Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Mini Comparison - Vibe (1st gen), C700, PK2, RE0, NE-7M, PFE, ER4S, OK1, TF10, UM3X, SE530, IE8
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mini Comparison - Vibe (1st gen), C700, PK2, RE0, NE-7M, PFE, ER4S, OK1, TF10, UM3X, SE530, IE8 - Page 9

post #121 of 142
Thread Starter 
OMG! What have I done...

I've...created a MONSTER!

Enough

I'll just leave everything else to PM format or maybe these discussions are better served in a dedicated thread or threads covering driver design, design choices, compromises, effects on sound, etc. It would be useful for a couple of the headphone engineers to chime into such discussions and explain specifics and go into detail of unique design aspects relative to headphones, material and configuration choices, sound compromises, and ways to gear a headphone towards certain specific end goals. That would be more useful then what I've been doing here. It also seems hard for me to represent what I'm saying in written word, so until I work up some graphs, data, etc. and dig into the specifics, I'm not being helpful.

As for Phonak, it is my opinion of the sound. It is a side effect of the light and airy presentation. It's sort of like with home-fi. Everyone loves Seas aluminum neo tweeter. Me too. Yet, relative to some other options out there, they are a bit light on body. There are just other options that are fuller and more robust. Dayton's Reference series subs are light and airy too. It's the only sub I'd ever call "airy," but it is. I like to call it squeaky clean. I do call it a fault for the Phonaks because it is noticeably short on note, enough so where I feel it degrades from the end presentation more so then it helps. I'm not saying the headphone is bad. It's rather quite good. But, when it does something that I feel deters the end sound, I consider it a fault. It is of course arguable as these things are a bit on a relative scale and a matter of preference.

And Joe, I was never hesitant on sources. I either missed it or ignored it for the time being. I have used most of the headphones on more then one source and most at least 3 sources. I do agree source does play a roll, but it's not a significant one on a grand scale unless the source moderately colors the sound. Some sources do. My bro's Sony Walkman does affect the bass some. My old Dell's onboard sucks. My bro's current onboard is mediocre. My onboard is decent. My add-on Audigy 2 that I used with my Dell is decent. I've used a few of the IEMs on my desktop's Fortisimo III, and I've run a couple on my bro's desktop Santa Cruz, both decent. I say decent because they don't really do anything wrong, although, I'm sure there's something better available. I only worry about noticeable coloring or distortion. I don't feel my laptop does that, at least not to a noticeable extent. I've used far, far worse sources, so I don't whine about it not care all that much about it. I simply don't care about it enough because it isn't terribly important in this case. If I was testing through a crappy source, I'd worry. The laptop simply doesn't color enough or add a lot of distortion, or anything else to really deter me from using it or feeling it detracts from the comparison. That's all. My reviews are based off my current laptop and without the E5 amp as I'm focusing on unamplified for the review, and the E5 noticeably colors.



Back on topic, review, review...Yuin's Ok1, some impressions:



OK1, having a good bit of fun with them. I got these because I wanted to try one of Yuin's higher end products. My bro has the PK2, and I do like that bud a lot. The OK series has been decribed as similar to the PK2 but better and the OK1 arguably better then the PK1(in certain ways). I grabbed a pair to try out and see if I'd prefer them even over some of the better IEM options. I'm not partial specific to IEM or bud, so I'm open to either option.

I do like them a bit better then the PK2, definitely a more refined sound, smoother and more open, less forward. It's a pleasant sound. Top end is slightly light, less emphasis then some of the IEMs I'm using. Frequency response is pretty flat and even, something I sort of expect now from Yuin.

For a bud that's 100ohms, it really seems to have very little need for an amp, even at higher volume. ...not complaining here, lol. There is very little to gain it seems with an amp.

Odd side note, they seemed pre-broken-in. Fresh out of the box, they did not exhibit traits of a new driver. I don't know if Yuin is running pre-burn-in step or it could possibly be returned or the driver is simply not that stiff new. I thought it was kind of interesting, but I can't say if it's normal or not. At the very least, it beats doing it yourself and waiting.

