iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 18/07/2026

I believe those were based primarily on the 2013 paper because the variation data in the 2015 paper was restricted to the 95th CIs, which with that size of a dataset was very small variation as shown in the first pic.

100

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 17/07/2026

Absolutely fascinating!!! I’ve been curious about this data for so long!!! Especially because, if memory serves, in the actual 2015 paper all that was published was the means and 95th confidence intervals. Two ?s 1) any particular reason you were looking into it? 2) would you be willing to share? 😇

300

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 07/07/2026

HD 560S should be fine enough for that if you’re doing individualized equalization per subject/per ear.

000

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 03/07/2026

I confess that not knowing the goal of the test means I'm recommending something less likely to vary significantly across heads based on loading; HD 560S varies quite a bit between Type 3.3/4.3 systems & my unit variation experience hasn't been great (pic related, two units DF-comped at my EEP).

200

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 03/07/2026

Unfortunately only two units. Konstantin might have more. Pic related is the average of two different units measured by two different operators (Andrew and I). 1/2

100

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 03/07/2026

“Harder to find” no kidding 😂 Realistically that’s probably the best you’ll be able to do at that price, though depending on the experiment its not entirely impossible that a FiiO FT1 Pro could also work—might be a bit more expensive though.

100

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 29/06/2026

Certainly didn't resemble Andrew's blocked DF HRTF (regardless of tilt/adjustment), at least not on the fixtures we used. Could be that in his actual ear, it measures differently, but I'm skeptical just because of the degree of difference between the result and Andrew's blocked ear+5128 canal HRTF.

000

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 29/06/2026

Andrew has, he decided not to publish a full review because it wasn't a product he found very interesting, instead opting to cover it in one of our livestreams. If memory serves, I saw nothing resembling what I would've expected (either HRTF-like features or anything like the contents of the paper).

000

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 27/06/2026

Were you able to get good results (as in, results that when measured actually resembled a preference-adjusted HRTF)? We and others got pretty confusing results when trying to measure these.

200

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 18/12/2025

Very, very cool! Always wanted to try demos like that. Those headphones are well-constructed too, love the light weight and the earpad materials.

000

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 17/12/2025

I've had a sneaking suspicion for a while that the headphone shown (MDR-MV1) was tuned with regard to optimizing for human HpTFs. Did you get a chance to listen to any stereo recordings you're familiar with?

100

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 22/11/2025

Hahah, we have one on its way to us currently. Thanks for the tip on the lighting, I’ll relay that to our tester. I’ve been seeing some pretty strange results for the “HRTF Reference” mode, but they’ve all been on 711 couplers so I’m skeptical. Excited to see what results you get on Mr. 5128!

110

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 22/11/2025

LOL You guys testing Tonalite?

110

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 01/11/2025

I actually have a question for you: Do you think there is an issue with the target not being the center of the bounded field?

000

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 26/10/2025

Idk how he even got it, it’s not supposed to be out for two more days! 😩

000

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 19/10/2025

@seanolive.bsky.social What's the best place to order the book to ensure the maximum amount of revenue makes its way to the authors?

110

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 18/10/2025

We had a meeting with Charles Sprinkle who indicated it was a primary goal for the tuning to be Harman-like. We had our suspicions before the meeting too, since their marketing material also very clearly showed the "Studio" preset targeting a smooth, Harman-like response.

100

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 17/10/2025

Yeah, one of the cooler papers in recent memory, thankful to Axel for turning me onto it. Been meaning to try the "tube" from this paper. Would love to see you give it a shot!

020

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 01/10/2025

Arya Unveiled is $1450, but they just released the Ananda Unveiled which is going to be the cheapest in their lineup with this "extremely open" approach to acoustic design ($550), so it may be worth waiting to see if that exhibits the same behavior & if so get that one instead. I'll keep you posted!

120

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 30/09/2025

Very interesting, can say it looks quite a bit different than our results for the unveiled versions. Attached is data for the Arya Unveiled. The HE1000 and Susvara Unveiled both show similarly small difference in the part of the headphone response dominated by pressure effects <3 kHz (~1dB max).

200

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 30/09/2025

Ahhh I see, thanks for sharing, this makes it very clear how it was done.

000

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 30/09/2025

It’s possible I’d opt for one of the Unveiled Hifiman headphones (AryaUV/HE1000UV/SusvaraUV) considering they’ve exhibited the least variation between Type 3.3 and 4.3 systems in our limited testing, but it’d have to be a unit that didn’t have the commonly-occuring THD issues around @ 4kHz/QC issues

100

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 30/09/2025

Its tough, because for all of its benefits the HD 800 still has reasonably high variation depending on how its worn, and most electrostats aren’t exceedingly well designed such that many have unintentional leaks in the front volume that change with clamp force (subject head width). 1/2

000

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 30/09/2025

Interesting. Was the metric tested “similarity,” or “similarity of preference”? I could see the former being a little harder/noisier to test than the latter.

200

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 28/09/2025

Was the replicator headphone for this sufficiently placement/ear load invariant? Very excited for this but I confess I'm really hoping you didn't only use Dan's headphones for the replicator duties 😅

100

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 23/08/2025

Just gave it a pass. Very interesting indeed. Wish I was going to the conference so I could be there for the discussion.

000

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 07/02/2025

Love my SSL 2+ except that the Phones A output has nasty channel imbalance. Love that there’s no BS software to deal with though.

020

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 19/12/2024

Any chance the HATS was a KEMAR with the Welti pinna? Your blocked canal measurements of headphones on humans + measurement fixtures showed good parity between it and humans iirc. On that note, is there any chance you’ve done anything like a DF / SRF measurement of a KEMAR with the Welti pinna?

100

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 19/12/2024

The latter I think would only work with a small sample size if you had access to a few of the same subjects from eg. the 2013 or 2015 papers though, so might be more pragmatic to do the other one :) 3/3

000

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 19/12/2024

But if it was up to me, I’d be asking you to do listening tests for OE headphones based on similar human measurements (DF HRTFs + HpTFs at the blocked canal) but testing how the LS/HS adjustments would deviate from 2013/2015 when individual HRTF is compensated for 2/?

110

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 19/12/2024

For CanJam audience I’d do “Does personalized EQ based on listener HRTF correlate to reports of ‘technicalities’?” Can measure DF HRTFs + HpTFs for a few people at the blocked ear&do listening tests with an HD 800S and see which profile—stock or personalized—has more reported soundstage/detail 1/?

220

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 16/12/2024

Ah okay that makes a lot more sense. Waaaay easier to avoid dealing with anything past the canal entrance 😂 & no kidding! Hats off to that engineer of yours.

100

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 16/12/2024

Looks like very clean work. Done in 00 35 silicone, I assume? I also assume you’re terminating this in a 711 coupler (or perhaps the ear sim from the HMS type 4.4 system), where did you decide to terminate the canal/place the microphone?

100

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 05/12/2024

It is: Harman AE/OE 2018 - Harman In-Room Flat ________________________ That curve

020

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 05/12/2024

I said this forgetting we have the 10dB slope 😓 Trust that the caveats I mentioned re: acoustic load interactions confounding confidence applies equally to this line 😅

000

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 05/12/2024

However, the same caveats discussed in other parts of this thread still apply; the relevance and predictive power of the bounds as well as either of the DF baselines are still limited by unknowns (ear load and IEM load). For these reasons I tend to advise more caution interpreting IEM measurements.

000

listener @listener800.bsky.social · 05/12/2024

If we did adopt some sort of target line—we're not, but if we did—we'd want it to be something performant in preference research. SoundGuys being so close to our chosen HRTF with prior well-performing adjustments does give us some confidence that the JM-1 DF as compensation baseline has merit. 2/?

200