Glad Rin settled it, its all in the details as I had expected.
Part 3 analysis of the UE900 has been posted by Rin one of his best works yet IMHO. A must read for all those interested in these.
Originally Posted by tinyman392
I stopped looking at compensation a while ago... I just look at the raws :p
Originally Posted by AstralStorm
Interesting discussion about measurements. I prefer to use my ears to derive ID equalization myself. (equal sine tone loudness)
Neither Tyll's nor Udauda's data for Etymotic ER-4S and Phonak 121 matches what I hear in 3-5k range. What sounds flat to me looks like a large dip on their compensated graphs...
Looking at a raw measuring thinking that's how the ear will perceive it is not going to happen. A flat IEM in raw measurements like the SM3 (in its midhighs) means it has subdued midhighs due to the ears resonance there. Rin uses the ISO DF standard because its the most consistent and backed approach, he has articles on it in his blog.
@Astral. No surprise there, ID is a hybrid of Free-Field Equalization hybrid afterall. One of the main reasons Free-field failed even 20 years ago is because of its inconsistency among users, so no surprise theres a deviation there with Tyll. To compare to Rins compensated you would have to use his DF standard. HRTFs dont differ that much, so something is wrong in the calculation if it differs greatly, it should at least be close.
Edited by Inks - 10/23/12 at 11:33pm