Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
This is a promo from Audio Precision, but it touches on some interesting aspects of
headphones. Yes, you'll have to "sign up" to watch the vid, but the AP folks are reasonable and if you don't like what they send later, simply unsubscribe. Here's their email: Learn About Headphone Testing Audio Precision Learn headphone test from the audio experts. View the web version: http://clients.gcs-email.com/vm2/929...47229f28c3afba HEADPHONES ARE JUST LITTLE SPEAKERS ON YOUR HEAD. REALLY? NOT REALLY Headphones and loudspeakers are both electro-acoustic transducers, but that is where the similarities end. Understanding the important distinctions that make headphone test unique can help you to avoid costly mistakes in design and production. LEARN FROM THE EXPERTS In this 10-minute video, you'll learn: * The definition of Head Related Transfer Function (HRTF) A demonstration of hRTF using a KEMAR head & torso simulator * The relationship between free-field and HRTF measurements * Why understanding HRTF is critical to proper headphone design and test WATCH THE VIDEO http://opt-in.ap.com/Headphone-Test/?s=Email -- |
#2
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
Frank:
According to some on here who shall remain nameless, HRTF does NOT apply to headphone usage or design. I'll let those individuals explain. |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On Wednesday, February 11, 2015 at 9:30:27 PM UTC-5, wrote:
Frank: According to some on here who shall remain nameless, HRTF does NOT apply to headphone usage or design. I'll let those individuals explain. You stand a better chance of surviving Isis than the regulars here!! Jack :-) |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
wrote:
Frank: According to some on here who shall remain nameless, HRTF does NOT apply to headphone usage or design. I'll let those individuals explain. It does apply to headphone usage and design! Okay, let's explain this again. When you listen through a pair of speakers, sound comes through the free air, and it strikes your head and your shoulders and your earlobes before it goes into your inner ear. The HRTF is the transform that is created by this process, it is a function of the shape of your head and outer ear and shoulders. When you put headphones on, the sound goes directly into your middle ear, so the whole process that is involved with the HRTF is bypassed. The reason _why_ the HRTF applies to headphone usage is specifically _because_ you are used to listening through the HRTF, and the headphones eliminate it. This is the second time... --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#5
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On Thursday, February 12, 2015 at 8:57:59 AM UTC-5, Scott Dorsey wrote:
wrote: Frank: According to some on here who shall remain nameless, HRTF does NOT apply to headphone usage or design. I'll let those individuals explain. It does apply to headphone usage and design! Okay, let's explain this again. When you listen through a pair of speakers, sound comes through the free air, and it strikes your head and your shoulders and your earlobes before it goes into your inner ear. The HRTF is the transform that is created by this process, it is a function of the shape of your head and outer ear and shoulders. When you put headphones on, the sound goes directly into your middle ear, so the whole process that is involved with the HRTF is bypassed. The reason _why_ the HRTF applies to headphone usage is specifically _because_ you are used to listening through the HRTF, and the headphones eliminate it. This is the second time... --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." Why I always suggest, after mastering, you listen to any alterations through speakers, because it's difficult to detect phasing issues with headphones!! Jack |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On 13/02/2015 4:35 a.m., JackA wrote:
Why I always suggest, after mastering, you listen to any alterations through speakers, because it's difficult to detect phasing issues with headphones!! So you know this, but you don't know what "sound-on-sound" is/was. Yeah right. geoff |
#7
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On Thursday, February 12, 2015 at 3:24:59 PM UTC-5, geoff wrote:
On 13/02/2015 4:35 a.m., JackA wrote: Why I always suggest, after mastering, you listen to any alterations through speakers, because it's difficult to detect phasing issues with headphones!! So you know this, but you don't know what "sound-on-sound" is/was. Yeah right. I love you, too!!! Jack geoff |
#8
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
Scott Dorsey wrote:
