11 has no DAC. It's only an amp (and a good one too, although slightly warm)

>> No.22370761
File: 1.20 MB, 3648x2736, 1269498538298.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Can't hear you over the sound of my accurate and warm sound reproduction.

>> No.22370777
File: 71 KB, 120x87, pedobear rape.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

im looking for a desk amp rather then a portabale one, i use my e5 for that...

>> No.22370781

FiiO E10

>> No.22370782

Choose one.
How can you be this fucking stupid? This two options are nearly opposites.

>> No.22370787


clearly not, might want to see an otolaryngologist

>> No.22370792
File: 297 KB, 788x788, Down-Syndrome_2073_2073[1].gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>"warm" (read: distortion)

>> No.22370803

whoops, got the E11 and E10 mixed up

So yeah, the fiio E10 is the one

E9 is also good, but it has no DAC
the E10 isn't portable, though, i think

>> No.22370807

Why are people even getting these ridiculous amps? Aren't soundcards good enough? Quit wasting your money.

>> No.22370812

pro-ject head box

every review i've read is highly favorable

>> No.22370813
File: 17 KB, 420x297, Bose_AE2_audio_headphones[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

What kind of headphones merit getting an amp?

Would it even be worth it for these?

In b4

Yeah, they cost too much, but it was either this or Skullcandy.

>> No.22370819

Doesn't fucking matter, portable or not. It's either good or not, and the E7 is nearly perfect (especially taking it's price tag into consideration)

>> No.22370829

E9 is meant to be paired with E7, but that's over the $100 budget.

>> No.22370835


not trying to fling shit but if you have a source (say guitar through tube amp) that is already warm, and you play it through headphones amped with tubes (which add warmth to the sound), how would that be accurate? Wouldn't you want flat reproduction since the source would already be warm? I've never used a tube amp so I don't understand.

>> No.22370843
File: 52 KB, 900x675, 1262848452041.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.22370850
File: 71 KB, 327x500, wa6.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>buying a tube amp for "warm sound"
that's like buying vinyl records because you want your music to be "all analog"

good tube amps sound better than solid state alternatives, great ones tend not to compete against solid states

don't be a faggot, Green Tea

>> No.22370854

>implying soundcards hove enough power do drive electrostatics

>> No.22370867


>either bose or skullcandy

isnt there another option besides bestbuy/futureshop?

>> No.22370874

>Having a soundcard instead of the onboard with external DAC+Amp)

>> No.22370881
File: 1.18 MB, 1589x1359, 1316554048313.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


ill take the E10 into consideration, i own a pair of ATH-M50S's right now but id like to get some nice open cans for home use withthe E10, price range is 300$ max ive been looking some akg's but is there any model in this range that out classes them all?

>> No.22370900

Are you me? That's my plan as well.

>> No.22370922
File: 275 KB, 119x68, epic brofist.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

no, just an educated consumer.

>> No.22370929

For the price range, the dt880 or k701 are both excellent choices, I wouldn't get sennheiser because its pretty much the bose/beats of audiofag headphones.

>> No.22370930

Beyerdynamic DT880 (600 ohm)

>> No.22370945
File: 30 KB, 500x500, Lynx.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>not getting a top tier sound card

There is a lot more in the market other than shitty creative shit you know.

>> No.22370949

is the $300 including the amp or just for the headphones?

if it doesn't include the amp, the K702s (best for soundstage and vocals), DT880s (best dynamic range, punchier bass than the K702s), and SR325is (grados are their own breed of headphone. everything has this physicality to it)

>> No.22370953


to add to my original query id also like something pretty neutral for some half assed mixing

>> No.22370966

Is dat a gameport I see :3

>> No.22370970

>serial port

any external DAC at or above $70 will outperform any soundcard out there, the only reason to get a soundcard is if you want 32/192 or something else that's ridiculous

>> No.22370978


Is that cat eating pizza? How did it like it?

>> No.22370987

>putting audio gear in a noisy pc case instead of its own isolated enclosure

>> No.22370988


Radioshack? That or order some really expensive ones off the Internet but there's a best buy a half mile from my house.

I dunno why people hate on Bose so much though. Other than the price.

>> No.22370997

E10 can't power 600Ω cans

>> No.22371002


Oh the ignorance. Keep parading shit you heard on Head-Fi.

>> No.22371020

>That or order some really expensive ones off the Internet
superlux 668s are better than Bose shit and they cost $40

>> No.22371030

and what sound card do you have, oh audio master

>> No.22371032
File: 45 KB, 425x340, graphCompare[1].php_graphType=0&graphID[]=2751&graphID[]=.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

K702's are a bit flatter from 30-5500 Hz, but I'd still get the 880

>> No.22371041


Something better than your magically external DAC.

