What is the Hz?

[ShearMe]

There probably isn't an easy antidote to marketing as nothing stops companies lying about their products.

 

Tell a lie long enough and people will believe it.

 

 

Sorry, I don't understand. The FR goal of audio equipment is to get a completely flat response from 20hz to 20khz right? What do you mean by 'picking a response'? How does it make it 'look' linear but sound not good?

 

Coupling a pair of speakers to your head changes the way they sound in various ways, so you don't want a frequency response that's measured to be flat on every headphone. Everyone's head is different - ear shape, canal angle, bone density, etc, can all effect how your brain picks up the sound in ways that cannot be measured by a microphone.

 

Some people think K701's are perfectly flat sounding, and some think DT990's are where it's at. Neither person is wrong or right from their personal perspectives, but objectively, neither headphone measures close to flat.

[Lutkeveld]

Didn't know that there are brands that do that, I thought all manufacturers go for a good response 'on-head'. But people who search for / understand FR's will know that just FR's are not very meaningful.

[ShearMe]

Didn't know that there are brands that do that, I thought all manufacturers go for a good response 'on-head'. But people who search for / understand FR's will know that just FR's are not very meaningful.

Every brand has various series of headphones that aim to achieve different frequency responses. Except Razer.

[mr.skyrim_pc]

I'm 15 and I can feel 1hz, but only hear up to 17000hz

there is no way you can hear 1 Hz.

[ShearMe]

there is no way you can hear 1 Hz.

Which is why he said feel, not hear.

However, I do doubt he has been near equipment that can produce 1Hz without too much THD, let alone be permitted to listen to it, let alone whilst playing any kind of content that goes that low.

[Whit3Rav3n]

Can also be caused by your audio equipment not being able to reproduce 14kHz.

 

 

Sorry, I don't understand. The FR goal of audio equipment is to get a completely flat response from 20hz to 20khz right? What do you mean by 'picking a response'? How does it make it 'look' linear but sound not good?

The problem is that your ears. head and torso will reflect the sound waves and therefore bend the frequencies that actually come to your eardrums. So if you listen to perfectly flat calibrated speakers and measure the frequency response at your ear drums it will be far from linear. If you listen to headphones you want to simulate the same experience as listening to speakers, therefore you have to actually simulate the effects of your body. This is called the head rated transfer function. That is the reason why headphones would sound unnatural if they sounded perfectly flat, in that case it would really sound like the sound comes right from next to your ear.

[Whit3Rav3n]

 

 

Coupling a pair of speakers to your head changes the way they sound in various ways, so you don't want a frequency response that's measured to be flat on every headphone. Everyone's head is different - ear shape, canal angle, bone density, etc, can all effect how your brain picks up the sound in ways that cannot be measured by a microphone.

 

Some people think K701's are perfectly flat sounding, and some think DT990's are where it's at. Neither person is wrong or right from their personal perspectives, but objectively, neither headphone measures close to flat.

Well partly this but then the hrtf is roughly the same for every person. The other part is that not everyone prefers a neutral sound. Even if we take the problem with different hrtf out of account and look at speakers we will find that a lot of people find truly neutral speakers too boring and thin sounding. As a result a lot of manufacturers don´t even try to design a flat sounding speaker but rather one that many people would like. The same thing also goes for headphones. A lot of people don´t want a neutral sounding headphone, they want more bass, more treble or less treble depending on taste. So headphone manufacturers also design differently sounded headphones for people who don´t want a neutral sounding headphone. To be fair most headphones on the market don´t really aim for neutral sound.

[ShearMe]

Even if we take the problem with different hrtf out of account and look at speakers we will find that a lot of people find truly neutral speakers too boring and thin sounding. 

 

Pretty sure it's been scientifically proven that everyone prefers a neutral sounding pair of speakers.

[Stagea]

Well partly this but then the hrtf is roughly the same for every person. The other part is that not everyone prefers a neutral sound. Even if we take the problem with different hrtf out of account and look at speakers we will find that a lot of people find truly neutral speakers too boring and thin sounding. As a result a lot of manufacturers don´t even try to design a flat sounding speaker but rather one that many people would like. The same thing also goes for headphones. A lot of people don´t want a neutral sounding headphone, they want more bass, more treble or less treble depending on taste. So headphone manufacturers also design differently sounded headphones for people who don´t want a neutral sounding headphone. To be fair most headphones on the market don´t really aim for neutral sound.

