Heir Audio 4.Ai - Appreciation/Impression/Review Thread - Page 98

 

Either way, that article has already been refuted. 

Edited by Inks - 11/8/12 at 10:21pm

This is getting ridiculous

 

Heir originally stated as a response that they don't care to release graphs. I can see why.

 

Then a couple members here keep poking the beehive with a stick. So Heir finally does share something which states that they base their design around what sounds good rather than what looks good on paper. 

 

Not good enough? I guess so....we are still listening to a pi****ng contest. Okay the detractors have shared the facts now get over it and move on. 

 

So there is a dip at 4k. I noted something as such in my review but it in no way detracts from my listening experience. I have tried bumping up the EQ there and there is a very slight noticeable difference if you do so. But there are ALSO noticeable differences if you bump up or down anywhere on the spectrum. 

 

So the headphone still sounds fantastic and it's the best one I've ever had the pleasure of owning. That has to matter, right? It matters to me. There are many others who feel the same way. I don't think heir is trying to mislead and rip people off. They designed a great sounding and nicely crafted headphone...

 

On another note... the comment that  "the 3AI was outright awful"  Really? I am having a great time with it. There are many genres where I feel it works better than the 4.Ai. Udadas hatchet job points out the dip is in there too but it's supposed to be in there it's V shaped. It works real well for it's intended purpose. I  would like to post more comments on the 3.Ai and 4.Ai but I am afraid they will just get buried in the mud slinging. 

 

God if I knew everything about making a perfect headphone I wouldn't be sitting around here posting away. Go build it. Sell it. Everybody will buy one. 

agreed...there's a different between criticism and just plain out rudeness. If you dislike the IEM, fine, I have respect for that. If you dont respect the company, fine I can accept that. But this is just simply attacking someone now. If you dont like it fine dont recommend it to people, but really we're not even enjoying music here anymore. And its a sad moment when people cant even talk about enjoying music anymore.

 

we're really not looking for trouble here...so lets not have that...

Oh! Yes! Music? Is that what we are here for? Well here's a good story about a positive forum related experience - A few pages or a dozen or more back Sorensiim made a suggestion about "Fink" as a band to check out as 4.Ai fodder. Well, I checked out a couple albums and it is REAL good stuff so there's another shout out on that one. "Wheels Turn Beneath my Feet" and "Sort of Versions" are two albums I've been ear deep in. Thanks Soresnsiim.

 

See.... we can get back on track here. 

Man I almost forgot about music.

 

There should be a section on these boards for analyzing graphs and being scientific about sound.

...that way I can make sure and never go there.

LOL

Everybody should just listen to some more Fink and the world would be a better place. 

 

I've purposely stayed out of this measurement debate until now because I haven't been sure what to make of it but I find I do have some thoughts and questions.

 

I don't usually listen to tone sweeps and test tones but when these measurements were made public I was curious so I gave it at a try and sure enough, when listening to a tone sweep, there's a dip in the frequency response that I assume correlates to the measurements, although I have no idea if it's as severe a dip as some are saying.

For fun I tried playing around with eq in the range of the dip, raising it between 4 to 6 db. The overall effect was subtle and not even noticeable on some tracks. Where I noticed it was snare drums had a bit more pop or snap, without the eq they sounded a bit flat or dull by comparison. Electric guitars also had more bite that gave them a little more of an aggressive gradoesque character which I do tend to like. The downside is there was also more emphasis on sibilance in some vocals, gone was that near perfect handling of sibilance to be traded for  a slight exaggeration that I know would end up bothering me over time.

This was by no means a scientific endeavor with definitive results but it was informative. Has it changed my opinion or how I feel about the 4.Ai? Not at all. It's still the best sounding and most well constructed universal IEM I've heard to date. To my ears the effect of this dip seems fairly subtle but, at least in part, it does help give the 4.Ai it's smooth character. In some cases boosting this region gave the 4.Ai a more lively and aggressive character but I'm personally rather sensitive to sibilance so the tradeoff of added emphasis to sibilance on some tracks wouldn't be worth it for me. Eq'd or not eq'd, both have their merits, to me neither sounded wrong,  just a slightly different approach which leads me to believe this was a design decision rather than a flaw like some would have us believe.

 

I do have some questions and a few issues with how this whole thing has been dealt with.

1. Inks was included on the Heir Audio World Tour of the 3.Ai and 4.Ai's and it was these pairs that were tested by udauda. Seeing as these were loaner pairs from Heir, was permission given for these tests to be done? Was Heir consulted first with these results? If not, why?

2. I'm sorry but I have no idea who this udauda/Rin Choi person is, his level of expertise or why I should take his measurements as gospel? I'm not exactly instilled with confidence when I read on his site "Please, I hope no one gets a chip on their shoulder - Yes, my DIY measurement setups are not accurate! It's OK, It's just a DIY. LOL"

3. Considering how damning Inks and udauda would have us believe these results are I'd like to know how many time the tests were run to ensure the results were accurate? Were the IEM's readjusted each time to ensure they were seated properly and what other measures were taken to ensure the results were repeatable?

4. Again, considering their take on the results, were these tests done on multiple sets to verify the results were repeatable and persistent and not just isolated to the loaner pair?