I should have a review up sometime next week.
post #122 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by mvw2 View Post
As for Phonak, it is my opinion of the sound. It is a side effect of the light and airy presentation. ... I do call it a fault for the Phonaks because it is noticeably short on note, enough so where I feel it degrades from the end presentation more so then it helps.
I don't share your impression of the PFEs, but as previously discussed, not the sound signature you are used to/like. I would buy them again if I could figure out when I would use them more than occasionally.

Quote:
And Joe, I was never hesitant on sources. I either missed it or ignored it for the time being. I have used most of the headphones on more then one source and most at least 3 sources. I do agree source does play a roll, but it's not a significant one on a grand scale unless the source moderately colors the sound. Some sources do. My bro's Sony Walkman does affect the bass some. My old Dell's onboard sucks. My bro's current onboard is mediocre. My onboard is decent. My add-on Audigy 2 that I used with my Dell is decent. I've used a few of the IEMs on my desktop's Fortisimo III, and I've run a couple on my bro's desktop Santa Cruz, both decent. I say decent because they don't really do anything wrong, although, I'm sure there's something better available. I only worry about noticeable coloring or distortion. I don't feel my laptop does that, at least not to a noticeable extent. I've used far, far worse sources, so I don't whine about it not care all that much about it. I simply don't care about it enough because it isn't terribly important in this case. If I was testing through a crappy source, I'd worry. The laptop simply doesn't color enough or add a lot of distortion, or anything else to really deter me from using it or feeling it detracts from the comparison. That's all. My reviews are based off my current laptop and without the E5 amp as I'm focusing on unamplified for the review, and the E5 noticeably colors.
Missed it or ignored it (from more than 1 poster)? Why would you ignore a simple question?

I could not disagree more with your assertion that the "source does play a roll, but it's not a significant one on a grand scale unless the source moderately colors the sound." You only "worry about noticeable coloring or distortion."

I am concerned with aspects of sound that can't technically be measured such as timbre, dynamics, rhythm, and soundstage. You can't discern them from graphs or specs, such as slew rate, bandwidth, current output, etc., you actually have to listen to it. That is why I am here and why I had questions about the source you used so I could personally evaluate the weight of your reviews in the grand scheme of Head-fi.

When I was into car audio (way back when), all it was about was loud, clean sound, oh, and lots of bass. That is not what it is about here.

Just a FYI, the Audigy 2 resamples 44.1 to 48KHz (sound quality reduction), the Fortisimo III is comparable with onboard sound (from 2002), and the Santa Cruz is decent, but not great compared to today's $100 sound cards.
post #123 of 142
Thread Starter 
I never said they were amazing. A better question is how much do you think they deter the overall sound quality? Yes, some sources are basically crap. Others simply aren't bad enough to really matter in a significant way.

There was a comment I ran across not too long ago that sums up my own feelings:

"In any audio application, the 2 points where you have the most distortion added and largest loss of "quality" are where energy is changed from acoustic to electrical. This means in the microphone on the recording end and in the speakers on the playback end. Other issues like sampling rate, the quality of DAC's, etc all have very minor impact compared to those two points. It is the job of both the microphone and speakers to perform this change in energy with the lowest amount of distortion or coloration."

-John_E_Janowitz, owner of Acoustic Elegance and majored in both EE and ME and makes some damn fine drivers.

I tend to agree with that, and it coincides with most everything I've experienced in the audio industry myself. I personally do put high regard on drivers more then anything else. I have said it many times over the years that I personally feel source units and amps (if car audio) don't play significant roles in creating the end sound. Now significant is a relative scale. I say significant is a substantial sense. I will agree wholely with you that source units, amps, and any other devices the audio signal is developed from, adjusted, and passes through do play roles and can maintain, degrade, or change the sound. I simply don't consider it to be significant relative to the drivers themselves. I will put far more weight on the sound of headphone A relative to headphone B over the source I run or amp I run through. It isn't me stating these things don't matter. They do, sometimes a lot. However, using my current laptop and even just the onboard chip, the sound is good enough not to care. Even when looking at other sound sources, some mediocre, the worst most can do is (a) have a crappy noise floor and isolation from the rest of the electrical system and (b) lack adequate power to sufficiently power attached hardware without clipping.

I've had people argue to me before about HUs and amps in car audio are major factors in the end sound, and I've disagreed with them too. It's not the fact that they can change the end sound, but it's the fact that the change isn't significant relative to other parts. For me, it really does come down to significance.

