CHANGSTAR: Audiophile Headphone Reviews and Early 90s Style BBS
Lobby => Headphone Measurements => Topic started by: ultrabike on January 22, 2015, 07:07:13 AM
-
Sound
These two (880 and 840) are very similar to one another IMO. Main difference seems to be a little more bass on the 840s, but both share fairly similar characteristics...
The following applies to both cans: Bass has quite a bit of presence. As said before, the 840s carry a little more but both have it in copious amounts. The bass quality is not top notch though. A little smeared compared to other closed cans I've heard such as the Focal Spirit Pros based on what I remember.
The mids are smooth, but also sunken relative to the lower treble and bass. This results in some incoherence. Not the most resolving of cans. That said, these are not necessarily fatiguing or annoying at all. Treble is not too boosted and actually easier than most Grados I've heard, but still has some glare to it. There is some lack of air.
The balance is not bad IMO. There is however a fairly large and real notch around 230 or so Hz that depending on the song, may show up.
Comfort
A little tight and closed in both cases (840 & 880). My ears touch the insides of the cup. The pads are pretty soft though.
Presentation
Fairly elegant and discrete. The main difference between the 840 and 880 is that the cups on the 880 have a metallic cover and the 840 is fully black. Also one says 840 and the other 880.
Price
Street price for the 880 is $500 and for the 840 is $300. I don't know why the 880 is $200 more than the 840 other than the 880 has a titanium coating on the driver according to Ultrasone's site. Focal Spirits are $350 and I like them more, though the Ultrasones may be a little tiny bit more comfy. I feel the 840s are a better deal, though IMO these are a little overpriced.
Overall
Not bad. Expected worse. But not too impressive either.
Measurements 880
Frequency Response
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2073.0;attach=8563;image)
Distortion Right
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2073.0;attach=8565;image)
Distortion Left
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2073.0;attach=8567;image)
CSD Right
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2073.0;attach=8569;image)
CSD Left
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2073.0;attach=8571;image)
Impedance
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2073.0;attach=8590;image)
-
Measurements 840
Frequency Response
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2073.0;attach=8575;image)
Distortion Right
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2073.0;attach=8577;image)
Distortion Left
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2073.0;attach=8579;image)
CSD Right
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2073.0;attach=8581;image)
CSD Left
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2073.0;attach=8583;image)
Impedance
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2073.0;attach=8592;image)
Comparo 880 (yellow) & 840 (red) Right Drivers
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2073.0;attach=8587;image)
-
A 10dB bass boost and 10dB treble peak + ringing is something I would prefer for serious listening.
Might not be so bad with crappy recordings on low bitrates of a random 'phone' though.
Perhaps the +10dB peak around 7.5k is sortof compensated by the -10dB dip between 2k and 4k ?
re the imp. measurements.
Do they measure (multimeter) around 70 Ohm DC resistance as well ?
-
LOL! I expected worse FWIW.
DC resistance is actually closer to 34 ohms. Good call!
Interesting though. DC for HD600 is 300 and so is the plot, but things don't work out like so for these ones. Dunno, will verify this out.
-
Thks Ultrabike :money: . It's always extremely interesting to see measurements after a serious time of listening. And trying to understand how measurements and Listening impresssions can match is a big question for me.
It seems I can recognize what I heard except I'm hearing more difference in the treble. the 880 can be bothersome for me while 840 treble sound a bit softer to my ears. I don't understand why i can't see this difference in measurements. Maybe the biggest bass does make the difference and mask more the treble peak ? Dunno but the two headphones does not sound as similar as your measurements suggest .. to my ears at least.
When I compare the three Ultrasone series I rate them like this :
Bass amount : 840 > 880 >> 860 ( still an hearable mid bass boost though)
Treble harshness : 860 >> 880 > 840
Mids clarity : 860 >> 880 > 840
Can the differences could be explained only by the different amount of bass that overwhelms more or less the whole spectrum and make me feel the mid/ treble amount are different ?
I'm more used to read Tyll's measurements so I have some questions :what does mean the THD number : 2,5 for the 840 and 3,25 for the 880 ? is it the average distorsion ? the lowest ? I don't see any scale for THD on the ordinate axis .
My listening impressions :
- Bassy headphone with low quality boomy bass. i feel the 880 bass are worst despite there's less bass boost.
- Not too sucked midrange . I could even say good mids for so bassy headphones.
- treble emphasis ( more with the 880 than with the 840 and even more with the 860) .
- Good soundstage for a closed can. wide and deep. I would not have said that those headphones lack of air myself.
- Energetic and lively sound. engaging despite the obvious flaws.