>> No.22371045


the price for what you get is enough to hate on it, just like people hate on any other overpriced brand

>> No.22371064

>I'm too embarrassed about my shitty soundcard so I'll just pretend I'm better than you

>> No.22371067

>magically external

>> No.22371091
File: 33 KB, 120x90, wtf man.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


so what then?

>> No.22371130


Honestly, what's the difference between plugging a pair of Sennheiser HD 650 into the 3,5mm jack of my onboard soundcard and plugging it into an headphone amp that's connected to my PC (digital?/analog?)?

Enlighten me please, I'm not trolling but some definite answer about this topic would be nice.

>> No.22371163
File: 618 KB, 1850x1387, IMGP5840.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

people arguing about the dt880's and tube amps?

>> No.22371184

>he really thinks his soundcard is better than my Benchmark dac1

>> No.22371215

it takes more power to move bigger drivers; amps aren't necessary but for high-end 'phones, there's a big loss to be had in terms of bass response and soundstage when you don't have enough power to move the driver as much

>> No.22371263


Ah ok, so it's just a mean to get the full potential of earphones instead with full power and thus having a good sound, right?

>> No.22371282

pretty much, yeah

>> No.22371322


They think that "PC noise" will make all sound card shitty, despite not having any concrete proof on this effect, not to mention a $180 Essence STX destroys practically all external DAC in the same price range on measured specification. Than there is the higher range AD/DA converter sound card used for professional recording/mixing that offers retardedly high sampling rate and balanced input/output along with a myriad of other features. Not to mention the absurdly low THD+N.

These audiophiles buys gear based completely on words of mouth and trusting "professional reviewers" on some forum telling them that this shit is awesome because it is expensive.

>> No.22371369

>thinking a $180 Essence STX is better than a $100 Fiio E10

>> No.22371373
File: 652 KB, 1299x933, cans2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I'll second this. Though I'd also advise looking at the actual measurements for various amps/DACs (eg, if something measures better for the same price get that instead).

>> No.22371438


In real world measured performance, it sure as hell is.

Let compare the Lynx L22 sound card I posted from before with the DAC1.

The L22 have higher SNR. Lower THD+N. Higher sampling rate. Offers analogue to digital conversion. At almost half the price.

>> No.22371535


I shoulda looked around more, but every time I saw a headphone thread on /g/ it was always people bitching about FLAC vs MP3 and showing off 600 dollar headphones.

>> No.22371578

>I don't know how to compare things

>> No.22371582
File: 269 KB, 1440x810, 2011-07-19 19-20-59.152.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Another stax user here, just some minor corrections:
Be wary of some measurements, as not everyone uses AES standards and instead quote chip specs. Also be wary of onboard card results - as they're usually performed via hardware muting (a method to doctor results), etc.

As for dacs.

If you have firewire available and are willing to use it, I strongly recommend echo audio as the "it" of price/performance

>> No.22371625

Finding reliable measurements for stuff in the audio world is pretty hard to do in general (unfortunately).

>> No.22371675

>Also be wary of onboard card results - as they're usually performed via hardware muting (a method to doctor results), etc.

As an example of this, you can basically look at testable results from a number of E-MU cards (eg. the cards that successfully attain -140dB for 24bit, which is basically the equivalent of silence to a nuclear blast at 500 metres). ASUS also does it on a number of their cards

You can do it yourself to some degree of success with RMAA, but it really only gives you a small the picture, and is EASILY cheated on.

Keep in mind, of course, that nearly every dac in production these days is going to exceed the noise levels that are inherent to 16bit audio.

As for headphone measurements my number 1 piece of advice is; learn how to read RAW measurements (i.e. not what headroom provies), because they're the only truly reliable piece of information out there (Stax and Etymotic are two examples of companies that provide raw data)

>> No.22371693

Thirding Audio-gd, the NFB5 are nearly flawless.

>> No.22371714
File: 53 KB, 800x500, IMAG0216.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

i heard headphone thread

saving up for Imagine Minis and an amp

>> No.22371732

How's the dacmagic?

>> No.22371747


Would it satisfy you if I wrote a 10 page essay describing the sound quality of the L22 in the most obtuse term possible?


I would recommend looking for third party measurement. But that is much easier to find for professional audio gears than hobbyist gears.

Most of the FR graph places like Head-room provide are heavily "smoothed", they're not very helpful at all. Even the ones provided by the manufacturer suffers from this, LCD-2 comes to mind, the real world measured response is vastly difference from the chart they provide.