Even with my reviews, my comments focus mainly on significant aspects. I don't worry so much about the subtleties. If I were too, my comments would be much longer. Anything I point out, I consider it to be a rather noticeable, main aspect of the headphone. If the headphone doesn't play above 10kHz, that's significant and rather noticeable. If the headphone has a 6dB peak at 8kHz, it's noticeable and a significant factor (assuming no EQing ability). If the bass is rather muddy and lacking control, that's significant. Things like timbre, dynamics, rhythm, and soundstage, I comment on. If there are significant aspects, I'll note. If there aren't, I have no need to comment. For example, I discuss dyanmics with the C700 and PFE because they are both very dynamic in range. The sound stage is particularly wide (beyond the headphone) for the Vibe, so I comment on that. Timbre is my body. It's the filler, the meat of the data, texture of the note. The term, like me using body, has many meanings to many people. My definition of timbre is breadth of note, reverberation of note, fullness, body, etc. Yours may be different. My comments point out significant and unique aspects to the headphones, things out of the norm or perhaps even exactly the norm or it sounds "real," "ideal," etc... The english language is open to interpretation.

I'm a bit of a stickler for sound. I grew up and still am an avid car audio guy. I've never been a bass head, and I've always preferred sounds that came across as "real" or at least as close as I could get. I prefer balance. I grew up using Pioneer products which seemed to have the more natural vocals of the mediocrity that is Best Buy, lol. In more recent years, I've strived for much better. I've run over 20 different drivers (tweeters, mids, subs) in my current car alone to find what I like best and to try out a variety of neat drivers. I've run a variety of car audio and home audio drivers like Pioneer, Alpine, Seas, Scanspeak, Vifa, and Dayton. I've run active for a number of years to make the process easy, and have learned a ton in terms of setup and tuning a wide range of hardware. Want to know my car audio world, look me up (mvw2) on CarAudioForum.com - The WWW Car Audio Forum and DIY Mobile Audio - Technical, Advanced & Informative That'll at least cover the last 6 years of my car audio life. Home audio, I'm not there yet, not until I own a house. I use the drivers because they spank most of the car-fi crap.
post #124 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by mvw2 View Post
OMG! What have I done...
As for Phonak, it is my opinion of the sound. It is a side effect of the light and airy presentation. It's sort of like with home-fi. I do call it a fault for the Phonaks because it is noticeably short on note, enough so where I feel it degrades from the end presentation more so then it helps. I'm not saying the headphone is bad. It's rather quite good. But, when it does something that I feel deters the end sound, I consider it a fault.
That's just your opinion. You gave a reason for what you called a fault but we soon established that your reasoning was deeply flawed.

Since you like to toot your own horn about your car audio experience and you seem to think that most on Head-Fi have never heard anything but headphones. I'd like to give you a FYI.

I have heard quite a lot of Hi-Fi gear from the lowest end to the highest end. Here is a list of speaker brands I have auditioned over the years I have listened to most of the range in some of these B&W, Dynaudio, Paradigm, Focal JM Lab, Jamo, ProAC, PMC, Joseph Audio, Sonus Faber, Revel, Vandersteen, Martin Logan, Wilson Audio, Meadowlark, Thiel, Von Schwiekert, Definitive Technologies, Boston Acoustics, Monitor Audio, NHT, Totem Acoustics etc .

Many of them driven by the best electronics Mark Levinson, Lexicon, Krell, Classe', Primare, Wadia, McIntosh, Bryston etc.

I think I know what good audio should sound like.

If you just wrote reviews based on what you liked or disliked it would be fine.

When you start treating everyone else as ignorant and go on a lengthy but flawed technical reasoning it becomes counterproductive.

I have no beef with you otherwise. I think you contribute very positively to this site.
post #125 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by mvw2 View Post
I never said they were amazing. A better question is how much do you think they deter the overall sound quality? Yes, some sources are basically crap. Others simply aren't bad enough to really matter in a significant way.
Here is an example: I am listening to my 5 year old 512MB MP3 player (my current workout player). Sounds like crap straight from the headphone out with my NE-7. I decide to hook up my E5. Wow, what an improvement, I actually didn't think it could sound this good. OK, now I go from the NE-7 to my IE8. Other than deeper, more controlled and impactful bass, not much difference.

