CHANGSTAR: Audiophile Headphone Reviews and Early 90s Style BBS
Lobby => Headphone Measurements => Topic started by: ultrabike on February 09, 2015, 08:17:07 AM
-
The differences in packaging between these and TH500RP is quite astonishing. Sure, there are still about 4 levels of packaging here, but unlike the TH500RPs, a 4 year old cannot be smuggled inside these boxes. The 3rd box seems like a silvery Breakfast at Tiffany's jewelry box with an optimal 5 channel satanic Audio Zenith star in the lower right hand corner. The 4th level of box hell is actually a handsome fabric carry bag with the same demonically golden ratio-y AZ symbol, but bigger. Finally, inside are the now nude and undressed cans, stuffed neatly and comfy. There is also a frequency response plot inside.
The cans look awesome. I always felt the PM-2 and 1 design was gentleman-ish (whatever that means), and elegant. It's still heavy relative to most dynamic and pretty much all electrostatic cans, but are pretty comfy. The can modifications certainly make it a point that these were AZ modded. Somewhere there is a "Patent Pending" sticker.
So bare in mind that the PM-2s (and/or PM-1s) were of my liking. They were not perfect, not as open as other cans I heard, but I like their bass and balance. Moving on to the AZ cans, I find them similar yet improved in some ways to their stock form. I like their bass better and balance might be a touch more refined. The bass to me is not muddy and not overly done. Filly Bee's Like a Bomb (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KRe8duwpwk) still delivers bone crushing bass (as opposed to farts). Drums sound decent enough to me when listening to Hotel California Unplugged:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYWO4LLundk
Moving on to Michael Jackson's Wanna Be Startin' Somethin' (https://play.spotify.com/track/1hu2s7qkm5bo03eODpRQO3) reveals to me one of the weaknesses of these cans... a little glare around the beginning of the track. It is not dramatic, but it's there relative to my HD600's which I used as reference in this comparo. That being said, I used quite a few songs with these and they managed to stay in my head for a while without me having an urge drop them hard against a concrete floor. So not bad.
These still sound closed to me. Perhaps it's that they isolate more than most open design cans or something.
Moving on to my inaccurate, not-science, POS lean measurements:
Frequency Response
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2117.0;attach=8674;image)
Distortion Right
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2117.0;attach=8676;image)
Distortion Left
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2117.0;attach=8678;image)
CSD Right
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2117.0;attach=8680;image)
CSD Left
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2117.0;attach=8682;image)
The channel imbalance in the measurements did not bothered me, but I did took measurements twice (re positioning the cans) and got the same response and imbalance across the spectrum.
+++
Linky to Hands non-bullshit impressions and stuff: http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,2117.msg58268.html#msg58268
-
Comparo time...
With PM-1s
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2117.0;attach=8684;image)
With HD600s
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2117.0;attach=8686;image)
-
So the HD600 is actually 300% more neutral?! ::)
-
That may depend on who's rig you are measuring. p:/
-
LOL! The two (PM-2 and HD600) share some similarities, and have their differences IMO. The HD600s to me are more laid back and easier to listen, but loose in bass depth and definition. The HD600 pull ahead in clarity and resolution. This is not something that is obvious to me in the frequency response plots. The only thing I can say in regards to measurements is that the HD600s seem to have higher non-linear distortion in the bass area, but lower distortion in the mids. Now, these are not THE non-linear distortion measurements, and other non-linear behavior (IMD like perhaps or other stuff) may be responsible for what I'm hearing.
The glare I experienced with Jackson's song among others IMO is relatively straight forward to identify. So if one has the two cans and has access to the songs I linked, it may or may not be apparent to the listener what I'm talking about.
Note that reference does not imply neutrality. The HD600s are just a set of cans I like quite a bit and use often as a point of reference.
-
Well... the HD600 has 5 to 7dB more 'presence' between 2k and 5k which benefits clarity (and resolution).
the PMx rolls off above 13khz where the HD600 goes on to >20kHz which benefits cymbals, strings and 'air'.
Based on the plots and my preference (and above all price) I would pick HD600 in a heartbeat.
Still... the PMx doesn't seem like a bad performer at all.
-
Yup. Still, the glare on some songs with the PMx AZ is something that I can only judge by music. Hard to pin point in the plots. I can only guess is something to do with non-linear distortion somehow.
BTW... I don't put full confidence in plots and random reviews. I did that in the past and ended up with a pair of DT-990s. No amount of plots and flowery language made up for the purchase and those (and others) hit the road. That said, it's also funny how I feel more at ease with measurements, and don't dismiss them at all. Many things may indeed be traced to features in the measurements, and confirmed to some extent through modding and listening.
-
Well... the HD600 has 5 to 7dB more 'presence' between 2k and 5k which benefits clarity (and resolution).
the PMx rolls off above 13khz where the HD600 goes on to >20kHz which benefits cymbals, strings and 'air'.
Based on the plots and my preference (and above all price) I would pick HD600 in a heartbeat.
Still... the PMx doesn't seem like a bad performer at all.
Unless you like cymbals, strings, air, clarity and resolution I suppose.
-
Plots can indeed be 'difficult' when trying to assertain 'tonal balance' of the sound.
What certainly helps in this case is that there is a comparison with a 'well known' which makes it easier.
But indeed certain aspects of sound can't be seen in a plot (or even several different ones).
And Analixus is right... I probably won't like the PMx based on the comparative plots, description of ears I have grown to trust etc.
I quite like cymbals, strings, air and resolution... ::)
-
Interesting, HD600 is more laid back to you than this? Latest AZ model, yes? Just curious because that is easily the opposite experience I've had. Well even the first model I heard would still apply. More thoughts from me on latest model in the next day or two.
-
With that song from Jackson, the HD600s were more laid back to me. Proly that glare I was talking about. With some other tracks, things were closer or perhaps a notch more forward (and resolving) with the 600s. I like the tonal balance of these. Of all the cans I had recently checked out (Ultrasone trifecta and TH500RP), these are the closest to the HD600s.
Wife also felt these looked better aestetically than most of the other cans I had around lately. To me they are not much different in apperance that the Oppo's originals save from branding.
-
Can someone please explain to me a bit more this idea of "glare" in audio reproduction that is mentioned so often. Not sure I quite understand what glare sounds like. Thanks.
-
To me is like a sort of brigthness or mid to high frequency distortion. In this case, the "Wanna Be Startin' Somethin'" song starts with some "tss tss" stuff. It comes across gentler with the HD600s and more agressive with the AZ PM2s. This "tss tss" stuff is not way up high in frequency though, but it's not narrow band tones either. It's is probably not comming from an instrument, but some electronic gadget, so it may have sounded that way originally, and the 600s are mitigating the effect, but I doubt it.
I use the word glare because it feels to me as if that part of the song gets sharpen.
-
What's your testing rig again?
Couldn't it just be that you're using a ODAC and the PM is more resolving than the HD-600?
-
I don't have an ODAC, so using a Focusrite 2i2.
It could still be the 2i2, but I doubt it. This is where measurements might provide some clues. The PM's are not particularly well behaved in the mids the way the HD600s are.
LOL, actually I have a set of cheap computer speakers that measure relativley flat, but had some problems in the mids (http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,1043.msg27229.html#msg27229). I did a sine sweep back then, and at the 400 Hz trouble spot, it got something similar to what I describe as glear here... When similar problems happen in the bass area I usually hear farts.
-
Thanks, Ultra. I haven't really heard that sort of glare on my end. I will have to listen closer. I did notice a touch of extra sparkle, if you will, using it with certain gear. I am hoping to share full thoughts later today. Hopefully measurements too, time permitting (tomorrow if not today). But I am really liking what I am hearing. Captures that smooth, cohesive PM1 with velour pad sound without being so boring/dead/limp-dick and so closed sounding. Right up my alley.
-
Honestly very puzzled about those measurements. On my own rig original PM-2 and my modded sets don't measure similar at all, please see the image attached (sorry about the size of the image, will do better next time;-). Well they don't sound similar at all to me neither so maybe my ears are strongly influenced by the aforementioned rig but really, put them side by side and there will be no resemblance of one with another pretty much at all. And about the low frequency extension on your measurements, to me there is just another puzzle.
(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/gth_IamONfqsGs3LQ6MmWj2S2EjhPPcLTtOGSSjUg7E=w1710-h518-p-no)
As for your own measurements of HD-600 vs other headsets, notice how all of your measurements display a dip starting around 1,5Khz and centering around 2,5Khz while HD-600 is just the opposite looking nice and fairly smooth in that area. Well, on my rig that's precisely where the well known HD-600s midrange peak is centered: 2,5Khz. After that there is a fairly smooth and deep roll off which in my opinion will surely mask glare present on some recordings.