>> No.22371756
File: 208 KB, 1495x997, 2012.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I attest to this as well

>> No.22371774


I used to own a dacmagic.

It's a good, versatile piece of hardware -IF- you can't use an internal soundcard.

Honestly,at that price, I'd just get the STX (which I didn't like FYI, everything sounds fairly blurry), unless you specifically want the ability to run from a laptop/usb/optical/etc

>> No.22371829

it's awesome

i'm at the point at which i'd probably be spouting bullshit if i claimed there was any more "clarity" to be had when i listen to music, so i'm probably not going to be upgrading it any time soon (i am going to a meet-up in june though, maybe i can be persuaded there)

god, the LCD-2s are so sessy

>unless you specifically want the ability to run from a laptop/usb/optical/etc
this was a big selling point for me. i switch between listening from my desktop and laptop a lot, plus i like to be able to hook up the AlgoRythm through coax to the DAC

>> No.22371853

How much difference do you notice between the filters? I tried one day to compare them at length but having to power down the NFB-12 and change jumpers every time is kind of inconvenient.

>> No.22371866

>I would recommend looking for third party measurement. But that is much easier to find for professional audio gears than hobbyist gears.
Even third party measurement is doctorable: for example, it's very easy to reproduce the -140dB on some EMU cards, which is frankly not even close to possible.

Pushing -116 for an AMPLIFIER is extremely difficult, let alone a dac. And I would be instantly skeptical of any results (particularly of internal cards with their own drivers) that exceed this in real world performance for tests like RMAA without costing a pretty $. You mention Lynx though which is a fairly high end 'brand' and is usually fairly reliable with their external units (not so much their internal units, since it's often tested in ideal conditions).

>Most of the FR graph places like Head-room provide are heavily "smoothed"
The problem with headroom graphs is that they apply head related transfer functions that may not be the intended design by the company.

For example; The DT880 is based on Diffuse Field Equalisation, and comes up quite well on headrooms graphs
The Etymotic ER4 is as well, but as it is a closed canal unit under Moller's measurements, requires more treble. As such, it shows up as "bright"
A stax lambda is freefield, and would show up as "dark" on the headroom charts

It's also worth noting that the headroom charts all apply a slight bass boost to most of their measurements for some unknown reason.

>> No.22371868

Does everybody in this thread only listen to flac files?

>> No.22371873

>K702 and LCD-2
that seems like an awesome pairing. like they play off of each others' weaknesses really well

>> No.22371888


i try to get everything in flac, but i can't tell the difference between 320 and flac, and can only tell the difference between 256 and flac if i'm paying really close attention

>> No.22371928

Oh, I forgot to mention

Ideally you want smoothing to be 1/12th of an octave or less (i.e. 1/24th is a good idea), as that covers every semitone. It's worth noting that smoothing based on temperaments are less accurate for high frequencies (which are harder to measure anyway)
Which do you prefer between LCD-2 and K701?

Personally, I hate the LCD-2s

>> No.22371959


>Even third party measurement is doctorable: for example, it's very easy to reproduce the -140dB on some EMU cards, which is frankly not even close to possible.

I am aware, just that your average user don't have as many reason to doctor the data. Not to mention two conflicting set of data should raise a red flag on the reliability of the data.

>> No.22372000

>I am aware, just that your average user don't have as many reason to doctor the data. Not to mention two conflicting set of data should raise a red flag on the reliability of the data.

Hardware manufacturers can do it, so it shows up on results.

There's a real shortage of tests out there. If there was enough, we'd see a much larger difference in performance in systems that use high end internal cards (since basically any noise from other components is going to knock 7dB off from 113 or so)

>> No.22372005

I really don't notice much- theres definitely a difference, but I can't say for sure that one is any better than another.

I only listen to lossless because thats all I have. Ripping physical discs for archival purposes, and theres no reason to make more unnecessary files when flac plays back fine and supports tagging.

I really enjoy the LCD-2.I've actually been meaning to sell the k702s but I don't know where.

>> No.22372010

>Ideally you want smoothing to be 1/12th of an octave or less (i.e. 1/24th is a good idea)

As a side note to this- smoothings that arent multiples of 12 are basically entirely useless

>> No.22372041

I like the LCD-2s bass a lot (easily best bass on a headphone today). I've been meaning to listen to the LCD-3, but I'm not sure what has changed.

