Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › VSONIC GR07 Impressions & Impressions Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

VSONIC GR07 Impressions & Impressions Thread - Page 305

post #4561 of 6375
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigon_ridge View Post

"what the ER4 produces may be truer to the recording, but the sound from the GR07 is truer to what you would hear in everyday life."

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you implying that it's the recording that is not containing "what you would hear in everyday life"? If that's the case, it's not the ER4S's fault, it's the recording; and any realism that you would sense from the GR07 would then be a distortion that brings that sense of realism to a recording didn't originally have.

 

"Note weight" is a tricky thing for IEMs. With loudspeakers, weight is generally not an issue even with flat response. With IEMs, a flat response may detract from some of that realism, but a boosted bass response can get in way of higher frequencies.

 

Again, I don't hear any less decay and reverb from my Etys than I do from my EQ'd GR07. That tells me that the reverb you're referring to may actually be more of a function of more intense bass response than actual decay.


Part of our perception of bass from loudspeakers comes from bone conduction. The low frequency notes move air that physically impacts out body, and it is entirely audible. Tap your finger against your head behind your ear, it's actually quite loud. Headphones, and IEMs in particular, do not have the same effect, so some small degree of bass boost can make them sound more natural. The ER4s are almost ruler flat, which explains why they might not sound as "natural" to some people. They do, however, accurately reproduce the volume of the frequency on the recording, just not the visceral impact of moving air.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by eke2k6 View Post

 

It's amazing how differently we can perceive things.

 

All the same, they are two different iems, suited for two different purposes. Let's leave it at that....for now biggrin.gif

 

_53681428_d05_robson_v2.gif


The ER4 are designed as reference-grade headphones. They're designed to replicate the source with all of its detail. In that, they succeed. The GR07 is tuned as a stage monitor; they are boosted slightly in bass and in the "presence region" of the treble to maintain definition and body in the noisy environment of a live show. In that environment, however, they sound closer to the ER4, to neutral.

post #4562 of 6375
Quote:
Originally Posted by gnarlsagan View Post


How close would you say the tip of the ER4S is to your eardrum? 6mm? 10mm? Just throwing out a guess but maybe try an even deeper fit with foams.
Either that or the definitions we use are completely different, which happens.

Well, it's the closest than any other iem - I won't comment on depth - if I get a deeper fit I should find a way to stick the cable in my ear cannal as it's right at the entrance now LOL


Edited by kova4a - 12/6/12 at 3:09pm
post #4563 of 6375
Quote:
Originally Posted by kova4a View Post

Well, sorry, LOL - I have to admit I'm slightly drunk but the maturity level should be anout the same. So I'm not patronizing anyone, both iems are great and everyone has personal preference - my point is that the er4s is not nearly the upgrade to the gr07 you're trying to make it as they are very very different. I do advice everyone to get bought and keep them though

Never did I say that the ER4S is an upgrade to anything. For me, it's a clear upgrade. Clearly, I was not trying to speak for everybody else; as I know many here have heard the ER4 and would disagree due to personal preference. I was merely giving personal impression of the differences that I perceive from these headphones. You read too much into my comparisons.

post #4564 of 6375
Quote:
Originally Posted by kova4a View Post

Yeah, all recordings are bad and cold. Are you kidding me. The er4s can't make a warm recording sound warm to save its life. Yeah, there might be some colder recordings made for boosting the clarity but you just can't say honestly that all recordings are cold as the er4s portrays them properly. ALso a flat response has nothing to do with note presenataion. There are extremely flat iems that have a thick note peresenation  and vice versa. It's pretty insane if you can't hear the difference in decay times between the two as it is pretty obvious - not to start an argument but my 98-year-old grandmother would hear  LOLthat


It's far more likely that you're perceiving neutral as cold, and warm as neutral. And actually, yes, many recordings are in fact very cold. They are boosted in the upper midrange/lower treble to bring out the vocals and to artificially add definition to the music. That makes them colder than neutral, and the ER4 reproduces that. 

What "extremely flat" IEMs have a thick note presentation? 

The ER4 has a quicker decay, absolutely. However, it is not too fast. Explain this to me: The decay of a note is present in the recording, and in the electrical signal being sent to the headphones. If the ER4 is receiving the signal to play the note decay, then how is it, according to you, not playing out the full decay? The ER4 are capable of bringing out even the tiniest of microdetails in a track, so how are they not capable of playing out the full decay? It's a physical impossibility. The more likely explanation is that the GR07 is still ringing after the signal for the decay has ceased, making the GR07 have more drawn-out decay times. That is not more accurate. 

post #4565 of 6375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alondite View Post

 

The ER4 are designed as reference-grade headphones. They're designed to replicate the source with all of its detail. In that, they succeed. The GR07 is tuned as a stage monitor; they are boosted slightly in bass and in the "presence region" of the treble to maintain definition and body in the noisy environment of a live show. In that environment, however, they sound closer to the ER4, to neutral.

