Jump to content
Computer Audiophile
StuartsYoga

Headphone + amp upgrade advice please

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, dalethorn said:

All of the planars I've tried are treble-deficient.

I think I have a good answer for this problem. The problem is not with planar headphones. It's sampling rates of digital contents. Planar headphones are simply too accurate. It produces sound exactly recorded in your digital tracks. For 44.1khz sampling rate, there is only four samples available to encode 10khz sound curve. It's just two above and two below the base line. With this kind of sampling rate, sound encoding of treble sound must be heavily distorted. Planar magnetic headphones are too detailed on this.

 

To avoid this problem, you need to use higher definition such as 24/192 or 24/384, or go analog such as vinyls. I tested this theory this on 24/192 track. I couldn't hear roughness. I tried treble rich CD rips, sound horrible! 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PS:

My test also shows that upsampling to 32/192 from Windows mixer makes treble sound much better. Planar headphones good match for high definition tracks.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, davide256 said:

Again, your personal preference/bias. You have no monopoly on the human experience.

Logic is not about monopoly, it's about comparing A to B and realizing they are not identical.  You are trying to create a false equivalence, but it doesn't pass logic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, hdo said:

I think I have a good answer for this problem. The problem is not with planar headphones. It's sampling rates of digital contents. Planar headphones are simply too accurate. It produces sound exactly recorded in your digital tracks. For 44.1khz sampling rate, there is only four samples available to encode 10khz sound curve. It's just two above and two below the base line. With this kind of sampling rate, sound encoding of treble sound must be heavily distorted. Planar magnetic headphones are too detailed on this.

 

To avoid this problem, you need to use higher definition such as 24/192 or 24/384, or go analog such as vinyls. I tested this theory this on 24/192 track. I couldn't hear roughness. I tried treble rich CD rips, sound horrible! 

 

 

 

False.  The planar driver is very large, very well suited to accurate bass.  Not so good for treble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hdo said:

PS:

My test also shows that upsampling to 32/192 from Windows mixer makes treble sound much better. Planar headphones good match for high definition tracks.

 

 

 

Upsampling works no better in audio than it does in photography.  It gets bigger, but not better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dalethorn said:

False.  The planar driver is very large, very well suited to accurate bass.  Not so good for treble.

I don't think you are right. Most large headphones also use large driver.

HD800 has 56mm driver.

PM-3 has 55mm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, dalethorn said:

Logic is not about monopoly, it's about comparing A to B and realizing they are not identical.  You are trying to create a false equivalence, but it doesn't pass logic.

Last I checked we were flesh and blood, not silicon chips. Logic has zero to do  with each unique persons hearing capability, ear training and experience. You and I can listen to 2 different headphones and based on our uniqueness come up with very different appraisals of its enjoy-ability. As an example, while the Beyers  you have may be more technically accurate, I'd gravitate to the Grado PS1000 because I care more about tone color richness  than I do  high frequency crispness and extension.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, hdo said:

I don't think you are right. Most large headphones also use large driver.

HD800 has 56mm driver.

PM-3 has 55mm.

The planar projects sound from a large flat surface, but the dynamic driver projects sound as a piston.  Very different.  The large flat surface is not good for high frequencies.  You should read up on this before posting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, davide256 said:

Last I checked we were flesh and blood, not silicon chips. Logic has zero to do  with each unique persons hearing capability, ear training and experience. You and I can listen to 2 different headphones and based on our uniqueness come up with very different appraisals of its enjoy-ability. As an example, while the Beyers  you have may be more technically accurate, I'd gravitate to the Grado PS1000 because I care more about tone color richness  than I do  high frequency crispness and extension.

Your logic is very faulty.  The whole purpose of high fidelity is accurate reproduction.  For example, it does not matter that we hear a live recording differently when we sit there and listen side-by-side.  What matters is that the high fidelity gear plays the recording accurately, so that I hear the same thing in my recording as when I was there live, and you hear in your recording and hi-fi gear the same as when you were there live.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

12 hours ago, hdo said:

I think I have a good answer for this problem. The problem is not with planar headphones. It's sampling rates of digital contents. Planar headphones are simply too accurate. It produces sound exactly recorded in your digital tracks. For 44.1khz sampling rate, there is only four samples available to encode 10khz sound curve. It's just two above and two below the base line. With this kind of sampling rate, sound encoding of treble sound must be heavily distorted. Planar magnetic headphones are too detailed on this.

