Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Sound Cards and Computer Audio › [Official] OCN Headphones and Earphones Club
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Official] OCN Headphones and Earphones Club - Page 1243

post #12421 of 37820
Quote:
Originally Posted by pez View Post

Done smile.gif. And where exactly did you get it from? Price? I have a FiiO amp that I need to utilize more tongue.gif. It's just fine with the cable I have already, though, as I don't think it will see that much of an improvement.

http://epiphany-acoustics.co.uk/

Send Oliver an email, asking him for a custom interconnect smile.gif
I paid around £16 for that cable smile.gif

Cable wise -> yeah that's what I used to say, until I heard a custom one.

Difference between my D2K and a friend's D2K was our cable.
Mine uses stock D7K, and his used a custom copper/silver plated cable -> his mids were a bit more present and clear, vs my D2K.

EDIT:
Here's his I was talking about:
http://www.head-fi.org/g/i/626827/default/sort/display_order/

Here's mine:
http://www.totallydubbed.net/2012/06/03/a-guide-on-how-to-recable-the-denon-ah-d2000-without-any-soldering-involved/

it was impressive to heard the difference on a headphone level, let alone, interconnect level smile.gif
Edited by Totally Dubbed - 12/22/12 at 9:16am
post #12422 of 37820
I don't mean to beat the dead horse here, but...

Sample-to-sample differences in performance between headphones of the same model are often much greater in terms of sound produced than a difference in cable. Differences from (unintentionally) putting the headphones on the head in a different spot are also generally greater. Differences in what people perceive when listening to the same thing multiple times are generally greater than the effect of the cable swap.

You're the one that heard the two headphones, not me, but I'd caution against being so loose in jumping to conclusions.
post #12423 of 37820
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeaj View Post

I don't mean to beat the dead horse here, but...
Sample-to-sample differences in performance between headphones of the same model are often much greater in terms of sound produced than a difference in cable. Differences from (unintentionally) putting the headphones on the head in a different spot are also generally greater. Differences in what people perceive when listening to the same thing multiple times are generally greater than the effect of the cable swap.
You're the one that heard the two headphones, not me, but I'd caution against being so loose in jumping to conclusions.

Not to mention I've never seen someone who claims to hear a difference between two cables pass a blind test.
SUPERPWN
(12 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 4670K Asus z87-Pro MSI GTX 1080 Aero 32GB DDR3 Gskill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveOSMonitorMonitor
4TB Seagate Windows 8 x64 Overlord x270 OC HP ZR27 
MonitorKeyboardPowerAudio
Asus PG279Q G-Tune Topre Realforce 800w Yulong D100 DAC with Denon D7000 headphones 
  hide details  
Reply
SUPERPWN
(12 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 4670K Asus z87-Pro MSI GTX 1080 Aero 32GB DDR3 Gskill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveOSMonitorMonitor
4TB Seagate Windows 8 x64 Overlord x270 OC HP ZR27 
MonitorKeyboardPowerAudio
Asus PG279Q G-Tune Topre Realforce 800w Yulong D100 DAC with Denon D7000 headphones 
  hide details  
Reply
post #12424 of 37820
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy9000 View Post

Not to mention I've never seen someone who claims to hear a difference between two cables pass a blind test.
It happens, can happen, especially with an unusually unsuitable cable. Like too much impedance causing a simple voltage drop, so the lower volume becomes audibly different. Occasionally, people have been surprised in the past by effects they didn't think about or think were significant (it's not just the "first-order" kind of effects, supposedly, according to some reports).

But when you're swapping headphones as well as cables...

I'm no statistician, but to me the basic question to ask is: "What's the probability that some positive outcome would be reported if we ran that 'experiment' repeatedly, without the cables actually being different?" i.e. the listeners think the cables are different (but hypothetically the electrical properties are the same), are using the different headphones, etc. Am I the only one that would think that the false positive rate would be out of control?


If you're just testing stuff out with a friend, having some fun, that's good. If you want to post about it, that's interesting too. Just say "I think" or otherwise be cognizant of the limitations.
post #12425 of 37820
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeaj View Post

I don't mean to beat the dead horse here, but...
Sample-to-sample differences in performance between headphones of the same model are often much greater in terms of sound produced than a difference in cable. Differences from (unintentionally) putting the headphones on the head in a different spot are also generally greater. Differences in what people perceive when listening to the same thing multiple times are generally greater than the effect of the cable swap.
You're the one that heard the two headphones, not me, but I'd caution against being so loose in jumping to conclusions.

Would it comfort you if I told you my D2K's, that have been modified to the extend of being like a D5K, actually sounded almost IDENTICAL to a D5K? More so, not only me, but others agreed the same thing?

I would love to say "cables don't make a difference to the sound" but from my experience, both in headphones, and earphones, they HAVE made a difference - be it positive or negative.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy9000 View Post

Not to mention I've never seen someone who claims to hear a difference between two cables pass a blind test.

I can't tell the difference between FLAC and 320 - but between two cables, I'm pretty sure I'de be able to tell the difference.

Heck i have two cables right in front of me:
Just Audio interconnect
EP interconnect

Swapping one for the other, I can hear the difference INSTANTLY. In fact, I'm sure my mum could even heard the difference, let alone me.
Edited by Totally Dubbed - 12/22/12 at 10:50am
post #12426 of 37820
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totally Dubbed View Post

Would it comfort you if I told you my D2K's, that have been modified to the extend of being like a D5K, actually sounded almost IDENTICAL to a D5K? More so, not only me, but others agreed the same thing?
On the contrary, I think that would be considered an argument against yourself. If you're saying that two particular headphones sound almost identical, then that's an admission (a very reasonable one, regardless of veracity) that you do not possess superhuman auditory facilities. Don't take this comparison to seriously as it doesn't fit, but it's along the lines of "I can't see people 5 km away." => unlikely that you can see a turtle 10 km away.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totally Dubbed View Post

May I ask, have you tried a set of earphones/headphones and compared it to one that hasn't been cable "swapped"?
I can't remember actually sitting down with two of the same model, if that's what you're asking. Anyway, is this a relevant point? For reference, you can look through some data collected from multiple headphones of the same model at InnerFidelity, changstar as well, to get an idea of the kind of sample variances that exist.

I hope that sighted or single-blind test results can be understood without further explanation. Yes, you get some information, but what are limitations? How do you interpret it? There are limitations in every design, even double-blind. But what do you say when the subject knows which is which beforehand?
post #12427 of 37820
Cable difference is there, obviously, but as long as both cables that are being compared are of at least decent quality, there is no way that difference is audible.
So spending too much is pointless and realistically only offers you a placebo effect.
post #12428 of 37820
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeaj View Post

On the contrary, I think that would be considered an argument against yourself. If you're saying that two particular headphones sound almost identical, then that's an admission (a very reasonable one, regardless of veracity) that you do not possess superhuman auditory facilities. Don't take this comparison to seriously as it doesn't fit, but it's along the lines of "I can't see people 5 km away." => unlikely that you can see a turtle 10 km away.
I can't remember actually sitting down with two of the same model, if that's what you're asking. Anyway, is this a relevant point? For reference, you can look through some data collected from multiple headphones of the same model at InnerFidelity, changstar as well, to get an idea of the kind of sample variances that exist.
I hope that sighted or single-blind test results can be understood without further explanation. Yes, you get some information, but what are limitations? How do you interpret it? There are limitations in every design, even double-blind. But what do you say when the subject knows which is which beforehand?

So you go by graphs? And analyse headphones and earphones by graphs?

Based on your argument of "what are the limitations and do you interpret it" - similarly, I can throw you the same question:
What says the equipment used, wasn't at a different variable, what says it didn't have a flaw when performing the tests, what says the machine is correct, how can we test the machine? Via another machine? What about that machine how is that being tested?

See this is never ending, by what I understand, that's what you are trying to get at. Correct me if I'm wrong though.
Also there has been those tests done already, but via HDMI vs expensive HDMI cables. Same thing applies. The difference there is, whereas with an audio signal, a digital signal via HDMI doesn't change in quality.
What I'm saying is (irrelevant of cost) a copper/silver cable will impact the sound, whereas a HDMI with the monster logo on it won't affect the visuals.

As for sitting down, with the two of the same model, and comparing them -> yes that's what I'm asking.

Oh and an FYI:
No, quite the contrary mate:
D2K are £200 headphones
D5K are £400 headphones

What are the differences?
Cable and cup.

What have I changed on my D2K?
Cable and cup.

Yes both, are CONFIRMED to be sharing the same drivers.

So what I'm saying, not even based on my experience, but even Denon's:
The only difference between the two models, is a bit of mahogany wood and a better stranded wire.

So instead of asking me these questions, maybe your questions are diverted towards Denon instead?
Ask them why they are charging a £200 premium for those two things that can be had at £60.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard View Post

Cable difference is there, obviously, but as long as both cables that are being compared are of at least decent quality, there is no way that difference is audible.
So spending too much is pointless and realistically only offers you a placebo effect.

Oh I agree. And the same thing would apply for earphones: For one person saying: "OMG THESE $600 earphones sound amazing" <- that's me btw.
The difference is, that argument is completely thrown out the window, when you have received, for free, to review all the earphones, and have no preference, nor bias towards any manufacturer thumb.gif
Edited by Totally Dubbed - 12/22/12 at 11:25am
post #12429 of 37820
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totally Dubbed View Post

putting quote in spoiler to save space (Click to show)
So you go by graphs? And analyse headphones and earphones by graphs?

Based on your argument of "what are the limitations and do you interpret it" - similarly, I can throw you the same question:
What says the equipment used, wasn't at a different variable, what says it didn't have a flaw when performing the tests, what says the machine is correct, how can we test the machine? Via another machine? What about that machine how is that being tested?

See this is never ending, by what I understand, that's what you are trying to get at. Correct me if I'm wrong though.
Also there has been those tests done already, but via HDMI vs expensive HDMI cables. Same thing applies. The difference there is, whereas with an audio signal, a digital signal via HDMI doesn't change in quality.
What I'm saying is (irrelevant of cost) a copper/silver cable will impact the sound, whereas a HDMI with the monster logo on it won't affect the visuals.

As for sitting down, with the two of the same model, and comparing them -> yes that's what I'm asking.

Oh and an FYI:
No, quite the contrary mate:
D2K are £200 headphones
D5K are £400 headphones

What are the differences?
Cable and cup.

What have I changed on my D2K?
Cable and cup.

Yes both, are CONFIRMED to be sharing the same drivers.

So what I'm saying, not even based on my experience, but even Denon's:
The only difference between the two models, is a bit of mahogany wood and a better stranded wire.

So instead of asking me these questions, maybe your questions are diverted towards Denon instead?
Ask them why they are charging a £200 premium for those two things that can be had at £60.

The graphs are another form of data. The ones I'm referring to are publicly available, so we can all look at them and interpret them. Also, microphones tend to be better than people at quantifying absolute differences. Everybody pointing at graphs as a source of data also listens to stuff too, you know...

We have to ask the same questions about repeatability when looking at headphone measurements as well. This article gives one look:
http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/expert-tests-innerfidelitys-headphone-measurement-repeatability-and-reproducibility

There are known limitations there. Also arguments about correct FR compensation, whether or not to test with artificial pinna, what kind of head-torso simulator, etc. (though that doesn't as much relate to precision, mostly accuracy) These are documented. As always, response on your ears is going to be different than the response on the dummy setup. IF data includes multiple raw data lines, below the compensated FR graph, so you can get a sense of consistency or lack thereof.

There is much higher consistency when doing electrical tests rather than acoustic tests. For example, here is some data on interconnect cable testing, so you can get a sense of how consistent results are (despite the methodology and equipment):
http://www.head-fi.org/t/405217/my-cable-test-enterprise

Note that interconnects are used between a line output and a line input (very high impedance load relative to headphones), transfer much less power. So effects and what is important, is in a different class than for speaker or headphone cables. Just an example. That said, many fanciful descriptions are given to interconnects as well.