Minor HTRF correction is easier to do in software. Besides, makers can post htrf corrected frequency response data anyway.

[Whit3Rav3n]

Pretty sure it's been scientifically proven that everyone prefers a neutral sounding pair of speakers.

Can you give a source to this because I am pretty sure that is impossible. No way everyone agrees on one thing in such a subjective topic. Also the vast amount of expensive speakers that clearly don't  aim for a neutral sounding would not make much sense. I even have speakers calibrated to flat frequency response and most people find the bass too thin, especially because almost every consumer grade speaker is tuned to have more bass than neutral. Or am I missing a troll post here?

 

Minor HTRF correction is easier to do in software. Besides, makers can post htrf corrected frequency response data anyway.

HRTF correction could be done in software but it can not be expected that everyone is going to run an audioplayer with convolver support. Also not having to dealing with phase shifts due to the correction filter is a nice to have. They could post a hrtf corrected measurement, that is what most headphone test sites do but because there are derivations in hrtf depending on person and the exact angle you measure at there is no "one and only" correct hrtf. And here comes the problem where manufacturers could bend their hrtf response the way they like claiming that this is the optimal response they found even if it is not the case and it is only supposed to make their headphones frequency response look good.

[ShearMe]

Can you give a source to this because I am pretty sure that is impossible. No way everyone agrees on one thing in such a subjective topic. Also the vast amount of expensive speakers that clearly don't  aim for a neutral sounding would not make much sense. I even have speakers calibrated to flat frequency response and most people find the bass too thin, especially because almost every consumer grade speaker is tuned to have more bass than neutral. Or am I missing a troll post here?

 

"There are clear visual correlations between listeners' loudspeaker preferences and the set of frequency graphs. Both trained and untrained listeners clearly preferred the loudspeakers with the flattest, smoothest and most extended frequency response curves, as exhibited in the measurements of loudspeakers P and I. Loudspeaker B was rated lower due to its less extended, bumpy bass, and a large hole centered at 3 kHz in its sound power curve. The measurements of Loudspeaker M indicate it has a lack of low bass, and has a non-smooth frequency response in all of its measured curves. Both the direct and reflected sounds produced by this loudspeaker will contribute serious colorations to the timbre of reproduced sounds.

 

It is both satisfying and reassuring to know that both trained and untrained listeners recognize and prefer accurate loudspeakers, and that the accuracy can be characterized with a set of comprehensive anechoic measurements. The next logical step is to use these technical measurements as the basis for modeling and predicting listeners' preference ratings. This will be the topic of a future post in this blog."

 

http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2008/12/part-3-relationship-between-loudspeaker.html 

[SSL]

 

"There are clear visual correlations between listeners' loudspeaker preferences and the set of frequency graphs. Both trained and untrained listeners clearly preferred the loudspeakers with the flattest, smoothest and most extended frequency response curves, as exhibited in the measurements of loudspeakers P and I. Loudspeaker B was rated lower due to its less extended, bumpy bass, and a large hole centered at 3 kHz in its sound power curve. The measurements of Loudspeaker M indicate it has a lack of low bass, and has a non-smooth frequency response in all of its measured curves. Both the direct and reflected sounds produced by this loudspeaker will contribute serious colorations to the timbre of reproduced sounds.

 

It is both satisfying and reassuring to know that both trained and untrained listeners recognize and prefer accurate loudspeakers, and that the accuracy can be characterized with a set of comprehensive anechoic measurements. The next logical step is to use these technical measurements as the basis for modeling and predicting listeners' preference ratings. This will be the topic of a future post in this blog."

 

http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2008/12/part-3-relationship-between-loudspeaker.html 

 

 

Shit that is hard to read.

[Stagea]

I even have speakers calibrated to flat frequency response and most people find the bass too thin, especially because almost every consumer grade speaker is tuned to have more bass than neutral. Or am I missing a troll post here?

HRTF correction could be done in software but it can not be expected that everyone is going to run an audioplayer with convolver support. Also not having to dealing with phase shifts due to the correction filter is a nice to have. They could post a hrtf corrected measurement, that is what most headphone test sites do but because there are derivations in hrtf depending on person and the exact angle you measure at there is no "one and only" correct hrtf. And here comes the problem where manufacturers could bend their hrtf response the way they like claiming that this is the optimal response they found even if it is not the case and it is only supposed to make their headphones frequency response look good.