Audeze has been a treble-shy company (basically by 10dB which is a HUGE amount since 3dB=half as quiet) since the LCD-1

>> No.22372065

apparently the LCD-3 isn't as dark, but it doesn't lose that bass-mid-centric audeze sound

>> No.22372101

Meh, colour me skeptical until I see results. It seems that with every mod/revision/etc that the deficiencies are ALWAYS improved.

Eg, "Wow this silver cable really opens up the treble!"

It's because they listen for it more

I actually appreciate companies who are CONSISTENT (Audeze, Stax (for the most part), Etymotic) over those who do badly across the spectrum (sennheiser)

>> No.22372126

Yes, the bass was a welcome addition after coming from the k702s. I actually prefer less treble, and I would get listening fatigue pretty quickly after listening to the k702s.

I don't really think the LCD-3s are worth it. If I'm going to spend that much on a headphone, I might as well go Stax.

>> No.22372162

>If I'm going to spend that much on a headphone, I might as well go Stax.
i'd rather be searching for K1000s, R10s, L3000s, HP-1s, etc

>> No.22372175

Eh, Audeze is basically as good as it gets for the people who want bass/mid centric sound. At least, as far as I've heard.

I actually don'y like the O2 and O2mk2 much at all and would get audeze over that, despite being a huge stax fan.

I don't even count o2/o2mk2 because it just seems like a throwback of the company going bankrupt - it doesnt conform to any of the companies ideals (and the only one that did that before was the Sigma, which was due to design)

O2 lovers be damned

>> No.22372213

Eh- maybe. It's not like I plan on upgrading for a while, if at all.

>> No.22372214

It's a toss up between the sigma and the K1K
It's actually not very good at all.
IMVHO the Audeze LCD-2 (which I hate) has essentially obsoleted the L3k for anything other than mystique. The green L3000 is fucking sexy, though
Lmao, Grado

>> No.22372229

>If I'm going to spend that much on a headphone, I might as well go Stax
Not surprising. Just for perspective, the LCD-3s cost more than everything in this picture by a few hundred >>22371373

>> No.22372246

The LCD-3s have lost the main drawcard of the LCD-2. It's a top tier headphone, that can be bought new, at a reasonable price.

If you ask me, the price hike is likely a tactic to instill apparent improvements that arent really there.

The LCD-2 is basically a facelift of the LCD-1 anyway

>> No.22372259

I was implying the high-end stax, but see >>22372213

>> No.22372271

>it's actually not very good
i will dispute that to the ends of the earth

>has essentially obsoleted the L3k for anything other than mystique
have you tried the L3000? i love the LCD-2's bass to death, but i have never heard more speaker-like bass than the L3000's, especially when you get into super sub-bass like organ music

>lmao, grado

>> No.22372317

If you need a receiver too, consider a Nakamichi RE-1. Since it can drive my mid 70's Pioneer piezo headphones, I'm pretty sure it can drive literally so *anything.* I wouldn't be surprised if it has a headphone output measured in watts as opposed to milliwatts.

>> No.22372319

>I will dispute that
It's basically half a step above the HD650. Bass Heavys (the most liked one), by the way
Yes, I have. IMVHO, the LCD-2 is a better headphone overall. However, as far as dynamics go, the L3k is easily bass king
Grado has always been awful. Even the fabled HP series.

Being "oh so neutral" shouldn't be a specification for being awesome. It should be the STANDARD (because fuck personal taste)

Etymotic and stax are the best at targeting curves anyway.

>> No.22372330



I do not believe there is a single headphone on the market that can cover the 10-30hz range at a reasonable volume.

None. at. all.

In fact, most speakers can't cover it. most of the "chest thumping bass" are in the 60-80hz range. Real sub bass is vastly different. You really need to experience the organ in real life in a large area to know it.

>> No.22372331

It cant drive electrostats because it doesnt provide a bias voltage

>> No.22372350


Stax, LCD-2 and L3000 all do piano and organ music perfectly well.

>> No.22372358

People are going to think you're trolling but it's true. The more religious-like audiophiles try to pin their poor ability to differentiate quality based on some inane idea that you must shape sound differently compared to monitors, meanwhile most of the holy grails (outside of the ridiculously awful grados) are basically straight lines up to the thousands of khz until a drop off.

hell the LCD-2 is one of the flattest around. people need to stop treating these headphones like idols.

>> No.22372371

Nakamichi still exists?

>> No.22372388

>grado has always been awful

seriously though, no no no. grado has always produced extremely good headphones, and the HPs stand out as some of the greatest headphones ever made imo

anywho, it's all personal opinion anyway

>> No.22372389

3dB is not perceived as half as quiet, 10dB is.

>> No.22372396

>hell the LCD-2 is one of the flattest around.

