Submitted by TheFrator t3_z6wmyt in headphones
Egoexpo t1_iy47lwk wrote
Reply to comment by c0ng0pr0 in Just EQ in resolution. by TheFrator
We can just speculate about this topic, maybe this text Here can help to understand.
c0ng0pr0 t1_iy4qr9r wrote
Thank you. That was interesting.
I look at headphones/speakers/IEMs as technology/hardware. So when I hear technicalities I expect something about part of the hardware, and it’s effects on all the stuff listed in the linked article.
Like different material filters = x resulting sound
Or driver arrangements in hybrid setups positioned differently = y result
Sorry if my perspective is off.
Egoexpo t1_iy50huy wrote
Engineers (like Sean Olive and Oratory) who have already been able to speak about this have already explained that the material, price or "arrangement of the drivers" does not necessarily make one headphone technically better than the other in terms of speed, decay or something of that order.
For those of us who just want to know about sound quality, any headphone technical result is show in the frequency response graph and the THD graph. Remembering that most headphones on the market do not have THD high enough for us to be able to hear, for this reason we have more frequency response graphs available than THD graphs on the internet.
Jackstraw335 t1_iy4v6wr wrote
That article lost me at "Knowing that all the characteristics of headphones are in frequency response graph..."
Egoexpo t1_iy519yh wrote
This is what engineers and scientists who study headphones talk about, only audiophiles disagree with this. I think it's worth remembering that these scientists and engineers also had the opportunity to listen to expensive headphones, such as the Hifiman and Stax headphones. If there was something about these headphones that wasn't showing on the frequency response graph and the THD graph, then those scientists and engineers who have been studying headphones for years would probably have noticed.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments