How do you interpret this graph? Does it mean that 530SE has better low end than D7000? That is quite unlikely. What am I missing?

http://www.headphone.com/technical/product-measurements/build-a-graph.php?graphID%5B0%5D=843&graphID%5B1%5D=283&graphID%5B2%5D=&graphID%5B3%5D=&graphType=0&buttonSelection=Compare+Headphones

Sounds about right. Even this review notes that the bass starts to roll off below 40Hz.
http://www.lawtonaudio.com/page20.html

It's also easy to get good bass with in ear headphones.

Clearly the Shures are more extended, but you may not notice that much with typical music program because there's not always much sub-40 hz, and very little sub 30 hz content.

THe denons will subjectively have more bass, since the midbass is rolled off. You could look at the Denon graph as showing a significant bump in the bass versus the rest of the spectrum (leaving out the sub-bass).

THe denons will subjectively have more bass, since the midbass is rolled off. You could look at the Denon graph as showing a significant bump in the bass versus the rest of the spectrum (leaving out the sub-bass).

Is that even desirable though? Isn't it distorting the source?

Is it also safe to say Denon will have better treble?

The desirable frequency response would be flat. But I've yet to see a pair of headphones that measure close to flat. And yes, you could say the Denon's frequency response is better above 3kHz, simply because it is closer in amplitude to the frequencies below 3kHz.

yess boosted bass is a kind of distortion. I would not characterize either of those headphones as having good high frequency response. THey're lumpy and rolled off. The denon does not roll off as soon so it has better extension in the highs than the Shure. NEither is especially accurate.

yess boosted bass is a kind of distortion. I would not characterize either of those headphones as having good high frequency response. THey're lumpy and rolled off. The denon does not roll off as soon so it has better extension in the highs than the Shure. NEither is especially accurate.

Can rolled off highs be considered as something positive in a headphone since manufacturers need to compensate for drivers being close to ears? I am speculating maybe manufacturers intentionally designed these expensive headphones to roll-off at highs. Thoughts?

Can rolled off highs be considered as something positive in a headphone since manufacturers need to compensate for drivers being close to ears? I am speculating maybe manufacturers intentionally designed these expensive headphones to roll-off at highs. Thoughts?

What reason would you want to roll off highs because the sound is being produced right next to your ear? A single ear cannot tell how far away a sound is.

What reason would you want to roll off highs because the sound is being produced right next to your ear? A single ear cannot tell how far away a sound is.

From my understanding, how far away a sound is dictated by the sound of the source plus any environmental effects, and the ratio between the source and the effects. You can certainly do this with one ear.

I would not say the Denon has "better" treble. It is closer to a flat response, but you can't tell very much about how either sound without a distortion graph.

As far as the bass goes, the Shure is definitely more flat in that area. But you still know nothing of the distortion characteristics. And in my opinion, information below 20 hz in headphones is useless. Very few people can hear anything that low. The only thing you'll most likely hear is harmonics thereof.

Are you trying to decide between the two? What will you be using them for?

I think the HF rolloff would be there to mimic the transfer function of a typical room.

The "How We Measure Headphones" and the "How To Interpret..." links are interesting; they're actually using an artificial head to make measurements. They indicate that a lot of the narrow peaks in the response curves are due to reflections in the outer ear and shouldn't be considered problems. They also say that a small bass boost is desirable, but I don't know exactly why that would be. Their explanation on the site sounds closely related to a recent post on Sean Olive's blog:

http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/06/whole-body-vibration-associated-with_7561.html

There's no whole-body vibration when you're listening through headphones.

In ear headphones are limited by the fit you get with the sleeves. The sleeves I use are comfortable but lack nice highs, so the only real way to get the best sounding sleeves is to get them custom made.

From my understanding, how far away a sound is dictated by the sound of the source plus any environmental effects, and the ratio between the source and the effects. You can certainly do this with one ear.

I would not say the Denon has "better" treble. It is closer to a flat response, but you can't tell very much about how either sound without a distortion graph.

As far as the bass goes, the Shure is definitely more flat in that area. But you still know nothing of the distortion characteristics. And in my opinion, information below 20 hz in headphones is useless. Very few people can hear anything that low. The only thing you'll most likely hear is harmonics thereof.