OK, so listening to the NE-7 through my best source, my Prodigy sound card with rolled op amps, it sounds OK, not too much better than from the old MP3 player. Then I switch to my IE8s...night and day difference in detail and stage.

Yea, sources don't make as big an impact as the speakers (or headphones), but they do make an impact. Especially if you go from a stock non-audiophile product (onboard sound card) to an audiophile product, even relatively low end. And by audiophile, I mean non-mainstream (like creative in sound cards). Poor sources won't reveal all the IEMs/earbuds are capable of and their true sound. Like buying a great car sub and using the stock radio amp.

And just so you know, when I was 16 I started reading audiophile magazine, so that is where my bias is. But that being said, I do trust my ears. And I have an uncle that has B&W 801D speakers & a Mark Levinson amp (which sound incredible together) in a custom built listening room. He thinks source matters

Oh, and I don't recall an answer to my question about what kind of engineering you are in from post #88.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mvw2 View Post
I know physics and am in engineering.
Also, how did you select your IEM/earbud test subjects? They seem to be all over the board in price, sound sig, and type, which isn't a bad thing.
post #126 of 142
I stopped reading audiophile magazines, since I got my Sony MDR-CD3000 . Since the source matters, I read professional audio magazines and audio journal instead, such JAS Journal, Prosound and Sound & Recording. BTW, both of these magazines and the journal are in Japanese. That time, I do owned 2 DAT decks, BBE 422, dbx SNR1, Sony DPS-M7 sonic modulator, and do my own recordings, for fun and experience.

Eventhough my listening setup is very simple and cheap, but it do achieve a certain standard for my listening. Yes, I do agreed source does matters

Thank you.
post #127 of 142
Thread Starter 
I don't judge. I had never once specifically stated anything about anybody's competence. Some of you simply take offense to me speaking in layman's terms. It's just the common method I have used for years simply because most folks I converse with do know very little about audio both in experience and in science. It's tough for me to specifically offend someone if I never specifically target someone, although, I understand the implied offense via the action. It's akin to talking to another adult as if they were a small child. Some would take offense to that and feel insulted. One shouldn't really be offended from comments if the person never stated their competence level. When you don't mention your background, I have no gauge to go by. I will simply pick the safest, albeit not the most respectful route, depending on who I'm talking to.

I'm curious how amping helps the NE-7M so significantly. They are so easy to drive. Other then the coloration, there really shouldn't be anything to gain. Maybe the old mp3 player has insanely low output capability.

Do you EQ your hardware?

I'm just curious if specific combinations work for you simply because the source/amp combo "EQ"s correctly for your taste. Yeah, I'm aware it's more then just EQing, just a generalized blanket statement here.

Your uncle built a custom listening room. That I would assume matters more so then the source choice itself. That of course depends upon what options are being compared. What weight would you give to each aspect in terms of the quality of the overall end sound?

Driver choice: ?%
Enclosure design: ?%
Speaker placement: ?%
Room design/treatment: ?%
Source choice: ?%
Tuning: ?%

Sum should equal 100%

I'm just curious what your take is on the aspects influencing the end sound.

My field, mechanical engineering. I thought I mentioned that somewhere in the sea of text I've written so far, maybe, maybe not. I think electrical engineering would be more useful to this conversation when discussing electrical signals and some of the interesting stuff that happens. All I can really do is basic stuff from an intro circuits class. I can play with RLC circuits, op-amps, and build my own crossovers and know mathematically what's happening. However, I'm missing a LOT of the more advanced aspects because it's not my field. I'm more familiar with dynamics and mechanical motion, so I treat speakers that way and approaching the motor simply as a force generator that's proportional to the input voltage, although, this really isn't an accurate representation beyond a basic sense. I treat the speaker as a mass, spring, and damper system(non-linear). More is actually happening. I'm aware of this but can't explain any of it because it all falls on the electrical side.

