Heir Audio 4.Ai - Appreciation/Impression/Review Thread - Page 82

Quote:

Originally Posted by elnero 

 

I do and I don't want to read that comparison, I'm interested in the differences and how the 8.A pulls ahead of the 4.Ai but it will also likely make me sad because I can't do customs so won't be able to hear it for myself.

The 8.A pulls ahead on soundstage. The 4.Ai is a small, intimate jazz club where the 8.A can do a full size stadium if you'd like. Rammstein's Völkerball sounds huge. The 8.A has a slightly more rounded flavor to it, without ever sounding rolled off or sacrificing details. When listening to Keith Jarrett's The Köln Concert the 4.Ai pinpoints exactly who in the audience is clearing his throat and that more than one person does it during the concert. The 8.A lets me know that somebody cleared their throats and if I listen for it, I can tell you where they're seated. All the detail is still there, but not served on a silver platter like the 4.Ai does. That album and stuff like Eric Clapton Unplugged is where I prefer the 4.Ai. The intimate feel and all the micro details done so well by the 4.Ai really makes those recordings come to life.

When it comes to bass, the 8.A is as good as it gets. They have no problems at all matching the depth and impact from bass monsters like the FS Atrio Mg7 and the ATH-Pro700 mk II while outshining them in both texture and control. But only if it's in the music. Some of the EDM stuff I enjoyed with the Atrios sounded a bit flatter on the 8.A than I was used to, so I thought the didn't go as deep as the Atrios. Then, when listening to the soundtrack for The Dark Knight, specifically the track "Why So Serious?" I found out that the 8.A goes deep - real deep. But unlike the Atrios, the 8.A does it only if it's in the music. The 4.Ai will are great at reproducing the sound of drums but don't hit you with the same visceral energy as the 8.A and they don't go as deep either. For those of you with the 3.Ai: Notice those huge bass drivers in the 3.Ai, twice the size of the mid- and treble units? Yeah those. The 8.A has two of those for each side.

Thanks for the comparison, it's interesting, from what you've said I think I would really like the 8.A but I'm not sure if I'd necessarily like it more than the 4.Ai.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sorensiim 

The 8.A pulls ahead on soundstage. The 4.Ai is a small, intimate jazz club where the 8.A can do a full size stadium if you'd like.

This is probably the area of the 4.Ai that I feel lacks the most. If it were able to give more breathing space to instruments with more depth to the soundstage they would be nearly perfect for me. In my case though I think the Dragonfly exaggerates this because it is rather forward itself. The soundstage on the 4.Ai definitely felt more spacious when I switched to the M-DAC but with the M-DAC transients got smoothed off a bit and it lost some of the immediacy it has with the Dragonfly. I'm hoping the CEntrance HiFi-M8 I have on order will be able to balance these all off at least to some degree.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sorensiim 

That album and stuff like Eric Clapton Unplugged is where I prefer the 4.Ai. The intimate feel and all the micro details done so well by the 4.Ai really makes those recordings come to life.

This is one of the things I really love about the 4.Ai's and would have a hard time giving up. If anything is going to supplant the 4.Ai for me it will have to match or come pretty darn close in this regard.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sorensiim 

The 4.Ai will are great at reproducing the sound of drums but don't hit you with the same visceral energy as the 8.A and they don't go as deep either.

While I find the 4.Ai very balanced top to bottom I wouldn't turn away a little something extra in the bottom, I don't think I'd want too much more though, just a dash, otherwise I think it would lose that very balanced overall feel. From what I've read I get the feeling the 8.A might be a bit more than I'd prefer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sly_in_the_sky 

Hello,

 

I also have the 4ai and i don't know if someone gave an impression of these beautiful IEM paired just with the Clip + alone...

 

To me,the combo 4Ai + Clip + is nicer than with an Hisoundaudio player because the Rocoo BA for example, is perhaps to much detailled and with the "extreme" details of the 4 Ai, to me, it's to much fatiguing in particular the treble region...  

 

I don't think that more treble means more detail. you can refer more clarity to more treble but not detail

for example, w4 lacks in upper mid quantity but it is extremely detail.

Might as well post it now, because someone's bound to sooner or later: http://rinchoi.blogspot.com/2012/10/heir-audio-4ai.html

Just for disclosure, in my own measurements (done with a completely different set of instruments), the notch was there, and I've referred to the notch in several of my posts already. It is indeed one of the flaws of the 4.A/Ai, but the notch isn't as deep as these graphs might suggest.

I find that EQ-ing the 3-4 kHz region up about 4 dB is enough to make things sound good. I also think people with some NIHL (noise-induced hearing loss) at the common 4 and 6 kHz will have some problems with this design.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomscy2000 

Might as well post it now, because someone's bound to sooner or later: http://rinchoi.blogspot.com/2012/10/heir-audio-4ai.html

 

Just for disclosure, in my own measurements (done with a completely different set of instruments), the notch was there, and I've referred to the notch in several of my posts already. It is indeed one of the flaws of the 4.A/Ai, but the notch isn't as deep as these graphs might suggest.

 

I find that EQ-ing the 3-4 kHz region up about 4 dB is enough to make things sound good. I also think people with some NIHL (noise-induced hearing loss) at the common 4 and 6 kHz will have some problems with this design.

Very interesting! Thank you for sharing...

Got my confirmation for the 4.Ai+! Wont be long now!

Quote:

Originally Posted by putente 

 

 

Very interesting! Thank you for sharing...

      Yes, very interesting as to what that particular equipment portrays the FR to be.   Sounds like we have 3 tests, with 3 different machines, and 3 different results. A perfect example of why Heir Audio does not release FR graphs. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by FullCircle 

 

      Yes, very interesting as to what that particular equipment portrays the FR to be.   Sounds like we have 3 tests, with 3 different machines, and 3 different results. A perfect example of why Heir Audio does not release FR graphs. 

True, but still, very interesting...

Quote:

Originally Posted by FullCircle 

To The Grobe:

 

 

Thanks for your thoughts as you really hammered out the design differences between the two.

Thanks Wizard, and thanks for making these great IEM's!

Honestly, it was joy to do so, and it is a joy to watch the lab crew develop and master the skill sets that are required to build these things!  We work hard, but we dress casual!

Wizard

Anybody know of some longer double-flanges that are compatible with 4.Ais? I like the stock ones, but they are a little short. Maybe even a pair of triple flanges, but I don't know if those even exist at this size?

Also, as a side note. The included double flanges are rather loose and always get stuck in my ears when I try and pull the 4.Ai out haha.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sly_in_the_sky 

Hello,

 

I also have the 4ai and i don't know if someone gave an impression of these beautiful IEM paired just with the Clip + alone...

 

To me,the combo 4Ai + Clip + is nicer than with an Hisoundaudio player because the Rocoo BA for example, is perhaps to much detailled and with the "extreme" details of the 4 Ai, to me, it's to much fatiguing in particular the treble region...  

 

And also, the Clip + give a "warmer" sound than the Rocoo, less analitical, the bass is perhaps more present with the Clip +.

 

Does someone had the same feeling?

I have a couple thoughts here, as it refers to using these with the Clip Zip . (I have no experience with the Rocoo).

The 4.Ai sounds good directly from the headphone out on either player, and sounds slightly better with the Clip. The Clip is clearer, has a more even top end and slightly punchier bass....BUT... in my opinion, the 4.Ai's sound better going through an amp, it seems to open the sound up a bit. The 4.Ai's have the ability to easily pull out as much detail as you put into them and I feel they do respond very well to using an amp. I also like to have the bass boost switch on my E11 available for those tracks where the 4.Ai could use a little help "fattening up" the lower frequencies. Between the two players, I find the iPod line out to have a bit more muddled sound and less detail available in the treble. I prefer the clip as a source. It is cleaner and is more even across the frequency range.

To sum it up, the 4.Ai definitely sounds best to me with an amp - and the clip as a source -  for critical listening, where the 4.Ai shines.

Now on the 3.Ai, the difference is less noticeable. It is more fun and carefree. You can plug it right into the headphone out of either player and really enjoy it. It also sounds better to me running through an amp - but the margin of difference is smaller than that of the 4.Ai. I also find my preference leaning to the clip as a source. Then again, the highs on the 3.Ai are somewhat edgier so if someone who finds that offensive, the iPod works really well here. It takes the edge off  the treble a bit but at the cost of some detail in the mids. But again the difference is not as noticeable as the 4.Ai. Please don't read this as the 3.Ai lacking somehow, it is just a different beast and works really well if you want to just throw a Clip in your pocket and go walk the dog.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomscy2000 

Might as well post it now, because someone's bound to sooner or later: http://rinchoi.blogspot.com/2012/10/heir-audio-4ai.html

 

Just for disclosure, in my own measurements (done with a completely different set of instruments), the notch was there, and I've referred to the notch in several of my posts already. It is indeed one of the flaws of the 4.A/Ai, but the notch isn't as deep as these graphs might suggest.

