Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Why not a Dual BA from Etymotic?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why not a Dual BA from Etymotic? - Page 9

post #121 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post

I know. However, 47 subject is not enough.

That might be true, but 99% of the IEM manufacturers do zero (0) research.
post #122 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post

 

Well, that's simply because a custom is supposed to be tuned for each individual shell/bore shape and design.  That's a huge advantage

 

Not sure about that. The people at the home-made-iem thread told me that there's no such a thing as individual tuning. For example, BA placement in relation to the shell/bore does not matter. That is to say, no matter how the BA drivers are placed, it still sounds the same. 

post #123 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulogin View Post

 

Not sure about that. The people at the home-made-iem thread told me that there's no such a thing as individual tuning. For example, BA placement in relation to the shell/bore does not matter. That is to say, no matter how the BA drivers are placed, it still sounds the same. 

 

No way.  Distance affects volume and acoustic impedance and even the appropriate shape/angle of the bore to the driver.  UM altered the position of there dynamic in the Merlin based on feedback of the prototype and JHA uses the DSP in the 3A to compensate for just this very thing among others like the crossover network.  They are personally tuned.  People have even had their ear canal tips shortened to improve clarity and noticed the effect with the 'musician's fit'.  Not all customs do or will but they should.  I'm pretty sure Gregorz at Spiral Ear pays particular attention to this as well.  AJ can correct me on any of this.

post #124 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post

No way.  Distance affects volume and acoustic impedance and even the appropriate shape/angle of the bore to the driver.  UM altered the position of there dynamic in the Merlin based on feedback of the prototype and JHA uses the DSP in the 3A to compensate for just this very thing among others like the crossover network.  They are personally tuned.  People have even had their ear canal tips shortened to improve clarity and noticed the effect with the 'musician's fit'.  Not all customs do or will but they should.  I'm pretty sure Gregorz at Spiral Ear pays particular attention to this as well.  AJ can correct me on any of this.

See this:
http://www.head-fi.org/t/430688/home-made-iems/1380#post_8499875
post #125 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulogin View Post

 

 

The shape of the tubes and the endings are almost the same in every ear canals.
 
Wrong.  I like the 'almost' part too.  Relative to what is it 'almost'?
 
The most personal part is the ear part. The tube endings are always parallel to the ear canal.  
 
Which depends on each ear and mold.
 
I can't see how a "fine tuning"can improve the final result!
 
He should tell Gregorz, Jerry Harvey and Unique Melody to stop wasting their time then since he's the industry expert.
 
During my tests, I have rotated the drivers and the sound was always the same.
 
What does that even mean and why would you rotate the drivers?
 
The important it's to get the lowest tube lengths (mainly for the mids/highs)
 
Which means they would have to placed based the shape and size of each custom mold and individual ear.  That means different, not the same.
post #126 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulogin View Post

Not sure about that. The people at the home-made-iem thread told me that there's no such a thing as individual tuning. For example, BA placement in relation to the shell/bore does not matter. That is to say, no matter how the BA drivers are placed, it still sounds the same. 

Of course it does. It is referred as 'phase' issue and can be measured with the right tool. I have read journal published research paper on this topic. It isn't something you can tell easily in a DIY project simply by listening, but it is there no less. In fact, I think UE has a patent on this.
post #127 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post


The shape of the tubes and the endings are almost the same in every ear canals.


 


Wrong.  I like the 'almost' part too.  Relative to what is it 'almost'?


 


The most personal part is the ear part. The tube endings are always parallel to the ear canal.  


 


Which depends on each ear and mold.


 


I can't see how a "fine tuning"can improve the final result!


 


He should tell Gregorz, Jerry Harvey and Unique Melody to stop wasting their time then since he's the industry expert.


 


During my tests, I have rotated the drivers and the sound was always the same.


 


What does that even mean and why would you rotate the drivers?


 


The important it's to get the lowest tube lengths (mainly for the mids/highs)


 


Which means they would have to placed based the shape and size of each custom mold and individual ear.  That means different, not the same.


I am sure you have a point.

But would you say that this 20-driver IEM (which is a creation of Wizard of Heir Audio, BTW) would sound differently if the 20 drivers are not lined up like this?
http://www.head-fi.org/t/568365/some-pictures-of-my-woodies-by-the-wizard-aka-the-grand-master/135
Edited by ulogin - 8/11/12 at 10:07pm
post #128 of 143

You want me to comment on a 20-driver IEM?  I think not.  Is Jude's April Fools joke still running?

post #129 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulogin View Post

 

Not sure about that. The people at the home-made-iem thread told me that there's no such a thing as individual tuning. For example, BA placement in relation to the shell/bore does not matter. That is to say, no matter how the BA drivers are placed, it still sounds the same. 

