CHANGSTAR: Audiophile Headphone Reviews and Early 90s Style BBS

  • December 31, 2015, 09:13:28 AM
  • Welcome, Guest
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6

Author Topic: NAD VISO HP50s impressions/measurements  (Read 14422 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

AstralStorm

  • Speculation and Speculums
  • Able Bodied Sailor
  • Pirate
  • ***
  • Brownie Points: +250/-164
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 559
  • Warning: causes nearby electronics to go haywire
Re: NAD VISO HP50s impressions/measurements
« Reply #20 on: November 18, 2013, 09:13:03 PM »
With hardcore equalization these could perhaps even sound neutral and good. Care to try?
Logged
For sale: Hifiman HE-500; Paradox; Brainwavz B2. PM me if you would like to buy them.

ultrabike

  • Burritous Supremus (and Mexican Ewok)
  • Master
  • Pirate
  • *****
  • Brownie Points: +4226/-2
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2384
  • I consider myself "normal"
Re: NAD VISO HP50s impressions/measurements
« Reply #21 on: November 18, 2013, 09:43:26 PM »
They have quite a bit of SNR from bass to mid-treble and no deep nulls, so probably pretty equalize-able. However, the default tuning sounded overall fairly good to me. From Tyll's interview with Paul, I think  the goal was to tune the cans to emulate speakers in a good listening room environment, as opposed to uber-flat neutrality.

I do personally prefer a little more neutral overall signature (not ruler flat though), somewhat more upper mids, little less mid treble energy, and perhaps more air, but these cans are fairly good IMO.
« Last Edit: November 18, 2013, 10:03:35 PM by ultrabike »
Logged

anetode

  • an objectivist trapped in a subjectivist's body
  • Mate
  • Pirate
  • ****
  • Brownie Points: +178/-7
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1067
Re: NAD VISO HP50s impressions/measurements
« Reply #22 on: November 18, 2013, 11:53:21 PM »
Thanks ultrabike for taking the time to do all these measurements!

Quote from: Sforza on November 18, 2013, 05:15:48 PM
Regardless of the outcome, I think the HP50 is a really good headphone as well. I love the bass, it's very well controlled yet with good extension. The treble sounds a little shelved, but it still has enough sparkle and never feels lacking. I'm still thinking it's possible production variation after listening for siblance again in the 3-5k region, which I really don't hear even when compared with other headphones.

There's definite weirdness around the upper-mid/treble boundary, but like the HD800s peak/resonance it's only pronounced in some songs. Glossy pop with boosted treble sounds a little grating and electric guitar doesn't sound quite right.

The bass is quite boosted in the graphs, I think what saves it during listening is that it's fairly tight - quick decay and low distortion, not bloated like a similar response would feel like on, say, a grado or skullcandy.
Logged
Love isn't always on time.

sp0525

  • Guest
Re: NAD VISO HP50s impressions/measurements
« Reply #23 on: November 19, 2013, 12:39:18 AM »
Great measurement and FU's, Ultrabike!

BTW, what curve did you use for the compensation here? (It looks like neither ID-HRTF nor DFE)

Anyway, both IF and these set of measurements point out the followings
  • Quite recessed response around 3k comparing with 'flat' compensated by Diffuse-field
  • Slightly boosted response on bass regions

I'm seriously guessing that Paul Barton might utilize Dr Olive's findings [2] as well as Dr Lorho's [1] ones.

[1] Lorho, G. (2009, May). Subjective evaluation of headphone target frequency responses. In Audio Engineering Society Convention 126. Audio Engineering Society.
[2] Olive, S., Welti, T., & McMullin, E. (2013, May). Listener Preferences for Different Headphone Target Response Curves. In Audio Engineering Society Convention 134. Audio Engineering Society.
Logged

anetode

  • an objectivist trapped in a subjectivist's body
  • Mate
  • Pirate
  • ****
  • Brownie Points: +178/-7
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1067
Re: NAD VISO HP50s impressions/measurements
« Reply #24 on: November 19, 2013, 12:48:22 AM »
Quote from: sp0525 on November 19, 2013, 12:39:18 AM
I'm seriously guessing that Paul Barton might utilize Dr Olive's findings [2] as well as Dr Lorho's [1] ones.

