Heir Audio 4.Ai - Appreciation/Impression/Review Thread - Page 127

I'm planning (hopefully) to post my 4.Ai review tomorrow afternoon :)  In the meantime...  You can enjoy my initial unboxing...  Er, I mean reboxed unboxing ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyberalpha11 


May I know does UM3X produce a natural quality bass or artificial boosted quantity bass?
Because some head-fiers claimed that 4.Ai has a good natural quality bass than UM3X.
Please comment.

I wouldn't call UM3X natural at all. It is quite boosted especially for a non-dynamic IEM. Westone 4 bass is closer to natural but again slightly boosted yet it never sounds bloated like UM3X.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aras 

I wouldn't call UM3X natural at all. It is quite boosted especially for a non-dynamic IEM. Westone 4 bass is closer to natural but again slightly boosted yet it never sounds bloated like UM3X.

A lot of headphiles, including some of the most experienced veterans here at head-fi, believes that a boosted bass response makes a headphone sound more "natural." Everyone has their own idea of what "natural" should be. Imo, subjective terms like "natural," "transparent," and "balanced" get thrown around too much. These descriptions should be qualified with phrases like "in my opinion," or "according to my taste." Imo, a lot of newbies likely buy headphones that are not compatible with their individual tastes due to these biased descriptions that they read in forums.

To me, the most natural bass response for most of my music collection is a flat response.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyberalpha11 


May I know does UM3X produce a natural quality bass or artificial boosted quantity bass?
Because some head-fiers claimed that 4.Ai has a good natural quality bass than UM3X.
Please comment.

I love the UM3X, but it's definitely artificially boosted. The 4.Ai seems pretty natural to me. Though, the UM3X's boost is by no means unpleasant; it gives a nice weight to male vocals and meshes well with it's intimate soundstage.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tigon_ridge 

A lot of headphiles, including some of the most experienced veterans here at head-fi, believes that a boosted bass response makes a headphone sound more "natural." Everyone has their own idea of what "natural" should be. Imo, subjective terms like "natural," "transparent," and "balanced" get thrown around too much. These descriptions should be qualified with phrases like "in my opinion," or "according to my taste." Imo, a lot of newbies likely buy headphones that are not compatible with their individual tastes due to these biased descriptions that they read in forums.

 

To me, the most natural bass response for most of my music collection is a flat response.

Personally I think most headfiers should drop those words from their vocabulary. Punchy too.

Coming from a combat sport background the term "punchy" does not evoke the appropriate meaning when it's used in descriptions around here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tigon_ridge 

A lot of headphiles, including some of the most experienced veterans here at head-fi, believes that a boosted bass response makes a headphone sound more "natural." Everyone has their own idea of what "natural" should be. Imo, subjective terms like "natural," "transparent," and "balanced" get thrown around too much. These descriptions should be qualified with phrases like "in my opinion," or "according to my taste." Imo, a lot of newbies likely buy headphones that are not compatible with their individual tastes due to these biased descriptions that they read in forums.

 

To me, the most natural bass response for most of my music collection is a flat response.

Natural has no definition...  It's never been defined, and never will be, as you said, it's 100% subjective.  The other two words you use, do have a definition to them with valid descriptions. 

• transparent: Easy to hear into the music, detailed, clear, not muddy. Wide flat frequency response, sharp time response, very low distortion and noise. A hear through quality that is akin to clarity and reveals all aspects of detail...  Essentially, transparency entails the idea of open, empty space.  Much of the time, it also includes a quicker decay period so space isn't filled by vibrations.  All of this is direct and not as subjective as you put it. 
  
  Now, that's not to say transparent hasn't ever been misused, it has been misused (haven't seen it on this thread though...). 
• Balanced: This word actually has 1 of two definitions.  The original (origin) definition is that it has a V-shape response to account for the lack of low-end and high-end boost our ears naturally do (basically, balance out the sound).  This definition only works for IEMs mind you.  The second definition is loosely defined as near, but not, neutral.  Normally entails ideas from it's origin meaning having a minor v-shape. 
  
  Balanced would be a poor definition for the 4.Ai. 

Final note, all impressions are subjective already.  The "in my opinion" is already implied. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fizz 

Personally I think most headfiers should drop those words from their vocabulary. Punchy too.

Coming from a combat sport background the term "punchy" does not evoke the appropriate meaning when it's used in descriptions around here.

Punchy has a definition defined and specific. 

• Punchy: Good reproduction of dynamics. Good transient response, with strong impact. Sometimes a bump around 5 kHz or 200 Hz.  Basically involves a bump around the 5 kHz and/or 200 Hz area (low treble and mid-bass respectively) in comparison to the frequency ranges around it.

Punchy is not a subjective term, nor is it used that way. 

______________

I agree with the natural though.  Natural is all about preference really, there is no "natural" sound that everyone will agree upon (and there never will be). 

Another word I see being abused is neutral (meaning a flat frequency response after all in-ear reference has been taken into account).  I've seen this word tossed around in just about every single thread about every single headphone.  None of the headphones were neutral :p 

Quote:

Originally Posted by tinyman392 

 

Natural has no definition...  It's never been defined, and never will be, as you said, it's 100% subjective.  The other two words you use, do have a definition to them with valid descriptions. 

