Why not a Dual BA from Etymotic? - Page 6

The end result is what matters, and obviously Ety gives an accurate representation of the music. Otherwise, people wouldn't be buying them. They certainly aren't buying them for their warm or colored sound. So adding drivers just for the sake of adding drivers and jacking the price up would be pointless.

 

That being said, there seems to be something that is accomplished by adding additional drivers (JH13), but the price is so much higher that it is really another option in a different price range. So, its nice to have options, but Ety is accomplishing what they need to with that single driver, so more power to them.

Can anyone give a brief rundown of the differences between the P, S, and B series? I read the blurb on the etymotic site but it isn't very specific.

Some observations:
The P series is boosted a lot in the highs and lows. Is this a large difference from the S series? How does it affect the sound signature?

The S series is designed to compensate for high frequency emphasis in all CD recordings. Do rips of CD's retain this high frequency emphasis? I though CD's stopped using emphasis years ago.

What's up with the B series? How does it differ in frequency response from the other two?

I hope these questions are relevant enough for this thread. I believe they are.
Edited by gnarlsagan - 8/8/12 at 7:14pm

B is the original ER4. At the time, we didn't have any other variants and ER4B was 'ER4'. The original ER4(B) is designed not for modern music with stereo recording (remember, that was 20+ years ago), but for binaural recording which was considered better for headphone listening (still is, actually). The 'pod' on the cable has a small circuit of resistors and capacitors to tune the sound.

S is the 2nd irritation of ER4, where the capacitor in the pod was removed to retune the sound. This is due to the popular demand where people find ER4(B) being a bit too bright for stereo recording (binaural recording tends to sound slightly darker, so the B is tuned to compensate it). So ER4 was made into two versions, B for Binaural recording and S for Stereo recording. Since both still have the same inline resistors, they have the same high impedance.

P comes much later to the game, in the age of CD player and iPod. Since these sources often can't drive the 100+ ohm ER4B and ER4S with loud enough volume, Etymotic decide to lower the resistors value (to 27ohm), but doing so compromised the overall accuracy because the FR curve has deviated much more from the 'ideal curve' than ER4B and ER4S.
Edited by ClieOS - 8/8/12 at 7:50pm

 

Awesome thanks! 

 

Just a quick couple of questions for you or anyone else: 

 

Does this mean that the ER4S is the most accurate for CD rips as well as emphasized CD's? I thought that emphasized CD's were de-emphasized in hardware. I'm concerned that this iem is compensating for something that doesn't pose a problem for digital copies.

 

The ER4P's FR curve deviates from the 'ideal curve' in what way? Too much/too little of what frequency? 

Edited by Anaxilus - 8/8/12 at 10:24pm

 

Actually I think that is all relevant to why or why not dual BA, etc.

______________

 

The fact that Ety rates their own ER4s as anywhere from 85-92% accurate means there is room for improvement even in just FR accepting the target curve.  Whether multi BA's offer that is up for debate.  

Edited by Anaxilus - 8/8/12 at 9:43pm

Nice post ClieOS

That we have to look into the history of portable music - In 1991, when Etymotic just invented the ER4, the world has began to switch from cassette to CD player. Walkman and cassette player had dominated the whole 80's but getting phased out by CD from early to mid 90's. I would think Etymotic had chosen CD playback for R&D purpose but they probably also look into other format as well. Also, Portable CD player was very expensive and rare at the time, so I would think Etymotic's standard is more for home gear rather than portable gear. That's why the high impedance of ER4B/S was not an issue back then. The standard they used were developed in the 70's by Consumer Union. Though in a way Etymotic has shaped that standard to become somewhat of an industrial standard, I think the real question is, how much of that standard still hold true (or close to 100%) with the current gears? Do Etymotic continue to monitor those standard to align / update to current gears as well? I really don't know, but that will be an interest topic if Etymotic ever choose to re-evaluate those standard they have used for so many years with an up-to-date setup.

As for what make ER4P's FR less ideal, I think Etymotic says it is because ER4P has '10~12dB higher sound output and slightly more bass...'

Im curious at how ety would do a dual... Maybe they can get up to that 95% accuracy mark or more..

 

Not with a TWFK they wouldn't. None of the TWFK-based IEMs for which FR curves are available would do very well on Ety's accuracy score. Again, to be clear, that's not to say they're worse (or better), which is a matter of taste;  just that that driver would not accomplish anything toward more closely approximating Ety's design target.
 

Edited by supersleuth - 8/9/12 at 7:59am

I would have thought the opposite would be the case, more drivers/crossovers to get in the signals path and adjust for. I think this is the common misconception on this forum, more is better where as I find less to be more! I am reminded of some ancient Rehdeko speakers I once owned, single driver and not every ones cup of tea but boy were they engaging! I actually find the Finals and Ety's similar to that experience.

Good point. Etys definitely have an engaging (read:addicting) quality to them.

Nice thread, I learned about some valuable info here.

I do own an Ety hf5 and for comparison I own the EX1000 (I bought it last year as some praised it as the best universal)

Upon comparing and listening, the Ety is more detailed (and probably more accurate) than the EX1000, but it lacks the impact of the EX1000's sub bass and the soundstage of the EX1000. Yes, I'm comparing a $100 IEM with a $400 IEM. I'd imagine the ER4S to sound marginally better (I also use the hf5 with a 100ohm resistance adapter).

Even if the Ety is flatter, there are other aspects and I believe that the percentage accuracy is just pure marketing IMO. There are just too many factors involved (some immeasurable) to deem something accurate.

I have not heard and multi-driver IEMs, but the Ety and EX1000 can do 30hz test files just fine.

 

Yeah, I can listen to my ER4 for hours with no discomfort, and my ear canal are smaller than average, based on the size of tips I get with the $15 earphones I try out every now and then (like my fave, the Phillips SHE3580).  Anyway, I have found that the larger gray 3 flange Ety tips work perfectly to make a fantastic, comfortable isolating seal -- the ear wax does soften it up some even after cleaning them regularly.

 

I can't seem to listen to my dynamic driver earphones quite as long, and usually keep turning the bass down a bit if I want to listen longer that 20-30 minutes.

 

I imagine a million dollars in my pocket, but something tells me that I'll be disappointed when I reach for it.