How did you calibrate the speaker? With close micing in open air? Most people prefer a heavier low end because they're used to hearing cabin/room gain that reinforces the bass. Flattening the frequency domain response in-room with an eq can also artificially reduce the intensity of certain frequencies (especially below 100Hz) during transients, as the measurement also picks up the result of room interaction (some frequencies can ring and intensify over the measurement period). Prudent use of FIR filters help, but it is best to fix everything first then correct last.

As for HRTF, it'd be nice to have plots of both the corrected response and the correction curve applied (or maybe the uncorrected measurement). I understand that each person should have a unique correction curve. Unfortunately, very few people actually get to have themselves measured.

[SSL]

Which is why he said feel, not hear.

However, I do doubt he has been near equipment that can produce 1Hz without too much THD, let alone be permitted to listen to it, let alone whilst playing any kind of content that goes that low.

 

there is no way you can hear 1 Hz.

 

I'm going to surmise that no sound system on earth can produce that frequency. Most consumer grade equipment can't even hit 16 Hz (fundamental of a 32' organ stop) and 1 Hz is fucking four octaves lower.

[Stagea]

I'm going to surmise that no sound system on earth can produce that frequency. Most consumer grade equipment can't even hit 16 Hz (fundamental of a 32' organ stop) and 1 Hz is fucking four octaves lower.

A lot can, but at a very low intensity. A reciprocating driver would need a lot of power and displacement to deliver significant intensity at this frequency in most rooms (unless you create a huge resonator, which on the other hand may exhibit poor transient response).

A rotary subwoofer is what you'd want for this application.

[Whit3Rav3n]

 

"There are clear visual correlations between listeners' loudspeaker preferences and the set of frequency graphs. Both trained and untrained listeners clearly preferred the loudspeakers with the flattest, smoothest and most extended frequency response curves, as exhibited in the measurements of loudspeakers P and I. Loudspeaker B was rated lower due to its less extended, bumpy bass, and a large hole centered at 3 kHz in its sound power curve. The measurements of Loudspeaker M indicate it has a lack of low bass, and has a non-smooth frequency response in all of its measured curves. Both the direct and reflected sounds produced by this loudspeaker will contribute serious colorations to the timbre of reproduced sounds.

 

It is both satisfying and reassuring to know that both trained and untrained listeners recognize and prefer accurate loudspeakers, and that the accuracy can be characterized with a set of comprehensive anechoic measurements. The next logical step is to use these technical measurements as the basis for modeling and predicting listeners' preference ratings. This will be the topic of a future post in this blog."

 

http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2008/12/part-3-relationship-between-loudspeaker.html 

 

Well the link doesn't work but it is not a universal truth. In other researches like the one at harman people actually liked other soundings more than neutral:

 

It's important to note at this point that a flat speaker in a typical home listening room does not sound flat. Due to the ever decreasing dispersion of sound from a direct radiating speaker as frequency rises and the low frequency gain of a small room (boundary effect), the actual sound power in the room is somewhat more bass heavy than the flat anechoic response of the speaker. This is normal, and it's believed that we expect and desire this warm tilt with speakers in a room.

The primary purpose of this test was to see exactly how people EQed the speakers and headphones away from flat, how much, and if there were differences between the preferred speaker and headphone response. It was found, generally speaking, that the preferred response was a warm tilt with about 8dB difference between bass and treble at the extremes. It was also found that people preferred speakers to have about 2dB more bass and treble relative to the mids than headphones.

 

http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/headphone-target-response-curve-research-update

 

 

How did you calibrate the speaker? With close micing in open air? Most people prefer a heavier low end because they're used to hearing cabin/room gain that reinforces the bass. Flattening the frequency domain response in-room with an eq can also artificially reduce the intensity of certain frequencies (especially below 100Hz) during transients, as the measurement also picks up the result of room interaction (some frequencies can ring and intensify over the measurement period). Prudent use of FIR filters help, but it is best to fix everything first then correct last.

As for HRTF, it'd be nice to have plots of both the corrected response and the correction curve applied (or maybe the uncorrected measurement). I understand that each person should have a unique correction curve. Unfortunately, very few people actually get to have themselves measured.

 

It was done as in room measurement, the point was to eq out problems caused by room reflections. I used Room EQ wizzard as software which does a good job at EQ-ing out peaks without overdoing it. The result is pretty good, the amount of bass is similar to the amount in a Sennheiser HD 800 which is pretty neutral in bass.