Sorry, but -10dB is not even close to flat.

The LCD-2 is not a flat headphone, and anyone who says it is is terribly misguided.

That's not to say you can't enjoy it all you like, or even argue that treble attenuation due to seating and bodies is normal at a concert.

>> No.22372399
File: 65 KB, 718x367, 007mk2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]



What you're hearing are the overtones, not the fundamental tone.

Headphones can't reproduce sub bass.

>> No.22372413

Oh and I forgot to add.

I wouldn't consider the R10 (only heard bass heavy), K1000 or L3000 flat by any stretch.

>> No.22372450
File: 85 KB, 1024x768, DSC01834.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


May as well be a ruler line. You're confusing technological limitations with not flat.

They're as flat as the engineers could make them, which is the whole point. Otherwise, if you don't care about skew, you may as well use cheap dynamic drivers and space them properly, because that'll give you all the depth you need.

>> No.22372457

No, 3dB is half the acoustic energy, and half the volume
Those measurements were shown as the byproduct of an inadequate seal (probably due mics).

The O2 is a piece of shit, for sure, but those measurements are not even close to reliable.

Stax and etymotic first party measurements are completely reliable.

>> No.22372465
File: 22 KB, 400x400, Fucking_Retard.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>Headphones can't reproduce sub bass.

My Sony V6 can do 5 Hz without breaking a sweat, and when I play a 5 Hz test tone (created with foobar2000 'cause it's fuckin' awesome and can do that easily) I may not be able to HEAR 5 Hz but I can damned sure feel the diaphragm in motion and the pressure on the ear drum as the tone is played.


>> No.22372474

>1/3 smoothing
Audeze u so fahni

>> No.22372489

based on what metric?

"sounds good" to you?

I see the beats are the best headphones available.

>> No.22372491

>May as well be a ruler line. You're confusing technological limitations with not flat.

That's not a technological limitation. That's probably a personal choice by audeze because the headphones from them have been consistently treble-shy.

You're forgetting to notice the -10dB in the treble

I'd be happy to post some stax graphs, or even some etymotic graphs to demonstrate, but as you're used to graphs that have already been compensated, I doubt you'd know how to read it.

>> No.22372492
File: 63 KB, 720x368, lcd-2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


I've mentioned before that the chart of LCD-2 provided by the manufacturer are not accurate, at all.


>> No.22372509

you are a retard

>> No.22372516


....Once again that is not 5hz tone, but higher frequency resonance of it.

>> No.22372531

The measurements you're linking are unreliable. See, the characteristic spike at 2.5kz (a common resonance frequency) in both graphs.

The LCD-2 graphs have been reproduced by external sources.

>> No.22372539

>taking measurements at -54DBFS

I dont understand why you want to take it seriously

>> No.22372543
File: 145 KB, 2147x1547, 92414349_5597818-FRandPhase.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

the etymotics are completely skewed towards treble production. you can go ahead and post the graph, because it's just proving my point about the drivers being unable to produce a complete frequency range flatly.

no, that's what you call a god awful seal.

>> No.22372546

i believe you're forgetting that the headphones are made to be listened to, not for their freq response graphs to be compared

the sounds grados create have this incredible physicality to them; hell, my old SR80s are nearly on the level of my K702s

>> No.22372566

Then what's the point of "better" headphones if the metric is your personal preference?

Plenty of people hate the midrange and treble bloat of the grados. going by your metric is as terrible as it is good.

>> No.22372582

>the etymotics are completely skewed towards treble production

You mean, like every headphone in existence - including headphones like the LCD-2?

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about

Go read the works of moller, please.

>> No.22372592

>another FR chart with 1/3 smoothing
Keep on posting useless data.

>> No.22372596


I'm a bit skeptical.

To me (just going by my ears) most grados seem to have upper mids and midbass bloat

>> No.22372602


I never claim that they're reliable (taken by some random guy), I saved it as a comparison between smoothed graph and raw graph.

I would disregard the high frequency portion of it completely.

>> No.22372635

To me, it looks like the contour of all his measurements are partially homogenised by his setup.

Everyone already knows (or they should) what a raw graph looks like

>> No.22372686
File: 69 KB, 579x356, lcd2-FR.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.22372687


Looks more of a taking both channel at the same time and the resulting SBIR effects.

>> No.22372712

you guys don't really think your headphones can produce low frequencies, do you?

>> No.22372715

Since when has averaging been anything but done for consistency?

Did someone use the word averaging and you decided it made you sound like you knew what you were talking about?

>> No.22372733


I hope not.

>> No.22372744

>you guys don't really think your headphones can produce low frequencies, do you?

