Originally Posted by vwinter
Can someone please explain to me how two sources which at a glance are ruler flat and measure well can sound markedly different?
Most of the problem I think is that people try to place limits on what matters, absolute thresholds, blanket statements etc. If you are looking at two specific pieces of equipment, to be used with specific headphones it becomes much easier to compare on a technical level. At this point in my journey I find it most useful to use a combination of measurements and subjective listening, measurements are useful to make sense of what is being heard and subjective listening to decide whether the differences in equipment are for better or worse or non-existent. Personally I tend to prefer listening first, don't let other people tell you what you can or cannot hear - listen for yourself then decide.
Originally Posted by lee730
Because there is more to sound than just measurements alone. Things in audio that I feel we cannot measure.
I agree, which is why I think it is important to test things out even if they seem ridiculous, just as long as they don't cost money...
Originally Posted by lee730
Your own negativity may be your own placebo ;).
Expectation bias cuts both ways. On the other hand I respect people who don't buy into differences because they have done first hand comparisons and actually found zero difference. More power to them.
Originally Posted by Achmedisdead
And sometimes expectation bias.
True, just be careful about putting everything that one can't explain down to some sort of anomaly. I know a professor who did a back of envelope calculation for the collapse time of the World Trade Center and therefore things there is some kind of conspiracy going on.
Originally Posted by Silent One
Design. Materials. Configuration.
At this point I'm of the "everything matters" school of audiophillia. I just don't try not to buy a whole lot of tweaks because most of them are overpriced, and the results are unreliable or even unpredictable. i still say "just listen to it" is the best philosopy EDIT: I'ma leave that that part out as it kind of missed the point. I guess what I meant to say is that it's hard to discuss what exactly measurements miss when we aren't discussing anything in particular...
Originally Posted by DigitalFreak
Alright, I'm back with more SM64 shenanigans. I was playing around with some tip rolling and discovered a few interesting things. A lot of people on the SM64 have commented this IEM's housing looks like a W4 clone. It may look like a clone but it sure as heck doesn't fit like a W4 housing. The tips on these IEM's are all useless to me with the exception of one pair of long deep seating Comply's. On my W4's I have a pair of medium T-400 Comply's. I use the shallower fitting T-400 on the W4's to bring out the highs more and try and give it a slightly more balanced sig. The T-400's tips fit quite nicely on the SM64 bore but no matter how hard I try I cannot get a seal while with the W4 I get a nice fit and seal. The outside housing of the SM64 may look like the W4 but the inside (the part that seats against your ear) is very different. It's completely flat while the W4 isn't. Because of this I'm guessing it's interfering with the fit of the SM64 and making it a lot harder to get a proper seal. I wanted to try and use the same tips on these two IEM's so as to level the playing field and see how they scored against one another. The bass on the SM64 is more prominent to my ears then on the W4 so I was wondering if a more shallow fit might push back the bass a tad and bring up the treble(hopefully not to much). I don't know, maybe I should order a few sets of T-400's in large size and see if that works for me? It would be nice to maybe push that bass back a couple of steps.
Since I bought the W4 into the discussion, based only only a short A/B listening session it's no contest, the SM64 owns the W4. The W4 treble energy isn't even close to the SM64 and it extends and has tons of detail while the W4 sound like a tizzy recessed mess. Mids, albeit more forward, the W4 mids sound veiled and jumbled next to the SM64. Bass, SM64 extends deeper has more texture and hits harder and tons of reverb while the W4 has no reverb. Soundstage, SM64 easily has more air between the instruments and sounds far wider. I'm surprised how far ahead the SM64 excelled over the W4, what a slaughter.
Sounds like you approve By the way is this the first or second revision?
Edited by drez - 5/16/13 at 5:50am