My IEM choices is simply off a wide array of reviews I've run across and some hype. I simply pick the hardware that descriptively seems to match my tastes or are generally considered good. Personal preference gets dibs, universal "good" options get tries. For example, the RE0 is descriptively what I'm looking for. On a number of areas, it hits my target well. The frequency response is good, has a very extended response, a clean sound, but I really disliked the tiny sound, enough so to send them back. It came across so small, weak with very little energy. Another example is the ER4S, one I wouldn't normally try simply from user reviews, however, it is highly regarded. It has become basically my favorite headphone, because despite some mixed reviews, it actually doesn't come off bad in any major way. I've bought a couple because they were the current forum boners. I got the Vibe way back, liked it a lot, still do, but the left driver is damaged and partially why I've been looking at replacements. The NE-7M was another forum boner. It's one I kind of regret buying. A lot of folks like them, and I can see why, but I see it as a headphone I have to work at to make decent. This is not to say it's bad, just wrong for my end goals.

I put particular weight on:
-frequency response, the less EQing need the better.
-transparency, want to hear the sound, not the speakers playing the sound.
articulation of note, wanting a clean, controlled, and well defined sound.
-energy, gusto, robustness, want a big, energetic sound
-naturality, neutrality, desiring a "real" and uncolored sound

I have a personal preference towards
-a slightly warm sound, full and velvety is yummy to the ears
-energy, prefer a big, robust sound, even if slightly unnatural.

I dislike
-rough frequency responses, means a lot of work
-tiny sound, no energy, fullness, impact, etc.
-lack of control, i.e. muddy, sloppy mess, noise without meaning
-fatiguing presentation, generally from harshness, poor frequency response, distortion, etc.
post #128 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by mvw2 View Post
I don't judge. I had never once specifically stated anything about anybody's competence. Some of you simply take offense to me speaking in layman's terms.
When it comes to subjective topics, I don’t judge, and I am not offended. When it comes to science, I will point out mistakes. I don’t take offence to you talking in layman’s terms, but when what you are saying does not make sense, I am going to challenge you to either re-explain it or correct yourself. An example of this is your 5ms v 3.5ms example, can’t happen that way.

Quote:
I'm curious how amping helps the NE-7M so significantly. They are so easy to drive. Other then the coloration, there really shouldn't be anything to gain. Maybe the old mp3 player has insanely low output capability.
I would assume the old mp3 player has insanely low output capability. But it is a source!

Quote:
Do you EQ your hardware?
Nope, no EQ. Don't feel I need to, and when I do, don't really care for the result, it never sounds natural to me.

Quote:
Your uncle built a custom listening room. That I would assume matters more so then the source choice itself. That of course depends upon what options are being compared. What weight would you give to each aspect in terms of the quality of the overall end sound?
First, putting importance on the listed factors is going to be setup specific. My cousin with a $20K system will have different percentages, as will someone with a $1K setup and my uncle. IMO, as the price of the equipment goes up, so does it’s importance. For example, you get a cheap car sub with a cheap amp, but enclose it perfectly vs. an expensive (quality) car sub and great amp. If the expensive sub is enclosed in a slightly less than ideal enclosure (but still good), which would you prefer? Also, the cheap amp will not make the expensive sub sound good, whereas the expensive amp will not make the cheap sub sound good. Better than the cheap/cheap combo, but not in the same league as the expensive combo.

If there wasn’t a big difference between sources, how would amp companies stay in business? The public would figure it out.

Hope that makes sense to you, if not, I can guestimate the weight of your factors for my uncle, or ask him (driver choice and enclosure design are taken into account with the pre-build B&W speakers, so that should be 1 category, and I don’t know what you mean by tuning. Speaker placement in the room vs. the listening location? Maybe cable, preamp, and source should be included also, or “rest of the system”).

But, with high end audio, any weak link will not allow the system to show why it is worth the price. So the percentages can be said to be all equal.

Quote:
I'm just curious what your take is on the aspects influencing the end sound.
They all do, and I don’t see how they can be generalized across price ranges/locations (car, home, on your head), as each setup is different.

Quote:
My field, mechanical engineering.
Thank you for explaining your knowledge base and where you are coming from.

