Harman Target Curve Download

[Alexandrina Burbidge]

When the Harman curve headphone research began, around 2010, the science of headphone design dated back about three decades, to an era before computer-based measurements, and it was long overdue for a refresh. Inspired by the emergence of a headphone boom (itself triggered by the invention of the smartphone), scientists at Harman International (parent company of JBL, Harman Kardon, Mark Levinson, Revel, and numerous other audio brands) began conducting blind listening tests to see what type of headphone and earphone sound most people prefer, and if such preferences correlated to measurements of headphone and earphone characteristics.

harman target curve download

DOWNLOAD https://t.co/2GrecN7Fjm

I just stumbled on this subreddit and applied the Harman curve to my Creative Aurvana Live with ODAC + O2 and the sound quality is noticeably improved. I just don't understand, if the Harman curve is objectively the correct frequency response for headphones, why don't any headphones come with this curve out of the box? How can all of the headphones makers get such a fundamental point wrong? There are plenty of headphones that have their own DAC or are wireless, why don't they just equalize the sound before it hits the speaker?

Edit: Even the brands that are part of Harman group like JBL and AKG have very few headphones that can accurately track the Harman curve. Even headphones that are explicitly designed with the research of Sean Olive (Samsung Galaxy Buds or NAD Viso) don't track the curve.

From there, attempts were made to replicate the results for headphones. Thus, industry-standard dummy head measurements were made of their reference loudspeaker setup. The Harman headphone curve(s) was a derivation of their speaker work. The resulting curve was tested with listeners for preference as well. These were the results for circumaural headphones and IEMs:

This is difficult to compensate. Nonetheless, it captures the crucial features that are most shared. Such a target curve has the best chance of being preferred, or requiring the least modification to be preferable compared to an arbitrary curve.

Additionally, the Harman curve differs between different design formats: in-ear monitors and headphones require a markedly different configuration due to the difference in the way they interact with the ear. In this detailed presentation by Sean Olive, several hypotheses are forwarded for the difference. For one, over-ear headphones radiate a wavefront that interacts with the pinna, but this is not true for IEMs.

Having an ear canal blocked (instead of open) alters the resonant characteristics of the canal. The seal of IEMs may also affect the preferred low-end balance. The new curve for IEMs appears to reflect these reasons, with the general shape of the 3kHz peak significantly different.

The free-field curve is the response of a well-designed loudspeaker in an anechoic room (yielding a flat, smooth anechoic response), placed in front of a dummy head. In contrast, the Harman curve uses a realistic, treated domestic room designed to have some controlled reflections and absorption that appear preferable, which tends to shelve response down into a smooth downward slope for flat and smoothly-dispersing loudspeakers (with very rare exceptions).

Thus, headphones could be reliably tuned to a smooth curve rooted in broad human features. The idealized abstraction of both curves was their downfall, though, because studios and listeners both did not produce and play back recordings with transducers that adhered to this curve. Instead, diffuse-field playback of music recordings was likely to be brighter despite the idealized abstraction.

The difference between the curve generated with the speaker and the headphone is therefore the individual calibration curve, measured at a coarse and non-invasive level, but nonetheless close enough to the HRTF to ensure externalization.

Thus, it appears the difference from individual HRTF introduced by the Harman curve outstrip the loss of detail from only taking data points every one-third of an octave for the individual. Arguably, preferable, or what we consciously perceive as accurate tonality (per Harman), is a less stringent target than the accuracy needed for spatial fidelity.

This automated equalization app has gained a lot of popularity, making much headway in traditionally equalization-resistant communities. While their proprietary calibration curve is not released, a company representative briefly commented on it on Reddit, saying it is similar but not identical to the Harman curve. Thus, the analysis on the methodology of Harman curves throughout this article series should still apply.

Etymotic, reputed as one of the most engineering-centric IEM manufacturers, uses a modified diffuse-field curve. Thus, much of the discussion on diffuse-field above applies. It will be much more bass-light and brighter than any default Harman curve. Etymotic explains their modifications as such:

He derived his individual calibration curve slightly differently from Griesinger: without using a speaker reference, and using sine waves continuously swept up the entire audioband, instead of pink noise at selected frequencies.

