Just EQ in resolution.Submitted by TheFrator t3_z6wmyt in headphones
c0ng0pr0 t1_iy449ib wrote
Reply to comment by dongas420 in Just EQ in resolution. by TheFrator
It’s funny to me after 18 months of paying attention to the “professional” reviewers… none of them have tried to start a wiki or something like to build a common vocabulary/jargon list which is clear.
dongas420 t1_iy4612j wrote
Browsing the /r/headphones front page every day doesn't count as paying attention. Crinacle and Precogvision have posted detailed articles on how they perceive and evaluate technicalities.
jeffthetree t1_iy59sc0 wrote
How dare you provide factual answer
mainguy t1_iy4z37u wrote
I mean its the same for musicians. We describe sounds as fuzzy, thin, thick, warm, bright, moody, and so on. It works because we have a common reference of experience (im talking about guitar).
It always baffles me how headphone reviewers get so much schtick for their vocab. Sound is hard to describe.
[deleted] t1_iy5yk7v wrote
[deleted]
BGpolyhistor t1_iy5tuht wrote
Headytexel t1_iy46aqx wrote
IIRC Head-Fi did it a loooooong time ago but it never really caught on. Also I’m sure newer reviewers like Resolve could do a much better version.
GL1TCH3D t1_iy4vvdd wrote
Something like this? https://www.head-fi.org/threads/describing-sound-a-glossary.220770/
I found it helpful to use this when describing what I was hearing.
Unless you mean understanding graphs or something
Headytexel t1_iy4xe6b wrote
Yep! I think that’s the one I was thinking of.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments