Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

IMKGI t1_ir6ne4k wrote

"Found the following in some article "I think it’s a PET diaphragm with a PVD metal plating (likely Titanium)" But i really don't see why that matters, the looks of the diaphragm should be the very last of your priorities when buying a headphone

63

GreenNerve OP t1_ir6pnam wrote

Airpods Max has very low THD across the whole 20 Hz to 20 kHz range, it outperforms lots of more expensive DD headphones.

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/apple-airpods-max-review-noise-cancelling-headphone.25609/

Apple has apparently developed a very good driver which leads me to think what can those drivers achieve if placed in a pair of well tuned open back cans

21

IMKGI t1_ir6qv23 wrote

THD isn't nearly as important as you think, it is incredibly difficult to hear, and even if it would outperform high end headphones (which it doesn't) it would make no real impact on sound quality, there are far, far more important aspects on a headphone that THD, and the airpods max fails to be competetive with high-end headphones on pretty much all of them, apple is (at its current stage) far from developing a "very good driver" and is on paar with the Sonys and Bose

42

GreenNerve OP t1_ir6rrnu wrote

No, I'm not talking about the whole headphone, I'm talking about just the driver itself. The THD is not the dominant factor of the sound quality, but it's really difficult to make a DD to have that much low THD. That's my point, the driver is great, it has lots of potential, given that the aurorus borealis' driver can be purchased with under $20.

14

IMKGI t1_ir6s8y8 wrote

Your source doesn't compare the THD of the airpod max with other headphone, so i can't say how reliable or good it really is, the only real website i know of which has a whole database of THD measurements is rtings while their reviews are BS, their measurements are still valid, and according to them the THD of the airpods max is about average

10

GreenNerve OP t1_ir6t518 wrote

$1400 focal clear:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/focal-clear-review-headphone.18585/

$4000 focal utopia:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/focal-utopia-review-headphone.22103/

​

APM obviously outperforms those 2 in terms of THD

10

mcjasonb t1_ir6y0l4 wrote

The Clear is still under 1% at 94Db, which is still louder than you should be listening at.

2

GreenNerve OP t1_ir6ym40 wrote

we are nerds, we care about things we shouldn't care

17

mcjasonb t1_ir6z0sc wrote

Anything under 1% isn’t a problem. Yea, the APM still somehow pulls off a really good distortion number, but it doesn’t really matter. I have an AirPods Max, and it’s a shame that on IOS there is no way to do a system wide EQ. I’d like them a lot better if there was.

0

SeeminglyUselessData t1_ir7hn5e wrote

Flawed logic. It can’t even play infrasonic bass at regular volumes without the driver hitting X max and the voice coil jumping the gap— let alone handle a sub bass shelf EQ. It’s a heavily compromised driver

3

mcjasonb t1_ir7ih3q wrote

What are “regular” volumes? I’ve had an Elex for 2 and a half years and don’t have any such complaints.

2

SeeminglyUselessData t1_ir7jq2q wrote

It completely depends what music you listen to. I’m talking levels below what most people would consider their maximum. Like 80db. Many Hans Zimmer songs will cause the problem at extremely comfortable levels, when you still want to turn it up higher. “Why so serious” for example

2

blorg t1_ir91dm0 wrote

I can hear the clipping on the Clear at high volumes if I go specifically looking for it with test tones or very sub-bassy tracks. These aren't crazy volumes but they are well above what I would actually listen at. I actually thought it was broken when I first got it as it clipped on pink noise (which is bass-weighted) at a loud but not extreme volume.

I never however get it in actual listening, an this includes sub-bass heavy tracks and using Oratory's Harman EQ which has +8.6dB in the bass. So while I can certainly understand why it could be an issue, it's not for my listening volumes, on my specific unit.

Focal say they do this deliberately for dynamics, I think the idea is the diaphragm is very free in its movement but has a hard limit for excursion. I can't say, but the Focal Clear does subjectively seem to have great dynamics, great sense of slam.

1

reticulatedjig t1_ir7lhhj wrote

Ive run into it once with my elex. It was while I was messing with EQ though and didn't adjust the levels to compensate. Hasn't happened again though and I'd say I listen pretty loud unfortunately.

1

Fullyverified t1_ir6yvdh wrote

Not when you consider that music isn't a wall of sound, but instead very quick transients.

−2

mcjasonb t1_ir6zecj wrote

I still never listen at 94Db or over. Most of my music isn’t all that dynamic though. The loudest parts of music I’m listening to still isn’t over 85Db, probably not even over 80Db.

3

Fullyverified t1_ir74eo5 wrote

You have no reliable way to measure that.

"Most of my music isn't tall that dynamic"

Yes it is. You realise sinewaves are just quick up down things right? You are underestimating the total volume during those peaks.

