I mentioned hurting your feelings due to the comment made above.
1 Like
Thanks for taking my feelings into consideration but like it says in my quote, “people who like to make others (not me) feel bad…”
1 Like
Agree, never said it was a dishonest review.
No one mans opinion stands alone.
…and the other reviews are not fly by night ones either…as u indicated.
And subjective opinions are just that “subjective”. Even backed with “Science, charts and graphs”…some will like and others will dislike.
I appreciate someone who takes the time to honestly try to state how things work, sound, interact etc.
Just saying there are other very mainstream sources of information that are trustworthy as well.
and now we know the rest of the story,
Enjoy the music!
Alex
2 Likes
Good discussion so far.
(So… when you read the comments below, please keep in mind that I’m not trying to shit on Chrono’s review. I’m just genuinely confused and looking for answers.)
Just to get this out of the way… Harman. Preference curve. You get a ton of people who probably don’t listen to music like we do, you mash all their thoughts on sound into a big average, and you get this curve. Oh, and it changes every few years. Let’s face it, most people’s opinion on good audio come from listening to junk in their cars. I hate the idea of using this curve as a target for a specialized sub-group of music fans who are leaps and bounds ahead of the average person in listening experience and the ability of their equipment to do so.
I understand there is pinna gain, other hrtf effects and stuff going on, but do you really want the majority of the treble region being 6+ dB greater than the rest of the FR? I don’t. I’ve always disagreed with this part of the curve, and I likely always will.
(Sorry for the side rant, but it leads me to this…)
I’m just confused with his impressions of the treble. Looking at the graph used by @Resolve to support Chrono’s impressions (not saying they are wrong, it’s his opinion and preferences after all) some things just don’t add up to me.
But… the graph shows that everything above 10k is below anything under 10k. How does that equate to “significantly boosted”?
I mean… Chrono likes the HD800S treble, which to my ears are unquestionably brighter than Empy in every regard.
Either there is production variance and mine sound different than this, something in the Chrono chain made his sound like warm K9 poopoo, or… hell, something is going on. I just spent 30 min listening to sine sweeps on Empy through 4 different amps (Yggy > T4, Blackwidow 2, Pendant, Asgard 3) and I can’t audibly detect what it is he’s talking about in most of his review, even in regard to the bass and mids. Edit: Hell, the VC are brighter than the Empyrean, and those were ok. What gives?
Someone help me make sense of this.
(And before anyone says it, yeah, I know preferences between listeners will differ, I don’t hear like other people will, etc.)
6 Likes
I just watched a few of your reviews on YouTube earlier today - very cool and informative!! But now I’m back down the YouTube rabbit hole again. One pill makes you larger…
3 Likes
I am not opposed to these and enjoy it, to the extent the review/content is otherwise substantial and informative.
2 Likes
Yup for sure as long as you state " the review/content is otherwise substantial and informative"…
Yup sounds good here…
A.
3 Likes
I cant agree any more…
Alex
3 Likes
I agree – informative, accurate, on point content first, before “his videos have good production value.”
Yeah no problem. I just didn’t get the (not me) from the original quote. Thought you were grouping yourself into/with the others.
All good.
It was an honest and thorough take, but an incomplete one, if I’m being honest. What’s missing is the information that would make me think that this might be the right headphone for me, which after having tried 30+ high-end headphones turned out to be the case for me.
Also usually with these ultra-expensive headphones, you guys often mention that value isn’t part of the conversation. Except for the Empyrean. This is a recurring theme in the more objectively oriented reviews on the Empyrean, and I just don’t understand why that is. It has unique sonic qualities that set it apart from other headphones, and that make it potentially desirable from a purely sonic perspective. Combine that with getting your moneys worth in terms of build/design/comfort, and it’s simply a really compelling package for the right person, and imo absolutely worth its asking price. It’s unfortunate that this isn’t covered in this review.
6 Likes
On this subject, that’s not at all what the Harman research is - even though I have similar criticism regarding the idea of ‘group consensus’ on any subject haha.
