Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Liesera t1_ja70yx1 wrote

I agree with this take, but the problem with this take is that it's functionally useless. FR is heavily smoothed because of how inconsistent it is with fine-grained measurements, especially in the treble, which is mostly what affects perceived detail. The way FR is measured is also just a constant volume one-tone sweep, which doesn't really catch anything nonlinear. Time-related response isn't measured either.

The more specific take would be "FR, split across all frequencies, of the sound reaching your ears, across all different speeds and volumes, is all that matters" but it's basically useless trivia at this point.

7

CrelbowMannschaft t1_ja71851 wrote

There won't be audible timing issues from equipment designed to vibrate more than 20,000 times per second.

Edit to add: I don't know what nonlinear means in this context.

>a constant volume one-tone sweep, which doesn't really catch anything nonlinear

−1

Liesera t1_ja73hnj wrote

It's not just the frequency of vibration that matters, but also the impulse response. Theoretically, transducers are limited by the fact that you can't replicate immediate changes in velocity while you're working with something that has mass. Even if we accept that over 20khz frequency changes aren't perceptible even in transients, FR up to that range is very inconsistent. Nonlinear in this context would be the change in FR when measuring at different amplitudes, which would include resonances for example.

1

CrelbowMannschaft t1_ja73xv6 wrote

I'm glad you backed off the speed issue. I think it is reasonable for people measuring headphones to assume that most listeners will generally tend to listen at a generally loud but safe volume. But my original point was not a defense of measurement, but an explanation of some illusions created by the designs of different headphones.

2

Liesera t1_ja74kvo wrote

Yeah, I'm not completely sold on speed myself, I just think it's an additional potential source of inaccuracy in how we measure FR. I just wanted to emphasize that measured FR is lacking, so there are perceived technicalities, but those technicalities are also just un-measured FR.

2