You should always be asking these questions about repeatability. It's not a knock on anybody. It's a starting point.


As for the Denons, I was of course making a different point than you were. My point was that you probably still ended up with (quite) measurably different-sounding headphones, even if they sounded the same to you (or me). Hence that's a strike against the human auditory system and perception for having ridiculous powers to discern things they shouldn't be able to. However, I don't know for sure that you didn't perfectly align those headphones. Just a guess. Even if that's not true, I pointed out the differences just by positioning headphones on the head slightly off. Also there are the inevitable psychological factors.

Denon is doing what everybody else does: offering multiple models—often sharing many internal components, to save costs and R&D, or rather all this on Fostex's part—to try to make money. They get higher profit margins on the AH-D5000. What a surprise, huh. That's not relevant to the point I'm making.
post #12430 of 37820
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeaj View Post

The graphs are another form of data. The ones I'm referring to are publicly available, so we can all look at them and interpret them. Also, microphones tend to be better than people at quantifying absolute differences. Everybody pointing at graphs as a source of data also listens to stuff too, you know...
We have to ask the same questions about repeatability when looking at headphone measurements as well. This article gives one look:
http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/expert-tests-innerfidelitys-headphone-measurement-repeatability-and-reproducibility
There are known limitations there. Also arguments about correct FR compensation, whether or not to test with artificial pinna, what kind of head-torso simulator, etc. (though that doesn't as much relate to precision, mostly accuracy) These are documented. As always, response on your ears is going to be different than the response on the dummy setup. IF data includes multiple raw data lines, below the compensated FR graph, so you can get a sense of consistency or lack thereof.
There is much higher consistency when doing electrical tests rather than acoustic tests. For example, here is some data on interconnect cable testing, so you can get a sense of how consistent results are (despite the methodology and equipment):
http://www.head-fi.org/t/405217/my-cable-test-enterprise
Note that interconnects are used between a line output and a line input (very high impedance load relative to headphones), transfer much less power. So effects and what is important, is in a different class than for speaker or headphone cables. Just an example. That said, many fanciful descriptions are given to interconnects as well.
You should always be asking these questions about repeatability. It's not a knock on anybody. It's a starting point.
As for the Denons, I was of course making a different point than you were. My point was that you probably still ended up with (quite) measurably different-sounding headphones, even if they sounded the same to you (or me). Hence that's a strike against the human auditory system and perception for having ridiculous powers to discern things they shouldn't be able to. However, I don't know for sure that you didn't perfectly align those headphones. Just a guess. Even if that's not true, I pointed out the differences just by positioning headphones on the head slightly off. Also there are the inevitable psychological factors.
Denon is doing what everybody else does: offering multiple models—often sharing many internal components, to save costs and R&D, or rather all this on Fostex's part—to try to make money. They get higher profit margins on the AH-D5000. What a surprise, huh. That's not relevant to the point I'm making.

Well as much as I like graphs, and as much as they TRY and depict what I hear, it isn't what you, nor anyone else will hear.

As for your point - of course the Denon point is relevant, but in a different manner.
I can assure you they were "properly placed" on my head. rolleyes.gif

The human ear won't be able to pick up what most graphs pick up, more so, as each of our ears are different, we will perceive them differently, and finally, the graphs that you showed me, as much as there are minute differences, the "human auditory system", in other words, ears, won't be able to pick up those differences, nor will we be able to distinguish the differences -long story short: Even though the tests might show mini-differences, it doesn't mean that you'll actually hear a difference.

Now, I suggest you go and find yourself a modded pair of D2K's and a pair of D5K's, compare them, and then come back to me with a review of both, and the differences (if any) that the two have.
I'll be intrigued to "hear" your differences.

I sense you are very much a person that relies on graphs, rather than personal experience.
However in my experience, especially several years ago, I found that graphs, hide what is actually being heard, and "felt".
When I look at the PFE232's graph, I think - meh normal earphones.
When I hear them, that meh, turns into - holy mother of....
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Cards and Computer Audio
Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Sound Cards and Computer Audio › [Official] OCN Headphones and Earphones Club