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/BHB6C_Yn1jUiGAA2yEm0T0sCXdpjgxbALkHn6C1JQUs=w1698-h520-p-no)
-
My AZ PMx2 measurements also don't look very similar to the the stock PM-1/2 or HD600. Nor do they subjectively sound all that similar (well, PMx2 is maybe closest to PM-1 with velour pads, but still noticeably different). They don't particularly measure like Alex's either, just so you know. I should be able to post thoughts and measurements by the end of the day.
-
FWIW, the Oppo PM-1 and the PM-2s modded by AZ were measured using the same rig and exact same method. I also have a set of PM-1 measurements as well... and they measure relatively close as well!
I also saw Alex measurements, which came included with the cans Alex sent. Did not get that at all. Did you position the cans the same way stock vs moddified? I can say that the Oppo based cans tend to show little variability in measurements unless one goes way overboard with how one positions them.
I did have an odd ball modified Oppo by Alex before that did not measured at all like the current production. An earlier generation which could have had broken drivers. Those didn't do very well...
Dunno mang. Maybe is the ODAC :P
Hans, what are you using as a coupler to the mic? (note these didn't measure exactly like HD600s BTW, they seem to have retained some of the Oppo characteristics though)
-
Ultra, I use the exact same positioning for both stock OPPOs and my Audio Zenith cans (there is a big crest with some secondary lines on the rig :-). I have to shift around some other sets like HD-800 and LCDs for example as they have tricky directivity but things like HD-600 ot K-7XX are always centered exactly as the OPPOs. I think some of the reflective properties of the materials used on the rig similar to yours play quite a few tricks with the measured sets. That is why I spent soooo much time creating mine.
-
I'm still using my in-ear mic with my gross, ugly head as a coupler. Though any measurements from me after and including the K7XX use a smaller tri-flange tip that lets me shove the mic in there further. Generally this boosts the treble a bit prior to measurements before that. Nothing crazy different though, and same measurement method in the end. But you won't see direct comparo graphs with old/new because of this.
Just gotta type up my thoughts and compile my measurements, then I'll be ready to post (unless Alex has some sort of objection?). Taking care of the new puppy in between though, so expect it later today.
-
Ultra, I use the exact same positioning for both stock OPPOs and my Audio Zenith cans (there is a big crest with some secondary lines on the rig :-). I have to shift around some other sets like HD-800 and LCDs for example as they have tricky directivity but things like HD-600 ot K-7XX are always centered exactly as the OPPOs. I think some of the reflective properties of the materials used on the rig similar to yours play quite a few tricks with the measured sets. That is why I spent soooo much time creating mine.
I think I understand, but I doubt the materials in the rig are making the too sets (stock vs non-stock) behave so similarly. That would be quite a fluke. I guess it's not impossible though.
I'm still using my in-ear mic with my gross, ugly head as a coupler. Though any measurements from me after and including the K7XX use a smaller tri-flange tip that lets me shove the mic in there further. Generally this boosts the treble a bit prior to measurements before that. Nothing crazy different though, and same measurement method in the end. But you won't see direct comparo graphs with old/new because of this.
Just gotta type up my thoughts and compile my measurements, then I'll be ready to post (unless Alex has some sort of objection?). Taking care of the new puppy in between though, so expect it later today.
That's a great setup, with great pros and cons. One pro I can think of is perhaps better modeling of the chamber volume. One con I can think of is positional senstivity.
-
Actually, the biggest con of my setup is more due to inconsistent mic insertion depth. Sometimes it tries to slip out, being the little bastard it is. On the upside, since I can actually feel everything on my head and in my ear, I can tell when things feel right or not in terms of placement and insertion depth. Plus I've done it enough times that I can tell when I foobared something when I get the results back (i.e. mic too far in or out, headphone off placement or lacking seal, etc.).
But, yeah, it has its pros and cons, but it's at least a different take on measurements. And it gives me a good way to communicate somewhat objectively about how I hear things, not necessarily others due to physical ear and head differences, given I'm actually using my own goods. So someone might not hear it the way I do, but at least they can look at my graphs and see why I might hear it that way.
-
I think I understand, but I doubt the materials in the rig are making the too sets (stock vs non-stock) behave so similarly. That would be quite a fluke. I guess it's not impossible though.
For what it's worth, my measurement rig shows really significant differences between all the OPPO pads; original leather, velour, pleather and alternative leather all measure quite different with the same driver and positioned exactly the same. Sorry but I seriously doubt one will be able to see serious variations in FR with the above pads while using the rig similar to yours. What do you think, could it be that it just isn't very resolving above 1.5khz and below 100hz?
Well, maybe I am wrong but we can at least check; I have a brand new set of PM-2s along with all the aforementioned pads, also brand new. Maybe we can arrange for another measurement/listening session or something like that in the future?
All those pads sound quite different to me personally, except maybe for pleather and alternative leather. Don't mean this to sound like my own measurement system is better but subjectively it surely corellates with what I hear quite well. Suppose yours does the same for you and that's why I was so puzzled.
-
Mmm. Well it seems that Tyll discussed certain characteristics of these cans with Igor rearding pads and seal:
http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,1590.msg42771.html#msg42771
... "the PM-1 will be relatively insensitive to pad seal"
I had problems before when dealing with headphones that required seal such as electrostats and some planars. These problems got solved by measuring with a non-leaky baffle which is used when dealing with headphones with sealing pads. This is does not seem to be a problem with the Oppos.
I'm not sure what you mean by the measurement setup not being very resolving above 1.5 kHz and below 100 Hz and how you arrived to the conclusion that you "seriously doubt one will be able to see serious variations in FR with the above pads while using the rig similar to yours". I thought that unlike Hans, you are using a rig similar to mine. Could you elaborate about your serious doubts?
BTW. I'm not saying your mods sound exactly like the PM-1sis and 2sis. But they do sound similar (going by memory) and measure similar... To me of course. I did say yours sound perhaps a little more refined than what I heard stock form. But you are right. I did not listened to them back to back.
-
What I meant was on my rig there is up to 5db variations in FR between the pads above 1.5khz. Do you think we will see such variations on yours? I just am really puzzled about how they could possibly measure this similar on your rig. I mean the original PM-1 and Audio Zenith PMx2. Therefore a question about possible issues with resolution on such rig with certain frequencies.
Not trying to confuse anyone here with all the assumptions but If you want I can surely remeasure all the different pads with the same driver so you can see I am not making things up.
-
Someone remeasuring their own rig tells us little if anything since an observer taking that data would require an act of faith. As Aristotle and Plato would know, that's not how science works. Someone replicating the same or similar measurements independently would actually be useful.
-
What I meant was on my rig there is up to 5db variations in FR between the pads above 1.5khz. Do you think we will see such variations on yours? I just am really puzzled about how they could possibly measure this similar on your rig. I mean the original PM-1 and Audio Zenith PMx2. Therefore a question about possible issues with resolution on such rig with certain frequencies.
Not trying to confuse anyone here with all the assumptions but If you want I can surely remeasure all the different pads with the same driver so you can see I am not making things up.
I'm not sure what to tell you Alex. I can measure much less than 5 dB variations in frequency response above 1.5 kHz. I will re-run measurements (re-positioning and all), and zoom in. I also don't run smoothing.
It has been said before that a baffle rig should be a bit more consistent. Tyll even reported on that when he visited Philips. Scroll downs to the picture where it says "Not an industry standard, but Rowan's simple jig allows repeatable measurements quickly without worrying about critically positioning the headphones on a HATS."
http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/visit-philips-research-labs-photos
If you are experiensing that much variation maybe you should revisit your rig. Unless you are certain all variation is due to pads. But on the other hand note how Tyll's investigation and discussion with Igor ended in an agreement that these cans do not change dramatically with pads... I mean I measured things with the PM-1 and PM-2 pads in the past. They may sound a bit different, but they did not measured dramatically different as what one would expect with something like an electrostat or something like that.
Here are Tyll's measurements of the PM-1s with different pads if you want another point of view:
http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/scrumptious-oppo-digital-pm-1-planar-magnetic-headphone-measurements
I also fully agree with Anax in that replicating, or at least trying to replicate, a rig to get similar measurements might be very useful. I believe that's what some folks around here have been trying to do.
