Mrspeakers Ether C Measurements

Mrspeakers Ether C Measurements

@Hands measurements: http://www.superbestaudiofriends.or...s-ether-c-measurements.1810/page-2#post-63441

I've gone through several records already (some marginal records - bright or poor balance, and some good records) from my reference system and have taken some notes. I won't do a full review, but will offer subjective impressions and thoughts tomorrow. Like the Ether (open), the build quality and ergonomics are world class. However, my overall assessment of the Ether C's sonics is not a strong as Tyll's. We both agree that the Ether C's tonality is slightly lean of neutral, that's about it. Magic eight ball already says that @Hands will strongly dislike them (bonus points who can point out two reasons). I might entertain some discussion tonight or do a stream of consciousness thing.

It is important to note that I haven't been seriously listening to headphones for a while; I have been completely spoiled by speakers which consist of Fostex back loaded horns (with a simple EQ network) plus a sub. The frequency response of the speaker system is far from perfect, but it does try to fit the B&K target curve. I did have on hand an LCD2r2 to compare to the Ether C.

These are going on the loaner program. So you guys can make up your own minds.

Mrspeakers Ether C Frequency Response L and R 0dbFS = 100db SPL



Mrspeakers Ether C Distortion (2nd, 3rd, 4th order) in Percentage



Mrspeakers Ether C CSDs

 

Alright, so, distortion really doesn't look awful here. I guess Tyll's rig was having a bad day? Might have been the same for the LCD4 too. Anyway, still a bit rough looking on yours, but overall pretty good.

Bass and low-mids aren't even. Upper-bass/low-mid dip. Overall 20Hz-1Khz looks slightly lean of neutral. Doesn't follow B&K target closely enough, primarily not enough of a slope downward after mids. Almost too flat looking for your rig. Possible treble peak.

I know your rig results decently enough to say I'm not seeing anything here that makes me think I'll feel a whole lot better on the 1.1 vs what I heard at RMAF.

Question is, which, if any, of the tuning discs are you using?

 

@Hands wins. (I am using no tuning discs - will get back to that in a bit). Distortion figures are actually pretty good, although some of the distortion spikes and rises may be related to frequency response or timbre (subjective) issues. I've found that the B&K target works best for my plots. Basically flat from 20Hz to a few hundred Hz with a slight downward slope toward the treble. I'd like to see 20Hz to 200Hz lifted a bit to hear more body. The very slightly lower midrange depression doesn't help either. The overall lean tonality makes the treble spikes at 6.5kHz (L) and 7.5kHz (R) a little bit more difficult to bear than usual. The ridges on the CSDs are very evident.

Subjectively, I couldn't decide whether the issue was glare or sharpness, but it turns out it was both. The Howard Jones record because of how badly it was mastered for most tracks was basically un-listenable (it's not much better on my speakers either, but it is just bearable). Erasure The Innocents should have passed easily, but when turned up, depending upon the track, the treble got difficult. Which is to say that the Ether is quite fine at low volumes (what I like to call @n3rdling levels), but not good for folks like @OJneg who crank it up. I'm trying to make sense of all the different impressions I've read from the guys here.

I don't know what's causing the uneven frequency response. The regular Ether has a little bit of that (up higher in the frequency range). The singled ended ortho HiFiMan headphones like the HEX and HE400S have it. I do wonder if it's related to orthos with only magnets on one side. Or maybe it's a bit of both with some interactions from the cups. A lack of smoothness or refinement would be an accurate statement.

I made sure I made a super seal on the measurement rig to reflect how I used the headphone. I pressed in the cups really tightly and moved the headphone slightly forward to make sure there were no gaps at the nap of the neck. I found the bass more authoritative this way, with low bass actually having more heft than that of the Audeze LCD2r2 (although the Audeze remained more punchy.) Those with glasses will lose some low bass as Ether C or Ether open is extremely sensitive to seal. I did find the overall bass quality of the Ether C better than the Ether open, being tighter, more defined, and having greater heft.

I didn't care for the fluffy white tuning sheet. It deadened and stuffed everything too much despite it being the most effective to tame the treble spike, but at the expense of killing all air. I found that a single black tuning sheet yielded the best results, but it still wasn't enough to tame those peaks.

 

Based on your description, it is likely I will not like these. I can see these being too lean under normal conditions. Like Bill, I don't think I will like the 6-7k peak either. Upper bass seems to take a bit of a hit.

Does not seem too bad of a headphone, but not seeing why these are $1.5K. $300?

 

If the loaner list isnt too lengthy, you might be able to get in. We usually allow one or two regular members in on each loaner at the end. Might need to go through a "background" check.

 

Is this a 1.0 or a 1.1?

 

I would like to try these on my own rig, if possible. I might have a couple damping materials that could work out well, all removable stuff. If the C uses some of the same foam around the edges of the drivers as the open Ether, I'll continue to repeat myself in that I think that material is not optimal for proper front damping and tuning.

It's possible this driver is just not meant for a closed environment. The open Ether has some genuinely good qualities (well, with a good pair...), just some rough edges that need smoothed out and some thicker, angled pads to compensate for the otherwise small, hard left/right, 3-blob stage.

I know Dan doesn't care for the crowd here in general, but he really would benefit from having some of us beta test his products. Last time I helped him beta test something (long, long ago), and any beta testers that made themselves known with later products, it seemed to me he tended to pick people that were already fans of his products and had a known presence and voice on Head-Fi. That means you're more likely to get back patting and hand shaking than genuine critiques. On the other hand, he seems to be doing quite well even with half-baked products that always seem to need rounding out (see historic revisions of pretty much everything he's released). It might be hard to care about dealing with assholes like us when most of your market doesn't really care or even have good ears.

Edit: Just checked out Tyll's Ether C measurements with some filters in place. Looks like they might offer some nice gains. Distortion results also look better, so I'll eat crow and just say that the higher distortion on the stock C was likely some sort of fluke, background noise, etc. Probably the same for the LCD-4 too. Ah, well, learn something new every day.

 

Sending it up to you then next. You can drop it off at Nick's.