Quote:
My IEM choices is simply off a wide array of reviews I've run across and some hype. I simply pick the hardware that descriptively seems to match my tastes or are generally considered good. Personal preference gets dibs, universal "good" options get tries. …
The NE-7M was another forum boner. It's one I kind of regret buying. A lot of folks like them, and I can see why, but I see it as a headphone I have to work at to make decent. …

I put particular weight on:…

I have a personal preference towards…

I dislike…
I can respect why you chose what you chose, after all you are the one that has to be happy with the final product.

What ‘work’ do you do to make the NE-7 sound good?

Sounds like the IE8 is a good fit for your likes. But then again, it goes back to source, if you don’t have a good one you may not get the result the product is capable of and you desired sound.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bakhtiar View Post
I stopped reading audiophile magazines, since I got my Sony MDR-CD3000 . Since the source matters, I read professional audio magazines and audio journal instead, such JAS Journal, Prosound and Sound & Recording. BTW, both of these magazines and the journal are in Japanese. That time, I do owned 2 DAT decks, BBE 422, dbx SNR1, Sony DPS-M7 sonic modulator, and do my own recordings, for fun and experience.
I read Audiophile magazine for 10 years, then my interests changed to the point where I wasn't home to listen to my music, so I sold it (for other toys). What do you get out of professional magazines, I have never read any.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bakhtiar View Post
Eventhough my listening setup is very simple and cheap, but it do achieve a certain standard for my listening. Yes, I do agreed source does matters

Thank you.
Thank You!
post #129 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by mvw2 View Post
My field, mechanical engineering. I thought I mentioned that somewhere in the sea of text I've written so far, maybe, maybe not. I think electrical engineering would be more useful to this conversation when discussing electrical signals and some of the interesting stuff that happens. All I can really do is basic stuff from an intro circuits class. I can play with RLC circuits, op-amps, and build my own crossovers and know mathematically what's happening. However, I'm missing a LOT of the more advanced aspects because it's not my field. I'm more familiar with dynamics and mechanical motion, so I treat speakers that way and approaching the motor simply as a force generator that's proportional to the input voltage, although, this really isn't an accurate representation beyond a basic sense. I treat the speaker as a mass, spring, and damper system(non-linear). More is actually happening. I'm aware of this but can't explain any of it because it all falls on the electrical side.
That makes sense. We were approaching it electrically and mechanically. So that's where the disconnect was...




Quote:
I put particular weight on:
-naturality, neutrality, desiring a "real" and uncolored sound

I have a personal preference towards
-a slightly warm sound, full and velvety is yummy to the ears

Aren't these two completely incompatible goals?

Warm generally means colored towards warm. I have never heard a neutral but warm sounding system.

A neutral sounding speaker will reveal the inherent harshness in a recording or instrument. A warm, velvety sounding speaker will mask the natural harshness and make it smoother.

We see eye to eye on the NE-7m. I didn't really like them either.
post #130 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by mvw2 View Post
I'm a bit of a stickler for sound. I grew up and still am an avid car audio guy. I've never been a bass head, and I've always preferred sounds that came across as "real" or at least as close as I could get. I prefer balance. I grew up using Pioneer products which seemed to have the more natural vocals of the mediocrity that is Best Buy, lol. In more recent years, I've strived for much better. I've run over 20 different drivers (tweeters, mids, subs) in my current car alone to find what I like best and to try out a variety of neat drivers. I've run a variety of car audio and home audio drivers like Pioneer, Alpine, Seas, Scanspeak, Vifa, and Dayton. I've run active for a number of years to make the process easy, and have learned a ton in terms of setup and tuning a wide range of hardware. Want to know my car audio world, look me up (mvw2) on CarAudioForum.com - The WWW Car Audio Forum and DIY Mobile Audio - Technical, Advanced & Informative That'll at least cover the last 6 years of my car audio life. Home audio, I'm not there yet, not until I own a house. I use the drivers because they spank most of the car-fi crap.
+12v is my home too...

My home is www.caraudio.com/forum

Moderator there and help run the site. Also, always been good friends with ANT @ DIYMA...



nG
post #131 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by average_joe View Post
I read Audiophile magazine for 10 years, then my interests changed to the point where I wasn't home to listen to my music, so I sold it (for other toys). What do you get out of professional magazines, I have never read any.
What is our audio source? Live performance? CD ? DAT ? MD ? SACD ? DVD ? DVD-A ? Radio ? Your own performance with computer music?