Are you trying to decide between the two? What will you be using them for?

Here is the harmonic distortion comparison. Was that what you were looking for? What does this tell you?

http://www.headphone.com/technical/product-measurements/build-a-graph.php?graphID%5B0%5D=843&graphID%5B1%5D=283&graphID%5B2%5D=&graphID%5B3%5D=&graphType=1&buttonSelection=Compare+Headphones

I already have a home system, but want headphones too since I am not allowed to use my home system all the time. I am sure you can guess why!

I currently have Shures. I am trying to figure out what would be the next step for me. I looked into Ultimate Ears, but there are some very conflicting reviews about them. Then I decided to check full size cans. I was assuming a high-end can would be better than an IEM in every respect. Particularly one like Denon which received great reviews all around. You should see how they tout Denon's bass. I read several reviews claiming Denon has the best headphone bass ever. I guess they were misguidedby its artificial upper mid-bass.

Now I learned 2 things: 1) Don't make assumptions and 2) Don't believe reviews

I think the HF rolloff would be there to mimic the transfer function of a typical room.

The "How We Measure Headphones" and the "How To Interpret..." links are interesting; they're actually using an artificial head to make measurements. They indicate that a lot of the narrow peaks in the response curves are due to reflections in the outer ear and shouldn't be considered problems. They also say that a small bass boost is desirable, but I don't know exactly why that would be. Their explanation on the site sounds closely related to a recent post on Sean Olive's blog:

http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/06/whole-body-vibration-associated-with_7561.html

There's no whole-body vibration when you're listening through headphones.

They are saying a 3 or 4 dB boost between 40Hz and 500Hz compensates for the fact that headphones don't give you the physical punch or 'impact' that the sound waves from a room speaker have

They are saying a 3 or 4 dB boost between 40Hz and 500Hz compensates for the fact that headphones don't give you the physical punch or 'impact' that the sound waves from a room speaker have

Yeah, I just didn't know whether to believe them or not. :D I don't use headphones much.

From my understanding, how far away a sound is dictated by the sound of the source plus any environmental effects, and the ratio between the source and the effects. You can certainly do this with one ear.

Should have made my statement/question clearer. :) I was only referring to volume, since that seemed to be what the original question was referring to. i.e. reduce the treble volume to compensate for being physically close.

Frequency response is over-rated. If sound is in balance and low in distortion, your brain can fix a lot of variance. Not saying it is not important, just that it is far better to buy by listening than by a chart.

Frequency response is over-rated. If sound is in balance and low in distortion, your brain can fix a lot of variance. Not saying it is not important, just that it is far better to buy by listening than by a chart.

I would like to do both. Hope that is OK?

seen a graph of the sennheiser 650, 800, or akg 701? id love to see the comprison graph, i hav also read several articles on how difficult it can be to "correctly" ( i.e. as your head hears them ) measure headphones...

seen a graph of the sennheiser 650, 800, or akg 701? id love to see the comprison graph, i hav also read several articles on how difficult it can be to "correctly" ( i.e. as your head hears them ) measure headphones...

The graphs at HeadRoom (http://www.headphone.com/) can be laid on top of each other to compare. Here's your three headphones compared. They use a fake head with built-in microphone and anechoic chamber.

http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=573&graphID[]=863&graphID[]=703

I would like to do both. Hope that is OK?

Of course. Just trying to help set priorities. Which is most important to convince your brain what you are hearing is really music. My goal at least.

Like the overlays. It would be most enlightening to have some evaluation of the differences in character and compare them to the charts. Would the big midrange dip make the 800's sound base heavy? Would the AKG's seem bright? Would the 600's seem "detailed"?
Would it matter what the overall room is like, as your brain is making adjustments for that when you put on the phones. If they are too far off the rooms character, will they seem "wrong" even if they are far more correct?

There are other interesting measurements to compare on that page. Distortion is interesting. They also show the way each headphone passes a 500 hz and 50 hz square wave. In general, the 500 hertz square waves don't look very square at all.

There are other interesting measurements to compare on that page. Distortion is interesting. They also show the way each headphone passes a 500 hz and 50 hz square wave. In general, the 500 hertz square waves don't look very square at all.

How do you interpret the distortion chart between Shure and Denon? I was lost there.