Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Hifiman IEM's: RE-400 and RE-600
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Hifiman IEM's: RE-400 and RE-600 - Page 85

post #1261 of 2307
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinyman392 View Post

 

Do you have any scientific proof that timbre is dependent on the FR.  Or is this another one of Inks' assumptions?  Seriously though, would you mind enlightening us on what frequencies are specifically impacted and how they impact timbre?  If not, you have as much information on the subject as he does.

Other than phase, FR and the time domain together hold all of the information of the the sound wave. Considering that earphones have much shorter decay times than actual instruments and that it is far harder to detect these time domain variations, the major difference is made by FR.

post #1262 of 2307
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinyman392 View Post

Actually...  Preferred is the main word here...  OW tried to create a curve that best suited a good audio system...  I'll quote Tyll's article on the OW curve:

 

 

^ that doesn't look flat to me ^

 

Compared to that, yes, the DF will be brighter and thinner than you'd want...  What I'm getting out of the article Tyll wrote about the thing is that they were trying to find something that was preferred musically...  That statement I will agree with...  But it really doesn't say they were testing to see which is more neutral.  Basically, they'll go about and show that a certain curve was more reasonable for music.  With that stated, they accomplished their goal, I'll 100% agree that the OW curve will be better suited for music; heck, even Etymotic found the DF curve to be horrible for music, reason why the Ety curve is actually a modified DF curve (they clip off some of the upper treble in their S and P models, their B model remains untouched), they are still a little too bright for some listeners; makes sense. 

 

 

Something that caught my attention...  Really interesting perceived outcomes to the actual measurements...  It just shows that we know very little about the correlation between what is measured, and how we perceive...  Olive's research is great, it does give a great target curve for headphones.  I hope to see Harman using the curve sooner, rather than later. 

 

REgarding the tip, I wasn't talking about the size of the bore...  I was literally talking about the bar you said made a world of difference. 

The study tests different curves to see which is perceived as preferred,in turn more neutral as in no region become overemphasized or lacking [listeners do prefer more neutral as Olive has proved in his past studies]. The perception results, greatly matched the graphs, which is something Olive and Welti were also getting at, listeners preferred the ones flattest to a diffuse-field curve with more bass/extension and a bit of treble taming. The best headphones match the ear's resonance, with a bump at 3k and gradual sloping down, the extent of these isn't exact, but it gives a basis to start at. Compensations are mostly an aid to raw graphs, when one knows the idea of HRTF, one can know what to expect. 

 

The whole point of the matter is, no matter what compensation you use, RE400 was a bit safe in the treble, reducing the treble even more in the RE600 was a bad move. We were all hoping a RE272 [their best IEM yet] with more bass, but oh well, didn't happen. 

 

ANYTHING in the way of the ouputbore will have acoustic resistance, basic acoustics. It's going to tame something, what I can't tell you it's the exact regions or the extent. 

 

The bar changes the size of the bore. From Rin:

"It has acoustic resistance, with constant porosity, blocking the flow of some air".


Edited by Inks - 7/3/13 at 3:54pm
post #1263 of 2307

My biggest grip with the Re-600 is that it has been "upcoming" for months and nowhere to try/purchase here in the NW anyway... (yawning)

post #1264 of 2307
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

The study tests different curves to see which is perceived as preferred,in turn more neutral as in no region become overemphasized or lacking [listeners do prefer more neutral as Olive has proved in his past studies]. The perception results, greatly matched the graphs, which is something Olive and Welti were also getting at, listeners preferred the ones flattest to a diffuse-field curve with more bass/extension and a bit of treble taming. The best headphones match the ear's resonance, with a bump at 3k and gradual sloping down, the extent of these isn't exact, but it gives a basis to start at. Compensations are mostly an aid to raw graphs, when one knows the idea of HRTF, one can know what to expect. 

 

The whole point of the matter is, no matter what compensation you use, RE400 was a bit safe in the treble, reducing the treble even more in the RE600 was a bad move. We were all hoping a RE272 [their best IEM yet] with more bass, but oh well, didn't happen. 

 

ANYTHING in the way of the ouputbore will have acoustic resistance, basic acoustics. It's going to tame something, what I can't tell you it's the exact regions or the extent. 

 

The bar changes the size of the bore. From Rin:

"It has acoustic resistance, with constant porosity, blocking the flow of some air".

