Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › REVIEW: The Frogbeats C4...an explosively good custom in ear monitor....SERIOUSLY!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

REVIEW: The Frogbeats C4...an explosively good custom in ear monitor....SERIOUSLY! - Page 15  

post #211 of 255

Also, I challenge any user to send their C4s for analysis by this blogger (Rin Choi), who I collaborate with. He is extremely reliable and has many head-fi references that can back him up in regards to taking care of loaned stuff. He is currently borrowing a UERM, so a comparison will be nice for those on the fence

 

Any takers can PM me, LFF?

post #212 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

 What's missing in the ER6 in terms of details is extension in the subbass and highest treble (past 10k), this can be covered by multi-driver IEMs, a modded UE900 seems to do just that, but it isn't as forward as the ER6 in the midhighs and treble up to 10k, dipping a bit more. I agree, people factor in cost WAY too much into thinking that means the sound quality is going to be that much better. In my experience, price hardly tells you about performance, many sub 100$ IEMs are on par or better than the much more expensive ones. 

I agree but are there any iems that actually remedy the sub-bass and treble extension without adding a boost or having dips in the mids or lower treble? Maybe the C4...
post #213 of 255
Originally Posted by gnarlsagan View Post
I agree but are there any iems that actually remedy the sub-bass and treble extension without adding a boost or having dips in the mids or lower treble? Maybe the C4...

  Dips are inevitable, ER6 dips 5-8k, at times they can be beneficial. IMO I do think the ER6 is a bit bright at times, (though generally smooth), I accept dips or bumps from the DF reference as long as they aren't constant or exaggerated. Many modern recordings do get boosted in these regions, at times 1-3k can sound "honky" on Etys. Point being, there are so many compromises that happen that IME the goal shouldn't be to cover all bases, but to get as close as you can without any major flaws. 

post #214 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

  Dips are inevitable, ER6 dips 5-8k, at times they can be beneficial. IMO I do think the ER6 is a bit bright at times, (though generally smooth), I accept dips or bumps from the DF reference as long as they aren't constant or exaggerated. Many modern recordings do get boosted in these regions, at times 1-3k can sound "honky" on Etys. Point being, there are so many compromises that happen that IME the goal shouldn't be to cover all bases, but to get as close as you can without any major flaws. 

Absolutely agreed but the question remains what exists without exaggerated or extended deviations from DF reference? Also I thought the ER-6 dip from 5-8kHz was designed based on listener feedback.
post #215 of 255
Originally Posted by gnarlsagan View Post

Absolutely agreed but the question remains what exists without exaggerated or extended deviations from DF reference? Also I thought the ER-6 dip from 5-8kHz was designed based on listener feedback.

Modded UE900, a bit safe in the midhighs but pretty flat. R50 with certain tips, though bass extension is no better than ER6. MH1 has better extension at both ends with a very similar treble response, too bad it's bass response is exaggerated and slow. The dip at 5-8k does make it smoother, you generally want to avoid bumps here as that will make things potentially sibilant, but 1-3k dips can be nice as long as it isn't too much. 

post #216 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

Modded UE900, a bit safe in the midhighs but pretty flat. R50 with certain tips, though bass extension is no better than ER6. MH1 has better extension at both ends with a very similar treble response, too bad it's bass response is exaggerated and slow. The dip at 5-8k does make it smoother, you generally want to avoid bumps here as that will make things potentially sibilant, but 1-3k dips can be nice as long as it isn't too much. 

I see what you mean about compromises. Still would really like to see a C4 graph though.
post #217 of 255
Originally Posted by gnarlsagan View Post
I see what you mean about compromises. Still would really like to see a C4 graph though.

  Indeed, specially since they're said to be so neutral, hope someone can volunteer a pair to test. 

post #218 of 255
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

Also, I challenge any user to send their C4s for analysis by this blogger (Rin Choi), who I collaborate with. He is extremely reliable and has many head-fi references that can back him up in regards to taking care of loaned stuff. He is currently borrowing a UERM, so a comparison will be nice for those on the fence

 

Any takers can PM me, LFF?


I already had Purrin take measurements.

post #219 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by LFF View Post


I already had Purrin take measurements.

Would you happen to know when he'll post it on Changstar? Awash with excitement at the moment. 

post #220 of 255
Given that there are plenty of Paradox measurements out there it's simple enough to know that LFF has an ear for neutrality. If the C4s are more even than the UERMs then there's already some rough idea of the FR tolerances.
post #221 of 255

I dont bother with graphs, the ety4 is regarded as one of the most neutral iems on this site but when you compare the graph with the perceived human hearing graph the treble response is anything but neutral.

post #222 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by fuzzy1969 View Post

I dont bother with graphs, the ety4 is regarded as one of the most neutral iems on this site but when you compare the graph with the perceived human hearing graph the treble response is anything but neutral.

But pretty much any graph you see adjusts for perceived human hearing. Considering raw graphs most iems would look even less neutral than they already are.
post #223 of 255

I don't think they do adjust I just pulled this from ety's website...

 

 

700

 

you can see the big bump, etys designed them this way but I wouldn't call it neutral in a graph sense although a lot of people on here say they are neutral, so I dont really go for graphs.

 

Im double posting but this is more of a official perceived hearing graph...

 

 

Human_Hearing_Graph.jpg


Edited by fuzzy1969 - 11/12/12 at 10:26am
post #224 of 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by fuzzy1969 View Post

I don't think they do adjust I just pulled this from ety's website...

 

 

700

 

you can see the big bump, etys designed them this way but I wouldn'tt call it neutral in a graph sense although a lot of people on here say they are neutral, so I dont really go for graphs.

  Those are raw graphs, before you factor in resonance from the canal, concha and pinna, the bump is a must for neutrality and many manufacturers use it. When these headphone-related-transfers are factored in this is the actual response of the ER4 line is line this

 

 

Originally Posted by LFF View Post

I already had Purrin take measurements.

  Nice, maybe the raw results can be shown to Rin and he can do a preliminary graph like this one,using his DF compensation. I do feel Rin can analyze certain things in detail which may help users, he's shown that repeatedly in his other analyzed IEMs. Maybe once he releases the full UERM analysis (which will be kind of soon) may a user be convinced. 


Edited by Inks - 11/12/12 at 10:36am
post #225 of 255

Will post measurements soon. I don't remember, but I think the measurements (EDIT: Not really it turns out) looked similar to ER-4S in the upper mids, but had more bass. Sounded like that too. Very clear sounding like the ER-4S and more clear than UERM. Although I feel the UERM is still my own "neutral" standard (at least when comparing with my custom-made nearfield desktop monitors actively crossed over and EQ'd to neutral.) YMMV.


Edited by purrin - 11/12/12 at 11:00am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › REVIEW: The Frogbeats C4...an explosively good custom in ear monitor....SERIOUSLY!