Study Shows No Correlation Between Price and Sound Quality in Headphones

[shadyJ]

If there is an audible difference between headphones, whatever it is, it should be revealed in a blind test. Olive's testing shows that frequency response is the chief attribute that differentiates these devices via blind testing. If there are other metrics that affect the sound, they would show up in blind testing, for instance distortion can be a factor sometimes, and that is shown in blind testing. If anyone is arguing for something that makes 'sound system A' sound better than 'sound system B' but that doesn't show up in blind testing, that is when I get sleepy and have to take a nap.

 

[mtrycrafts]

.... If anyone is arguing for something that makes 'sound system A' sound better than 'sound system B' but that doesn't show up in blind testing, that is when I get sleepy and have to take a nap.

Before you fall asleep though ask for good evidence then take the nap.

 

[<eargiant]

Wow. I thought I was the only one skeptical about the assumptions, hypotheses, and methodology of Sean Olive. Glad to see other people share similar concerns...

I see you have the Sennheiser HD-800S, have you compared them side by side to the HD-600 or HD-650? If so, I'd like to hear your thoughts.

 

[swspiers]

I see you have the Sennheiser HD-800S, have you compared them side by side to the HD-600 or HD-650? If so, I'd like to hear your thoughts.

I'm getting the Massdrop 6XX in December, otherwise I haven't heard a 650 in almost 10 years. But I could represent a headphone forum and lecture about headphone's I've never heard...

 

[<eargiant]

I'm getting the Massdrop 6XX in December, otherwise I haven't heard a 650 in almost 10 years. But I could represent a headphone forum and lecture about headphone's I've never heard...

I ordered the Massdrop 6XX's too and they're supposedly going to ship out early!

I'm definitely not expecting them to sound anywhere near as good as the HD800S which I loved but at the Massdrop price I couldn't resist.

When you get the 6XXs let us know how you think they compare to your 800S. I'd be curious to see if we agree.

 

[jslivingston]

What happens is an extreme case of diminishing returns, especially in the audiophile world. I'm more than happy with $99 set of Sennheiser HD 280 Pro's as I was listening to a $350 set of cans, all properly powered by an amp through a solid converter. The expensive ones might have sounded a bit better, but not $251 better. Then next higher priced pair will deliver even less additional value for an even steeper climb in price.

And that's not because it's a rip off, it's because the research and development to create a flatter and flatter frequency response gets increasingly more expensive. Someone's gotta pay for that. I'd rather get to 95% perfection and not pay 10x more to get to 98%.

 

[<eargiant]

Got my 6XX's today! Run don't walk, at $199.99 this is the best headphone value out there.

https://www.massdrop.com/buy/massdrop-sennheiser-hd6xx

I've had a bunch of supposedly flat measuring speakers that cannot reproduce recorded music like the 650s do. I still think the 800S are in a completely different league.

 

[<eargiant]

Another great set of headphones at the same great price of $199.99 are the Massdrop AKG7XX although these will require more power to get them cooking than the HD-650's.

I have the Sennheiser HD-6XX & the AKG 7XX and while very different I like them both. Especially at this price.

https://www.massdrop.com/buy/akg-k7xx-massdrop-first-edition-headphones

 

[William Sommerwerck]

This is one of those odd "arguments" where the arguers more or less agree. Why anyone would spend $20K on a turntable, simply because they think they like its sound, is beyond me.

Audio equipment is meant to be listened to, not measured. I know of no form of bias-free testing that can be performed in a half hour. Valid testing requires long-term listening by multiple listeners. Manufacturers rarely have time for this.

There are other points worth discussing. Let me know if you'd like to go further.

 

[shadyJ]

Audio equipment is meant to be listened to, not measured. I know of no form of bias-free testing that can be performed in a half hour. Valid testing requires long-term listening by multiple listeners. Manufacturers rarely have time for this.

I have some big news for you: measurements can be correlated to listening experience. Once you have good enough measurements, and you know how to correlate that to experience, then you can have a very good sense of what a speaker or headphone sounds like without having heard it. If a piece of audio equipment measures well, than it will sound good.

 

[William Sommerwerck]

And if you know how to build a big rocket, you can fly to the Moon. There are all sorts of things one can measure. How do you know which measurement(s) correlate with which aspects of sound reproduction?

I just read an article about how Magico designs its speakers. It tries to reduce all errors (including diffraction and cabinet-vibration noise) to the lowest possible levels. Magico claims that this approach pushes the speaker's sound in the direction of accuracy or realism, and away from euphony.

As far as individual drivers go, I stand by my statement that how quickly a driver stops when the signal is removed is the principal factor in the driver's sonic accuracy. (Accuracy is what we're interested in, not whether the driver "sounds good".) This is testable in a straightforward way, but I know of no one who's done systematic research.

 

[shadyJ]

And if you know how to build a big rocket, you can fly to the Moon. There are all sorts of things one can measure. How do you know which measurement(s) correlate with which aspects of sound reproduction?

Psychoacoustic research. There have been more studies done in this area that are published in the JAES and JASA than I can shake a stick at. For starters, look at much of the research from Sean Olive or Floyd Toole from the last 30 years.