 

OK, I won't disagree with what you said...  A lot of people, myself included, have problems with true DF compensation, as stated, it's simply too bright.  Etymotic quickly figured this out and did do something minor about it.  IMO it wasn't enough XD  I'll agree that the OW curve is more preferred, what the study actually wanted to find out; arbitrary to what kind of signature used, what would be the most preferred target curve. 

 

Yes, the RE-400 was on the safe side of treble, I'll agree with this, I personally, like Rin, wouldn't mind a little more 5 kHz, even a little more extension up high would have been preferred.  We'll see how the RE600 fares, there are slightly different time domain characteristics, when I say slight, I means slight.  It also has lower distortion as well at higher volumes, not that any of us would hit that (assuming).

 

Dr. Fang measured with and without the bore, no difference in measurement in this case (someone asked him in NY).  Yes, physically speaking, it'll block some air, unfortunately, with the bar, it's not enough. 

post #1265 of 2307
I just plugged my laptop into my head while I was listening to my re-400s.

The screen filled with one word:

AWESOME

I think we can all sleep safely now.
post #1266 of 2307

A bit late to the party, but I feel like timbre has a lot to do with the FR transitions, regardless of the tonality of the phone in question.

 

Both my HD600 and DT880 actually have good timbre, despite being on opposing ends of the tonal spectrum. The HE-500, however didn't sound natural to me because of how the upper mids transitioned into the treble. I felt like it threw off how a lot of instruments are "supposed" to sound.

 

Same goes for the FX700, an aggressively bright phone that still happens to have marvelous timbre. I think it's all in the transitions, since instruments don't remain in one area of the spectrum. For instance, the snap of a snare drum encompasses the bass, mids, and lower treble, so the timbre will be off if the transitions between all three of those areas aren't seamless.

post #1267 of 2307
Quote:
Originally Posted by eke2k6 View Post


Both my HD600 and DT880 actually have good timbre, despite being on opposing ends of the tonal spectrum. The HE-500, however didn't sound natural to me because of how the upper mids transitioned into the treble. I felt like it threw off how a lot of instruments are "supposed" to sound.

This hurts me so. I didn't have a chance for extended listening but the HE-500 sounded a good deal more on than the DT880 and HD650 I demoed (edit: not that they were anything less than really good by any stretch), but I'm weird with full-sized. I'll give the 880 and 650 another shot though. I don't know about the 600 but I might be able to get some time with the 598...
Edited by vwinter - 7/4/13 at 9:19am
post #1268 of 2307
Quote:
Originally Posted by vwinter View Post


This hurts me so. I didn't have a chance for extended listening but the HE-500 sounded a good deal more on than the DT880 and HD650 I demoed (edit: not that they were anything less than really good by any stretch), but I'm weird with full-sized. I'll give the 880 and 650 another shot though. I don't know about the 600 but I might be able to get some time with the 598...

 

Well, I haven't had much experience with the 650, but it's definitely darker than the 600 in key areas. The 600 is pretty neutral.

 

However, I was talking about transitions, not tonality (which is a part of timbre, yes).

 

Once you adjust to the FX700 and DT880's brightness you can better understand them.

post #1269 of 2307
Gotcha. I was talking about general timbre rather than the more specify aspects of tonality or transitions. In that way, timbre really is one of those wholistic things. I don't really feel I'm qualified to get in on this discussion lol, but I just wanted to express my sadness lol. Honestly, it just makes me want to hear the LCD-2 now. What's another $300 at that point right??

And the FX700 was one of the few very bright phones that I really really really really really liked. But you already knew that. smile.gif
Edited by vwinter - 7/4/13 at 9:37am
post #1270 of 2307
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

Tonality is FR dependent and so are timbre, though with timbre the distortion figure will play a role. Do you have any scientific backing for that claim? Cause all the research suggest that when FR are matched, the headphones are rated closely in blind subjective tests.

Can't believe Hifiman decided to have less treble than RE400, when it actually needed more. RE272 is surely missed....oh well

This is one definitive text that discusses FR, timbre, phase, spatial interactions and tonality in considerable detail. While written for loudspeakers, much of the science is equally applicable to headphones.

It is well within the capabilities of a headphone design engineer to create nearly any FR curve desired, but simply mimicking the curve of, for example, a Stax SR-009 will not necessarily result in a headphone that sounds exactly like a SR-009 as clearly there are other factors involved, many of which are discussed in the above reference volume.