 

I find that EQ-ing the 3-4 kHz region up about 4 dB is enough to make things sound good. I also think people with some NIHL (noise-induced hearing loss) at the common 4 and 6 kHz will have some problems with this design.

Interesting....When I wrote my review I said this:

"Occasionally on a very “busy” recording I notice something going on in the upper mids – like it is kind of like something is falling back in the mix, an instrument here or there…It’s hard to put my finger on. What I think might be  going on is I have been listening to IEM’s that are lacking in other areas (lows/highs).  Something in the midrange used to seem more up front and now it’s evenly presented so I guess I am still adjusting."

I wonder if this is what I have been noticing. I will try bumping up the EQ a bit there and see what happens. Thanks.

Still a great sounding headphone - a graph isn't going to change that.

Also kind of an fun fact.....my 4.Ai is #0092 and my 3.Ai is#0094. Almost a matched set!

Quote:

Originally Posted by thegrobe   Interesting....When I wrote my review I said this: "Occasionally on a very “busy” recording I notice something going on in the upper mids – like it is kind of like something is falling back in the mix, an instrument here or there…It’s hard to put my finger on. What I think might be  going on is I have been listening to IEM’s that are lacking in other areas (lows/highs).  Something in the midrange used to seem more up front and now it’s evenly presented so I guess I am still adjusting." I wonder if this is what I have been noticing. I will try bumping up the EQ a bit there and see what happens. Thanks.

It could be. I found that the key benefit was a better centered, taller vocal, as there are quite a few vocal harmonics in this area. The overall soundstage felt more accurate to me at this stage. Interestingly, it started to sound interestingly similar (though not exact) to the TO GO 334 when I A/Bed the two (the EQ'ed 4.A and the unaltered 334). Again, the EQing was something I did by ear, and not especially precise. I also knocked down the 5.5-6.3 kHz range by about -1.5 dB.

Currently, I don't have my 4.A, as it's getting a tune-up with the good folks at Heir Audio, but once I get it back in a few weeks, I'll be refining the EQ process with pure tone comparison tests at every EQ slider I have at my disposal, as well as frequency sweeps. I'll also be doing tone tests for various orchestral instruments at their fundamental notes to make sure they sound even to my ears, as well as some of their harmonics. I'll be testing mostly with violin notes, since I know the instrument well.

While I know that udauda takes many measures to ensure his measurements meet international standards for testing, conform with established academic studies, and match well with other reputed measurement guys like Tyll, Sonove, and GoldenEars, there are also other concerns I have. The other thing I found confusing about the measurements is the big drop-off after 10 kHz. While the 4.A isn't the king of airiness, I never had a problem hearing things above 12k with my 4.A. It certainly sounds airier than the 334, and while that earphone doesn't have anyone calling it a blonde bimbo either, from 10-16k it has more presence than an ER4P. My own measurements don't go that high (frequencies >8 khz are really hard to measure accurately, anyways), so I can't really go by any personal data. I also had to borrow equipment to make my measurements (it was intended as a one-time thing for my personal learning), so I won't be making any more measurements.

Quote:

Originally Posted by thegrobe 

Interesting....When I wrote my review I said this:

 

"Occasionally on a very “busy” recording I notice something going on in the upper mids – like it is kind of like something is falling back in the mix, an instrument here or there…It’s hard to put my finger on. What I think might be  going on is I have been listening to IEM’s that are lacking in other areas (lows/highs).  Something in the midrange used to seem more up front and now it’s evenly presented so I guess I am still adjusting."

 

I wonder if this is what I have been noticing. I will try bumping up the EQ a bit there and see what happens. Thanks.

 

Still a great sounding headphone - a graph isn't going to change that.

 

Also kind of an fun fact.....my 4.Ai is #0092 and my 3.Ai is#0094. Almost a matched set!

Haha I stole your matching 4.Ai. Mine are #0094