Overally Meh headphone. Bad for an audiophile , not so bad for average consumer who likes bassy heaphones. Definitely not for me.
-
Could be that some masking is going on. Not sure.
Distortion harmonics 2 through 5 correspond to the 2nd through 5th harmonic distortion components, while THD is the total harmonic distortion contributed by all of the harmonics. Tyll usually shows % THD distortion relative to the fundamental (linear frequency response). The numbers in the measurements here are dBSPL. This is how REW does it.
-
OK then Tyll's measurements and yours are not comparable ?
-
My understanding is that frequency response in Tyll's measurements is done through a head/torso simulator with microphones inside the ears. The results are then compensated using an "Independent of Direction" compensation curve:
http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/headphone-measurement-proceedures-frequency-response
I and some others here use a different approach where instead of modeling the human ear and compensating for it's gain, we attempt to remove the ear from the equation much like it's done in speaker measurements. A pseudo-anechoic chamber is attempted through sponges and other materials in order to reduce reflections while maintaining acoustic impedance. Ideally, in my mind, the two approaches should yield similar results, but there are non-idealities that get in the way.
THD results can be reported in dB or %. REW allows to get a % THD result for a particular frequency, but the plot is in dB. Still, either approach should give an idea about the weaknesses and advantages of a headphone.
Results are not immediately comparable in the absolute sense. However, relative differences between headphones might. Say for example comparing Tyll's results on headphone X vs headphone Y might yield similar results when comparing same headphone X vs headphone Y using another measurement approach.
-
I think I understand despite my flawed english.
so what are the best and the worst headphones you measured in term of THD? I would like to know where those Ultrasone sit against other headphones. With tyll measurement it's easy but I need to learn how to compare headphones with your method ;)
-
Probably the worst I've measured in terms of THD (and pretty much everything else) are these:
http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,1308.msg34924.html#msg34924
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1308.0;attach=4931;image)
Best in THD might be these:
http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,23.msg32768.html#msg32768
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=23.0;attach=4531;image)
Best in FR might be these:
http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,40.msg44731.html#msg44731
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=40.0;attach=7055;image)
I still like the HD600 better than the HD650 though... could be placebo and to me they are more similar than different.
-
I still like the HD600 better than the HD650 though... could be placebo and to me they are more similar than different.
I'm in the same page.
Thks for the comparison points ;)
-
DC resistance is actually closer to 34 ohms. Good call!
Are the 2 drivers accidentally in series when making the measurement as 2x35 Ohm = 70 Ohm.
-
I'll revisit that tonite. I don't think that's what's going on (2 drivers in series) but we'll see.
-
When I compare the three Ultrasone series I rate them like this :
Bass amount : 840 > 880 >> 860 ( still an hearable mid bass boost though)
Treble harshness : 860 >> 880 > 840
My impressions from briefly listening to these are the same: 840 seemed bassy, the 860 sounded the most Ultrasone-y bright, and the 880 was a decent balance- not too bassy, not too bright (relatively speaking).
WRT the correlation between measurements and subjective impressions, could the offset drivers of the S-Logic play a part here? I've noticed that along with the sometimes weird, disembodied sound they can give, these S-Logic cans are quite position sensitive on my head.
-
I can try moving them around a bit. In general, closed type cans with sealed pads can be a bit positional sensitive. I try to center the mic to where my ears my end up in most measurements, and as long as I'm not grossly off I do tend to get consistent results, even with these cans (I believe this is one of the advantages of not using an ear simulator for measurements).
Basically, while these might be positional sensitive due to the type of can, I didn't find them much more sensitive than similar type cans w/o the S-Logic deal. But will double check.
+++
I need an adapter to verify impedance measurement. Will update as soon as possible.
-
Impedance curves revised. Cans are indeed about 32 ohms.
Problem was the adapter I use requires 3.5 mm TRS, while the 3.5 mm cable that came with these has volume or mute control so it's TRRS. Somehow it may have put the drivers in series or something wacky. This does not affect other measurements or impressions since for that the 1/4" TRS cable was used.
It happens...
-
LOL . I saw on the main page that Ultrabike refused to give pics. that's a real shame ! walk the plank
If people want some pics I have a bunch ;) unboxing , on my head, details ...
-
Again Ultrasone made something that can only be classified as sounding... weird. Less weird than 6xx but still.
Again super dependent on actual placement.
Good placement gets brightness and reduces these nulls, bad placement gets ugly comb filtering and weird positioning sounding like source behind head.
Why don't they just drop the buzzword reflectors from the design, since they're clearly not doing the job?
-
Thank you for confirming my ongoing belief that Ultrasound just doesn't do it.