-
FWIW regarding pads, different OPPO pads show more noticeable changes with how I measure than I've seen on other rigs. Not dramatically different, but there nonetheless. Of course, I didn't save any results..was just fooling around. So I may be full of crap. :) But you know those situations where you feel like you hear more of a difference subjectively than measurements let on? Those seemed to be better captured when I measured things. Not to say my rig is truly all that accurate in the end, just noting what I saw (and, yeah, can't back it up because my dumbass didn't save results).
Really, though, I wish we could all have a good discussion about the PMx2 without going through all this again. I'm really liking what I'm hearing, and I'd like to focus more on that topic than what measurement setup produces prettier looking lines.
Edit: because clearly I win for prettiest lines. :)p3
-
:)p13
Welp, will be all for checking out your impressions dude... but don't leave the plots aside! p:3
(http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/553/459/fd1.jpg)
-
If you are experiensing that much variation maybe you should revisit your rig. Unless you are certain all variation is due to pads. But on the other hand note how Tyll's investigation and discussion with Igor ended in an agreement that these cans do not change dramatically with pads... I mean I measured things with the PM-1 and PM-2 pads in the past. They may sound a bit different, but they did not measured dramatically different as what one would expect with something like an electrostat or something like that.
To finish up the measurement thingy I can say that my random measurements of different pads from few months ago do correlate perfectly (within 0.5db) to the ones done just recently when all four brand new pads arrived along with brand new PM-2s. This for me removes the rig variation concerns but I would certainly agree small variations should exist within reason just not something like 5db.
Tyll's article and measurements of OPPO pads (http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/oppo-ear-pads-listening-and-measurements) clearly indicate significant, also up to 5db variations in frequency response for different pads. That is quite noteworthy considering some small differences had to be smoothed out by how he averages multiple takes and compensates for HATS. Though it would be really interesting to see how my PMx2s would measure on his rig.
Once at it will say a few things from my own experience about in ear measurements similar to those Hans uses. Crucial points for those are the insertion depth, angle of the mike relatively to the driver, acoustical properties of the material used to secure the mike inside the ear canal ( different materials would create different pressure within the coupler, different materials will also exhibit different reflections with the tip of the mike, different distance for the tip of the mike related to the surround material will also play a huge role ). Only considering all of the above one could imagine how correct combination is probably incredibly difficult to strike. Then add a different shape and size of the pinna, hair on it, then properties of hair surrounding the ear itself and finally properties of the skin. Seriously complicated would be an understatement.
Well either way Hans is correct, what really maters is how they sound to the listener and I can tell already they really don't seem to sound the same for all, that's a shame. Ideal set should sound great for all, just a dream for now but what could stop us from achieving such dream? My answer is nothing, we just have to keep on working!
-
All bullshit aside, I'm very thoroughly enjoying the Audio Zenith PMx2 (official name, as I understand it). These headphones are right up my alley. The previous iteration I heard sounded good, but it wasn't quite where I wanted it to be. Not that I'm the guy designing it, but you get the idea. Apparently Alex agreed there. That earlier one sounded a bit too mid-centric for me. Smooth and laid-back, yes, but something was missing. What I'm hearing on what I believe is the final AZ PMx2 is the sort of sound that is very pleasing and very easy to sink into.
Tonality is probably the highlight of this headphone. Nice extension on both ends. Full-bodied, but balanced, sound. Plenty of well-controlled kick down low. Very cohesive and integrated sound from top to bottom. However, it is on the darker or laid-back side of neutral, but not in any sort of way that jumps out at you. It just sounds "right" to me without about everything I throw at it. Very smooth sounding. Granted, I like a more laid-back, smooth sound, so these fit my tastes almost perfectly. I suspect some will find them a bit too polite.
In a way, these are more in line with the sort of response of the PM-1 (w/ velour pads). Except the PM-1 sounded kinda dead, or "limp-dick" as I said originally. The PM-1 was also sort of claustrophobic sounding. Warm, clean sounding in some regards and a bit soft or smears in others, but generally lifeless. Not sterile, just boring over time. But the overall tone, cohesiveness, and smoothness were big drawing factors for me. The AZ PMx2 captures those positive aspects but inject life into the sound. Bass has more authority and life to it. The warmth from the PM-1 is better controlled. The clean, smooth, fatigue free sound from the mids on up is there but sounds less restricted. There's a noticeable gain in airiness and lower-end presence or reverberation. Soundstage no longer feels like you're being strangled in a very narrow french fry hallway. The PMx2 is not the most open sounding headphone I've heard, but it certainly doesn't sound closed anymore. It's still a bit two-dimensional and at times lacks a bit in the center area, but it sounds wider from left to right than either the stock PM-1 or PM-2. These minor issues are things I generally put pretty low on my list of what matters most to me with headphone sound.
As mentioned, the treble is quite smooth and easy to listen to. Thankfully, the PMx2 is decently resolving and decently fast. It's not the absolute fastest, blackest, clearest, or cleanest sounding headphone I've heard across the spectrum, but it doesn't sound veiled or smeared. Nor is it the snappiest sounding headphone. Like I said, it's smooth and more on the laid-back side, but not dull or sleepy. It captures a very pleasing balance in my mind. I still get the upper-end details and resolution I want, but in a smooth, fairly fast, and fatigue-free manner. Depending on your source, you may hear a bit of extra "sparkle" or sharpness on the top-end of the PMx2. I think the mid or upper-treble is just a bit lifted relative to the immediately surrounding areas, but pleasantly so and still laid-back in comparison.
If anything the PMx2 might be a little more laid-back up top than even the HD650. That's how I hear it compared to my HD650. But the PMx2 somehow sounds better integrated despite this. The HD650 doesn't sound nearly as smooth up top. It has a brighter, sharper, and more grainy top-end presentation compared to the PMx2. The HD600 is more "hot" sounding than either, around the 2-4KHz area, which is something the PMx2 is definitely not subject to. The PMx2 just seems to get out of the way despite sounding more laid-back to me than the HD600 or HD650. Sure, the latter follow a more neutral response on average, but with less cohesion and integration. Less "rightness," or whatever. Just throwing out the same words over and over.
I also have to say that I much prefer the visual accents on the PMx2 over what I tested previously. Instead of the gold and carbon fiber theme, the PMx2 follows the PM-2's silver and black theme but with an added holographic tint. Maybe it just brings me back to the excitement of finding a holographic Pokemon card in a booster pack as a child, or maybe it makes me feel more like I'm living in the future, but I like it.
All in all, I think the AZ PMx2 is excellent. Sure, it's on the laid-back, smooth side of things, but it does so in such a way that somehow doesn't sound particularly colored, dull, closed, or bassy. It strikes a balance that not only fits well with me but perhaps just sounds more "right" than any other headphone I've tested recently.
As I understand it, the modding process is actually quite lengthy, involved, and costly for each headphone. I don't know specifics, but there seem to be a lot of under-the-hood tweaks that are meant to look entirely seamless. For example, I know there are quite a few mods done to the pads alone (internally, that is), but you'd have a hard time telling given how well put together it all is. I had to be told about the pad mods before I noticed them. Yes, that seamless. And Alex isn't cranking these out like MrSpeakers does with his Dog line of headphones. So, given the care put into each one and how nice they sound, I'm not put off by the relatively high price. You can do a lot worse for the same price or higher. And I'd put a bit premium on something sounding this "right" to my ears.
Someone asked me in the previous AZ thread/shit storm if I'd buy a pair myself. That model I heard, probably not at the listed price, and I think some of you picked up on that hesitation. With the current PMx2...well, I've already told Alex a couple times that I want a pair after hearing them. I usually throw a fit about the industry's pricing standards, but I'd probably find a way to pony up the cost for these simply because they work so well for me.
I think after all the time and effort Alex spent working on these, it's finally starting to pay off handsomely with a great pair of headphones. :)p5 (YMMV unless you cut off my head and use it as your own. I ask you to please refrain from doing so.)
OK, enough of that. Let's get on to the pretty lines.
Pretty Line Analysis - Sorry, No Anime Boobs for Ultrabike
I'll admit, I was a bit surprised by how measurements turned out for the PMx2. I was expecting a bit less bass and less of that upper tilt in the 4-10KHz region. Actually, I was expected a bit less of a sloped response in general. Measurements make these seem darker than they sound subjectively, but they are indeed more on the laid-back side. With the bass peaking around 40-50Hz, I think that gives them a nice sense of impact. From there, you have an very linear response to about 3KHz. Realistically, you can expect that notch in the treble to be filled out. I think the depression centered around 2-3KHz helps them sound so smooth and laid-back, yet integrated enough, and the treble uplift helps give them a nice sense of detail and upper-end life. Channel matching is quite good. I didn't hear anything off about that subjectively. In a way, this response sorta-kinda reminds me of the Slants I measured, except the PMx2 shifts the bass emphasis lower in the registers in comparison. I don't think they subjectively sound all that similar...just something I noticed in terms of graphs.