Compared to this dynamic variation, calibrating to your own ears is a more stable approach, at the expense of inconvenience, involvement and perhaps more mindfulness than the set-and-forget-and-roughly-tune-as-you-like-it approach of the Harman curve.

Of course, even Harman uses different variations of the target curve on their headphones. The reason is that every person hears differently, so there is no universal headphone sound to please them all. The latter was also apparent in testing.

As of right now, the Harman curve is the best approximation of how the studio recording should sound like. So, if you want to experience the music as intended, we recommend checking Harman-tuned headphones. The AKG K371 and K361 are the most well-known.

Make a curve and save it to a slot then edit a little bit here and there and save it to the next one. Compare both to the No curve and repeat until you get something that sounds good to you. Following the natural curve will give your filter a better start to change only the frequencies that you want and not everything.

After reading your posts, I have modified my +4dB to -4dB target slightly.

Adjusted target beetween 40-100Hz to match more closely to speakers response.

Now I like it. SVS Prime Pinnacle

Target26981572 314 KB

Here one of the adjusted graphs- my speakers are flat, so we followed them with some adjustments in the low and high frequencies. I have an open space next to the right column so the two speakers have individual curves

Buying headphones is always a challenge. After all, you can't tell how they are going to sound until you've actually tried them on. Although, there is a metric you can use that guarantees good sound quality regardless of the type of listener you are: the Harman curve.

The Harman curve is a theoretical target sound signature said to produce the best sound quality that most listeners would prefer. It was developed in 2012 by a team of scientists and audio engineer Sean Olive, who described the signature in "The Relationship between Perception and Measurement of Headphone Sound Quality" via Sean Olive's blog.

If you're unaware, sound signature refers to the tuning of sound frequencies (bass, mids, and treble) of a headphone, which results in a unique pattern or "curve" in its frequency response. There are different types of sound signatures, with each one having different properties.

The goal of the Harman target curve is to act as a guideline for manufacturers to tune their headphones to replicate its sound. Harman argues against the notion that it's impossible to find the best sound for headphones since every listener has different preferences.

To establish the Harman curve, the team conducted a series of blind tests with 283 participants from four different countries across 11 test locations. To minimize bias against certain demographic groups, the sample included a broad range of ages, listening experiences, and genders, with most of the participants being Harman employees.

If you're looking for a new pair of headphones or wireless earbuds, the Harman curve is the safest reference point available. Headphones that match the Harman curve are most likely to sound good, whether you're a trained or untrained listener. That way, you know you probably won't be disappointed with your purchase.

If you don't want to bother researching for headphones that match the Harman curve sound, the easiest way to experience it is to buy Samsung Galaxy Buds. Since Samsung acquired Harman International in 2017, its Galaxy Buds lineup offers the closest match to the curve.

That said, the Harman curve is not the ultimate gold standard for sound quality; there's no such thing. Listening is a very personal experience, so there's no guarantee what sounds best to others will sound best to you too. The only way to know that is to try out different headphones yourself.

The Harman curve is an incredibly useful indicator to judge the sound quality of a headphone before buying it. If you have some time to spare, we highly recommend reading Sean Olive's paper to understand more about how the Harman curve was established.

There are tools and graphs available online that you can use to compare the sound signature of your desired headphones against the Harman target to ascertain their sound quality. But do note that headphones that deviate from the Harman target don't necessarily sound bad; like we said, the curve is not the gold standard but simply a guideline.

The Harman target curve is a rough approximation of what is acceptable in tonality to disregard individualization for precise tonality and spatial audio. The chart shows the target frequency response of an ideal pair of headphones, which levels they should exhibit, and the correct specialized equipment to measure it.

Harman curve, therefore, targeted to establish standard controlled, double-blind comparative and subjective evaluations that minimized headphone tactile and visual biases such as price, cosmetics, and brand.

f448fe82f3