But they can, and they've been shown to by measurements

They produce more harmonics than speakers, which is why it sounds different.

You don't think that low frequencies are anything other than moving slowly, do you?

>> No.22372747

I think they really do

>> No.22372765
File: 208 KB, 630x447, 232422-jh-audio-jh16-pro-jh-audio-jh-16-pro-vs-etymotic-er-4s.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

the etys are the opposite skew. LCD-2s are trying to maintain flatness and end up with treble rolloff.

>> No.22372777

I'd like to see the DB measurements for these measurements you speak of

-0.988743 db @ 45 hz?


>> No.22372784

I hope you realise that the red graph there is a RAW graph, and shows a diffuse field curve for closed canals.

You know, the technically CORRECT way to produce a FLAT sound.

Jesus christ.

>> No.22372809
File: 617 KB, 1024x768, 126689787926.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>this thread

I'm never trusting an "audiophile" review again.

>> No.22372828

No, this is based on hearsay and audiophile logic.

I've never heard of anyone deeming peaking diffusion as legitimate other than guys like gilmore trying to justify bad headphones.

>> No.22372831
File: 87 KB, 800x415, 800px-StaxLa-p4_detail_sm.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


And now I'll wait for you to be unable to read this graph.

It's raw data, btw. And it's freefield design.

I hope you can read graphs

Some reading for you

>> No.22372835


The graph wouldn't be accurate at all.

You need VERY, VERY expensive equipment to accurately measure low frequency response. Most just sent it to a laboratory and pay them to have it tested.

>> No.22372860

You obviously have no idea what I am talking about

Time to read before you post



>> No.22372861

You never should have in the first place

these are the same people that would recommend monitor speakers if you love bass

You're right, I can't read it

mostly because the image is shit quality

why don't you tell me what it says?

What do you think they will say?

I'm just bringing this up, because usually, you need, say, a fucking 60 inch woofer to even hit lows below 20hz

some high end 15"s and 18"s might do it, but Headphones will not fucking do it

>> No.22372890

"These headphones are extremely neutral (almost perfect) and have significantly higher harmonic distortion at lower frequencies than high"

>> No.22372929

Well that doesn't sound fun to listen to at all

>> No.22372939

>I'm just bringing this up, because usually, you need, say, a fucking 60 inch woofer to even hit lows below 20hz some high end 15"s and 18"s might do it, but Headphones will not fucking do it

No you dont.

In fact, most BASS GUITAR RIGS use between 8 and 15" cones.

Anything can produce that frequency provided it can move enough air in a relativistic sense. The smaller the cone, the higher the distortion for lower frequencies.

>> No.22372958

I don't know why you point to moller when he says the contrary. He associates the diffusion with other virtual means of sound processing like HRTF. Why not include some damaging virtualization while you're at it to give the sense of binaural depth?

Sounds like you just copied a bunch of references from another thread without actually reading them.

>> No.22372970

I'm talking about his studies into sound at the ear drum in freefield and diffuse field situations.

I.e. the target curves for headphones

>> No.22372971

That's because you're completely retarded and don't even know how sound works. I could easily get a 10" woofer to hit 20's at respectable levels, the response would otherwise be total shit however.

As for the low note on headphones, give the solar sailer track from TRON a blast and tell me if you can hear the lowest note. I can, and that is a fact.

>> No.22373003

8's won't hit shit below 60hz

15's will hit pretty damn low if you feed them enough juice

but, you know, what do I know

we should just go ahead and go to a sound laboratory and test it!

How about, if i'm right, I get to kill you, and if you're right, you can kill me?

Woah guys, we got a real audiophile here, watch out

he bought some fucking headphones, he must know everything about audio!

I knew this guy once, he bought a ferrari, he must have been an expert with engines!

>> No.22373014

An eight inch cone probably can, at least if optimized for frequency extension at the cost of efficiency. Thing is, speaker designers need *usable* output, or that which is no more than 6DB down. Getting a woofer that can do 20hz at 6DB down is much harder, never mind one that won't need a big EQ boost at the lowest frequencies to stay bowel-purgingly flat.

On another note, proper accordian-style bass guitar drivers are high efficiency models with poor frequency extension by comparison to home hi-fi woofers.

>> No.22373016

Right but the filtering based on ear drum is similar to HRTF and Moller himself compares them in filtering and inconsistency. I don't know why you would apply this concepts of diffusion while ignoring other head related transfer functions. To me it seems like this was included on various headphones, but so subtle that your average person did not notice the diffusion, meanwhile other methods like dolby transfer were obvious distortions.