It is not my intention to be argumentative, but to simply suggest that FR curves are but one of many means of comparing different transducers without actually having an opportunity to listen to them.
Edited by HiFlight - 7/4/13 at 11:23am
post #1271 of 2307

Well, a month after getting my re-400s, and loving them, they decided to break on me today. Fault seems to be internal around the jack strain relief, but they have effectively died on me.

 

Bummer. So back they go, for replacements.

 

Thing is, I just reached for my back up pair of Soundmagic E10s, and lo and behold I seem to be loving those just as much as the re-400s!

 

I'm either very easily pleased, or audio memory is as utterly, subjectively unreliable and dodgy as some claim.

 

But hey, either way there's a lesson to be learned.... a primo case of wood and tree interface, methinks. 

 

Thiirty quid for the E10s, lasted me almost a year now. A ton for the RE-400s and a month down the line they're toast.


Edited by Muzeick - 7/4/13 at 2:10pm
post #1272 of 2307

They're certainly pretty fragile. The housings have multiple scratches and one little chink merely from being in an inside jacket pocket sometimes, which all my other earphones survive unscathed. A filter also came off during tip changes, though it was easily put back again. I have a feeling I'll be grateful for my warranty somewhere down the line...

post #1273 of 2307
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muzeick View Post

Well, a month after getting my re-400s, and loving them, they decided to break on me today. Fault seems to be internal around the jack strain relief, but they have effectively died on me.

Bummer. So back they go, for replacements.

Thing is, I just reached for my back up pair of Soundmagic E10s, and lo and behold I seem to be loving those just as much as the re-400s!

I'm either very easily pleased, or audio memory is as utterly, subjectively unreliable and dodgy as some claim.

But hey, either way there's a lesson to be learned.... a primo case of wood and tree interface, methinks. 

Thiirty quid for the E10s, lasted me almost a year now. A ton for the RE-400s and a month down the line they're toast.

Soundmagic iems last forever. I use mine for mowing. Best bang for buck budget brand I've ran across.

So that's a few re400 problems I've read about. Hope it's not a trend.
post #1274 of 2307
Quote:
Originally Posted by eke2k6 View Post

A bit late to the party, but I feel like timbre has a lot to do with the FR transitions, regardless of the tonality of the phone in question.

 

Both my HD600 and DT880 actually have good timbre, despite being on opposing ends of the tonal spectrum. The HE-500, however didn't sound natural to me because of how the upper mids transitioned into the treble. I felt like it threw off how a lot of instruments are "supposed" to sound.

 

Same goes for the FX700, an aggressively bright phone that still happens to have marvelous timbre. I think it's all in the transitions, since instruments don't remain in one area of the spectrum. For instance, the snap of a snare drum encompasses the bass, mids, and lower treble, so the timbre will be off if the transitions between all three of those areas aren't seamless.

 

I don't see this problem when looking at HE-500 FR graph. Exactly what frequencies do you have in mind?

post #1275 of 2307
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiFlight View Post

This is one definitive text that discusses FR, timbre, phase, spatial interactions and tonality in considerable detail. While written for loudspeakers, much of the science is equally applicable to headphones.

It is well within the capabilities of a headphone design engineer to create nearly any FR curve desired, but simply mimicking the curve of, for example, a Stax SR-009 will not necessarily result in a headphone that sounds exactly like a SR-009 as clearly there are other factors involved, many of which are discussed in the above reference volume.

It is not my intention to be argumentative, but to simply suggest that FR curves are but one of many means of comparing different transducers without actually having an opportunity to listen to them.

But the process of how each mechanism comes about is important, FR doing most of the dictation and small little factors changing its timbre, time domain, etc. it's not a 100% exact replica but its being prove that simulated headphones are being rated quite closely to the originals, FR being the main dictator.

Stil doesn't change the fact that Hifiman is charging 4 times the amount for an iem with the same driver, housing, bandwidth and build. They've done this before but now it's even more exaggerated and the flagship actually has less treble than an already a bit conservative RE400. At least the 272 was clearly better than the 262s, will be interesting to see what others I know think when they have both in hand, because its just looking like a sidestep.
Edited by Inks - 7/4/13 at 5:39pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Hifiman IEM's: RE-400 and RE-600