It does. Watch out for phase matching and resonance, they can even change the iem's tonality if the builder doesn't get them right. I don't know who told you these things but they are utterly wrong.

post #130 of 143

deleted. sorry.

post #131 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post

You want me to comment on a 20-driver IEM?  I think not.  Is Jude's April Fools joke still running?

Well, Heir Audio is a sponsor so I doubt that it's founder is a fool.

I was just asking a legitimate question: would the sound differ, if one of the 20 drivers is placed differently than this:
http://www.head-fi.org/t/568365/some-pictures-of-my-woodies-by-the-wizard-aka-the-grand-master/135
post #132 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulogin View Post

Well, Heir Audio is a sponsor so I doubt that it's founder is a fool.
I was just asking a legitimate question: would the sound differ, if one of the 20 drivers is placed differently than this:
http://www.head-fi.org/t/568365/some-pictures-of-my-woodies-by-the-wizard-aka-the-grand-master/135

Why ask us since you are questioning the reasons we give you? Just ask Heir Audio if they would randomly place those BA drivers inside their IEM and can still achieve the same sound every time. Obviously the maker of the IEM would have known all about it. wink.gif
post #133 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulogin View Post

Do you read these threads?  He was a member here long before a sponsor.  He made this in response to the April Fool's joke.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by FullCircle View Post

Not really, I did this project more out of a "challenge" more than anything.  You may remember a certain IEM/CIEM company announced they were going to market a 20 driver CIEM.  The announcement caused a big stir, and a lot of folks said it could not be done. It was latter disclosed that the $7,000, 20 driver was a joke. So I decided to show that it could be done, not so much that it should be done.

 
post #134 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulogin View Post

That might be true, but 99% of the IEM manufacturers do zero (0) research.

 

Your statement doesn't somehow vindicate the absence of proper academic rigor in the study. The study was not done with IEMs in mind. It is scientific research. We weren't talking about whether IEM manufacturers do research or not. It wasn't about putting down Etymotic (because it was not). You also have no evidence in stating that IEM manufacturers don't do research. Just because they don't publish in a journal doesn't mean they don't do research. Also, Hammershoi/Moller weren't funded by Etymotic. You're somehow linking the study to Etymotic, and that's just not true.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ulogin View Post

Not sure about that. The people at the home-made-iem thread told me that there's no such a thing as individual tuning. For example, BA placement in relation to the shell/bore does not matter. That is to say, no matter how the BA drivers are placed, it still sounds the same. 

 

It does matter, but the differences are minor. There are very small timing differences between a driver placed at the very front of the shell and one placed at the very back. We may not be able to easily hear it, but there are differences, and correcting for those differences is an imperfect approximation. Phase differences will then occur, and when there is definite λ/2 resonance off phase with everything else, things will sound off, especially with respect to high frequencies.

 

There are subtle differences with respect to peak energy because of the attenuation of sound energy absorbed by the sound tubes. Distance of dampers placed also affect peak energy and attenuation. That's why high frequency drivers need to be placed close to the opening, so that there's less dampened energy.

 

Sound tubes that go from large to small diameter or small to large also affect sound with respect to high frequencies, because of the horn effect.

 

I've been doing some unpaid consulting for a new customs company and have been involved with their designs, and these are things that I've learned in the past few months.

 

These days, especially with people experimenting with titanium sound tubes and CF tubes, they can do even more with tube length/diameter, and can even implement Helmholtz resonators for sound equalization.

 

Dr. Moulton designed that 20-driver CIEM using dual internal platforms, effectively shaping a separate sound chamber for the mids/highs, and another for the lows, making it more of a dynamic design. It was not designed as a traditional CIEM.

post #135 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post

 

Your statement doesn't somehow vindicate the absence of proper academic rigor in the study.

 

If the study lacks scientific rigor because it used only 47 participants, then how many participants are enough? 470? 4,700? I would say that even a sample of 470,000 Americans would not be enough if the purpose is descriptive, because it does not represent Canadians, Mexicans, Brazilians, etc. etc. But, if the purpose is experimental, 47 participants are very good enough (provided other things are properly done).

 

 

It does matter, but the differences are minor. There are very small timing differences between a driver placed at the very front of the shell and one placed at the very back. We may not be able to easily hear it

 

+ Rep. This response is more educational, because it explains rather than simply throwing out jargon.

 

Still have a question though (sorry for the digression): If driver placement makes inaudible or at most minor difference (provided the configuration is not too off), what is the advantage of custom, then? I read you writing on Spyro's page that custom is better because "the extension on both ends is also much easier to feel/identify". How so?

 

Dr. Moulton designed that 20-driver CIEM using dual internal platforms, effectively shaping a separate sound chamber for the mids/highs, and another for the lows, making it more of a dynamic design. It was not designed as a traditional CIEM.

 

Got it. Not April fool.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Why not a Dual BA from Etymotic?