Most discriminating audio reviewerSubmitted by SnooStories7223 t3_y2lgqb in headphones
QuatreMyr t1_is44z7s wrote
Reply to comment by SnooStories7223 in Most discriminating audio reviewer by SnooStories7223
>Neutral is what you want buddy.
Definitely not what everyone wants. Or most people, honestly.
Bickster- t1_is4ec9m wrote
I guess a better way to put it is that neutral should be the norm, not the exception
It's okay to like a certain signature, but I should not have to pay out the ass for a neutral headphone because almost every headphone under $150 measures like a damn heartrate monitor
QuatreMyr t1_is4icdu wrote
Thats the dream isn't it... Unfortunately from an engineering standpoint, neutral fr + no time domain problems is very hard to do, which is why there are few of them, and why headphones that are close tend to be more expensive.
Bickster- t1_is4lw0t wrote
I understand that tuning headphones (especially on a manufacturing scale) isn't exactly easy, but I find it hard to believe that V-shaped signatures became the norm because it's easier to engineer. I've seen some enthusiasts DIY tune headphones with household materials and get significantly better measurements. I think it's more of a marketing issue, where manufacturers won't post any information about the sound signature of a headphone, and just kinda assume that people like V-shaped headphones because most people don't have the vocabulary to express what they like about a particular headphone. Recently JBL came out with a well-measuring cheap Bluetooth over ear headphone (the tune 710 I believe), but you wouldn't know it, because absolutely no-where in the website, stats or marketing material can you find the measurements. Clearly it isn't impossible if JBL can come out with a well tuned headphone. Not to mention the leaps and bounds the IEM market has been making, and some of the headphones Koss has released too.
QuatreMyr t1_is4pxlk wrote
In my 10+ years of experience with headphone communities, neutral definitely is not what most people enjoy, give them a headphone that perceptually has all frequencies at roughly the same volume, and itll get called boring by the majority. Whenever I see someone call a headphone neutral, it's almost always a little v shaped at the very least.
Not neutral is definitely easier to engineer though. Headphones in particular, by nature, don't start out flat, and often fight you every step of the way if you do try to coerce them into being flat. A fix one thing, 3 more go wrong kind of thing, every change you make has cascading effects. Speakers are far easier to work with if neutral is your only goal.
audioen t1_iseimcm wrote
Neutral -- meaning literally flat frequency response -- is also not how a speaker sounds in a room. There will be downward slope in treble, there will be boost in bass, and earlobes do their thing around 2-6 kHz at least as far as our eardrums are concerned. The point of these tuning targets is basically to mimic the tonality of a real speaker in a real room at a reasonable listening distance. So in a bizarre sense, if you have a reasonable tuning target, it will be v-shaped, but it also sounds similar to studio monitor's flat response in an actual listening room.
Then there are equal loudness contours to consider as ear's response is not flat either but depends on overall sound level. It is another v-shaped correction curve.
My opinion is that there is no single tuning target. As long as the response is somewhat like any of the various harman/soundguys etc. target curves, it is probably close to what it "should" be, especially given that there is not and can not be one single target as it all depends on assumptions used to derive it, and ultimately is up to individual's preferences and experiences, also.
I find it pointless to eq few dB boosts here and there, because there is no universal headphone audio truth. However, if something in the sound does bother you, it is probably best to fix that part. Yet, it can be due to any number of things, one possibility being that your individual preference for sound reproduction is slightly different from the manufacturer's approximation, e.g. maybe your main music listening room has bit different dimensions or your earlobes have slightly unusual shape, or whatever. It can be pretty much up to any random thing like that.
oratory1990 t1_is4lb02 wrote
> Or most people, honestly
By definition, "neutral" is what most people want. "neutral" meaning "neither of both", as in "neither too little nor too much".
Detectiveleht t1_is4np7t wrote
I think you’re confusing neutral with popular. If a V-shaped frequency response is the preferred sound signature of most people, then it still isn’t neutral because the bass and treble are amplified.
Joulle t1_is58zk1 wrote
It's a little word game at this point. Are we talking about objective neutral or subjective neutral. Even objective neutral could be just harman neutral or a completely flat FR response if you ask me but what do I know, I'm just an enjoyer with limited experience.
Every time someone mentions neutral I'm a bit confused because they might mention a headphone that I don't think is neutral.
How it all sounds to my ears, I think the Hifiman Arya SE and the DT1990 with analytic pads and with oratory's EQ (except not with mount Beyer) are pretty neutral so I guess something like flat lows and mids and the harman treble bump. Arya being more neutral than the Beyers in my opinion.
The hifiman Anandas don't sound neutral to me as their bass is even too "boring", as in lower bass isn't there. Other than their bass, they're neutral in my opinion.
Although maybe I'm mixing my own preferences with neutral here.
Detectiveleht t1_is6rp5m wrote
that’s a good point. It all depends on what are you using as the standard or so called “true neutral”. I’m not too experienced in audio matters myself but i felt that i have to point it out, even if it’s wrong. I don’t have the money to invest in some nice cans but i’m an avid ultrabudget iem enjoyer lmao. and a good example imo would be the sony MH755 vs moondrop chu, where MH755 is tuned to the harman target and chu is more of a “true neutral”. for me MH755’s sound signature is a tad bit more enjoyable because i like the boosted subbass. Yet they’re both good iem’s for the money and it all comes down to personal preference.
oratory1990 t1_isa21uv wrote
> it still isn’t neutral because the bass and treble are amplified.
That's hypothetical, because the preferred sound of most people is not V-shaped (when given the option).