"The reason _why_ the HRTF applies to headphone usage is specifically _because_ you are used to listening through the HRTF, and the headphones eliminate it." ????? Above = clear as mud! First you say that HRTF has everything to do with headphone design, then in your last paragraph you state headphone listening BYPASSES it. Well which shall it be??? |
#9
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
|
#10
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
John Williamson wrote: "- show quoted text -
To get an apparently flat response when listening to headphones, they need to have the inverse response engineered in. " This I understand perfectly! |
#11
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
John Williamson wrote:
On 13/02/2015 11:27, wrote: Scott Dorsey wrote: "The reason _why_ the HRTF applies to headphone usage is specifically _because_ you are used to listening through the HRTF, and the headphones eliminate it." ????? Above = clear as mud! First you say that HRTF has everything to do with headphone design, then in your last paragraph you state headphone listening BYPASSES it. Well which shall it be??? To get an apparently flat response when listening to headphones, they need to have the inverse response engineered in. Except that no people have the same response! Which is why it gets so exciting! --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#12
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 7:08:02 AM UTC-5, wrote:
John Williamson wrote: "- show quoted text - To get an apparently flat response when listening to headphones, they need to have the inverse response engineered in. " This I understand perfectly! I do not. I mean, I do not believe man can produce headphones or speakers with a "flat" response. Just my two cents! :-) Jack |
#13
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
JackA wrote: "- show quoted text -
I do not. I mean, I do not believe man can produce headphones or speakers with a "flat" response. Just my two cents! :-) Jack " Ruler-flat transducers? Of course not. Flat is generally held to be within plus-minus 3dB of reference, so some "wrinkles" are to be accepted. |
#14
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On 13/02/2015 12:56, Scott Dorsey wrote:
John Williamson wrote: On 13/02/2015 11:27, wrote: Scott Dorsey wrote: "The reason _why_ the HRTF applies to headphone usage is specifically _because_ you are used to listening through the HRTF, and the headphones eliminate it." ????? Above = clear as mud! First you say that HRTF has everything to do with headphone design, then in your last paragraph you state headphone listening BYPASSES it. Well which shall it be??? To get an apparently flat response when listening to headphones, they need to have the inverse response engineered in. Except that no people have the same response! Which is why it gets so exciting! I know. Fun, isn't it? -- Tciao for Now! John. |
#15
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 1:44:28 PM UTC-5, wrote:
JackA wrote: "- show quoted text - I do not. I mean, I do not believe man can produce headphones or speakers with a "flat" response. Just my two cents! :-) Jack " Ruler-flat transducers? Of course not. Flat is generally held to be within plus-minus 3dB of reference, so some "wrinkles" are to be accepted. Maybe you can achieve a flat response with a flat-top waveform!! :-) Then, once you think everything is flat, this comes along!!.. http://www.swee****er.com/insync/eff...ty-live-sound/ Jack |
#16
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 12:35:56 -0800 (PST), JackA
wrote: On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 1:44:28 PM UTC-5, wrote: JackA wrote: "- show quoted text - I do not. I mean, I do not believe man can produce headphones or speakers with a "flat" response. Just my two cents! :-) Jack " Ruler-flat transducers? Of course not. Flat is generally held to be within plus-minus 3dB of reference, so some "wrinkles" are to be accepted. Maybe you can achieve a flat response with a flat-top waveform!! :-) Then, once you think everything is flat, this comes along!!.. http://www.swee****er.com/insync/eff...ty-live-sound/ Jack That is of course only a small part of the story. The main reason you hear the rumble and not the crack at a distance is because low frequencies (long waves) diffract round solid objects much more successfully than short waves. Thunder is usually associated with very humid conditions in which the differential frequency effect is relatively small. The humidity problem is very real though. Attenuation of high frequencies is greatest at about 20% RH. The literature gives an attenuation of 0.084 per metre at 12.5kHz. That's about 0.4dB per metre. So thirty feet away, you are going to be about 4dB down at 12.5kHz compared to 1 to 2 kHz. Once you get up into more normal humidities of about 50%, that discrepancy is halved. d |
#17