3

SeeminglyUselessData t1_ir7i51c wrote

THD is very useful to determine how a headphone will handle EQ. What authority do you have to declare the driver being far from good? The tuning is flat (by design) sure, but you have no way of comparing the driver design and quality to Sony or Bose.

10

IMKGI t1_ir7jdda wrote

I don't need to compare the drivers directly, I can just look at measurements from different headphones and compare those, it gives you a good understanding on how good a driver/headphone performs, realistically noone is going to EQ to a point where the distortion starts playing a role, and if you are one of those people who actually does, ok, it is a important to you but you should also recognise that you are in the minority, I also don know what you mean with "flat" tuning, if you are referring to the Airpods, they are considered to be U-shaped, what about other aspects I take I to account when buying a headphone like detail retrieval, imaging and sounds, are they suddenly not relevant anymore or is there something I am missing?

−12

Fullyverified t1_ir96ulh wrote

Anyone on this subreddit talking about headphones is in the minority, so it applies to all of us.

Distortion is definitely an issue. Bass just sounds different on my 650s than it does on my LCD-Xs (after eq). It has this softness / fuzziness to it - and when you look at the distortion measurements it makes perfect sense.

4

CALL_ME_AT_9AM t1_ir9bhk0 wrote

>realistically noone is going to EQ to a point where the distortion starts playing a role

and then there's audeze shipping their isine and lcd i series with wonkyass tunings and fixes them with brute force +- 16 dB EQ in their cables lol

4

Neglected_Martian t1_ir7wlcx wrote

You made the mistake of saying something pro Apple in this subreddit. You will get downvoted Everytime.

15

Incarnation139 t1_ir849yl wrote

The Apple dongle is extremely capable. The Airpods Pro and Airpods Pro 2 are best-in-class soundwise and as an overall package (for a TWS). Both are given a lot of praise here.

13

title-fight t1_ir8feof wrote

You’re right, the APP and the dongles do definitely get their praise. Apple missteps a lot but I still think they catch a ton of flak.

You said it yourself that the APPs are best in class. I haven’t tried some of the really high end TWS stuff but they definitely beat the samsung ones I own (pretty much all the buds line minus the plus and buds pro 2) but even then, I still see the product catch a lot of flak from time to time.

4

CeeBee2001 t1_ir95c41 wrote

I wish I had a set of APP's to test but I'm fairly sure that a a pair of KZ ZS10's on TWS adaptors ($50 total cost) would wipe the floor with them. Has anyone here been able to do a comparison at all?

−1

title-fight t1_ir964mk wrote

That would depend a lot on the TWS adapter too. Aren’t the fiio ones one of the better ones that are actually TWS? Those are pretty pricey to my knowledge too.

Regardless, you know what apple is. You know you’re paying their ridiculous R&D costs and getting some weird features you’ll never use. You’ve heard it all but Apple stuff just does the job that’s their whole marketing. Sometimes it does it’s job pretty well and that’s fine.

I don’t even know if I’d agree on the KZs, plenty of great iems out there that might wipe the floor with APPs but that’s purely sound wise.

You gotta remember in the bluetooth space, they’re just as much tech as they are traditional headphones. Tons of compromises made, but they’re also a lot more complicated. Also remember you aren’t getting a transparency mode, a pocketable case, a low profile bud, good battery life, ANC, spatial audio, multi device pairing, etc.

It really depends on the use case. APPs pricing has had tons of promos even as their flagship TWS bud, they’re a compelling purchase at the $175~ CAD pricepoint but they’re not for everyone. If you just want a good pair of TWS, the option you mentioned is a cool way to have some repairability and potentially great sound but do you think most people want to be messing around with that? I like audio and even I wouldn’t.

I truthfully don’t need anything amazing on the go. The APPs are just fine and the convenience features make it a good purchase.

3

TheOnlyQueso t1_ir7915x wrote

Not at all how headphones work. Drivers and the housings that hold them are developed in conjunction. Taking a driver out of one headphone and putting it in another housing will completely and utterly change the tuning, particularly if going from closed backs to open backs or vice versa.

Apple's drivers are nothing special. It's the combination of the drivers, housing, and more than likely DSP that makes them moderately good headphones. But totally uncompetitive with other $500 wired headphones.

12

GreenNerve OP t1_ir7a2v5 wrote

Thank you, you spend lots of words saying nothing

−34

The_scobberlotcher t1_ir8plkx wrote

Bro, the dude's comment is correct. I'm not sure what you your aim is with your reply but it's kinda fucked up.

9

Wellhellob t1_ir99njs wrote

That's very impressive. Better than even most planars. However that tuning horrible. Worse than Audeze's.

0