Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

LaTerreEstPlate t1_j20303y wrote

You're going to get downvoted a lot for this observation, but you are right. Frequency response is separate from soundstage, imaging, detail, and dynamics, though the general consensus on reddit is that fr is responsible for all aspects of a headphone's sound.

Reviewers provide frequency response in their reviews because it's one of the only objective factors in sound quality they can provide. EQ can be very helpful in fixing a headphone's flaws, but many people don't want to deal with that, and I suspect that's why many reviewers emphasize frequency response. It's much easier to just buy a headphone that's well tuned from the start.

−4

ku1185 t1_j204b0n wrote

Frequency response is basically the only measurements that I can... hear. THD, CSD, impulse response, etc., doesn't always correlate to what I hear out of headphones. Not to say that's not useful, but seems less reliable in terms of predicting what something sounds like.

5

LaTerreEstPlate t1_j204nkb wrote

That's essentially what I was getting to in the second part of my post. It's the only objective measurement a reviewer can provide that has a useful basis for comparison for the average person.

2

ICrySaI OP t1_j207bru wrote

That might be true but I'm more interested in the aspects of a headphone I cannot change, since those are ultimately what will decide if I like it or not.

And for an audiophile audience who spend thousands on audio equipment I really don't think fiddling with a few sliders to make their stuff sound better should be too much.

Thanks for your explanations :D

2

blazecc t1_j23lt7q wrote

> And for an audiophile audience who spend thousands on audio equipment I really don't think fiddling with a few sliders to make their stuff sound better should be too much.

As a counter point, if I'm spending thousands on equipment, I shouldn't need to.

1