View Single Post
Old 05-11-2018, 08:12 PM   #4
High Supremacy Member
wwenze's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 33,262
Part 2.5: More on mapping accuracy, and lots of frequency response charts

The reason I chose Diff4 and Diff3 above is because I already knew Diff4 and Diff3 are both accurate mappings of my ear.

So, while mapping, I already saw the things that can go wrong during mapping.

- Like not detecting the earlobe or detecting extra earlobe
- The face can be mapped at various vertical angles, or the mapped face does not cover the whole face
- I think the ear can be mapped at various angles as well
- The best one was when it thought the side of my face is the ear

Results - Frequency response

Profile 2 vs Profile 3
This two profiles are definitely different

Profile 4 vs Profile 3
Now these profiles are quite close to each other

Note that due to me using white noise to measure frequency response, the result will fluctuate:

Profile 4 vs Profile 4

Hence anything below 1dB is close enough

Profile 5 vs Profile 4

So profile 5 and 4 are definitely accurate. Profile 3 is a little off. Profile 2 is wrong.

David Bowie vs Profile 3

So David Bowie is different from me.

However, seeing how similar David Bowie's is compared to my Profile 2, this makes me wonder if this occurs when the mapping is bugged. (Because I used a photo for David Bowie.) Different normal people may result in smaller differences if their ears are similar, perhaps like the difference between my Profile 4/5 and Profile 3 (which might be inaccurate). But this shows that the software does detect big differences when there are big differences, and small differences when there are small differences, and apply the appropriate processing. So for the most part, I'm going to say a "Yes", the personalization does work. Exactly how precise? I am not going to measure my ears many times and then measure many different people's ears to find out the signal-to-noise ratio.

This also means I need to mention a PSA: Please make sure your mapping is done correctly, or you may get a result that is way, way off.

Frequency response of SXFi, "Unknown Headphone", and various earphone/headphone selection

So, when SXFi is off, the amp is completely flat as it should be. But when it is on, I get the below frequency response:


I think this was taken with one of the bugged mappings. But as you can see, the SXFi effect itself has a much greater impact on the FR than the mapping and the head/earphone selection. (Note the different vertical dB scale.)

So, I compared "Unknown Headphone" with some other head/earphones for the lolz.


Note that FR measurements of sound effects are mostly meaningless because sound effects are not linear-time-invariant, which means the FR can change with the type of sound being presented.

Or basically these measurements are just for lolz only.
Financial advice from selfish-gen is like Trump's opinion on climate change

Last edited by wwenze; 06-11-2018 at 04:14 PM..
wwenze is offline   Reply With Quote