Distortion results are good, as expected. The PM-1/2 midrange distortion weirdness is still present, but I don't subjectively hear it as a problem and never really have. Towards the bass, the PMx2 more or less hits the limits of my measurement rig in terms of distortion. With measurements that turned out really well (averaging sort of covers this up), distortion was basically a flat line down to 10Hz. That area is fickle with my setup.
CSDs are clean as expected. The trail around 1KHz also shows up to an extent on the stock PM-2. I didn't hear anything out of the ordinary or unpleasant here.
Do note that with my in-ear mic now being in a smaller tri-flange tip, any measurement results after and including the K7XX will tend to have a greater treble emphasis beyond 3-4KHz or so than earlier measurements.
-
Any chance we can get a linky on the first post to my impressions and measurements so folks don't have to wade through as much crap to get to them? Thanks a lot if so. :)
-
Linky added.
BTW, as promised, here are a few more measurements from my rig (4 times after re positioning):
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2117.0;attach=8736;image)
And here are comparos with stock version of a PM-1 and a PM-2
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2117.0;attach=8738;image)
Against previous iteration of Alex's mod
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2117.0;attach=8740;image)
And finally a zoom in version of the 4 independent measurements of the current PM-X2 (didn't try too hard to align to the baffle)
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2117.0;attach=8742;image)
-
:)p13 Wait a minute. Hands, you do seem to show a valley around 2-3 kHz there.
I agree with "the PM-1/2 midrange distortion weirdness is still present". I think this is a limitation of the driver as pretty much all Oppo based drivers have it. One may not be sensitive to it, but I think that's where my "glare" issue comes from... Otherwise I dunno.
As far as grain, I definitively hear more grain with the Oppos (including the PM-X2) than the HD6x0s, and find the Oppos and iterations a little less "right" (again, whatever that means).
Would I pay $600 for the PM-2s? In light of the HD600s, proly no. But these are definitively not bad. I think the bass area is superior and offer quite decent mids and treble.
-
I guess we hear those headphones differently then. Btw are those PM1 and 2 measurements all with velour pads? Even then I am surprised all of them measure so similarly (though just PM1 and 2 should be very close).
-
Yep. All velour.
Did leather comparo for the PM-1s in the past though:
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2117.0;attach=8746;image)
This seems to be in agreement with Tyll's independent findings, as far as measurements is concerned with these particular cans.
For clarification, the above are PM-1s with different pads, not PM-X2s.
-
That's quite decent L-R matching though.
I guess we are back to the 'who's measurement/correction method' is most correct in an absolute sense discussion and how different people perceive the same thing differently.
As in: what's one mans 'detail' is another man's treble horror and what's one mans 'accurate' is anothers 'dull, boomy, bass-shy, shrill'.
Fun to debate though and reading this topic popcorn
Never heard an Oppo nor measured one so can't post my opinion but can relate to UB's and AZ's measurements the best (I know how 'off' the in ear thing can be) and know by now that UB's perception is 'similar' to mine.
-
HUGE thanks to both Hans and Ultra for all the measurements, impressions, honesty and most of all willingness to work with a hard case like me.
Glad you both liked the cans better then the original Oppo's and considering how good PM-1/2 sound and well regarded by so many audiophiles and major publications to begin with this must be a great sign. Well at least to me it is so kudos to you guys! :)p1
-
No problem, Alex! I've had fun with it and am glad to help out.
Ultra, not that I generally doubt your measurements much, but I guess I'm just surprised the PMx2 measured so similarly to the stock PM-1 or 2. Just seems a bit too homogeneous for me, and I subjectively hear a larger difference. Even compared to the HD600. Dunno. Also, what amps have you tried the OPPOs from? IME certain setups and amps make them sound more strained and grainy than others, but I believe that you heard what you heard when you listened to these.
-
Ok here is a few more measurements of different PM-1/2 pads from Tyll and then ones made today on my own rig using left driver of the brand new PM-2 positioned exactly the same with all the pads. The differences are quite dramatic and true for both mine and Tyll's rigs. We can also see that PM-2 pleather pad measures quite similar to the alternative leather one while both original leather and velour measure quite different with original PM-1 leather which in turn is closest to the alternative leather and PM-2 pleather pads. The differences are definitely there, don't know why not every rig and every ear captures them though.
(http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/140819_Blog_Graph_OppoPadCompare.jpg)
(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/C2nWxWciR0a4gX0yQx92Rha8Zg9-rJr0Eg5T4-IEb1Q=w1423-h430-p-no)
(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/4wZGVmoVeq8MijppuU260aY7bjYMzWiPo_aqBv5uoAU=w1378-h418-p-no)
(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/p2oCMydwwBAT6IpxaPthJY_gZhKMVxKvYZ4nHYfL6Ws=w1385-h415-p-no)
-
Ultra, not that I generally doubt your measurements much, but I guess I'm just surprised the PMx2 measured so similarly to the stock PM-1 or 2. Just seems a bit too homogeneous for me, and I subjectively hear a larger difference. Even compared to the HD600. Dunno. Also, what amps have you tried the OPPOs from? IME certain setups and amps make them sound more strained and grainy than others, but I believe that you heard what you heard when you listened to these.
I think it's definitively ok to doubt both my measurements n my impressions just as much as anyone's but your own.
Subjectively n measurements wise I honestly don't hear this nite n day difference you n Alex r hearing vs the stock product. BUT IMO there are non negligible difference between these n the HD600s. The 600 IMO r much more my cup of tea. Easily. The mids are grainier on the PMX2s. I think this is due to driver limitations n not sure Alex can do much about it. Like I said before, I loved the bass of the PMX2sm but that was about the only thing I liked more about them vs the 600s.
Now I've heard the Oppos from a variety of setups including Oppos own amp n some of Craig's amps n sources. Felt the bottleneck was always the cans.
Ok here is a few more measurements of different PM-1/2 pads from Tyll and then ones made today on my own rig using left driver of the brand new PM-2 positioned exactly the same with all the pads. The differences are quite dramatic and true for both mine and Tyll's rigs. We can also see that PM-2 pleather pad measures quite similar to the alternative leather one while both original leather and velour measure quite different with original PM-1 leather which in turn is closest to the alternative leather and PM-2 pleather pads. The differences are definitely there, don't know why not every rig and every ear captures them though
Alex, we talked about this before. Like Tyll said in the article were u got his plots: "All these pads are close enough in character to be quite similar, but different enough to warrant a good hard look." We are looking at differences after averaging of 1 or 2 dB. I don't see the dramatical difference you keep alluding to. Not all headphones react the same way to pad or other mod changes. The driver on these ones seems to be a bit less pad seal dependent.
I would have to look at the measurements you supplied, but those did look dramatic if I remember correctly. Even in the bass region.
-
OK, I gotcha. I might also be referring more to treble grain than mid grain, and I think the 650 is a bigger offender than the 600 in that way. But I'm sure many disagree. Hard to know how similarly we're really hearing things let alone if we're always talking about the same thing.
-
Could be Hands. But I didn't feel the Oppos stuff had superior treble to th 6x0es. Just bass.
BTW Alex, Tyll's plots exhibit a higher variation due to head coupler Vs a flat baffle coupler. What I read from those plots and commentary is that differences between pads exist. But these changes r not mind blowing.
Though "mind blowing" is really kind of a relative term. If I was a sucker for the Oppos sound I Proly would just get a PM2 TBH. However, your cans do seem to steep it upanother notch.
This is not like the case of the T50RP were mods do seem to turn a POS can into something quite enjoyable. Mainly cuz I do not feel the Oppos r POSes in stock form. stock T50rps suck quite a bit more.
-
I really could use having a stock PM1 or 2 on hand with velour pads to compare directly, but I feel like I can at least trust my general memory enough that the PM1 with velour pads is the sort of headphone you could fall asleep to where as the PMx2 is not for me. Retains the idea but livens it in a sense. That alone is a big change in my mind but, no, nothing like going from a T50RP to a Paradox, I agree. And dunno, maybe I get a stock Oppo in and realize my memory was extra bad!
-
To finish up the measurement thingy I can say that my random measurements of different pads from few months ago do correlate perfectly (within 0.5db) to the ones done just recently when all four brand new pads arrived along with brand new PM-2s. This for me removes the rig variation concerns but I would certainly agree small variations should exist within reason just not something like 5db.