If you haven’t seen it yet, definitely check out the explanation of the Harman target here:
The bottom line is that while it’s worth scrutinizing/criticizing, the initial premise makes so much sense for developing a reference tuning curve - and the subsequent research is corroborated by other independent studies as well (Fleischmann). For the curve I used here, it’s closer to the initial in-room listening target (I don’t use the bass shelf the 2018 target asks for).
With regards to the ear gain region, the Harman target is actually already a bit relaxed in that area (around 3khz) compared to other target curves. You may be an outlier here, but I actually think there’s a strong argument that suggests the treble in general is a bit rolled off as well. But apart from that, there really isn’t much debate about how headphones should measure above 1khz. The bigger point of scrutiny is what’s going on below 1khz, because this is where frequencies aren’t being impacted by human anatomy. So the question is, is the contoured lower midrange and bass shelf appropriate? Or does that cause a lack of body - this is why I also showed the IEF target. I tend to agree with Crin on this criticism of the Harman target.
Now with regards to the shiny treble comment, it’s important to note that the 711 standard rigs are accurate up to 10khz, and less so above that. But even on this rig if you look closely, you see that the peak is actually at around 11khz. More important than this though, is that it’s not about whether this matches the target here or not, but rather it’s about how this section comes across in relation to the rest of the frequency response. So for example, you probably wouldn’t notice the ‘shiny’ character if the rest of the treble were a bit more elevated. But, because it’s a bit relaxed (pleasantly relaxed, because the balance is totally appropriate), the sudden upper treble spike can come across in an intense fashion.
Once again, it’s not about being bright overall - I don’t think he’s said that, but rather just the information around 10khz and above is out of balance with the rest of the warm tuning.
3 Likes
It boils down we listen not with a 711 rig or whatever.
We listen with our ears…
Alex
2 Likes
This is true, and I’ll be the first to say that there’s more to it than just FR, but with these industry standard rigs, we can be confident that they do in fact match the experience below 10khz in almost all cases. I’ve found some outliers, but I also use in-ear mics to see if there are deviations for how I hear it with my own pinna (different ear shape), and in almost all cases there’s hardly any difference.
3 Likes
In other cases, the headphone’s technical performance is a bit more competitive for those price tags. If anything though I’m inclined to say that the value proposition for the Empyrean is there (I said this in my review), specifically because of the build and comfort. In other cases, even better performing headphones, the ergonomics are often so poor that I don’t think it’s worth it - at least not for me and the way I use headphones.
3 Likes
Whats really amazing to me is with only one exception i am aware of headphone designers spend hours, days, months and years designing and re-designing headphones to reproduce music well…
Never have i heard any vendor of TOTL can tell me "Hey Alex, pay me $5000 for my cans, they are the best and oh by the way “trust me!”…and oh by the way your going to have to EQ these to fix them…
Yes they all sound different, thats not debateable.
The degree of their success is judged by us the consumer and our ears and wallets!
Simply Amazes me…
A.
Well, everyone has different preferences. Just to be clear - in this case, nobody is doing that. The review/content team isn’t involved in the sales side of things with the store.
4 Likes
When evaluating or making a headphone used by or for audiophiles, I don’t believe the appropriate benchmark should be “the majority of listeners.” Such would be fine for more mass produced and consumer grade headphones, which are unlikely to line up with audiophile sonic preferences.
That being said, it may be the best we currently got.
Extract below for reference:
Our research over the past 7 years has led to the Harman Target Curve, a frequency response preferred by the majority of listeners, and a measurement tool and model that accurately predicts listeners’ sound quality ratings of a headphone based on how much it deviates from the Harman Target Curve.
This. So much this.
I get it, we might not have better alternatives, but stop holding it up as an appropriate target for audiophiles. Make the Samsung buds match the curve and sell a gajillion of them, knock yourself out, just don’t expect audiophiles to like it. It is the most inappropriate “appropriate” thing in the hobby. (Other than $5000 headphone cables, that is.)
2 Likes
Nothing to do with the store…the point is TOTL and other can makers dont go around telling us to eq their stuff because there cans are well “not performing to someones definition” of technical performance.
Which leads me to ask this question:
What is your objective definition of technical performance and how do you objectively measure and grade this???
A.
2 Likes