>> No.22373021

>8's won't hit shit below 60hz

Except they will, and do.

All they have to do is move more slowly.

>> No.22373036

Do you really think that's how audio works?

It just moves slow, and BAM, it's correctly hitting a low note?

If it's hitting the note at fucking 0db then what is the point?

>> No.22373041

>Makes no attempt at all to argue my points, instead results to slinging some o dat shit.
Mate, why even bother replying to anyone in this thread if all you're going to do is make unfounded claims and absolutely refuse to even bother learning?

>> No.22373054

FWIW I have a bass cabinet built from 12" cones that are designed for purposes other than bass guitar (you can google the schematics - it's called fEARFUL).

The cabinet is quite neutral and hits everything just fine. It has typical roll-off for extreme low frequencies. But you need to pump the juice up high for bass anyway (lots and lots of watts) because of the way we perceive bass relative to treble

>> No.22373080

Frequencies measured at the eardrum take into account HRTF.

I don't even think we're talking about the same thing anymore

>> No.22373081

Alright, fine then

IF a ten inch woofer on it's own could hit sound levels at the lows you claim

THEN people would have no reason to use 15"s, or 18"s, or anything else

BUT, they don't

Here you go

Measure the DB level while playing this

>> No.22373173

>thinking low end extension is solely a function of driver surface area or power
full fucking retard, the most important factor in tuning for bass extension is the configuration/volume of the enclosure in relation to the T/S parameters of the driver. More amplification does precisely nothing to extend the low end frequencies of a subwoofer either, it merely provides more SPL.

>> No.22373220

No, you idiot, they can. It's not fucking black magic.
>THEN people would have no reason to use 15"s, or 18"s, or anything else
Because of frequency response. It could hit 20-30 with an abysmal rolloff on either side and have a massive internal volume, otherwise it's hitting those low notes you say they can't.
Larger diameter speakers can hit the low low and above with a far better curve, because they don't need an enclosure that has to focus on a very specific band.
>BUT, they don't
If you want a flat response after accounting for cabin gain, you sure as shit do with filters, filters everywhere on a 10, 15 and even an 18 if you really want to be anal.
>Here listen to this
Disregarding the fact I already have a plethora of generated waves, I don't have anything to record db levels. I can't 'hear' anything below 30Hz on my cans using generated waves without turning the volume above what would be otherwise unbearable on other tones.

>> No.22373242

>THEN people would have no reason to use 15"s, or 18"s, or anything else

"it's bigger so it must be better"

>> No.22373302

You didn't really just say that did you?

Do you just have a bunch of magical 10 inch woofers lying around that can do this?

I think a number of audio companies would like to have a word with you

and what fucked up frequency response do you have that functions apparently like voodoo?

I usually amplify my subwoofers, just because I enjoy them working

I ran out of Batt-trees for them

Oh, and yes, if you put a 10 inch woofer in an ice chest it would probably be loud, but when you don't define the fucking parameters of the enclosure, then yes, you can make claims like that all day

>> No.22373407

>I usually amplify my subwoofers, just because I enjoy them working, I ran out of Batt-trees for them. Oh, and yes, if you put a 10 inch woofer in an ice chest it would probably be loud, but when you don't define the fucking parameters of the enclosure, then yes, you can make claims like that all day
None of this refutes my arguments, you're braying like a jackass and demonstrating nothing at all.

Learn what bandpass, dipole, transmission, ported, sealed, tapped horn and folded horn subwoofer configurations are before you make sweeping generalizations about what subwoofer drivers can and cannot do. Alternatively, go back to circle-jerking with the other know-nothings in whatever shit-tier car audio forum you came from.

>> No.22373437


Here's some reading for you

I think their 30 years of experience tops whatever placebo you're taking

Btw, you own Yamaha monitors and sennheiser headphones, Amiright?

>> No.22373494

>Do you just have a bunch of magical 10 inch woofers lying around that can do this?
You can make a box for any woofer or subwoofer, you goddamn protozoan.
There's even many kinds that focus on particular strength where the weaknesses don't matter with the application. Even the length of the port can drastically change the response, things like port velocity need to be taken into account as well.
>I think a number of audio companies would like to have a word with you
No they wouldn't, because they're already reaping the benefit of ported boxes tuned to a narrow band in most cases, just for maximum 'punch'. They know the specs of the woofer, they build a box around it to exploit that punch and probably even set up a horrible amp gain to get fantastic db levels from a shit woofer with decent sensitivity.
>and what fucked up frequency response do you have that functions apparently like voodoo?
Goddamn, son. I run a 10/12 setup with the 12 6th ordered, 10 sealed and filtered to 25-55~, 50-110 respectively. They may overlap but the rolloffs IMO are good enough for me.