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 4:08:24 PM UTC-5, Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 12:35:56 -0800 (PST), JackA wrote: On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 1:44:28 PM UTC-5, wrote: JackA wrote: "- show quoted text - I do not. I mean, I do not believe man can produce headphones or speakers with a "flat" response. Just my two cents! :-) Jack " Ruler-flat transducers? Of course not. Flat is generally held to be within plus-minus 3dB of reference, so some "wrinkles" are to be accepted. Maybe you can achieve a flat response with a flat-top waveform!! :-) Then, once you think everything is flat, this comes along!!.. http://www.swee****er.com/insync/eff...ty-live-sound/ Jack That is of course only a small part of the story. The main reason you hear the rumble and not the crack at a distance is because low frequencies (long waves) diffract round solid objects much more successfully than short waves. Thunder is usually associated with very humid conditions in which the differential frequency effect is relatively small. The humidity problem is very real though. Attenuation of high frequencies is greatest at about 20% RH. The literature gives an attenuation of 0.084 per metre at 12.5kHz. That's about 0.4dB per metre. So thirty feet away, you are going to be about 4dB down at 12.5kHz compared to 1 to 2 kHz. Once you get up into more normal humidities of about 50%, that discrepancy is halved. Yeah, Don, who wants soggy woofer syndrome?! :-) Jack d |
#18
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On 2/13/2015 4:08 PM, Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 12:35:56 -0800 (PST), JackA wrote: On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 1:44:28 PM UTC-5, wrote: JackA wrote: "- show quoted text - I do not. I mean, I do not believe man can produce headphones or speakers with a "flat" response. Just my two cents! :-) Jack " Ruler-flat transducers? Of course not. Flat is generally held to be within plus-minus 3dB of reference, so some "wrinkles" are to be accepted. Maybe you can achieve a flat response with a flat-top waveform!! :-) Then, once you think everything is flat, this comes along!!.. http://www.swee****er.com/insync/eff...ty-live-sound/ Jack That is of course only a small part of the story. The main reason you hear the rumble and not the crack at a distance is because low frequencies (long waves) diffract round solid objects much more successfully than short waves. Thunder is usually associated with very humid conditions in which the differential frequency effect is relatively small. The humidity problem is very real though. Attenuation of high frequencies is greatest at about 20% RH. The literature gives an attenuation of 0.084 per metre at 12.5kHz. That's about 0.4dB per metre. So thirty feet away, you are going to be about 4dB down at 12.5kHz compared to 1 to 2 kHz. Once you get up into more normal humidities of about 50%, that discrepancy is halved. d For what it's worth, the Swee****er article seems to have the effects right but the physics wrong. Erroneously suggesting that that speed of sound is a function of density is a pet peeve of mine. The same gas mixture, at the same temperature will have the same sound speed at 1 Atm., 10 Atm., or 0.1 Atm. It's not a matter of density /per se/. Yes, it's counter intuitive. == Later... Ron Capik -- |
#19
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On 13/02/2015 2:35 AM, JackA wrote:
Why I always suggest, after mastering, you listen to any alterations through speakers, because it's difficult to detect phasing issues with headphones!! You are kidding right? I find it far easier to detect phasing issues with headphones, and always listen to mixes with both headphones and speakers anyway. With so many people listening to more of their music on headphones than speakers these days, it amazes me that some mixing/mastering engineers still don't. Watching TV shows and movies late at night with headphones though makes me realise the problem is even worse there as they apparently still don't expect people to ever listen via headphones. :-( Trevor. |
#20
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On 14/02/2015 4:58 AM, JackA wrote:
I do not. I mean, I do not believe man can produce headphones or speakers with a "flat" response. It's not that hard to produce headphones with a nominally flat response when measured. What is not so easy is getting anyone to agree to whether a simple near field measurement bears any resemblance to what is heard by most listeners. So as usual you must first define how you want that flat response to be measured (good luck with that) rather than making simple statements that have no real life meaning. Speakers are another matter as it is not only extremely difficult to produce a flat speaker response in an anechoic chamber, but impossible to produce one with a flat response in different environments. Trevor. |
#21
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