 

The ER4 might be able to dig up every single detail in a recording, but the note presentation is highly uni-dimensional. 

 

My immunology professor once used an analogy to describe opsonization by complement proteins, where a foreign object in the body would be coated by a protein to make it much easier for the host defenses to neutralize it.

 

She would say "Cake is good, but buttercream icing is better." 

 

You could call it cheating, and say that the antibodies are not staying true to the fight. Or you could say that the body is actually quite smart, and took the best approach for getting the best results.

 

That's how I view the natural vs analytical argument.

 

Sorry if my analogy didn't make sense.

post #4566 of 6375
Quote:
Originally Posted by eke2k6 View Post

 

The ER4 might be able to dig up every single detail in a recording, but the note presentation is highly uni-dimensional. 

 

My immunology professor once used an analogy to describe opsonization by complement proteins, where a foreign object in the body would be coated by a protein to make it much easier for the host defenses to neutralize it.

 

She would say "Cake is good, but buttercream icing is better." 

 

You could call it cheating, and say that the antibodies are not staying true to the fight. Or you could say that the body is actually quite smart, and took the best approach for getting the best results.

 

That's how I view the natural vs analytical argument.

 

Sorry if my analogy didn't make sense.


I understand how antibodies work, and there is no logical parallel between antibodies and analytical vs. natural; antibodies are a natural defense. A more accurate argument would be using drugs to assist the body in immune response compared to letting the body use only its natural defense. But that still places the blame on the recording/pathogen. 

post #4567 of 6375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alondite View Post


It's far more likely that you're perceiving neutral as cold, and warm as neutral. And actually, yes, many recordings are in fact very cold. They are boosted in the upper midrange/lower treble to bring out the vocals and to artificially add definition to the music. That makes them colder than neutral, and the ER4 reproduces that. 

What "extremely flat" IEMs have a thick note presentation? 

The ER4 has a quicker decay, absolutely. However, it is not too fast. Explain this to me: The decay of a note is present in the recording, and in the electrical signal being sent to the headphones. If the ER4 is receiving the signal to play the note decay, then how is it, according to you, not playing out the full decay? The ER4 are capable of bringing out even the tiniest of microdetails in a track, so how are they not capable of playing out the full decay? It's a physical impossibility. The more likely explanation is that the GR07 is still ringing after the signal for the decay has ceased, making the GR07 have more drawn-out decay times. That is not more accurate. 

Well, for me you're still looking at things at the wrong angle. You think that the decay time or a cold signature is all beacuase of how the rocording was made - that's not true at all. You just get a hold of a Heir Audio 4Ai and tell me that an analytical iem can't have a thicker note presentation. I'm still not trying to argue - the er4s is phenomenal but is still not that universal iem that handles all genres and sounds the best

post #4568 of 6375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alondite View Post

What "extremely flat" IEMs have a thick note presentation?

The SM3 is definitely one. Very very thick and enveloping. It's a decay monster and has a nearly flat response. It's very unnatural sounding to me. GR07 has much shorter decay in comparison, which was a big relief when I first heard them.


Edited by tigon_ridge - 12/6/12 at 3:30pm
post #4569 of 6375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alondite View Post


I understand how antibodies work, and there is no logical parallel between antibodies and analytical vs. natural; antibodies are a natural defense. A more accurate argument would be using drugs to assist the body in immune response compared to letting the body use only its natural defense. But that still places the blame on the recording/pathogen. 

 

Awesome! So I can further explain then.

 

What I can say is that the phagocytes would have to chase down the xenogenous object, put out the pseudopodia, then engulf it. This is how I view the analytical iems trying to "stay true to the recording."

 

Whereas, natural sound signatures achieve what is more in line with nature, and how we hear things.

 

 

I'd also like to add that the RE272 is also considered to be analytical due to it's ability to unearth everything that is hidden in a recording. Yet, it's still able to sound more natural than the Etys due to better note weight.

post #4570 of 6375
Quote:
Originally Posted by kova4a View Post

Well, for me you're still looking at things at the wrong angle. You think that the decay time or a cold signature is all beacuase of how the rocording was made - that's not true at all. You just get a hold of a Heir Audio 4Ai and tell me that an analytical iem can't have a thicker note presentation. I'm still not trying to argue - the er4s is phenomenal but is still not that universal iem that handles all genres and sounds the best


As I understand it, that comes from low-order harmonic distortion, which makes it technically less accurate, less analytical. 

post #4571 of 6375
Quote:
Originally Posted by eke2k6 View Post

 

Awesome! So I can further explain then.

