|
About our testing:
For our testing, we utilize only the finest robots and computer programs. Our resident robot, HATS (head and torso simulator), has precision microphones in his anatomically-similar ears. Our computer program was developed by our pals at ListenInc., and is known as SoundCheck. This program ensures we perform identical testing procedures each time. It also analyzes the data that HATS sends back to it, producing all the pretty graphs you'll see below. If you are a curious cat, you can find more information about our tests here.
Frequency Response (6.59) 
How the test works:
Our frequency response test measures the amount of emphasis or deemphasis the headphones will add to your playback. To do this we play a frequency sweep through the headphones. HATS listens to the headphones and relays what it hears back to SoundCheck. Using this information, we can get a detailed chart of exactly how the headphones are altering any given frequency.
What we found:
The Turbines did well here for the most part. They emphasize bass like crazy, and therefore might sound a bit boomy to some. Fortunately, they reel it back a bit and fall within the limits until just before the 10kHz mark. At this point the right channel takes a 10dB drop for a short stretch. This means that any instrument using this frequency will likely sound a bit dull, more so in the right ear than the left. After the scoring limit ends, the graph generally trends downwards, meaning the brilliance of some instruments might be a bit understated.
Other than the downward spike near 10kHz, the Turbines did well on this test. Fans of booming bass should pay particualar attention to these things.
How the Monster Turbines compare:
The Turbines had the best frequency response out of all our comparison headphones. Typically in-ears don't do well on this test compared to full-size headphones. There are many reasons why this is the case, including tiny drivers and being particularly finicky with regards to positioning – all we know is there's a trend towards poor frequency response. The Turbines prove to be an exception to the rule, with a score that's better than most on-ear or over-ear headphones. The only comparison headphones below that came close to the Turbines were the MM 50 iPs, which are currently our highest rated in-ear headphones.
Distortion (4.46)
How the test works:
Distortion is bad. It refers to differences between the original waveform and the one that HATS hears. The level of distortion will be more or less noticeable based on the type of music you prefer. Do you prefer metal or punk? Chances are you won't notice much unless there's something seriously wrong, since the instruments are distorted to begin with. Do you like classical? You will notice distortion, even in minor doses. We measure distortion as a percentage at any given frequency, with separate measurements for the left and right channels.
What we found:
The Turbines had ok distortion control. Throughout, the levels of distortion never rose far above 1%, and mainly stayed below 0.5%. If you listen to a lot of vocals, you might notice something a bit funny on a track you know particularly well. Differences would also be apparent if you switched between these headphones and headphones with lower distortion. The average consumer might not notice the difference, but chances are, if you're actually reading this section, you aren't the average consumer.
How the Monster Turbines compare:
Unlike frequency response, there's no real trend towards high or low levels of distortion on in-ear headphones. As you can see from the chart below, the range is quite large.
In a group of its peers, the Turbines fall on the below average side, and not just because the two Sennhieser in-ears received outstanding scores. The current average score for this section is a bit over 5, so while the Turbines didn't perform horribly, they could do with some improvement.
Tracking (7.35)
How the test works:
Our tracking test measures the relative difference in volume levels between the left and right channels (ear buds/cups). Even though headphones emphasize/deemphasize individual frequencies, as illustrated above, those alterations should happen uniformly across both channels.
On the graph below, the blue line should, on a perfect pair of headphones, be horizontal at the zero mark. When it drops below zero, the right channel is louder, and when it raises above zero the left channel is louder. We do not score the extreme low and high end of the graph pictured below, because the data isn't 100% accurate. We do, however, show the full spectrum, to give an idea of the general performance trend.
What we found:
The Turbines didn't do a bad job here. The right channel seems to be slightly louder than the left during the low and middle frequencies, with the left channel growing louder a little before the 1000Hz mark. These skews towards the left and right channels are slight, however, staying within a 4dB range. The sudden hump just after 100Hz is the sharpest incline and decline up until 10kHz, and it's not a particularly big swing.
Towards the 10kHz mark the graph goes a bit funny, but that's normal and not particularly accurate. Really, the most significant bump here is after 100Hz. While it moseys a little afterwards, the changes aren't particularly sudden or stark.
How the Monster Turbines compare:
The Turbines' peers had slightly better tracking on average. Note how flat their lines are in comparison. The only one with a similar jump is the AH-C351s, but it was a bit smaller. Despite only beating the V-MODAs on the list of headphones below, the average score for this section is a bit under 7, so the Turbines are still slightly over average. Unless you're particular about your headphones, the Turbines' tracking won't bother you.
Maximum Usable Volume (9.73)
How the test works:
We define maximum usable volume as the loudest your headphones can get without outputting more than 3% distortion. As volume increases, distortion magnifies, and 3% is a noticeable amount. This test is simply a battery of our distortion tests, held at varying decibel levels.
What we found:
The Turbines were capable of outputting 118.87 decibels, which is a good amount. We award max points for 120dB: anything over that is downright harmful, regardless of how distortion-free it is. This is actually a bit quieter than many in-ear headphones, which typically output over 120dB, but a difference of one decibel and change isn't a particularly large gap.
Isolation (6.72)
How the test works:
Isolation refers to how easily a pair of headphones can block out external sounds. There are two types of isolation: active and passive. Passive isolation comes from your headphones creating a physical barrier between your ear drums and the outside world. Active isolation, or active noise cancellation, is a feature that uses fancy science to actually cancel out incoming sounds. Typically these headphones have microphones that listen to your surroundings, then plays back an inverse-amplitude sound along with your music. The inverse amplitude collides with the incoming sound, resulting in a flat(ish) sound wave, i.e. something you can't hear.
This test is performed by blasting a headphone-wearing HATS with pink noise, then measuring how much sound of any given frequency makes it through to HATS ears.
What we found:
The Turbines do an ok job of isolating for a pair of in-ears. Like all other in-ears, they do a great job above 1kHz and a significantly less great job below it.
In-ear headphones, which are essentially ear plugs, have a tendency to isolate better than all other headphones, including those with active noise cancellation. This being said, active noise cancelling headphones excel at blocking out low-end noise. Active cancellers also block out far less middle or high frequency noise and block out less noise overall.
active cancellation typically blocks out far more bass noise, but not as much middle or high-end noise.
How the Monster Turbines compare:
In-ears have the potential to block out a lot more noise than the Turbines did, but they still didn't compare badly to their peers. The only headphones that blocked out significantly more noise were the SE420s and their foam ear buds (if the sleeve looks like an actual ear plug, chances are it'll perform like an actual ear plug). The Turbines ended up coming out on the top half of the comparison headphones below, but just barely. Compared to all headphones, the Turbines are way above average, but compared to other in-ears, they had solidly average isolation.
Leakage (7.67)
How the test works:
Leakage refers to the amount of sound that escapes the ear-headphone seal. While leakage isn't a problem in a room by yourself, if you're looking to listen to a movie while a room mate sleeps, or if you want to listen to music in the library, then you want headphones with low leakage.
This test is performed by playing pink noise through the headphones, which are worn by HATS. A microphone placed a set distance away captures any sound that escapes.
What we found:
The Turbines performed well enough here, although they were below average for a set of in-ears. Typically in-ears score closer to our max score of 10. Chances are the Turbines would be fine to listen to at a moderate level in just about any public setting, although if you're in a silent library those around you7 might hear a whisper of your music. If you listen at a louder level, you'll only annoy everyone further.
|
