tonmeister86

One option is simply equalize your headphone to match the current target response that we find most listeners prefer. Second option is simply replace your headphone with one that comes close to the target.

Thanks. Yes, I think we have an OE headphone target curve that is preferred to the current DF and FF target curves, and many highly regarded headphones. We will publish it and probably push it as an improved standard. You can't patent a specification so why not share the love?

Current measurements are able to capture the linear and nonlinear distortions in audio equipment which can be used to predict perceptual dimensions related to timbre (e.g. bright/dull, clarity, coloration,etc). Current measurements of nonlinear distortion such as THD are not reliable indicators of audibility as the added harmonics are often masked by the signal. Spatial dimensions are generally harder to characterize with measurements as the recordings themselves, speaker directivity and listening room all interact in ways that affect the dimensions you suggest. That said, binaural measurements at the listening seat using some signal processing can reveal the general location of the image (azimuth) and the width and envelopment of the imagery which is related to the IACC. Look at some of PhD work of Wolfgang Hess for example. Time-variant Binaural Activity Characteristics as Indicator of Auditory ... - Wolfgang Hess - Google Books

Cool. We've since written an Ipad version of this listening test software that has software knobs that replicate the functionality of the Powermates. Not as nice as the real knob but with 5 ipads we can test 5 listeners at a time w/o the expense and weight of lugging 10 Powermates around the world.

Thanks for the kind words. Glad you like the JBL Charge. I have given a few JBL Flips (a bit cheaper than the Charge) as presents and people are quite happy with them.

Yes, this research was done using over-the-ear headphones. We haven't published any research yet using in-ear headphones but the target response is likely different from the over-the-ear headphone target response given that that there are different acoustical and cognitive factors at play when you put a transducer inside your ear canal.

The science behind the perception and measurement of headphone sound quality is not well understood. There is little published data based on controlled headphone listening tests, and few manufacturers agree on how a headphone should sound or be measured. It is clear from our research and others', that the current diffuse and free-field standards are not optimized to produce best results for accurate reproduction of stereo recordings. To shed some light on this topic, I posted a summary of some research we've been conducting over the past 18 months aimed at understanding the relationship between perception and measurement of headphone sound quality. Using both real and virtual headphone listening test methods we asked over 200 listeners both trained and untrained listeners from different demographics what they prefer in headphone sound quality with the influence of brand, price, fashion and celebrity endorsement removed from the test. Read on further to find out what type of headphone sound quality they agree sounds best?

Thanks. We have learned a lot from doing these listening tests. They are a pain in the butt to do, which is probably why so few people try.

Yes, this is true. We considered anesthetizing subjects from the neck up but the lawyers wouldn't allow us to for some reason There are virtual headphone listening test methods where you can simulate the different headphones over a reference headphone that is equalized to the measured linear magnitude response of the target phones. That makes the comparisons blind w/o tactile/comfort cues; of course, it ignores the nonlinear behavior of the headphone but binaural recordings can capture that. We tried this with some success, and are presenting a paper on this at the upcoming AES 51st Loudspeaker/Headphone conference in Helsinki in August.

Alex, I'm wondering how important this is? How many input sources have such high output impedances? The iPod/iphone are much less than 120 ohms, as are most receivers.

We recently conducted some controlled double-blind listening tests and measurements on six popular headphones to study the relationship between perception and measurement of headphone sound quality. The question we posed was can listeners agree on what headphones they prefer based on sound quality? And can their headphone preferences be predicted based on a set of objective measurements? I've post a summary of the paper with a link to the slides we presented at the recent AES Convention: Audio Musings by Sean Olive: The Relationship between Perception and Measurement of Headphone Sound Quality

P.S I wanted to add that we also eliminate listener and loudspeaker positional effects or biases in the listening test by having each listener sit in the same seat and by moving the different speakers into the same location via a pneumatic speaker shuffler. We are the only audio company I know that has such a device. See

Level matching of speakers is done by playing pink noise measured at the listening position at around 80 dB B weighted slow with an omni mic )and adjusting the speaker input until they match within 0.1 dB. We recently started using an ITU R 1770 loudness meter which is similar to B weighting but flat at high frequencies and has as lower high pass frequency than B.

Sometime this spring or summer I am told.

LSR monitors are tested against other pro monitor competitors including Genelec. We have tested them against consumer speakers from time to time. Our best consumer models do well against LSR: why wouldn't they since we aim for the same performance targets in consumer/pro monitors, and both are designed and tested in the same facility. The main difference is that LSR's are powered whereas most consumer home speakers are not. The consumer speakers tend to have wider dispersion at higher frequencies because historically Pro speakers have steeper waveguides to maximize efficiency of the tweeter output. However, that is changing and the new LSR monitors previewed at AES have a high efficiency compression driver mated to a radically new designed waveguide that gives very wide dispersion in vertical and horizontal planes. The main benefit is you have a much wider sweet spot that allows you to move around the room with little change to the timbre. The reflected sounds are more similar to the direct sound as well. Regarding room correction, the new LSR monitor uses room correction based on our research, and it's the same as implemented in JBL Synthesis (known as ARCOS). So professional sound mixers can set them up in any control room, and calibrate them so that their mixes are more consistent from room to room. When consumers listen to those same recordings over a similar calibrated system, they get as close to hearing what the artist intended as you can get. Cool, eh?