 

To avoid this problem, you need to use higher definition such as 24/192 or 24/384, or go analog such as vinyls. I tested this theory this on 24/192 track. I couldn't hear roughness. I tried treble rich CD rips, sound horrible! 

 

 

 

Its basically a bandaid... up-sampling moves the high frequency irritants beyond the audible range but confuses the ear on details at the limit of the original formats resolution. Works on cheaper solutions  that can't reach the limit of source  format resolution but decreases the fidelity with better DACs and source solutions that can resolve to the format limit  So enjoy the honeymoon, it won't last as your system improves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, hdo said:

I don't think you are right. Most large headphones also use large driver.

HD800 has 56mm driver.

PM-3 has 55mm.

Bigger drivers have more inertia, can't respond as quickly to transients in the highs. That's why most room speakers have a smaller tweeter for highs. Headphones are small already but that inertia can still affect high frequency transients. Planars as  a class have bigger driver surface/mass, are slower on highs than the Sennheisers and Focal headphones. The flip side is they have very little resonance coloration from their driver. Having played in an orchestra, I prefer planars. Had I played in a rock band, my preference might have been tilted towards the Sennheisers or Focal headphones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s correct that the diaphragm on many planar are large and have a flat surface. With a big diaphragm it’s difficult to get enough tension especially in the middle of very thin and big membranes. The planar membrane is btw always a bit looser in the middle than around the edges. To reproduce a high note the membrane has to be able to move very fast and if the membrane isn’t firm the high frequency will roll of.

 

Some of the best planar headphones; Audeze LCD4, Abyss and Hifiman HE6 does not roll of much or at all, because they have diaphragm with very high tension. High tension is also good for firm bass. The down side is they get insensitive and need a lot of current to get the same SPL non-planer headphones do.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Summit said:

Some of the best planar headphones; Audeze LCD4, Abyss and Hifiman HE6 does not roll of much or at all, because they have diaphragm with very high tension. High tension is also good for firm bass. The down side is they get insensitive and need a lot of current to get the same SPL non-planer headphones do.  

 

Hold the Focal Elear and get a good look at the driver, then blow *very* slightly on it and see the large amount of excursion.  That's what you need to push the amount of air to create strong deep bass notes like organ pedals.  Planars are getting vastly more expensive, but not as good as electrostatics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, dalethorn said:

 

Hold the Focal Elear and get a good look at the driver, then blow *very* slightly on it and see the large amount of excursion.  That's what you need to push the amount of air to create strong deep bass notes like organ pedals.  Planars are getting vastly more expensive, but not as good as electrostatics.

 

Electrostatics are also planar. Which design or headphone one prefer is individual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Summit said:

 

Electrostatics are also planar. Which design or headphone one prefer is individual.

 

They are NOT the same.  There are huge measurable differences between planars and electrostatics.  Planars are still in the development stages as far as competing with electrostatics, and maybe in another 10 years or so they'll achieve a good measure of fidelity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-12-17 at 9:49 PM, dalethorn said:

 

They are NOT the same.  There are huge measurable differences between planars and electrostatics.  Planars are still in the development stages as far as competing with electrostatics, and maybe in another 10 years or so they'll achieve a good measure of fidelity.

 

Correct, they are not the same technology, one use electrostatics drivers and another planar magnetic drivers. But then it comes to the diaphragm they are very similar. Both use big flat planar membrane that are very thin. It was the large flat surface you said was not good for high frequencies and that’s the same for electrostatics and planar magnetics.

 

I don’t agree that planar are still in the development stages. Have you ever heard speakers like Apogee Diva and Martin Logan or Hifiman HE6/HE 1000 v2?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Summit said:

 

Correct, they are not the same technology, one use electrostatics drivers and another planar magnetic drivers. But then it comes to the diaphragm they are very similar. Both use big flat planar membrane that are very thin. It was the large flat surface you said was not good for high frequencies and that’s the same for electrostatics and planar magnetics.

 

I don’t agree that planar are still in the development stages. Have you ever heard speakers like Apogee Diva and Martin Logan or Hifiman HE6/HE 1000 v2?

 

What I know from personal experince may not agree with the stated specs.  What I know is that ES headphones have always been excellent treble machines, and as recently as 2 years ago using some pricy planars, they're nowhere near as good.  To be informative, someone needs to explain why this is rather than say it isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎22‎/‎12‎/‎2017 at 2:11 AM, Summit said:

It was the large flat surface you said was not good for high frequencies and that’s the same for electrostatics and planar magnetics.