Tyll's article and measurements of OPPO pads (http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/oppo-ear-pads-listening-and-measurements) clearly indicate significant, also up to 5db variations in frequency response for different pads. That is quite noteworthy considering some small differences had to be smoothed out by how he averages multiple takes and compensates for HATS. Though it would be really interesting to see how my PMx2s would measure on his rig.
Once at it will say a few things from my own experience about in ear measurements similar to those Hans uses. Crucial points for those are the insertion depth, angle of the mike relatively to the driver, acoustical properties of the material used to secure the mike inside the ear canal ( different materials would create different pressure within the coupler, different materials will also exhibit different reflections with the tip of the mike, different distance for the tip of the mike related to the surround material will also play a huge role ). Only considering all of the above one could imagine how correct combination is probably incredibly difficult to strike. Then add a different shape and size of the pinna, hair on it, then properties of hair surrounding the ear itself and finally properties of the skin. Seriously complicated would be an understatement.
Well either way Hans is correct, what really maters is how they sound to the listener and I can tell already they really don't seem to sound the same for all, that's a shame. Ideal set should sound great for all, just a dream for now but what could stop us from achieving such dream? My answer is nothing, we just have to keep on working!
AZ - can you let me know which set of pads you prefer subjectively with the stock PM-2 and why. My recollection is that Marv prefers the Alt PM1 pads and Tyll prefers the original Leather PM1 pads with the PM-2. I have the stock pads, but have heard the Alt pads which I do think I prefer (it being acknowledged that my audio memory is not the best). But I haven't had the chance to listen to them with the original PM-1 leather pads.
Also, please keep me posted if/when you will start modding pre-owned PM-2s.
-
BTW Alex, Tyll's plots exhibit a higher variation due to head coupler Vs a flat baffle coupler. What I read from those plots and commentary is that differences between pads exist. But these changes r not mind blowing.
I didn't really want to go deep into this but the whole measurement subject just keeps on bugging me, no measurement rig is perfect but maybe this could help us understand a few things just a little bit better.
I did one experiment with the original PM-1s where FR was DSPd to perfection using measurements from only one driver for building a single filter to be applied for both left and right drivers. Then I built two separate filters based on the measurements of both drivers. The difference between those filters as you can probably imagine was around 0.5db in a couple of places. Then I listened to both and could clearly identify the differences in back to back testing where dual filter always sounded just a bit better.
Please bare in mind I didn't have to take the cans off, it was just a matter of hitting one button to hear the instant change. This slight difference was verified by other people of different age groups (so much for a theory of humans not hearing differences less the 3db). Suppose when it comes to music we can hear all the finer details much better.
When we start talking about 5db differences between the pads in few places I just go really, there is a BIG difference for me! With all the mods I fight real hard for each half of a db so when there is a measurement showing no difference between neither the pads nor between my PMx2 and original OPPOs of course I go WTF!
If you look closer at the Tyll's measurements of HD-600 and PM-1 you will see that both cans go head to head at 2.7Khz while for example your measurements exhibit a difference of about 5db between them in that particular area. Let's go further, there is about 10db difference between the aforementioned cans at the 5Khz point on Tyll's measurements while it is only 5db on yours. There is also approximately 5db difference at 7Khz between 600s and PM-1s on Tyll's rig and pretty much zero on yours. Then everything goes back in sync by somewhere around 9Khz.
Those facts lead me to an assumption that lots of detail in that neighborhood within the aforementioned 5db range is somehow goes missing or misinterpreted. I attribute it to the acoustical properties of the foam used which either absorbs what normally gets reflected or the proper pressure simply isn't created within such coupler at those particular frequencies which makes driver act a bit different.
Now please look at Tyll's measurements of the same HD-600 vs PM-1 and notice how different they are below 100Hz while on your graphs they are incredibly similar and in fact HD-600 does even a bit better.
Somewhere in the other treads I already mentioned just how many bad tricks measurement rigs could play with you in the midrange. Please compare my measurements of the PM-1s vs HD-600s with those from Tyll as well, I couldn't find any serious discrepancies but maybe someone else can. I actually was very much surprised finding out how they correlate so well as never before today did I ever do such comparisons. Does this mean my rig is as accurate as the one Tyll uses? I don't know as I don't believe in HATS compensation algorithms therefore such a match could be a bad sign, who knows?
Once again no measurement rig is perfect but this doesn't mean we should stop looking for one. Darin just sent me a link on some very interesting research done by solderdude which brings even more questions to the table: http://www.mediafire.com/view/ac2017rapds7y0c/test_rig_tests.pdf
As for the listening impressions; I very much appreciate your honesty and what you hear makes perfect sense. You like both the original PM-1 and PM-2s so it could be safe to assume they press most if not all of your personal buttons so well that something else even if it's different from the originals just won't do much for you. You will surely hear some major differences like those in bass, high frequency extension and resolution but that would understandably still seem fairly insignificant.
Then take me or Hans or Marv, we all didn't like the original PM-1s all that much and so both Hans and I started modifying them right away while Marv found himself more satisfied with PM-2 using alternative pads (which for all I know could have been cherrypicked as I myself have experienced a much different sounding and measuring PM-1 unit of a reference grade).
I suspect Marv is getting his loaner PM-2s back soon so if he can find time to do a comparo that would hopefully clarify a few more points. In the mean time I will plan for a loaner program so hopefully those who have the original PM-1s and PM-2s could also chime in with their own impressions.
-
AZ - can you let me know which set of pads you prefer subjectively with the stock PM-2 and why. My recollection is that Marv prefers the Alt PM1 pads and Tyll prefers the original Leather PM1 pads with the PM-2. I have the stock pads, but have heard the Alt pads which I do think I prefer (it being acknowledged that my audio memory is not the best). But I haven't had the chance to listen to them with the original PM-1 leather pads.
Also, please keep me posted if/when you will start modding pre-owned PM-2s.
Sorry but I don't like any of those pads. For me it's either all or nothing but if you were to put a gun to my head with PM-2 I would probably pick the original leather one (they would still sound limp-dick, flat, boring and non resolving to me). As you already mentioned Tyll prefers original leather, Marv alternative leather, Hans I know liked velour the most while Ultra I suppose doesn't mind either so there you have it ;-). There is also a difference in FR between drivers in one set as well as between different sets which in my experience could significantly affect how different sets couple with different pads. Then there is your own priorities, see how differently Hans and Ultra perceived my two sets which by the way measured pretty much exactly the same, so.... I don't know but this HF business doesn't seem to be all that simple ;-).
To your last question, yes I will.
-
...
I'm talking about differences in measurement systems using a head simulator given the simulated ear shape:
http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/expert-tests-innerfidelitys-headphone-measurement-repeatability-and-reproducibility
These issues should be less significant in a rig such as yours and mine.
As far as what I like, I do like the Oppo cans, but I don't think they are that great either. I find most of them a little too laid back in balance and the mids seem to suffer from grain. While I did like your modifications, I did not feel they made a significant impact in those problem areas. In other words, the PMX2s still suffer from some misgivings inherited from the Oppo original cans. That's my opinion though.
-
Hey, Ultra, aside from that one particular track you mentioned earlier (unless it's the best example), do you have a track that really highlights the grainy mids on the OPPOs for you? I'd like to see if I can hear what you're referring to compared to my HD650. My tracks might not be highlighting that area, as I hear most everything as smoother on the PMx2. Might also just be me listening for something different or not being sensitive to things you may be.
I know the OPPOs are relatively insensitive to seal (personally, I feel they're less sensitive to placement than they are less sensitive to seal), and I'd like to move away from the measurement rig discussion, but I would be curious to see what results you get from a less leaky baffle/coupler for shits and giggles.
-
Don't discard ear geometry differences. Hell, my left ear has a strong resonance at 9.2KHz and the right one has a milder one at 10KHz.
-
I do not think measurements of the very same headphone on different (DIY) rigs should be expected to look exactly the same. There are simply too many variables that have an effect. I guess what makes more sense is comparing measurements of different headphones or modifications on the same rig and drawing conclusions based on differences and similarities.
I find my humble rig useful because it of gives me "objective" feedback for what I am hearing when performing modifications. And, with some experience, I have found that by simply looking at a frequency response/distortion/CSD plot resulting from a modification I have a very good idea if the mod will sound good or not. Very often I mod the headphones until I achieve such a promising-looking graph (on my rig) and then listen. Almost always a nice looking graph corresponds with good sonic performance. But finally it is your ears that provide the final verdict.
And, I am very much certain that my headphones will measure differently on a different rig. At least to some extent.