Here is an example of the audio source path before it reaches our ears.

Live performance -> microphone -> mixer -> master tapes -> editing + effect -> convertion -> CD, SACD, ... -> our audio equipments -> speakers/headphones/IEMS -> Ears.

From the path, which is the nearest to the source. I really loves audio, and I like to understand and learn to appreciate a good audio quality.

I also have EBU SQAM CD EBU.CH :: Tech3253 overview as my reference audio test disc and very useful to assessment my ears and my cheap/simple audio equipments. I also use it for calibrations during recordings.

To mvw2 :
Audio itself is a phenomenon which can be explained by science (math and physic). As I mentioned earlier human taste cannot be explained accurately using numbers or formulas. I do agree with average_joe and others concerns, I respect your opinions and taste, but if you want to explained something with science, please do it properly. There still more things to learn and references are welcomed.

FYI. I am from computer engineering field, and audio is just my hobby .

Thank you.
post #132 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by bakhtiar View Post
Live performance -> microphone -> mixer -> master tapes -> editing + effect -> convertion -> CD, SACD, ... -> our audio equipments -> speakers/headphones/IEMS -> Ears.
Yea, I like to lump everything before our audio equipment into source recording quality, as I have no control over it. And I am not going to stop buying mainstream music, I just hope the quality is good.

Quote:
I also have AES/EBU SQAM CD EBU.CH :: Tech3253 overview as my reference audio test disc and very useful to assessment my ears and my cheap/simple audio equipments. I also use it for calibrations during recordings.
Thanks for the link, looks like good test tracks.
post #133 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by average_joe View Post
Yea, I like to lump everything before our audio equipment into source recording quality, as I have no control over it. And I am not going to stop buying mainstream music, I just hope the quality is good.
Exactly. In other words, good source does matters. A good recording preserves good sound quality from the source. Some end user audio equipments are already good to reproduce the content of the media/source. even a simple/cheap audio DAC chipset can deliver full potential of digital audio.

Quote:
Thanks for the link, looks like good test tracks.
Yes, that CD is one of the reference CDs for professionals to tune/calibrate/test their equipments

Thank you to everyone for sharing knowledges and opinions.
post #134 of 142
Thread Starter 
I can't really provide the science in a short time frame. I'll work through some numbers and make some pretty graphs and illustrate my point when I get some free time. That'll be more appropriate for what people are seeking. In just conversation, I can only "describe," and everyone will translate the words in their own context. This makes understanding difficult. Trying to incorporate more descriptive words just complicates things more. You guys want raw numbers, so I'll work that out for you guys. I'll be better then me just going blah, blah, blah, lol.

"Work" for the NE-7M is EQing. That's the one thing that bugs me the most. I really can't listen to them and like them unless I do EQ, and without any, I pretty much can't stand listening to them. I'll listen to them for a little bit and then put them away because I just don't like the presentation. EQing just evens out the response and makes for a much more balanced and pleasant to listen to experience.

Yes neutral and natural to warm and velvety are two different things. I grew up liking the warm side. I have grown to prefer the neutral and natural side. However, I accept either and will happily listen to something that is slightly warm despite the hit on realism.
post #135 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by mvw2 View Post
I can't really provide the science in a short time frame. I'll work through some numbers and make some pretty graphs and illustrate my point when I get some free time. That'll be more appropriate for what people are seeking. In just conversation, I can only "describe," and everyone will translate the words in their own context. This makes understanding difficult. Trying to incorporate more descriptive words just complicates things more. You guys want raw numbers, so I'll work that out for you guys. I'll be better then me just going blah, blah, blah, lol.
Don't stress over it. Heated discussions are good. I learned a few things from this discussion too.

This is supposed to be fun and enjoyable.. no need to think of it as work or homework.

Quote:
Yes neutral and natural to warm and velvety are two different things. I grew up liking the warm side. I have grown to prefer the neutral and natural side. However, I accept either and will happily listen to something that is slightly warm despite the hit on realism.
After all it is individual taste. Its like Chicago vs New York Pizza... In the end we can all agree that we like pizza.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Mini Comparison - Vibe (1st gen), C700, PK2, RE0, NE-7M, PFE, ER4S, OK1, TF10, UM3X, SE530, IE8