[1] Lorho, G. (2009, May). Subjective evaluation of headphone target frequency responses. In Audio Engineering Society Convention 126. Audio Engineering Society.
[2] Olive, S., Welti, T., & McMullin, E. (2013, May). Listener Preferences for Different Headphone Target Response Curves. In Audio Engineering Society Convention 134. Audio Engineering Society.

Your guess is right on the nose. Oh and welcome! +Karma for proper citation formatting  :money:
Logged
Love isn't always on time.

ultrabike

  • Burritous Supremus (and Mexican Ewok)
  • Master
  • Pirate
  • *****
  • Brownie Points: +4226/-2
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2384
  • I consider myself "normal"
Re: NAD VISO HP50s impressions/measurements
« Reply #25 on: November 19, 2013, 12:51:11 AM »
I'm actually not using compensation in any of the measurements. Coupling materials seem to take care of that to some extent. This makes CSD, FR, and other measurements somewhat comparable. Not necessarily saying this is the right way of doing it, but so far the results seem to correlate more or less with what I hear.
Logged

donunus

  • Cheapus Sexus
  • Mate
  • Pirate
  • ****
  • Brownie Points: +52/-3
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 875
Re: NAD VISO HP50s impressions/measurements
« Reply #26 on: November 19, 2013, 01:01:41 AM »
I am very sensitive to anything going on in the upper mids to the lower treble section of the sound of cans and speakers so I will report when I get to listen to Sforza's pair whether I can hear what you guys are talking about. If I can't hear it even with my sensitivity to that area then it must mean that there are variations in manufacturing. Anyway, I can't wait to give them a try.
Logged
Team Delicious and Juicy Sound

Marvey

  • The Man For His Time And Place
  • Master
  • Pirate
  • *****
  • Brownie Points: +555/-33
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6698
  • Captain Plankton and MOT: Eddie Current
Re: NAD VISO HP50s impressions/measurements
« Reply #27 on: November 19, 2013, 04:06:16 AM »
UB brought these NAD VISO HP50 over tonight and we had a mini-meet.They don't sound too bad, but they do sound very bassy and a bit trebly. That's sort of what I hear. They also remind me of the Beats Studio (don't laugh - they are actually not as bad as people want to make them out to be.)

So we brought out the Beats Studio (from cold storage) and popped in new batteries. Lo and behold! I think I prefer the Beats - just a more even presentation, although the middle-mids on the Beats seem sucked out more, the overall FR transitions seems smoother than the NAD VISO HP50. Vocals sound much more normal. (Vocals on the NAD sound nasally - just kind of off - hard to describe - probable dip in vocal harmonics region.) And the Beats have more normal bass too.

Also, can't crank these up before the overall treble starts to hurt. Same thing on the Beats too, but to a lesser extent.
Logged

Marvey

  • The Man For His Time And Place
  • Master
  • Pirate
  • *****
  • Brownie Points: +555/-33
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6698
  • Captain Plankton and MOT: Eddie Current
Re: NAD VISO HP50s impressions/measurements
« Reply #28 on: November 19, 2013, 04:22:37 AM »
R Ch measurement. Neighbor just turned some low-frequency device on - so no L Ch measurement.



Ultrabike's
Logged

Marvey

  • The Man For His Time And Place
  • Master
  • Pirate
  • *****
  • Brownie Points: +555/-33
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6698
  • Captain Plankton and MOT: Eddie Current
Re: NAD VISO HP50s impressions/measurements
« Reply #29 on: November 19, 2013, 04:32:41 AM »
CSD. Not too shabby. Little bit a 5k and 8k. It's the 8k that bothers me once the volume is cranked (also made worse by the fact that the treble is emphasized in FR.)
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6
« previous next »