I just read an article about how Magico designs its speakers. It tries to reduce all errors (including diffraction and cabinet-vibration noise) to the lowest possible levels. Magico claims that this approach pushes the speaker's sound in the direction of accuracy or realism, and away from euphony.

Give me a break, "euphony" vs accuracy. No offense, but that is audiophile nonsense. Read up on what the latest psychoacoustic research has to say about this. The article that this thread is the subject of mentions some of that research.

As far as individual drivers go, I stand by my statement that how quickly a driver stops when the signal is removed is the principal factor in the driver's sonic accuracy. (Accuracy is what we're interested in, not whether the driver "sounds good".) This is testable in a straightforward way, but I know of no one who's done systematic research.

Why would you stand by that statement when you have nothing to support it? What you are talking is damping, and there is nothing to suggest that an over-damped driver sounds better than a properly damped driver. An overdamped driver can have a very high-Q response shape and sound bad, by the way. Drivers usually stop moving very quickly. If they don't, the suspension is too loose, and there will be all kinds of problems after that. A whole different set of problems occur of the suspension is too tight. This is not a serious problem in speaker design. Most large manufacturers know how to apply suspension correctly.

 

[William Sommerwerck]

I apologize to the other members of this group for my bluntness, but shadyJ makes statements about things he lacks a proper grasp of. (As Cary Grant said, "How can you talk of things about which you know nothing?") If you don't understand the difference between euphony and accuracy -- what can I say?

He confuses the damping of a driver's fundamental resonance with the damping of its overall motion, which is quite a different thing. Peter Walker briefly discusses this in his JAES article about the ESL-63.

"Drivers usually stop moving very quickly. If they don't, the suspension is too loose, and there will be all kinds of problems after that." I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

I have a BS EE, made live recordings on a regular basis (more years ago than I care to admit), and belong to the AES (sponsored by Saul Marantz and Jon Dahlquist). My ultimate qualification, however, is that as I grow older, my ignorance increases. I am more and more aware of questions for which there don't seem to be good answers, and issues I can't get a proper hold on.

A big part of "intelligence" is being aware of one's own ignorance. shadyJ has a way to go.

 

[shadyJ]

I apologize to the other members of this group for my bluntness, but shadyJ makes statements about things he lacks a proper grasp of. (As Cary Grant said, "How can you talk of things about which you know nothing?") If you don't understand the difference between euphony and accuracy -- what can I say?

He confuses the damping of a driver's fundamental resonance with the damping of its overall motion, which is quite a different thing. Peter Walker briefly discusses this in his JAES article about the ESL-63.

"Drivers usually stop moving very quickly. If they don't, the suspension is too loose, and there will be all kinds of problems after that." I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

I have a BS EE, made live recordings on a regular basis (more years ago than I care to admit), and belong to the AES (sponsored by Saul Marantz and Jon Dahlquist). My ultimate qualification, however, is that as I grow older, my ignorance increases. I am more and more aware of questions for which there don't seem to be good answers, and issues I can't get a proper hold on.

A big part of "intelligence" is being aware of one's own ignorance. shadyJ has a way to go.

If you followed psychoacoustic research, you would know that people more often preferred a flat frequency response ie accuracy, therefore 'euphony.' Psychoacoustics shows that euphony and accuracy in a sound system are the same thing. 'Euphony' should be accomplished in the recording, and the sound system should simply reproduce that recording. It is that simple. You seem to be arguing for distortion.

 

[William Sommerwerck]

You don't know what "euphony" means, do you? Please refer me to a source where the equivalence of euphony and accuracy is demonstrated.

 

[shadyJ]

A Multiple Regression Model for Predicting Loudspeaker Preference Using Objective Measurements: Part I - Listening Test Results

A Multiple Regression Model for Predicting Loudspeaker Preference Using Objective Measurements: Part II - Development of the Model

Listener Preferences for In-Room Loudspeaker and Headphone Target Responses

Subjective Measurements of Loudspeaker Sound Quality and Listener Performance

Loudspeaker Measurements and Their Relationship to Listener Preferences: Part 1

Loudspeaker Measurements and Their Relationship to Listener Preferences: Part 2

 

[shadyJ]

He confuses the damping of a driver's fundamental resonance with the damping of its overall motion, which is quite a different thing. Peter Walker briefly discusses this in his JAES article about the ESL-63.

"Drivers usually stop moving very quickly. If they don't, the suspension is too loose, and there will be all kinds of problems after that." I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

One more thing, I am using the word damping in the normal sense. I believe the confusion is on your part. The suspension determines the driver's damping factor and its compliance. These parameters determine how fast the moving assembly returns to rest position, and also plays a part in determining its resonant frequency.

You seem to think that a driver that returns to its rest state faster than another is the better driver. This purely depends on application.

 

[William Sommerwerck]

The Toole articles you reference are about preference, not accuracy. The two are not necessarily related.

When arguing with someone lacking a proper technical background, and who is willfully ignorant, you eventually reach the point where an ad hominem attack becomes all-too tempting. I will refrain. To those willing to be led down the path of intellectual foolishness -- be my guest. No one is paying me to educate you, so why should I care?