Planar magnetic headphones use thin light diaphragm. Driving force is spread over surface area. So it can move very fast, even large ones. Inertia and momentum are functions of mass. PM diaphragm are very light. So the theory that big drivers cannot move fast for high frequency sound is false. I tested sound tones ranging 1khz to 13khz generated using Audacity. PM-3 planner magnetic headphones produce very nice TREBLE sound. Both PM-3 and Audeze Sine claims frequency response of 10hz to 50khz. I am satisfied with their claim.

 

The reason that some people claim that planar magnetic headphones lack treble is because they play songs that are treble deficient. Especially old songs lack treble sound. Note that analog tapes were not good in recording high pitch sound. The high pitch tone sound from dynamic headphones are plastic noise or distorted sound from plastic cones used in dynamic. If your favoured song is treble deficient songs, plastic dynamic headphones may be preferred. Otherwise planar magnetic is much better technology. With high definition digital recording become standards, planar will replace dynamic headphones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/14/2017 at 7:09 PM, dalethorn said:

There's a tremendous difference in the treble strength of a Senn HD800 and planars in that range, such as the LCD2 Fazor edition I had.  Particularly above 10 khz.  To think that they sound about the same (treble), doesn't compute.

Its quite obvious planar have more driving force so better at low frequencies and electrostats have no big magnet arrays to mess up mid and highs. So no one is perfect. It is what compromise you like better

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, hdo said:

Planar magnetic headphones use thin light diaphragm. Driving force is spread over surface area. So it can move very fast, even large ones. Inertia and momentum are functions of mass. PM diaphragm are very light. So the theory that big drivers cannot move fast for high frequency sound is false. I tested sound tones ranging 1khz to 13khz generated using Audacity. PM-3 planner magnetic headphones produce very nice TREBLE sound. Both PM-3 and Audeze Sine claims frequency response of 10hz to 50khz. I am satisfied with their claim.

 

The reason that some people claim that planar magnetic headphones lack treble is because they play songs that are treble deficient. Especially old songs lack treble sound. Note that analog tapes were not good in recording high pitch sound. The high pitch tone sound from dynamic headphones are plastic noise or distorted sound from plastic cones used in dynamic. If your favoured song is treble deficient songs, plastic dynamic headphones may be preferred. Otherwise planar magnetic is much better technology. With high definition digital recording become standards, planar will replace dynamic headphones.

 

No, not even close.  The Senn HD800, for example, has incredible upper harmonic resolution and sparkle, and the best planars I've heard cannot compare.  I think if you read enough commentary and reviews, you'll find the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, monteverdi said:

Its quite obvious planar have more driving force so better at low frequencies and electrostats have no big magnet arrays to mess up mid and highs. So no one is perfect. It is what compromise you like better

 

To be honest, I don't find any compromise to be "better".  A good headphone should not be like a politician, where you choose the least evil option. A good electrostatic like the Stax SR009 would probably work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, dalethorn said:

The Senn HD800, for example, has incredible upper harmonic resolution and sparkle, and the best planars I've heard cannot compare

That's your preference for sound. Planars produce sound as it is recorded!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, hdo said:

Planar magnetic headphones use thin light diaphragm. Driving force is spread over surface area. So it can move very fast, even large ones. Inertia and momentum are functions of mass. PM diaphragm are very light. So the theory that big drivers cannot move fast for high frequency sound is false. I tested sound tones ranging 1khz to 13khz generated using Audacity. PM-3 planner magnetic headphones produce very nice TREBLE sound. Both PM-3 and Audeze Sine claims frequency response of 10hz to 50khz. I am satisfied with their claim.

 

The reason that some people claim that planar magnetic headphones lack treble is because they play songs that are treble deficient. Especially old songs lack treble sound. Note that analog tapes were not good in recording high pitch sound. The high pitch tone sound from dynamic headphones are plastic noise or distorted sound from plastic cones used in dynamic. If your favoured song is treble deficient songs, plastic dynamic headphones may be preferred. Otherwise planar magnetic is much better technology. With high definition digital recording become standards, planar will replace dynamic headphones.

 

I have not said that planar cannot play high frequency sound, I have stated the very opposite.

 

@Dalethorn are on the right track in regard to that it’s hard to make a planar without roll of high treble. But I object to his statement that planar can’t be made without roll of treble or that planars are poor quality attempts at doing what ES do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Superphonica
×