SupOrSalad
SupOrSalad t1_iydb8cm wrote
Reply to What is Burn-in? by PieDiscombobulated11
You don't need it
SupOrSalad t1_iy9utek wrote
Reply to Sennheiser 560s sound terrible to me by ben_reshef
Whe you use headphones with a particular sound signature, your brain automatically adjusts to it, and a deviation from that will sound exaggerated. The XM4 is a really bassy headphone, it actually has more bass than even modern beats headphones.
If that's what you're used to, your brain will equalize to that so that sound signature sounds like a neutral to you.
The 560s has linear bass. Switching to that from an XM4 will make it sound like all the low end is missing, and it usually takes a few days of constant listening for your brain to readjust, then the bass will sound more full again and overall the sound signature will be fuller and you'll likely notice more details in music youre used to. After that happens, going back to the XM4 from the 560s will probably sound like the XM4 is really bloated and congested sounding, with much of the details in the mids masked
SupOrSalad t1_iy9oqe7 wrote
Just use whatever you enjoy most
SupOrSalad t1_iy9mh3l wrote
Reply to comment by nutyo in Just EQ in resolution. by TheFrator
The thing is, those are still more of a perception thing. The physical driver will follow whatever the signal is near instantaneously since it's a minimum phase system. Even between "slow" sounding and "fast" sounding headphones, the driver response is basically identical. So effects of attack, decay, speed, and clarity, are more due to frequency masking and what parts of the frequency a particular driver emphasizes more than another (not something you can just EQ in. Different drivers have unique sounds to them).
I just think the term "resolution" can be misleading to some since it may imply more of a physical difference you can read on a stat sheet, rather than something you just have to hear for yourself to understand
SupOrSalad OP t1_iy6z48m wrote
Reply to comment by 20EYES in Headphone wizardry by SupOrSalad
Watched them now. Really informative and actually enjoyable to watch. Thanks for sharing that!
SupOrSalad OP t1_iy6p8wq wrote
Reply to comment by neon_overload in Headphone wizardry by SupOrSalad
It's just a play on sound waves and wave forms. Music has multiple frequencies, but they're all combined together into a single waveform that the driver follows to create a pressure wave. Then your ear hears that pressure wave and extracts the individual frequencies again
SupOrSalad OP t1_iy6dnq6 wrote
Reply to comment by FrenchieSmalls in Headphone wizardry by SupOrSalad
Yeah. It's just a meme based on semantics, that's all. It's producing multiple sounds, just in one waveform. Nothing to take seriously
SupOrSalad OP t1_iy6brcj wrote
Reply to comment by FrenchieSmalls in Headphone wizardry by SupOrSalad
It's just a play on how transducers make sound. The speaker itself is only moving up and down to generate a single waveform. It's just that the waveform is a combination of many frequencies which our ears and brain is able to decipher as individual sounds
SupOrSalad OP t1_iy670na wrote
Reply to comment by imahawki in Headphone wizardry by SupOrSalad
Asking the real questions
SupOrSalad OP t1_iy62xv9 wrote
Reply to comment by 20EYES in Headphone wizardry by SupOrSalad
Will definitely when I get off work. Thanks
SupOrSalad OP t1_iy5ykpb wrote
Reply to comment by 20EYES in Headphone wizardry by SupOrSalad
Thanks. I know it's a math equation that I really don't understand. Hoping to learn as much as possible, but yeah my understanding is definitely limited
SupOrSalad OP t1_iy5sabv wrote
Reply to comment by WoodenSporkAudio in Headphone wizardry by SupOrSalad
Disregard my original comment, I misread the comment above, and mine is a poor and incorrect explanation>!Yeah it all combines together through the fourier transform. The movement of the driver is a sum of its frequencies, and even if the driver seems to be moving up and down in a simple pattern, it is doing that as a result of the different frequencies all adding together. Your ear is able to take that sound and through a reverse of the same fourier transform equation, each individual frequency is separated and heard individually!<
SupOrSalad t1_iy4nurm wrote
Reply to comment by Dangerous-Ad5282 in Just EQ in resolution. by TheFrator
Nah but for real, I think the term "Resolution" is misused a lot in audiophile terms since we think of Resolution as a fixed stat. Screen resolution, etc.
In terms of audio, we could call the frequency range or bit rate as "resolution" but that's not what people mean when they describe resolving headphones. They more talking about a perception or how it feels
SupOrSalad t1_iy4hakf wrote
Sennheiser build has changed a lot. Still durable, but thinner and lighter plastics. Even a new HD600 or 650 next to an older pair (or compared to a current 6xx which uses the old mold), the new one feels cheap and light. At first I even thought it was fake because of how it felt in comparison
SupOrSalad t1_iy4alhx wrote
Reply to comment by Gimp_Ninja in Just EQ in resolution. by TheFrator
>2. Referring to the Harman target and headphones that fit it well as "neutral" when that is clearly V-shaped. Neutral is flat, damnit.
I think when people think of Harman, they hyper focus on the bass, which is meant to be adjusted to your liking. More important to the Harman target are the mids and treble. That's why things like the HD600 are considered as following the Harman target really well, even though it has neutral bass
SupOrSalad t1_iy46cja wrote
Reply to comment by Dangerous-Ad5282 in Just EQ in resolution. by TheFrator
20hz-20khz
Submitted by SupOrSalad t3_z715hp in headphones
SupOrSalad OP t1_iy3yk2n wrote
Reply to comment by oratory1990 in The future is now by SupOrSalad
Yeah it's more just meant as a joke on how some react.
SupOrSalad t1_iy3sx9c wrote
Reply to Just EQ in resolution. by TheFrator
15+ more upper mids and treble? We're ascending to the next level of hifi untapped before
Submitted by SupOrSalad t3_z6hiqc in headphones
SupOrSalad t1_ixwxf7y wrote
Reply to What aspect of performance is the most important or most undervalued (tonality, Soundstage, timbre, transience, etc.) ? by TheRadiantSoap
I think Soundstage is the most overvalued (me a 6X0 enjoyer)
SupOrSalad t1_ixvjo0l wrote
Reply to Sennheiser HD600 Sound Quality? by I_Dont_Have_A_Name13
Listen to them for a few days straight. Your brain will always "auto EQ" to whatever you listen to the most. This makes the difference in sound signature exaggerated for a couple days.
When I first switched to 600s they sounded anemic and lacking energy, but after a few days they sounded very balanced and clear, and other headphones I was used to sounded muddy and really lacking in sound quality
Submitted by SupOrSalad t3_z43t46 in headphones
SupOrSalad t1_ixoo84q wrote
Reply to comment by ArkadyDarell_NA in Moondrop Alice sound is disappointing by ArkadyDarell_NA
I do think that for your case its probably better to return the Alice. I found moondrop Bluetooth IEMs have sort of a background noise and don't sound the best on my devices. For a reliable TWS, I do prefer airpods pro or Galaxy Buds Pro.
I do like wired IEMs, but fit and convenience is really important
SupOrSalad t1_j19ukpo wrote
Reply to criteria by lightning696969
It's really just a meme ranking. For example mid-fi or summit-fi isn't a thing. It's just brackets people set by price.