|
#22
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 21:31:39 -0500, Ron C wrote:
On 2/13/2015 4:08 PM, Don Pearce wrote: On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 12:35:56 -0800 (PST), JackA wrote: On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 1:44:28 PM UTC-5, wrote: JackA wrote: "- show quoted text - I do not. I mean, I do not believe man can produce headphones or speakers with a "flat" response. Just my two cents! :-) Jack " Ruler-flat transducers? Of course not. Flat is generally held to be within plus-minus 3dB of reference, so some "wrinkles" are to be accepted. Maybe you can achieve a flat response with a flat-top waveform!! :-) Then, once you think everything is flat, this comes along!!.. http://www.swee****er.com/insync/eff...ty-live-sound/ Jack That is of course only a small part of the story. The main reason you hear the rumble and not the crack at a distance is because low frequencies (long waves) diffract round solid objects much more successfully than short waves. Thunder is usually associated with very humid conditions in which the differential frequency effect is relatively small. The humidity problem is very real though. Attenuation of high frequencies is greatest at about 20% RH. The literature gives an attenuation of 0.084 per metre at 12.5kHz. That's about 0.4dB per metre. So thirty feet away, you are going to be about 4dB down at 12.5kHz compared to 1 to 2 kHz. Once you get up into more normal humidities of about 50%, that discrepancy is halved. d For what it's worth, the Swee****er article seems to have the effects right but the physics wrong. Erroneously suggesting that that speed of sound is a function of density is a pet peeve of mine. The same gas mixture, at the same temperature will have the same sound speed at 1 Atm., 10 Atm., or 0.1 Atm. It's not a matter of density /per se/. Yes, it's counter intuitive. == Later... Ron Capik Quite right. It is a function of air temperature, not density. d |
#23
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
Trevor writes:
On 13/02/2015 2:35 AM, JackA wrote: Why I always suggest, after mastering, you listen to any alterations through speakers, because it's difficult to detect phasing issues with headphones!! You are kidding right? I find it far easier to detect phasing issues with headphones, and always listen to mixes with both headphones and speakers anyway. With so many people listening to more of their music on headphones than speakers these days, it amazes me that some mixing/mastering engineers still don't. Watching TV shows and movies late at night with headphones though makes me realise the problem is even worse there as they apparently still don't expect people to ever listen via headphones. :-( Yes, I was curious about that statement too. In general, headphones can reveal some interesting things that speakers sometimes don't. However, much also depends on the room/speaker and the headphones. A properly-treated room free of early reflections can reveal much about phase issues and confirm what the headphones found (or the phones can lead you to listening more carefully in the room). OTHO, lesser headphones, afflicted with that awful plastic resonance sound, can mask such details. It's good to use both and in your environment know which one is likely to tell you what. Frank Mobile Audio -- |
#24
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 11:26:11 PM UTC-5, Trevor wrote:
On 13/02/2015 2:35 AM, JackA wrote: Why I always suggest, after mastering, you listen to any alterations through speakers, because it's difficult to detect phasing issues with headphones!! You are kidding right? I find it far easier to detect phasing issues with headphones, and always listen to mixes with both headphones and speakers anyway. I'm talking stereo channels being out of phase. I'm not kidding, I'm dead serious. With so many people listening to more of their music on headphones than speakers these days, it amazes me that some mixing/mastering engineers still don't. Watching TV shows and movies late at night with headphones though makes me realise the problem is even worse there as they apparently still don't expect people to ever listen via headphones. :-( I enjoy mixing with headphones, but I always check any mixing with speakers. I'm not your ordinary mastering engineer!! :-) Jack Trevor. |
#25
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
JackA wrote:
On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 11:26:11 PM UTC-5, Trevor wrote: On 13/02/2015 2:35 AM, JackA wrote: Why I always suggest, after mastering, you listen to any alterations through speakers, because it's difficult to detect phasing issues with headphones!! You are kidding right? I find it far easier to detect phasing issues with headphones, and always listen to mixes with both headphones and speakers anyway. I'm talking stereo channels being out of phase. I'm not kidding, I'm dead serious. Reversed polarity should be very easy to detect on either headphones or speakers. It's not exactly subtle. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#26