The word "neutral" comes from latin "ne utrum", meaning "neither of both".
In this context it refers to "neither too little nor too much".
If the average person (in a properly conducted listening test, which is hard to do) prefers a sound, then by definition it is neutrum, meaning it leans neither in one direction nor in the other direction.
Detectiveleht t1_isefu9a wrote
>If the average person (in a properly conducted listening test, which is hard to do) prefers a sound, then by definition it is neutrum, meaning it leans neither in one direction nor in the other direction.
This doesn't sound right to me. As far as I understand, neutral sound means that all frequencies are perceived at the same volume. i.e the sound doesn't lean toward one nor in the other direction.
Preferring a sound doesn't make it neutral.
For example. If a person likes their foods sweet then it doesn't mean that sweet is neutral. Sweet is still sweet and neutral means not too sweet nor not too bitter.
To me it seems that you made a mistake and instead of having the courage to admit it, you doubled down.
oratory1990 t1_iset0i5 wrote
> neutral sound means that all frequencies are perceived at the same volume. i.e the sound doesn't lean toward one nor in the other direction.
That's exactly it though - you get a rotary button to control the amount of bass, and you get asked to dial it in until it sounds correct, as in "it sounds the way it should sound".
You repeat this with many, many people go get a meaningful average.
"neutral" does not mean "flat on a measurement".
Detectiveleht t1_isfefba wrote
it seems this doesn’t lead anywhere so let’s just agree to disagree.
CleanOutlandishness1 t1_is5awxu wrote
not by definition.
While i agree with your premise, given the chance i believe most people would rather have a neutral sounding headset. it's not self evident either.
First i tought most people would rather have bassy gear like Bose or Beats. A quick search showed me that the most sold earpiece was apparently the airpods (i couldn't fact-check), which have a treble bias.
But frankly, this doesn't prove that most people like either bassy or trebly headphones. To me it only show that people react more to brand recognition and/or to the "fashion" element of their gear. Also i believe there's a mass production element to it. It's easier and more efficient to have a controlled bias than go to accuracy for accuracy's sake (as in, TRYING to be accurate).
But whether most people would rather want unbiased gear or not is left to be proven.
oratory1990 t1_isf3e5j wrote
> First i tought most people would rather have bassy gear like Bose or Beats.
Most people buy after the brand name, not after sound quality - even though they sometimes follow what they think a certain brand promises in sound.
Few people are save from that - yourself (no disrespect to you, I'm sure you are a good listener) being not excempt either: Both Bose and Beats have made bass-light products! Yet the myth that "bose = bass" and of course "beats = bass" persists (not entirely unfounded eiher of course)
> A quick search showed me that the most sold earpiece was apparently the airpods (i couldn't fact-check), which have a treble bias.
Most likely not because of sound quality though, but because of the ease of use and also the brand name, as you said yourself:
> To me it only show that people react more to brand recognition and/or to the "fashion" element of their gear.
> But whether most people would rather want unbiased gear or not is left to be proven.
There's been quite a lot of research on that matter actually, plenty of controlled listening tests having been done with different ways of formulating essentially the same question: Do people prefer unbiased/"good"/neutral/uncolored sound, or have they gotten used to something else?
In general, most research (that I'm aware of) does in fact point towards the average person preferring what would be considered "good" sound (neutral, uncompressed, uncolored, ...) - as long as they're given the option.
CleanOutlandishness1 t1_isflf7r wrote
Right, it seems we're basically saying the same thing as far as opinion goes.
I'm definitely not offended as i pretty much know for a fact that i rely a lot on brand and word-to-mouth. I have little tools, time or money to make much empiric researches for the gear i use. Or even read and understand released documents.
The main point i was making was that the language you used implied some self-evident truth in how a neutral sound is basically good sound, and that goes for everyone. Why would anyone even make any research if it was indeed self-evident ?
I'm glad researches point toward that being the case though, i would really like to convert everyone i know to using more neutral gears.
Privester t1_is5ecwr wrote
I think neutral sound the same way as neutral colors.
Neutral colors in the purest sense would be black, white and many other gray tones. But many people find those boring.
Mix in a tiny amount of colors and you get a wide palette of other colors which are still called neutral colors.
Harmon, Ief neutral,. .. can be thought as some widely popular neutral colors like Navy and khaki.
oratory1990 t1_isbtjed wrote
> Harmon, Ief neutral,. .. can be thought as some widely popular neutral colors like Navy and khaki.
That comparison falls flat, because the question is not "tell me a neutral color" (for colors) or "tell me a neutral amount of bass" (for sound).
The question that the research answered was: "here's a control wheel, dial in the amount of bass that sounds correct while listening to music".
Which is the equivalent of: "here's a control wheel to control the amount of yellow in this picture of a sunflower, dial in the amount of yellow until it looks correct to you".
TheSunflowerSeeds t1_isbtl0b wrote
When your sunflower is coming to the end of it’s blooming period, You may want to use the last rays of the afternoon and evening to cut a few for display indoors, leave it any later and the sunflower may wilt.
Privester t1_isdcagx wrote
Yeah thats a seperate topic and I 100% agree with you there.
Maybe we both want different definitions for the word "neutral" for sound here. Most audiophiles when they say neutral, they prob mean somewhere along the lines of the harmon target. Which was what I was thinking too.
Realizing that using neutral colors as a bad idea. If popular sound signatures are considered neutral.
Does this make sense? Harmon, ief neutral,. .. are considered excellent neutral sound signatures. Soundguy, rtings are considered good. Bassy sound signatures are considered average?
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments