The Half Life of Expectation Bias

[Orb]

Which measurement there casts light on the audibility of detail?

Tim

Tim,
you are the one who keeps on saying headphones are best for resolving detail and neutrality-transparency far better than any speaker and like listening to the real music so you tell me
However these measurements do ignore headband resonance testing methodology, while also downplaying L/R pair matching-etc due to averaging (which is needed but ideally would see individual results).
Anyway I provided that to help with those wanting to compare 600 to 800 series that is subjectively perceived (by reviewers) as more resolving and neutral albeit with a more fatiguing/unforgiving treble.

Cheers
Orb

 

[microstrip]

Micro, yes, there is no real advance in two channel high end analog gear, in atleast 20 years. We had this discussion before, what you might consider an advance to me would only be an evolutionary step, ie a small incremental step in FR or distortion or whatever. High end analog on this forum is ANALOG...so, shoot me down with any real advancement in high end analog. And please don't mention 150 pound TT platters spinning around with funny belts, and with some non matched arm and non matched cartridge resulting in unknown resonances in the arm and unknown specifications from the record groove to the input of the phono pre-amp. We already know from tests here on WBF that those can not play the same song twice in a row anyway...and i like vinyl also and have it although others (who may step forward and identify themselves maybe) are more experts in vinyl than me... (....)

Tom,

I am sure that F. Toole and many other scholars who spent the last 20 years carrying audio related research would be disappointed with you - the real advance in audio in the last 20 years has been in understanding the fundamental mechanisms being stereo sound reproduction and implementing equipment according to these findings. Thanks to technological development and talented designers many of these findings are being incorporated in our systems. Curiously digital is one field that is taking advantage of these knowledge.

Do you imagine that audio designers do not read research on psycho-acoustics and scientific and technological papers? That they do not carry their systematic research? Remember we are just spectators looking at the tip of the iceberg, and fortunately many of us really appreciate their efforts. And yes, we know they will not release their findings to the public. Even people such as Nelson Pass, who is a great contributor to dissemination of audio design and DIY, keeps some secrets about the implementation of his top amplifiers.

 

[microstrip]

Hi

This has become an interesting debate with one side claiming that Headphones are not as accurate as speakers ... Frankly I always thought the contrary as headphones remove likely hte major distortion component in the reproduction chain:The Room. From the measurements that have been posted so far, I can only infer they (headphones) are not perfect and that there are room for improvements. OTOH can someone point me toward speakers that have better measurements in a room, in their own room or any other person's room, for example?

It will depend on how you define accuracy. Due to the proximity and physical characteristics of the typical headphones, their frequency response is strongly dependent on the morphology of the ear of the listener - this would mean that the subjective frequency response of the headphones is not predictable.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Tim,
you are the one who keeps on saying headphones are best for resolving detail and neutrality-transparency far better than any speaker and like listening to the real music so you tell me
However these measurements do ignore headband resonance testing methodology, while also downplaying L/R pair matching-etc due to averaging (which is needed but ideally would see individual results).
Cheers
Orb

Somebody may keep saying that, orb, but it's not me. I've said nothing about neutrality-transparency, which would be redundant, by my definitions. And I've said nothing about "like real music" about headphones or anything else in audio reproduction, and never will. I have used the term "resolution," but have abandoned it in latter posts as it is meaningless in this conversation. What I've said is that they are better at revealing detail. Let me try again -- headphones are better at making very low level sounds audible. Which, of course, means you hear more of what's on the recording. There are a number of reasons why they do this, and none of them are tested in the measurements you posted.

Tim

 

[Orb]

Somebody may keep saying that, orb, but it's not me. I've said nothing about neutrality-transparency, which would be redundant, by my definitions. And I've said nothing about "like real music" about headphones or anything else in audio reproduction, and never will. I have used the term "resolution," but have abandoned it in latter posts as it is meaningless in this conversation. What I've said is that they are better at revealing detail. Let me try again -- headphones are better at making very low level sounds audible. Which, of course, means you hear more of what's on the recording. There are a number of reasons why they do this, and none of them are tested in the measurements you posted.

Tim

Fair enough,
but then why is subjectively is the HD800 seen as more resolving-detailed and in general better than the 600 model and also measures better with those tests.
They must have some influence on revealing detail.

I guess we will disagree to some extent, because I feel both loudspeakers and headphones both can provide excellent detail, but not necessarily same way that IMO is backed up to some degree by said measurements and variables mentioned earlier.