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On Sunday, February 15, 2015 at 8:07:15 PM UTC-5, Scott Dorsey wrote:
JackA wrote: On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 11:26:11 PM UTC-5, Trevor wrote: On 13/02/2015 2:35 AM, JackA wrote: Why I always suggest, after mastering, you listen to any alterations through speakers, because it's difficult to detect phasing issues with headphones!! You are kidding right? I find it far easier to detect phasing issues with headphones, and always listen to mixes with both headphones and speakers anyway. I'm talking stereo channels being out of phase. I'm not kidding, I'm dead serious. Reversed polarity should be very easy to detect on either headphones or speakers. It's not exactly subtle. I say both you and Trevor have never experience an out of phase condition and you're both guessing you can detect it with something you never heard before with headphones. Jack --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#27
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On 14/02/2015 11:49 PM, Frank Stearns wrote:
Trevor writes: On 13/02/2015 2:35 AM, JackA wrote: Why I always suggest, after mastering, you listen to any alterations through speakers, because it's difficult to detect phasing issues with headphones!! You are kidding right? I find it far easier to detect phasing issues with headphones, and always listen to mixes with both headphones and speakers anyway. With so many people listening to more of their music on headphones than speakers these days, it amazes me that some mixing/mastering engineers still don't. Watching TV shows and movies late at night with headphones though makes me realise the problem is even worse there as they apparently still don't expect people to ever listen via headphones. :-( Yes, I was curious about that statement too. In general, headphones can reveal some interesting things that speakers sometimes don't. However, much also depends on the room/speaker and the headphones. A properly-treated room free of early reflections can reveal much about phase issues and confirm what the headphones found (or the phones can lead you to listening more carefully in the room). OTHO, lesser headphones, afflicted with that awful plastic resonance sound, can mask such details. Well using "lesser phones" that have such problems for critical evaluation is simply asking for trouble. Even great headphones are far cheaper than average speakers, and usually cheaper than room treatment for that matter. It's good to use both and in your environment know which one is likely to tell you what. Right. Trevor. |
#28
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On 16/02/2015 11:54 AM, JackA wrote:
On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 11:26:11 PM UTC-5, Trevor wrote: On 13/02/2015 2:35 AM, JackA wrote: Why I always suggest, after mastering, you listen to any alterations through speakers, because it's difficult to detect phasing issues with headphones!! You are kidding right? I find it far easier to detect phasing issues with headphones, and always listen to mixes with both headphones and speakers anyway. I'm talking stereo channels being out of phase. I'm not kidding, I'm dead serious. OK, you should have added "In your experience", not in mine anyway. Trevor. |
#29
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On 16/02/2015 1:05 PM, JackA wrote:
On Sunday, February 15, 2015 at 8:07:15 PM UTC-5, Scott Dorsey JackA wrote: On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 11:26:11 PM UTC-5, Trevor wrote: On 13/02/2015 2:35 AM, JackA wrote: Why I always suggest, after mastering, you listen to any alterations through speakers, because it's difficult to detect phasing issues with headphones!! You are kidding right? I find it far easier to detect phasing issues with headphones, and always listen to mixes with both headphones and speakers anyway. I'm talking stereo channels being out of phase. I'm not kidding, I'm dead serious. Reversed polarity should be very easy to detect on either headphones or speakers. It's not exactly subtle. I say both you and Trevor have never experience an out of phase condition and you're both guessing you can detect it with something you never heard before with headphones. Now you really prove just how stupid you are ! As they say, stupid people just don't know what it is they don't know! :-) Trevor. |
#30
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
JackA wrote:
On Sunday, February 15, 2015 at 8:07:15 PM UTC-5, Scott Dorsey wrote: JackA wrote: On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 11:26:11 PM UTC-5, Trevor wrote: On 13/02/2015 2:35 AM, JackA wrote: Why I always suggest, after mastering, you listen to any alterations through speakers, because it's difficult to detect phasing issues with headphones!! You are kidding right? I find it far easier to detect phasing issues with headphones, and always listen to mixes with both headphones and speakers anyway. I'm talking stereo channels being out of phase. I'm not kidding, I'm dead serious. Reversed polarity should be very easy to detect on either headphones or speakers. It's not exactly subtle. I say both you and Trevor have never experience an out of phase condition and you're both guessing you can detect it with something you never heard before with headphones. Jack --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." Are you even remotely aware of how stupid you sound? |
#31
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On Saturday, February 14, 2015 at 7:50:04 AM UTC-5, Frank Stearns wrote:
Trevor writes: On 13/02/2015 2:35 AM, JackA wrote: Why I always suggest, after mastering, you listen to any alterations through speakers, because it's difficult to detect phasing issues with headphones!! You are kidding right? I find it far easier to detect phasing issues with headphones, and always listen to mixes with both headphones and speakers anyway. With so many people listening to more of their music on headphones than speakers these days, it amazes me that some mixing/mastering engineers still don't. Watching TV shows and movies late at night with headphones though makes me realise the problem is even worse there as they apparently still don't expect people to ever listen via headphones. :-( Yes, I was curious about that statement too. In general, headphones can reveal some interesting things that speakers sometimes don't. However, much also depends on the room/speaker and the headphones. A properly-treated room free of early reflections can reveal much about phase issues and confirm what the headphones found (or the phones can lead you to listening more carefully in the room). OTHO, lesser headphones, afflicted with that awful plastic resonance sound, can mask such details. It's good to use both and in your environment know which one is likely to tell you what. Even though it's subtle, I can generally hear tape hiss noise better with speakers. But I'm strictly talking computer audio; i.e. two different monsters. Jack Frank Mobile Audio -- . |
#32
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On Sunday, February 15, 2015 at 9:44:00 PM UTC-5, Ralph Barone wrote:
JackA wrote: On Sunday, February 15, 2015 at 8:07:15 PM UTC-5, Scott Dorsey wrote: JackA wrote: On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 11:26:11 PM UTC-5, Trevor wrote: On 13/02/2015 2:35 AM, JackA wrote: Why I always suggest, after mastering, you listen to any alterations through speakers, because it's difficult to detect phasing issues with headphones!! You are kidding right? I find it far easier to detect phasing issues with headphones, and always listen to mixes with both headphones and speakers anyway. I'm talking stereo channels being out of phase. I'm not kidding, I'm dead serious. Reversed polarity should be very easy to detect on either headphones or speakers. It's not exactly subtle. I say both you and Trevor have never experience an out of phase condition and you're both guessing you can detect it with something you never heard before with headphones. Jack --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." Are you even remotely aware of how stupid you sound? Do you make it a habit to reply to stupid people? Jack |
#33
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
JackA wrote:
the blitherings of a idiot snipped I say you're sufficiently full of **** that you have no idea what you are talking about. -- shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com HankandShaidriMusic.Com YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic |
#34
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
Ralph Barone wrote:
JackA wrote: On Sunday, February 15, 2015 at 8:07:15 PM UTC-5, Scott Dorsey wrote: JackA wrote: On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 11:26:11 PM UTC-5, Trevor wrote: On 13/02/2015 2:35 AM, JackA wrote: Why I always suggest, after mastering, you listen to any alterations through speakers, because it's difficult to detect phasing issues with headphones!! You are kidding right? I find it far easier to detect phasing issues with headphones, and always listen to mixes with both headphones and speakers anyway. I'm talking stereo channels being out of phase. I'm not kidding, I'm dead serious. Reversed polarity should be very easy to detect on either headphones or speakers. It's not exactly subtle. I say both you and Trevor have never experience an out of phase condition and you're both guessing you can detect it with something you never heard before with headphones. Jack --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." Are you even remotely aware of how stupid you sound? Obviously, it is not. These bots have limited grasp. -- shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com HankandShaidriMusic.Com YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic |
