Why don’t we see more dynamic tests for audio gear?

Submitted by shiny_potato t3_12658xx in headphones

Noob here… I feel like a lot of discussions about headphones and amps could be resolved if we had more dynamic measurements.

For example, in computer monitors we measure contrast ratio and color accuracy, which I would compare to measuring the frequency response in audio. But this only tells you a fraction of what it is like to use the monitor.

Computer monitors are also tested for dynamic properties such as motion blur and grey-to-grey timings. Is there a test for how fast a headphone or amp can transition from making no sound to making a sound? Or whether the frequency response stays stable while rapidly alternating between multiple concurrent frequencies?

I feel like those kinds of tests could cover things like “quantity vs quality of bass” and other seemingly subjective properties discussed here. Like how “well measuring amps” can sound better or worse than each other (assuming that’s not all snake oil).

Is there any reviewer that has a better diversity of measurements and more objective means of comparing audio gear?

2

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

eckru t1_je7yv4p wrote

Because frequency response makes them irrelevant. CSD, impulse response - it's the same data presented in a way that's harder to interpret.

10

No_Analysis6187 t1_je8fm75 wrote

Because there won't be any excuse to spend more than couple hundred dollars and snake oil amp, DAC, headphones and IEMs companies that sell them for thousands of dollars would go bankrupt.

0

SupOrSalad t1_je8pjuk wrote

So there are a few things to dissect here. A number of years ago, there was a lot more emphasis on alternative measurments like impulse, square wave, CSD, ect. But over time it became much more clear that SPL frequency response is most of what you need when it comes to headphone measurments. Due to them being mostly minimum phase, time relevant measurments are most often consistent and predictable. So simplifying things to just frequency response removes a lot of confusion, and is more representative of audible differences when it comes to headphone measurments.

On to your point about speed. How fast a driver can respond to a signal, it's common to initially think about inertia and how mass causes some lag in motion, but when it comes to headphone drivers, they are so light and thin that most are capable well beyond what is required. Many drivers are capable of over 40khz, but the audible range is up to around 20khz at best. That means any thing within the audible range will be reproduced "fast enough". If it wasn't able to respond fast enough, you would see a drop in the frequency response and an increase in distortion. Similar to what you may see in some sub woofers when they try to play above their frequency range.

On to your point about playing multiple frequencies at once, it's good to look into fourier series. When multiple frequencies are played at once, the amplitude is all added together. So when there is a rise, the amplitude is added together, and if there is a rise in one frequency and a decrease in another frequency, it's subtracted. This means many different sound waves are able to be layered in a single motion, and your ear works as a fourier transform to separate the frequencies and phase from the single combined motion into its individual frequencies. So when playing multiple sounds at once, the driver can make seemingly simple motions, that contain all the frequencies needed to hear multiple sounds at once which is then separated into its frequencies at your inner ear and brain

11

shiny_potato OP t1_je9ao5o wrote

Replying to SupOrSalad (#2,475,448)

Would a planar driver and a dynamic driver headphone with an identical frequency response have an pretty much identical listening experience? I keep hearing things like “dynamic drivers have more bass slam but planar drivers have more bass precision”. Is that kind of thing represented in the frequency response?

1

shiny_potato OP t1_jea5jem wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#2,482,821)

I’m getting the sense that the meat of most headphone reviews are really just ELI5 of translating a frequency response curve into a prediction of what an individual user will perceive as the listening experience. Such reviews are important because the average person looking at a FR graph will have no idea if they would enjoy the Arya’s FR vs. the LCD-X’s FR more.

Is that a reasonable takeaway from this thread?

1