-
Hey, Ultra, aside from that one particular track you mentioned earlier (unless it's the best example), do you have a track that really highlights the grainy mids on the OPPOs for you? I'd like to see if I can hear what you're referring to compared to my HD650. My tracks might not be highlighting that area, as I hear most everything as smoother on the PMx2. Might also just be me listening for something different or not being sensitive to things you may be.
Try Talking Heads Unfinished Outtake 1:43 to 1:54 (synthetic keyboard):
https://play.spotify.com/track/6CtUsDcTVu2JYbZevtaiQ5
To me it sound edgier and grainier on the PMx2s than the HD600s (not sure about the HD650s because that's not what I have with me at the moment.)
Then try Talking Heads This Must Be The Place (start). It also sounds edgier and grainier to me on the PMx2s. Move on to 1:28 to 1:40 on the same track. I felt a loss in resolution and things sound as if about to clip.
https://play.spotify.com/track/6aBUnkXuCEQQHAlTokv9or
Bass is awesome. But IMO there are better out there.
I know the OPPOs are relatively insensitive to seal (personally, I feel they're less sensitive to placement than they are less sensitive to seal), and I'd like to move away from the measurement rig discussion, but I would be curious to see what results you get from a less leaky baffle/coupler for shits and giggles.
Leaky vs Non Leaky measurement:
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2117.0;attach=8784;image)
There are differences between the measurements due to coupler. But they are not nite and day as in some other cans. Specially in the bass where some cans will go limp dick in the absence of proper seal.
I do not think measurements of the very same headphone on different (DIY) rigs should be expected to look exactly the same. There are simply too many variables that have an effect. I guess what makes more sense is comparing measurements of different headphones or modifications on the same rig and drawing conclusions based on differences and similarities.
I find my humble rig useful because it of gives me "objective" feedback for what I am hearing when performing modifications. And, with some experience, I have found that by simply looking at a frequency response/distortion/CSD plot resulting from a modification I have a very good idea if the mod will sound good or not. Very often I mod the headphones until I achieve such a promising-looking graph (on my rig) and then listen. Almost always a nice looking graph corresponds with good sonic performance. But finally it is your ears that provide the final verdict.
And, I am very much certain that my headphones will measure differently on a different rig. At least to some extent.
Certainly. However, that is not what I think Alex finds objectionable about my measurements. His measurements show this delta in improvement (and no channel imbalance at all) vs Oppo cans ("crap" Oppo cans above, "Alex-Awesome" mod below):
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2117.0;attach=8790;image)
My measurements show this delta:
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2117.0;attach=8684;image)
Obviously his delta improvement and mine do not match. Perhaps I measured a stock PM1 and PM2 as baseline, and Alex started with a broken PM2 set. Alex claims in so many words that my rig is broken and his measurements from his super-secret rig and bat-like hearing tells him his cans are uber-netural and worth well over $1k. Any disagreement will yield a "Sorry, you're wrong", "don't understand why", and in so many words, ears in disagreement are not discerning.
Well, my un-discerning ears tell me his cans are just OK, but not amazeballs. I feel that simpleton HD600s are superior to his cans.
As far as looks, I also prefer the stock Oppo presentation to this:
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2117.0;attach=8794;image)
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2117.0;attach=8796;image)
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2117.0;attach=8792;image)
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2117.0;attach=8798;image)
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/86/e9/3a/86e93a939ef3f0e1dae2938850724d1b.jpg)
-
To be fair, and even though my stock PM-1/2 measurements were done with a mic I couldn't insert as far into my slimy ear holes (primarily affects treble elevation and dip artifacts), I see a larger measured delta between those and the PMx2 as well, unless I'm reading things wrong, including the previous mod Alex sent me. And while my methods are far from perfect, subjectively the cans sound noticeably different to my ears. Still in the same vein, but noticeably different in some relatively large ways (not talking like going from a Senn to an Ultrasone, of course). Of course, my own PM-2 is no longer stock, but I'm hoping my memory of it and the stock PM-1 isn't THAT bad. Plus my ears are not your ears, nor is my brain your brain, but that would make things a lot easier. :)
I could also see someone preferring the HD600 over these for a variety of reasons, stock or modded in any shape or form. I'll have to check out those tracks too. Thanks!
-
Please provide a comparo of your measurements of stock vs modded Hans.
FWIW, the cans that Alex modded and sent to me in the past sounded and measured MUCH WORSE than stock cans.
And while my methods are far from perfect, subjectively the cans sound noticeably different to my ears. Still in the same vein, but noticeably different in some relatively large ways (not talking like going from a Senn to an Ultrasone, of course)
The measurements that Alex provided indicate that the modded cans would not be even in the same vein.
-
Stock vs. the PM-2 I modded? This thread has some info on it: http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,1841.msg50000.html#msg50000 (http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,1841.msg50000.html#msg50000) (see the original PM-2 measurements thread for other measurements, primarily those before I stretched out the headband to lessen clamp, which does affect treble response)
Last measurements I took were here: http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,1841.msg50377.html#msg50377 (http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,1841.msg50377.html#msg50377)
Those were with the "old" mic I was using, so comparable. Though stock PM-2 was using stock pleather pads, and mod is using velour. Mod with pleather pads measured pretty funky.
Yeah, I get that Alex's measurements suggest they wouldn't sound too similar. I'm just saying the latest PMx2 mod I'm hearing sounds more similar to something like a stock PM-1 with velour pads than it would compared to something like, well, a Sennheiser, Paradox/Slant, something from MrSpeakers, etc. Noticeably different to my ears between stock and mod, but more similar than not. Just speaking subjectively here and not referring to anyone's measurements, in case the way I phrased that earlier was confusing.
-
Well, my un-discerning ears tell me his cans are just OK, but not amazeballs. I feel that simpleton HD600s are superior to his cans.
hello,
this is going to get interesting. popcorn
-
In the mean time I will plan for a loaner program so hopefully those who have the original PM-1s and PM-2s could also chime in with their own impressions.
That's a very good idea. I have a PM1 with all the pads here (a present for my special lady).
-
If it's ok by Alex, I could put the set he sent me on tour after OJ and I have made comparos w the Mad Dogs + 600 + Slants this next week...
-
If Alex OK's it I would love to be on list (NY). I own the stock PM-2 and would love to compare and give my subjective thoughts between the two. Would also be helpful in determining whether I should have Alex mod my PM-2s once he rolls out that's service.
-
If it's ok by Alex, I could put the set he sent me on tour after OJ and I have made comparos w the Mad Dogs + 600 + Slants this next week...
Sounds good, as long as set doesn't spend more then a week at one place.
-
Obviously his delta improvement and mine do not match. Perhaps I measured a stock PM1 and PM2 as baseline, and Alex started with a broken PM2 set. Alex claims in so many words that my rig is broken and his measurements from his super-secret rig and bat-like hearing tells him his cans are uber-netural and worth well over $1k. Any disagreement will yield a "Sorry, you're wrong", "don't understand why", and in so many words, ears in disagreement are not discerning.
There is one easy way to check if I was in any way cheating with baseline measurements of the original PM-1s. All one has to to do is compare them to my measurement of HD-600 both posted in one graph earlier in this tread. Then simply compare differences between two graphs on my measurement to the differences between PM-1 and HD-600 frequency response displayed on the graphs posted on Inner Fidelity by Tyll. See how closely those differences match and please stop suggesting I used some broken OPPOs, unless you want to say Tyll was also measuring a unit as broken as mine.
To finish this endless discussion about "superiority" of my rig and "bat-like" hearing of mine once and for all I suggest we perform one simple experiment. Please send me your HD-600s, I will measure and build a couple of DSP filters based strictly on those measurements, one for each ear. Then we upload one into my processor for both left and right drivers to get a first preset. We will also upload two separate filters for both left and right drivers to get a second preset. Then we can use a bypass mode for the third preset.
If you are able to hear the difference between first two presets (which I assume won't be more then 0.5db in few places) then you just like few others I already checked this with do have a "bat-like" hearing. We can also compare bypass with DSPd preset and if you agree that my filter sounds better it would suggest that measurements I perform are no BS. If it's all wrong please keep on posting as many evil pictures as you want but if I am right please simply say it. Does this sound reasonable?
On top of all the above we could possibly set up the same comparo at the upcoming CanJam and a make everyone vote. Random listeners not knowing which preset is which would make this pretty much a blind test and would probably give us a bit more scientific results.