Cheers
Orb

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

We will disagree, I'm sure. But it's not a great mystery. The HD800s have "better" high-frequency response (I actually prefer the 600s/650s and I'm not alone), and we perceive that as "detail," right up to the point where we begin to perceive it as annoying. A point that is quite variable, depending on who you're talking about. And regardless of perception, the "quiet stuff" in the upper ranges, is going to be a bit quieter in the 600s than the 800s. We can agree on that all day. Where we'll probably disagree is that I believe that a good headphone like the 600 is still going to render more of the quiet stuff audible than will any speaker system that isn't in a very heavily treated room (even then, I have my doubts). Take the next step to good quality closed headphones or IEMs, and in addition to the masking effect (as in the music masking everything else) of the simple proximity of the drivers to the eardrums, you have isolation. Enough to render the physical environment a moot point in some cases. I think that's why headphones have been the pro's tool of choice for hearing the small stuff for, like, forever.

And I'm happy to disagree.

Tim

 

[mep]

uhm, dude, its all in your head... ahaa ahahah ahah

Tom-For once you are right, it is all in your head when you listen to headphones.

 

[mep]

Well, actually, naw, wont go there. We certainly took a tangent on expectation bias here....

I don't know about "we," but somebody hijacked this thread. I'm fine with it though.

 

[mep]

Headphones have a purpose in the audio world. Some people have to use them professionally to do their job. Some people have to listen to them because they either don't have a big rig or their wives won't let them listen to their stereo systems when they are home (Turn that damn thing down! Don't make me come in there!). Some people live in apartments or dorm rooms and are actually semi-considerate of their neighbors and are forced into phones. Some people actually like the damn things.

However, even those that claim they just love them some headphones, I bet if you gave them a choice of having a dedicated room in their house with a big rig where they could listen at whatever level they wanted to and their wife/husband/partner/significant other couldn't hear it and couldn't bitch, there wouldn't be much headphone listening going on.

 

[mep]

Your response above is to my statement re-quoted below, and does not have anything to do with what I said, ie GEAR, but of course there is advancements in pschoacustics etc....but there is nothing new about two channel stereo analog gear except small evolutionary steps, in some cases even backward steps....

Micro, yes, there is no real advance in two channel high end analog gear, in atleast 20 years

Then why does new gear sound better Dark Star?

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Headphones have a purpose in the audio world. Some people have to use them professionally to do their job. Some people have to listen to them because they either don't have a big rig or their wives won't let them listen to their stereo systems when they are home (Turn that damn thing down! Don't make me come in there!). Some people live in apartments or dorm rooms and are actually semi-considerate of their neighbors and are forced into phones. Some people actually like the damn things.

However, even those that claim they just love them some headphones, I bet if you gave them a choice of having a dedicated room in their house with a big rig where they could listen at whatever level they wanted to and their wife/husband/partner/significant other couldn't hear it and couldn't bitch, there wouldn't be much headphone listening going on.

I love this new language we've recently taken on. Somebody even used "big-boy rig" recently. Fun stuff.

By the way, I prefer listening to my small, near filed rig over headphones. But that has nothing to do with which one renders the most detail audible.

Tim

 

[mep]

I love this new language we've recently taken on. Somebody even used "big-boy rig" recently. Fun stuff.

By the way, I prefer listening to my small, near filed rig over headphones. But that has nothing to do with which one renders the most detail audible.

Tim

You might even like it better if it was near-field instead of being near filed. Seriously, I will amend my statement to say that people might even choose small systems over headphones if they could listen to them at the volume they desire.

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

It's a fine day when someone has access to my big rig.

 

[rockitman]

Micro, yes, there is no real advance in two channel high end analog gear, in atleast 20 years

ah yes, more objectivist fatigue flowing into the forum.

 

[mep]

ah yes, more objectivist fatigue flowing into the forum.

Yes Virgina, there is no Santa Claus!

 

[mep]

It's a fine day when someone has access to my big rig.

It took me a minute Johnny, but I got it.

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

It took me a minute Johnny, but I got it.

 

[microstrip]

Your response above is to my statement re-quoted below, and does not have anything to do with what I said, ie GEAR, but of course there is advancements in pschoacustics etc....but there is nothing new about two channel stereo analog gear except small evolutionary steps, in some cases even backward steps....

Micro, yes, there is no real advance in two channel high end analog gear, in atleast 20 years

These small evolutionary steps and what exists behind them are the real advance. People should understand that the evolution of high high-end in now carried in the micro-detail - very small aspects that under very controlled conditions create fantastic sound reproduction. The possibility of creating these conditions systematically was due to the use of better materials or devices, better knowledge of the designers and the power of CAD and CAM.

I have owned SoundLab A1's since the 1990's. The difference in sound quality between my first speaker - that is still working - and my current A1 PX is really large.

 

[mep]

Tim-I'm not taking a dig at you. Lots of guys can't listen to their systems at the levels they want to for numerous reasons including wives. I appreciate the dig about "bloated mid-fi" speakers, but I don't know who you are talking about now.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Tim-I'm not taking a dig at you. Lots of guys can't listen to their systems at the levels they want to for numerous reasons including wives. I appreciate the dig about "bloated mid-fi" speakers, but I don't know who you are talking about now.

Wow. You're fast. That post wasn't up 30 seconds before I deleted it myself.

Tim