• transparent: Easy to hear into the music, detailed, clear, not muddy. Wide flat frequency response, sharp time response, very low distortion and noise. A hear through quality that is akin to clarity and reveals all aspects of detail...  Essentially, transparency entails the idea of open, empty space.  Much of the time, it also includes a quicker decay period so space isn't filled by vibrations.  All of this is direct and not as subjective as you put it. 
  
  Now, that's not to say transparent hasn't ever been misused, it has been misused (haven't seen it on this thread though...). 
• Balanced: This word actually has 1 of two definitions.  The original (origin) definition is that it has a V-shape response to account for the lack of low-end and high-end boost our ears naturally do (basically, balance out the sound).  This definition only works for IEMs mind you.  The second definition is loosely defined as near, but not, neutral.  Normally entails ideas from it's origin meaning having a minor v-shape. 
  
  Balanced would be a poor definition for the 4.Ai. 

 

Final note, all impressions are subjective already.  The "in my opinion" is already implied. 

 

 

Punchy has a definition defined and specific. 

• Punchy: Good reproduction of dynamics. Good transient response, with strong impact. Sometimes a bump around 5 kHz or 200 Hz.  Basically involves a bump around the 5 kHz and/or 200 Hz area (low treble and mid-bass respectively) in comparison to the frequency ranges around it.

 

Punchy is not a subjective term, nor is it used that way. 

 

______________

 

I agree with the natural though.  Natural is all about preference really, there is no "natural" sound that everyone will agree upon (and there never will be). 

 

Another word I see being abused is neutral (meaning a flat frequency response after all in-ear reference has been taken into account).  I've seen this word tossed around in just about every single thread about every single headphone.  None of the headphones were neutral :p 

Thanks for clarifying tinyman. Gotta disagree about punchy though. Even in your definition are the words: "good", "good", "strong", and "sometimes". That leaves a little too much wiggle room to be meaningful objectively imo.

"Natural" can take on certain meanings sometimes, but you know what term doesn't? Musicality. I've never seen that term connected with a meaningful description. One might as well say "this produces sound."

Quote:

Originally Posted by gnarlsagan 

 

Thanks for clarifying tinyman. Gotta disagree about punchy though. Even in your definition are the words: "good", "good", "strong", and "sometimes". That leaves a little too much wiggle room to be meaningful objectively imo.

 

"Natural" can take on certain meanings sometimes, but you know what term doesn't? Musicality. I've never seen that term connected with a meaningful description. One might as well say "this produces sound."

These aren't my definitions :p  I'll highlight the key words that make the definitions more objective...  I copy and pasted the entire definition, then added in a clarification note towards the end :p

• Punchy: Good reproduction of dynamics. Good transient response, with strong impact. Sometimes a bump around 5 kHz or 200 Hz. 
  
  Basically involves a bump around the 5 kHz and/or 200 Hz area (low treble and mid-bass respectively) in comparison to the frequency ranges around it.
   
• Balanced: This word actually has 1 of two definitions.  The original (origin) definition is that it has a V-shape response to account for the lack of low-end and high-end boost our ears naturally do (basically, balance out the sound).  This definition only works for IEMs mind you.  The second definition is loosely defined as near, but not, neutral.  Normally entails ideas from it's origin meaning having a minor v-shape.
   
• transparent: Easy to hear into the music, detailed, clear, not muddy. Wide flat frequency response, sharp time response, very low distortion and noise. A hear through quality that is akin to clarity and reveals all aspects of detail.
  
  Essentially, transparency entails the idea of open, empty space.  Much of the time, it also includes a quicker decay period so space isn't filled by vibrations.  All of this is direct and not as subjective as you put it.

If I were to define them, it would go as follows:

• Punchy: Response in the 200 Hz region bumped anywhere from 0 dB to about 5 dB. (Note how the 5 k isn't placed here, in my reviews, I specifically say lower highs for the ~ 5 k region).
• Balanced: Having a minor v-shape in the sound signature due to a small dip somewhere in the midrange.
• Transparent: An airy sound (response above the 10k region or spike in the upper highs) mixed with quicker decay in the entire midrange and highs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tinyman392 

 

Because of number two, I would advise people to test both for themselves (if they can) before making a purchase :p  I do find them on level with one another though. 

Where can I test-drive the Heirs? 

Anyone know of a place near Atlanta where I could do this? 

I want to buy either the 3.ai or 4.ai, but I'm starting to lean towards the 4.ai 

I just can't drop $400 on something without test driving them first... (I'm a college student... I don't just have the money to go and spend on something like this without being 100% sure it's what I want)

If I were looking for a sound signature that was as close as possible to the sound I would hear if I were in the recording studio as the recording was being made, or in the engineering booth during the recording or mixing session, what description would I look for?  (Assuming that the mix was being made to top listening standards rather than being optimized for what it would sound like through an AM radio or on a dance floor.)   I always figured that was "natural" or "flat" - closest reproduction to the way the artists intended it to be heard.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peculier 

I wish these Heir IEMs could hit stores as retail products with nice packaging and everything

     Baby steps my friend.  But doing as you wish may tarnish the "boutique audio" flavor that Heir Audio has.