I'm also rather put off by the claims of the Magnus 1 cable being "snake oil", Heir has never made any claims to better sound quality with the Magnus 1. The only claims Heir has ever made is in regards to better quality materials and construction as well as better usability. In my eyes to label it as "snake oil" is an outright lie and does nothing but discredit Inks opinion.

Don't get me wrong, I do appreciate the time and effort taken by those that are doing measurements, it is a service that has proven to be helpful to the community, but with it I think comes a certain level of responsibility. When there's a perceived anomaly discovered, instead of going public in a tabloidesque "look at this dirty little secret I discovered" sensationalistic manner, I personally think every effort should be made to ensure the data is correct and repeatable over multiple sets, then, if the anomaly is persistent, an effort be made to contact the company with the results before making them public. Let the company either explain or rectify the situation before trying to publicly crucify them. For the most part these are small companies that can possibly live or die on word of mouth on these forums and other social media, this is a community and we should be working together to make it better.

 

1. I am a critique, than a reviewer. I don't deal with manufacturers and their games. Inks saw the benefit of an objective electroacoustic analysis with these IEMs, so he simply came by and I got the measurement done in couple of hours. 

 

2. You don't need to trust my analysis if you don't feel like it, but the repeatability has been proven. Let's not blow a simple joke out of proportion. If you'd like to know more about me, come see me at the ALMA symposium held in Las Vegas this January.

 

3. Yes, exactly five times, according to the common practice of the industry.

 

4. Check out the 2cc measurement provided by the manufacturer, my data, and Heir Audio's real ear measurement. The notch is there on all three. Period.

 

It is no doubt 4.Ai is a well-made product. Hey, it's hand-made! Still, should there be some kind of defects on the manufacturer's end, rather than making contradictory excuses, they better fix the problem.

Edited by udauda - 11/9/12 at 6:29am

 

1. This is not an answer to the questions I asked.

 

2. Again, this does not an answer my question.

 

3. This is only a partial answer, there's no details, I have no idea what common practice is in the industry.

 

4. Again, this is not an answer to the question I asked. I'm not refuting that there's a dip, I've heard it in tone sweeps and it's seems fairly common knowledge that it's there in the TWFK design, but you're claiming the dip is far more extreme than others. I'm curious if given this anomaly in your measurements whether you tried to verify it was this single set or repeatable across multiple sets.

Elnero-- all of your points are very well put. Especially the point about how a small company can live and die over something like this. Very true. Inks and udauda please consider the livelihoods of those who are trying to improve and further a hobby that belongs to all of us. Such behavior is uncalled for and just downright nasty.

Udauda - "the notch is there on all three. Period" Yes, it was discussed and decided that an notch it's present in all iems of this design. ..."They better fix the problem" Or what? You will continue your crusade of slander?

Give it a rest, you shared your opinion.

1. Yes it is. As An independent analyst, I don't care what the manufacturers think, want, or hate.
2. YES I did. Come see me in person at the ALMA symposium if you'd like to know more about me. (I wonder why my expertise is at stake when Heir Audio can't even properly identify their data with proper terminologies)
3. Take courses.
4. As previously stated, the degree varies from unit to unit, but the notch is there, regardless of the interunit variations.
Edited by udauda - 11/9/12 at 6:56am

Damn, is it possible to read something else? Those that don't like, can you save other people on other threads please... and let the others talk about something else?

Some don't give a S&€@) about graphs... and want to read something else... is it possible to stop this crusade? I don't think to be the only one that want's things to change!!...

You gave your opinion, nice! But not 3 days long the same subject please...

Several times ago, I didn't liked the pfe 232 treble... to hot... and the graph shoved later that there was a peak in the treble region... and also some people gave the same impression but GOD, that did not 'ook so many pages and people continued (and continue) to like the 232 even if the graph isn't a perfect line!!!! And that's fine!!!

So please stop because I think that this kind of to much looooong technical discussion will begin to make people go away from this site...

Can you read this article about graphs and human ears please:

http://www.inearmatters.net/2012/10/behind-scene-sony-mh1-r-story.html
Edited by sly_in_the_sky - 11/9/12 at 8:02am

I've never been as big of a fan of the twfk as some others because I have always been aware of it's character. When the top is unsparkled to my satisfaction, the dip becomes even more noticeable. Looks like AKG and perhpas UE got it sorted to the point of non issue but I've become generally wary of them for my personal preferences even though their capabilities are undeniable. Perhaps these are newer versions.

 

You would think dropping the xover point some by raising the capacitor value would even the dip a bit as I think it's usually a simple high pass but if it's simply a common character of the drivers, there's not too much to be done. That said, looking at the graphs, while I don't think the 4ai would be for me, I don't see a gross xover error which would show up in the phase or pulse graph. I consider a gross error as something like a driver phase issue at the crossover point which would cancel output. As is, it probably follows Knowles' capacitor value but I'd think it could be massaged a bit to improve the performance. Doesn't make them better or worse for those that like them and I'm in no position to judge without a listen.

 

I understand Rin's take on the 4ai as you would hope for that massaging from this source but his take can be a bit gruff at times. Opinion on motive or deception is not just a technical review. Having seen enough snake oil over the years can bias one as well. That said, I very much appreciate his work and blog. Like everything, take from it what works for you. I enjoy the tech but don't let it get in the way of what I hear or just happen to like.I've always felt that the best stuff involves a dash of art to go along with the tech.

Edited by goodvibes - 11/9/12 at 7:16am