I never questioned your ability to judge the right sound from wrong and that is why I keep on sending you my units. At the same time I criticized your measurement system before and will do it again simply because I think it has flaws. I also criticized some issues with measurements from Hans as you criticized albeit very politely those from Tyll but that doesn't mean we should all get upset with each other. Instead let's try to hear and understand what everyone has to say, think it over and communicate as a gentleman of fortune. This is what pirates do.
Either way this turns out I am open to a reasonable critique and suggestions, as always.
ps.
Thanks a lot for the link about possible flaws in Tyll's measurements, very entertaining. I will have a few things to say about this too but maybe after/if I earn a bit more credibility here.
-
LOL! As far as I know u got a few ideas about how to measure headphones from me and Marv. I still remember when we first meet in Sandyego.
I'm pretty sure u use a flat baffle with perhaps your own choice of materials. I was able to get fairly close to Marvs 1st gen measures n left it at that because those measurements described some cans I was familiar wth close to how I heard them. I could modify it and get a little bit different results but chose not to in order to keep relative comparos valid as much as possible. You can check on my ksc75, hd558, and others and compare to Marvs original ones. Not exactly the same, but IMO close. I believe Marv went for v2 measurements to have a unified approach for seal and non-seal critical cans. I may add a secondary set of measures later to compare to Marvs 2nd gen.
I know I can use a random materials and claim the randomness that come out of it is the absolute truth like it seems you are attempting. Non of that bullshit. I only claim my measurements should be close to v1 measurements here. They may not represent the absolute truth.
Now, about your measurements. Feel free to drop your hd600 vs pm2 vs pmx2 in this tread and see how they compare to Marvs v1, v2, mine, Hands, and Tyll. Whatever the result, forgive me if I doubt your results are the absolute truth. I can compare sonic signatures of what I like and the pms including your mods. The result is on average pleasant to my ears and not offensive. So likely these cans, even in stock form, r sort of what I like and should be close overall to the HD600. Not exactly the same though. Note also the driver you are working with throws monkey chunks in the mids when pushed sufficiently hard.
As far as DSP. There is only so much you can do with it. What "processor" r u using? How r u going making adjustments? What type of filter and optimization r u using?
As far as listening tests, we r going to do some compares soon here, n ur cans will circulate around for folks to listen. Some I'm sure will like them. Some I'm sure will think they are shit. I think they r Ok.
-
The processor is a prototype of a pro grade DSP. Correction algorithms are my own developments and proprietary. Adjustments are being made to align time, phase and frequency response. What one can do with DSP is complicated but at least we have our ears to verify the results, so we can simply do the experiment.
I honestly believe if something sounds truly right, it will sound right for most if not all. In other words; if something is right it will never sound like shit to anyone. One will never mistake black for white if not completely blind. Once we start adding colors choosing the right combination becomes much more complicated and all of a sudden one ends up dealing with all kinds of tastes for different sound signatures. This is why my goal was to make PMx2 as neutral as possible.
-
The processor is a prototype of a pro grade DSP. Correction algorithms are my own developments and proprietary. Adjustments are being made to align time, phase and frequency response. What one can do with DSP is complicated but at least we have our ears to verify the results, so we can simply do the experiment.
If you are making fine and significant adjustments to the response then you will have to contend with positional issues which will results in crap flying around all sorts of directions. Furthermore, an optimization approach for frequency/impulse response requires a weight factor to quantify optimality. By large the most widely use metric is power of the error which almost invariably results in a least squares approach... if you are doing some sort of fitting which I'm gessing you are doing. One such approach can be found in Matlab's "FIRLS" function. If you are using a random "proprietary" deal w/o proper DSP knowedge and w/o a processor with sufficient contraints you more than likely will end up with shit. I've been through that road many years ago.
I'm not against using ad-hoc methods, but given what I know and given you are using "DSP", "filtering", and "processor" to support your "optimal" mod, at the very least I would expect some sort of explanation of what you mean. Otherwise, your position there is groundless signal processing wise, because you are not telling me anything, and ultimately resorting to subjective support claims.
EDIT: We can certainly do the experiment if you want to base your claims by subjective evaluation of your random filtering deal there. Be aware that only deltas can be derived from this test and no absolute "truly right" stuff will likely come out of it. Of course, if you are too far off or if you screwed up your filtering approch then shit will hit the fan and crap will be obvious. Last time I think you presented something to me using your processor and I told you it sounded good. But would have to compare back to back w and w/o your "proprietary" changes and against what I use as reference to give you any sort of meaningful feedback other than "sounds good".
I honestly believe if something sounds truly right, it will sound right for most if not all. In other words; if something is right it will never sound like shit to anyone. One will never mistake black for white if not completely blind. Once we start adding colors choosing the right combination becomes much more complicated and all of a sudden one ends up with all kinds of tastes for different sound signatures.
You are taking an absolutist approach and seem to disregard sonic signature preferences. You will find that recordings are art and "truly right" is to some extent in the eyes of the beholder. But let's say you are trying to achieve neutrality in the transducer equipment. Your cans, just like the Oppos are rolled off in the treble, non-linear in the mids, and to my ears a tad wonky over all. They are fun to listen and not too far off from what I think they should be... which actually applies to the stock Oppos as well. So no, your cans don't sound fully and "truly right" in the absolute sense to me.
-
I have a lot to say about all of the above but probably won't have time within the next few days. One thing I want to emphasize on though: the absolutist approach. Every human being has an equalizer built in by the nature which helps us distinguish natural sounds throughout our life. When we get ear infection for example, everything all of a sudden starts to sound off simply because aforementioned equalizer couldn't realign itself so quickly. We all are surrounded by the natural sounds pretty much 100% of the time, even when we are asleep (a human nature survival is based upon this ability).
What happens when we put headphones on and play the recording? We substitute all the natural sounds for the artificial reality but our survival instinct simply can't be shut down just like that and our built in equalizer can't adjust to a new environment so quickly. Therefore if either recording (at least 90% of the time in my opinion), headphone (90% of the time, again in my opinion), or the upstream gear (maybe 75% of the time) is nonlinear we would feel something is off and get uncomfortable. This applies to each and everyone of us (musicians, audio reviewers, audiophiles or untrained listeners) because we all live within the same ecosystem called Earth and that ecosystem is a setting point for our equalizers from the day we are born. Trained ears though would recognize flaws a bit quicker and with more confidence only not because their survival instinct is stronger but because they are much more familiar with the sound of musical instruments in real life.
Basically it all boils down to our most important instinct: survival, which simply can't be tricked so easily. Therefore I say if everything sounds right, anyone/everyone will know it pretty much immediately. If it doesn't then something will keep on bugging us pretty much subconsciously no matter how beautiful the music is, artful the recording or how resolving is the gear involved. I say we better start producing realistic recordings and linear gear.
Going back to our case, you feel my cans are "not too far off from what I think they should be..." which for me is a very good sign. This "little bit off" thing could be attributed to either upstream gear (in your case I believe that chance should be pretty slim), recordings (same thing, even though not many are good I suppose you would still know your way around those pretty well) and lastly my cans. Well, suppose some more work may be needed if I wanted to bring the absolute perfection to all and everyone then :-).
-
Yup. My opinion is just one out of many.
-
Too much emphasis on FR in this thread. Human 'eq' or psychoacoustic adjustment (aka. Brain burn-in) is only one metric of many that produces natural or accurate sound. Personally I think most people are too attuned to their shitty speaker rigs as their personal references rather than actual live human instruments and performances. I think it becomes clear who is who after some discussion with people. Most people don't even know what their own reference tracks actually sound like tbh and are shocked the first time they actually hear it properly.
Look no further than bright and analytical sounding upstream gear versus dark and compressed sounding gear. They can all measure flat beyond 20-20khz and be within thousandths % of distortion. That should tell someone how dominant those two metrics are for accuracy in the grand scheme of things. Important but not really primary if you ask me unless your standards for audio reproduction are fairly low at which point we shouldn't really be talking about totl price tiers. Focus on only FR for anything beyond a couple hundred bucks would just be a red herring to distract from other inadequacies IMO.
Software peq is cheap to do, acoustic mods are more involved, but neither will push a driver beyond its design potential.
-
Personally I think most people are too attuned to their shitty speaker rigs as their personal references rather than actual live human instruments and performances. I think it becomes clear who is who after some discussion with people. Most people don't even know what their own reference tracks actually sound like tbh and are shocked the first time they actually hear it properly.
That's the truth behind most of the 'reviews' one sees on HF and most elsewhere.
Peoples 'reference' is completely screwed over by a wrong 'calibration', this may not be the case for people dealing with real instruments though.
personally I agree with AZ that a flat FR is paramount for correct tonal balance and that this sounds correct to me as well... on WELL MADE recordings that is.