#35
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
JackA wrote:
Do you make it a habit to reply to stupid people? Jack A lot, since you shwoed up. -- shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com HankandShaidriMusic.Com YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic |
#36
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On 16/02/2015 00:54, JackA wrote:
On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 11:26:11 PM UTC-5, Trevor wrote: On 13/02/2015 2:35 AM, JackA wrote: Why I always suggest, after mastering, you listen to any alterations through speakers, because it's difficult to detect phasing issues with headphones!! You are kidding right? I find it far easier to detect phasing issues with headphones, and always listen to mixes with both headphones and speakers anyway. I'm talking stereo channels being out of phase. I'm not kidding, I'm dead serious. If you have problems detecting out of phase channels with headphones, you really need to practice more. With so many people listening to more of their music on headphones than speakers these days, it amazes me that some mixing/mastering engineers still don't. Watching TV shows and movies late at night with headphones though makes me realise the problem is even worse there as they apparently still don't expect people to ever listen via headphones. :-( I enjoy mixing with headphones, but I always check any mixing with speakers. I'm not your ordinary mastering engineer!! :-) After listening to some of your mixes, you got that right. -- Tciao for Now! John. |
#37
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On Sun, 15 Feb 2015 20:15:26 -0800 (PST), JackA
wrote: Even though it's subtle, I can generally hear tape hiss noise better with speakers. But I'm strictly talking computer audio; i.e. two different monsters. Jack Tape hiss on a computer? How did that happen? Is wow and flutter a problem too? |
#38
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On 16/02/2015 1:54 p.m., JackA wrote:
I'm not your ordinary mastering engineer!! :-) You certainly aren't, You are a self-usually-wrongly-opinionated rank amateur who has played with a little re-mixing and mastering, usually with crap source media. I have done a heap (probably tens-to-hundreds of times) more mastering than you, for paying clients, and I would not dare presume to even call myself a 'mastering engineer'. geoff |
#39
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On 16/02/2015 5:15 p.m., JackA wrote:
Even though it's subtle, I can generally hear tape hiss noise better with speakers. But I'm strictly talking computer audio; i.e. two different monsters. ???!!! geoff |
#40
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting Bit from Audio Precision Regarding Headphones
On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 1:47:04 AM UTC-5, John Williamson wrote:
On 16/02/2015 00:54, JackA wrote: On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 11:26:11 PM UTC-5, Trevor wrote: On 13/02/2015 2:35 AM, JackA wrote: Why I always suggest, after mastering, you listen to any alterations through speakers, because it's difficult to detect phasing issues with headphones!! You are kidding right? I find it far easier to detect phasing issues with headphones, and always listen to mixes with both headphones and speakers anyway. I'm talking stereo channels being out of phase. I'm not kidding, I'm dead serious. If you have problems detecting out of phase channels with headphones, you really need to practice more. With so many people listening to more of their music on headphones than speakers these days, it amazes me that some mixing/mastering engineers still don't. Watching TV shows and movies late at night with headphones though makes me realise the problem is even worse there as they apparently still don't expect people to ever listen via headphones. :-( I enjoy mixing with headphones, but I always check any mixing with speakers. I'm not your ordinary mastering engineer!! :-) After listening to some of your mixes, you got that right. You only wish you were 1/4 a good as I am!!! Jack Jack -- Tciao for Now! John. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
For Sale: True Audio Precision 8 | Marketplace | |||
For Sale: True Audio Precision 8 | Pro Audio | |||
Precision Audio - THEY ARE MORONS!! | Car Audio | |||
FA: ending today, a/d/s/ & Precision Power car audio components | Marketplace | |||
FA: high-end car audio gear - a/d/s/ & Precision Power | Marketplace |