I'm not sure what your agenda is or where you're getting your info but you could seriously benefit from reading the masters handbook or something, because you're not doing yourself any favors by being this ignorant, educated or not.

>> No.22373545

Cool story bro, you must have a fucking enclosure from hell

Oh, my agenda was to make retards stop saying that shitty sennheiser headphones could hit 5hz frequencies

>> No.22373598
File: 12 KB, 438x176, 36Corner[1].gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>appeal to authority
>no results
Hey look at that, they know about as much about alternative subwoofer configurations as you do!

Why, just look at what this shitty 12" driver can do in a folded horn enclosure, no usable output here!

>> No.22373640

Well they can, you just can't hear them.

As for cool story, again you really should do some research, lurk an audio forum or something. What I'm doing is not different to any DIY audio person is capable of. How are you coming to the conclusions that everything I say is bullshit? You don't even know what I'm running at what wattage, what my room measurements are, port lengths or diameters, what I'm using to power them etc.

I'm just really at a loss as to how you wont believe anything or even bother finding out for yourself how feasible tuning an enclosure is. I really am.

>> No.22373659

Can we see pics of your setup?

>> No.22373678

I'd really love to do a folded horn, they're fantastic with even the lowliest driver. It took my lazy ass over 4 months start to finish just to build a fucking 6th order for my 12 as it is, I'd sure as shit go big for a scoop or tapped horn if I were.

>> No.22373745
File: 33 KB, 668x393, justcscale[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

The in-room frequency response of some of the tapped horns gets my dick hard. Look at these Danley DTS-10 measurements (two 12" drivers)


Pictured related, dat SPL, dat ~9Hz F3

>> No.22373751

As much as I'd love to share, I don't own any cameras so I'll just have to read your 'lies lies lies' response. It really doesn't matter though, it wont change anything.
I'd offer you the chance to score some bropoints for posting yours, but I feel we should just let this die.

As a parting note, you seem able enough to figure things out on your own so long as you're not reading a corporate website dictating what you should buy, just because they say so and happen to have just what you need. There are .pdf's of audio/loudspeaker design and how to understand the differences between drivers. Who knows, you might even be keen enough to try something out yourself.

>> No.22373794

One key thing is that larger speakers are more efficient. Across the bands so, but particularly at lower registers. Certainly, an 8" cone can thump and rattle things, but only with gobs of power. Tube gear and venue operators need something more efficient, and a very large woofer can be sensitive at far lower frequencies. As for an extreme, Fostex has a 30" woofer that has high 90's sensitivity in the lowest registers for cinematic sound with small class A tube amps (not that lower bass distortion/fidelity is so important anyway).

>> No.22373826

Holy fuck, looks like I need to move from hometheatreshack and go there, that is BLACK MAGIC!
Just as I've started saving for a new amp, too.

>> No.22373834

That's to say nothing of enclosures, the point me and dear tripfriend have been trying to communicate to Nutsuru.

>> No.22373843

Especially when you're projecting that bass several hundred meters.

>> No.22373914

the DTS-10 is a commercial product that Danley has made available a few times, $1,000 for the DIY kit (flatpack plywood + the drivers), it uses custom drivers and the plans are not made available to the public. However, the AVS forum nutjobs have several threads detailing folded/tapped horn subwoofers that are every bit as impressive.

If you ever do have the cash and opportunity though, the DTS-10 is insane, I wish it was around back when I had a financial windfall.

>> No.22374041

about how much did your setup cost?

>> No.22374056

1k really is nothing at all considering, bigger companies would steal thousands more from you for something anywhere NEAR that.
I think I'll still save for my amp and put that on next, you've got me so wound up you bastard.

>> No.22374238

For the sub branch?
Not exceeding 1000 usd, including passive filters/crossovers (Hand wound, oh god), cables, terminations (MDF excluded). If I had to pay for the 1" MDF, I'd say easily hit the 1k mark.
I was lucky enough to get a mint cerwin stroker 12 for $190, patience is everything. The 10 is an infinity kappa 10.1 which while not entirely desirable, it does great in a sealed box.
Amp is an Alto mac 2.4.

>> No.22374914


>> No.22375848


>> No.22376208
File: 45 KB, 444x322, 1284231200829.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

but why?

>> No.22376327

While this thread is still alive, what you do guys think about the house curve compared with a flat one? Is there any good logical reasons for it or is it just preference?

>> No.22376360

Preference, I'm more for it than against it.

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.