It could sound poo on a lot of other recordings.
I also agree with the statement that a flat FR isn't everything there is to it.
IF I EQ several headphones so they measure 'flat' they all sound very similar (in tonal balance) BUT do NOT sound the same.
Flat FR could also sound poo to a lot of other folks so 'flat FR' headphones might ONLY be good or 'real' to just a handfull of folks out there.
The majority of headphone users will PREFER bassy, coloured, rolled off sound perhaps to complement their tastes or poo recordings (MP3 128kbs).
There will never be such a thing as a 'universal' and correct sounding headphone that will be liked universally.
It's a good thing to strive for 'perfect' reproduction though and a select few people may like it.
Perhaps.... you (AZ) should not stare at Oppos ONLY though as the FR roll-off is audible (as far as I can tell) and seems a limitation of the driver as is the distortion in a certain frequency range.
It's what UB and Anax are saying as well I reckon... a driver potential limit.
Software peq is cheap to do, acoustic mods are more involved, but neither will push a driver beyond its design potential.
There is only so much one can do with mechanical/acoustical/electrical mods indeed.
IME certain mods and EQ (regardless if it is SW or HW) can improve sound beyond the drivers apparant potential though.
BUT you can't polish a poo and in many cases the driver indeed can't be pushed beyond its design potential in that sense.
For instance the roll-off that is seen in all the plots and which UB metioned is not solvable with acoustic mods but may be improved upon with EQ only.
So you can 'passively' modify the Oppos as much as you want but most likely will never be able to 'repair' the roll-off.
That is from my POV as I have NO experience with any Oppo at all.
Just my opinion of course...
-
That's the truth behind most of the 'reviews' one sees on HF and most elsewhere.
Peoples 'reference' is completely screwed over by a wrong 'calibration', this may not be the case for people dealing with real instruments though.
personally I agree with AZ that a flat FR is paramount for correct tonal balance and that this sounds correct to me as well... on WELL MADE recordings that is.
It could sound poo on a lot of other recordings.
I also agree with the statement that a flat FR isn't everything there is to it.
There will never be such a thing as a 'universal' and correct sounding headphone that will be liked universally.
It's a good thing to strive for 'perfect' reproduction though and a select few people may like it.
Perhaps.... you (AZ) should not stare at Oppos ONLY though as the FR roll-off is audible (as far as I can tell) and seems a limitation of the driver as is the distortion in a certain frequency range. There is only so much one can do with mechanical/acoustical/electrical mods indeed.
For instance the roll-off that is seen in all the plots and which UB metioned is not solvable with acoustic mods but may be improved upon with EQ only.
So you can 'passively' modify the Oppos as much as you want but most likely will never be able to 'repair' the roll-off.
That is from my POV as I have NO experience with any Oppo at all.
Just my opinion of course...
I did some testing lately and gathered very interesting and promising results. General public was given a listen to two in my opinion of the most linear, neutral sounding headphones I know of. Many of the recipients had some kind of degree in music and played different instruments in their past, many but not all. All have listened to the same song with the same volume aligned for both sets and could repeat the test as many times as they wanted. None were audiophiles and none were familiar with neither of the headphone sets.
So far the vast majority preferred the same one set of headphones to the other one ( 10 out of 11 recipients to be precise). Two of those people preferred the other set initially but changed their mind in the end. No comments of any kind were given by me during the testing.
I will surely continue this experiment as I found results to be very surprising and the whole process very entertaining. At least one major thing became clearer to me already as a result; general public does not seem to be biased by the typical sound signatures we all are aware audiophiles have come to accept. I also found the results to go pretty well along the lines with my theory on our survival instinct.
As for the roll off and how this basic signature and distortion figures can't be changed, please see the graphs of my other pair of PM-1s measured earlier by UB and supposedly on the same rig.
Alex sent me his modified Oppo PM-1 cans. Thanks mang :money:
I do not have the stock PM-1s with me anymore, but at the meet I thought the modded PM-1s had a little more bass than what I'm hearing right now. Who knows, maybe I'm a bass head or something. Anyway, to me the impact is perhaps lessened (even from the stock if my memory serves me), but it's not gone. If anything, these are a little more laid back in the bass region. The treble is pretty good. I think the treble on this is an improvement over the stock. More airy. It is a bit brighter though.
I dig these. They sound perhaps a little less low-fi to me. Note I did not dislike the PM-1s in their stock form, but didn't go crazy about them either.
These seem also a little heavier than the previous ones I heard (perhaps due to the mods). Still, pretty comfy though, and not as heavy as some other orthos.
Here are some measurements...
Frequency Response
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1590.0;attach=6712;image)
Distortion Right
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1590.0;attach=6714;image)
Distortion Left
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1590.0;attach=6716;image)
CSD Right
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1590.0;attach=6718;image)
CSD Left
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1590.0;attach=6720;image)
Impedance
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1590.0;attach=6722;image)
-
I just received my pair back from Hans and it made me go back to this tread. I just wanted to let everyone know how much of a meticulous person he is. It's the second time I am receiving my cans back from him in absolutely impeccable condition. First time I said nothing, who knows maybe he was making it all look right to establish connection. Now I understand perfectionism is just his personality.
My cans are all black, have black synthetic velour pads and attract a lot of dust just by sitting on the table. Imagine my surprise when both times pads looked brand new, not a single smudge anywhere else and packaging was as if I did it all myself for a first time buyer. The only sign of him ever listening to these was a light smell of cologne, this part you have to keep on working on man (kidding of course ;-).
When any of you guys are thinking about loaning you gear to Hans I suppose you can be assured of getting it back in the same exact condition, literally. Thanks a lot man!
-
I did some testing lately and gathered very interesting and promising results. General public was given a listen to two in my opinion of the most linear, neutral sounding headphones I know of. Many of the recipients had some kind of degree in music and played different instruments in their past, many but not all. All have listened to the same song with the same volume aligned for both sets and could repeat the test as many times as they wanted. None were audiophiles and none were familiar with neither of the headphone sets.
Another test is to let 'general public' choose between say a TH900 or other pleasantly euphonic headphone and a 'flat' headphone while playing different types of music.
I suppose most of them will go for the Euphonic one because of the bass amount and musicality ?
People listening to a really flat headphone ALL mentioned it sounded extremely good so would not be surprised if you would come to the same conclusion.
I like experimenting on people this way and found interesting things in the process.
As for the roll off and how this basic signature and distortion figures can't be changed, please see the graphs of my other pair of PM-1s measured earlier by UB and supposedly on the same rig.
Do the PM1's and PM2's have the same driver ?
What's causing the roll-off in the PM2 's that appears not to be there in the PM1's ?
Can roll-off be undone with mods in the PM2 so it measures equally extended as the PM1's ?
As said, never seen nor heard an Oppo so have no idea other than what's being said here and your experiences with oppos and other headphones.
Too bad you are not willing to share your measurement techniques.
-
Both PM-1 and 2 have exactly the same driver.
-
You wouldn't call me a perfectionist if you saw my desk, LOL. I just do what I can to keep or make things nice before I send them back is all. I am curious though if they did pick up some scent from me because I don't wear cologne or use scented products. Always wondered how I smell to others I guess? Weird, I know. Or maybe that whole part was a joke, haha.
-
Possible that Alex latest mods iteration (and Oppo) is trading some high frequency performance and coloration in the mids for better low frequency response (extension and distortion). In general, closed cans seem to do better than open cans in the low frequency range. There are exceptions of course, but I have a feeling that's the general trend. Closed cans however tend to sound a little... well... closed. Oppos in general seem to sound closed relative to other open type cans IMO.
As mentioned before, the bass lite first iteration of mods by Alex seemed to have less of a closed sounding signature, and perhaps better mids response vs the stock Oppos I heard before and after. Trade offs...
-
Are you trying to say your puppy's poop has that scent :-00. What's the breed, I want one :)p17
-
Are you trying to say your puppy's poop has that scent :-00. What's the breed, I want one :)p17
(http://www.aspencountry.com/assets/product_images/DogSmellBacon3.jpg)
-
I meant my poop. No more questions! :)
-
Dude, what where you doing with those cans?! :-0
-
Seriously though I also never use cologne and only organic no scent products but my cans still have a light scent. Shampoo manufacturers I suppose could be cheating.
-
Seriously though I also never use cologne and only organic no scent products but my cans still have a light scent. Shampoo manufacturers I suppose could be cheating.
Maybe it smells of bullshit. *:p
Just send them round and we'll listen for ourselves because I couldn't care less what some people I don't know at all think of how it sounds, even if they're all concertmasters.