 

What I can say is that the phagocytes would have to chase down the xenogenous object, put out the pseudopodia, then engulf it. This is how I view the analytical iems trying to "stay true to the recording."

 

Whereas, natural sound signatures achieve what is more in line with nature, and how we hear things.

 

 

I'd also like to add that the RE272 is also considered to be analytical due to it's ability to unearth everything that is hidden in a recording. Yet, it's still able to sound more natural than the Etys due to better note weight.


That makes much more sense. However, logically, it still places the blame on the recording, haha. Look at it this way:

The antibodies are a "crutch" for the body to aid in immune response because the phagocytes are less effective at specific response. That is, the antibodies help the body more easily achieve a natural homeostatic state, which was disrupted by the pathogen. 

Now let my turn that over to audio terms.

The recording is the pathogen here. A bad recording, specifically. A bad recording makes the music sound unnatural, it "disrupts homeostasis." A colored headphone can color the sound in a way that makes the unnatural recording sound more natural. The analytical IEMs are less effective in that regard, similar to how the phagocytes are less effective at specific immune response. 

It's still not a direct parallel, but it's closer.

post #4572 of 6375
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigon_ridge View Post

The SM3 is definitely one. Very very thick and enveloping. It's a decay monster and has a nearly flat response. It's very unnatural sounding to me. GR07 has much shorter decay in comparison, which was a big relief when I first heard them.


Decay isn't determined frequency response, though. Extension and extreme peaks/valleys might play a part, I'm not entirely sure.

post #4573 of 6375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alondite View Post


Decay isn't determined frequency response, though.

Right. You asked what headphones has flat response and heavy decay, and the SM3 is one with both qualities.

post #4574 of 6375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alondite View Post


That makes much more sense. However, logically, it still places the blame on the recording, haha. Look at it this way:

The antibodies are a "crutch" for the body to aid in immune response because the phagocytes are less effective at specific response. That is, the antibodies help the body more easily achieve a natural homeostatic state, which was disrupted by the pathogen. 

Now let my turn that over to audio terms.

The recording is the pathogen here. A bad recording, specifically. A bad recording makes the music sound unnatural, it "disrupts homeostasis." A colored headphone can color the sound in a way that makes the unnatural recording sound more natural. The analytical IEMs are less effective in that regard, similar to how the phagocytes are less effective at specific immune response. 

It's still not a direct parallel, but it's closer.

 

Yes, but would you call it a "crutch" or an enhancement? 

 

 

It doesn't necessarily take a bad recording for a track to sound unnatural on a set of headphones. What I got from your last paragraph is that the audio engineer would have to significantly boost certain frequencies on the recording for them to begin to sound natural on the ER4.

 

Let me summarize my argument so I can focus on not failing my last final tomorrow morning.

 

A flat FR is desirable, yes. What I'm saying is that the Etymotic driver technology cannot cope with the demands of a natural recording. It has no visceral feel to the sound. It's simply a uni-dimensional representation of the notes in a recording. It's missing out on the ambiance that is usually compensated for by other factors. 

 

Case in point:

 

900x900px-LL-1e07f497_l10103741_MikeTweak_x1080.jpeg

 

 

This iem has the second most skewed FR response I've heard, yet it somehow manages to produce certain instruments  in a manner so realistic and tangible, that other iems can never even dream to touch its performance.

 

How?

 

In the words of this wise sage,

 

oreillycantexplain1.jpg

post #4575 of 6375
Quote:
Originally Posted by eke2k6 View Post

 

Yes, but would you call it a "crutch" or an enhancement? 

 

 

It doesn't necessarily take a bad recording for a track to sound unnatural on a set of headphones. What I got from your last paragraph is that the audio engineer would have to significantly boost certain frequencies on the recording for them to begin to sound natural on the ER4.

 

Let me summarize my argument so I can focus on not failing my last final tomorrow morning.

 

A flat FR is desirable, yes. What I'm saying is that the Etymotic driver technology cannot cope with the demands of a natural recording. It has no visceral feel to the sound. It's simply a uni-dimensional representation of the notes in a recording. It's missing out on the ambiance that is usually compensated for by other factors. 

 

Case in point:

 

900x900px-LL-1e07f497_l10103741_MikeTweak_x1080.jpeg

 

 

This iem has the second most skewed FR response I've heard, yet it somehow manages to produce certain instruments  in a manner so realistic and tangible, that other iems can never even dream to touch its performance.

 

How?

 

In the words of this wise sage,

 

oreillycantexplain1.jpg


"Engaging" is not the same as "natural." And that's your subjective view of colored sound. My subjective view of sound that is intentionally colored for "enhancement" is one of "no, that's wrong, it's not supposed to sound like that," and I can't enjoy it.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › VSONIC GR07 Impressions & Impressions Thread