or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Zero Audio - ZH-DX200 Carbo Tenore | ZH-DX210 Carbo Basso (Carbon & Aluminium IEM) thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Zero Audio - ZH-DX200 Carbo Tenore | ZH-DX210 Carbo Basso (Carbon & Aluminium IEM) thread - Page 175

Poll Results: Which one would you order??

 
  • 73% (274)
    Carbo Tenore
  • 26% (97)
    Carbo Basso
371 Total Votes  
post #2611 of 5962
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post


Finally someone that knows their stuff...

 

So if time domain distortion is doubly improbable and decay is as it should be, what is the issue with Tenore's bass? Is it just a placebo or is something else going on? What do you think?

post #2612 of 5962
It's just mildly bumped. It's flat throughout the range (Vwinters comments about the treble make no sense to me but oh well). So that small bump gives it that hint of warmth but this can also be manipulated with a seal and the bump is so small to begin with. It's no issue, bass tuning is hard, most iems honestly have poor bass response when it comes to control and authority, you usually have to give up one of the two, this is nicely in between.
post #2613 of 5962
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkiesOfAzel View Post

So if time domain distortion is doubly improbable and decay is as it should be, what is the issue with Tenore's bass? Is it just a placebo or is something else going on? What do you think?

When I get my Tenores back I'll try some eq to see how close I can get it to my ER4S and DBA-02 in the bass area. Of course those don't have a dedicated bass driver like a high-end multi BA a la UERM or JH13. We may have to rely on the talents of vwinter and James to get to the bottom of what they're describing.

I do agree there is a difference in presentation in the bass, at least with the JH13, but I didn't have enough time with it to rule out simple FR differences. Could there be differences in attack? Or is attack more important for higher frequencies? And have we really ruled out decay below 500Hz? I'm not saying the Tenore is worse or better than the UERM or JH13 in bass reproduction, but those iems might have less decay below 500Hz, which might account for James and maybe also vwinter's impressions.
Edited by gnarlsagan - 6/11/14 at 3:10pm
post #2614 of 5962
Quote:
Originally Posted by gnarlsagan View Post


When I get my Tenores back I'll try some eq to see how close I can get it to my ER4S and DBA-02 in the bass area. Of course those don't have a dedicated bass driver like a high-end multi BA a la UERM or JH13. We may have to rely on the talents of vwinter and James to get to the bottom of what they're describing.

I do agree there is a difference in presentation in the bass, at least with the JH13, but I didn't have enough time with it to rule out simple FR differences. Could there be differences in attack? Or is attack more important for higher frequencies? And have we really ruled out decay below 500Hz? I'm not saying the Tenore is worse or better than the UERM or JH13 in bass reproduction, but those iems might have less decay below 500Hz, which might account for James and maybe also vwinter's impressions.

 

Yes, you can forget about decay, i did test tones in most of that range. No issues whatsoever. It might be attack in the lower bass area or it might just be what Inks is saying, a little too much sub-bass. I personally don't mind, when it comes to faithful reproduction, mids are my top priority, but i also love the treble on these so i am very happy. Now if it also had GR07's bass (or the ex1000's which i haven't listened to but i will take James' word for it :normal_smile :), it would have been exactly what i am looking for in an iem. 


Edited by SkiesOfAzel - 6/11/14 at 3:59pm
post #2615 of 5962
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkiesOfAzel View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

Finally someone that knows their stuff...

So if time domain distortion is doubly improbable and decay is as it should be, what is the issue with Tenore's bass? Is it just a placebo or is something else going on? What do you think?
I have no issue with my bass. It's perfect, tight, clearly textured, deep when present, impactful, kick drums sound real...

I wonder if the bass on our sets is slightly different...
post #2616 of 5962
Quote:
Originally Posted by luisdent View Post

Agreed. I really believe the flat response is percieved differently between users causing a lot of these impressions.

They aren't flat if you're realistic. They are just more than reasonably linear from the midrange onward, assuming you got an ideal pair. Maybe unit variance is causing these perceived differences. What is the simpler answer that people are hearing phantom differences or that there really are differences to be heard.

And peoples HRTF can differ greatly, so more than reasonably linear only under ideal circumstances.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

It's just mildly bumped. It's flat throughout the range (Vwinters comments about the treble make no sense to me but oh well). So that small bump gives it that hint of warmth but this can also be manipulated with a seal and the bump is so small to begin with. It's no issue, bass tuning is hard, most iems honestly have poor bass response when it comes to control and authority, you usually have to give up one of the two, this is nicely in between.

My set exhibits a steady rise into the subbass, like the ie800. That linear rise creates a coolness to the lower mids. I can adjust it by bumping up about 2-3dB at about 120hz with a q value of I think .4 which creates a sort of shelf which then drops more smoothly into the mids. This warms up the sound to a natural level without excessive midbass and gives the low end a bit of much needed body. I'd say the balance between control and amplitude is good. I don't know about authority.

But more to a direct response, the only time I mentioned treble was to say that I wasn't talking about the treble. As a matter of fact, the treble is their strongest point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gnarlsagan View Post

When I get my Tenores back I'll try some eq to see how close I can get it to my ER4S and DBA-02 in the bass area. Of course those don't have a dedicated bass driver like a high-end multi BA a la UERM or JH13. We may have to rely on the talents of vwinter and James to get to the bottom of what they're describing.

I do agree there is a difference in presentation in the bass, at least with the JH13, but I didn't have enough time with it to rule out simple FR differences. Could there be differences in attack? Or is attack more important for higher frequencies? And have we really ruled out decay below 500Hz? I'm not saying the Tenore is worse or better than the UERM or JH13 in bass reproduction, but those iems might have less decay below 500Hz, which might account for James and maybe also vwinter's impressions.

I like the low end on the ER4S, it's much more linear and had great weight. The subbass boost on my set is more than is needed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by luisdent View Post

I have no issue with my bass. It's perfect, tight, clearly textured, deep when present, impactful, kick drums sound real...

I wonder if the bass on our sets is slightly different...

Thin, cool, midbass masked by subbass and upper mid bumps, any large drums sound unnatural due to lack of body.

I suspect they might be a bit different smile.gif
Edited by vwinter - 6/11/14 at 6:51pm
post #2617 of 5962
Er
Quote:
Originally Posted by vwinter View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by luisdent View Post

Agreed. I really believe the flat response is percieved differently between users causing a lot of these impressions.

They aren't flat if you're realistic. They are just more than reasonably linear from the midrange onward, assuming you got an ideal pair. Maybe unit variance is causing these perceived differences. What is the simpler answer that people are hearing phantom differences or that there really are differences to be heard.

And peoples HRTF can differ greatly, so more than reasonably linear only under ideal circumstances.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

It's just mildly bumped. It's flat throughout the range (Vwinters comments about the treble make no sense to me but oh well). So that small bump gives it that hint of warmth but this can also be manipulated with a seal and the bump is so small to begin with. It's no issue, bass tuning is hard, most iems honestly have poor bass response when it comes to control and authority, you usually have to give up one of the two, this is nicely in between.

My set exhibits a steady rise into the subbass, like the ie800. That linear rise creates a coolness to the lower mids. I can adjust it by bumping up about 2-3dB at about 120hz with a q value of I think .4 which creates a sort of shelf which then drops more smoothly into the mids. This warms up the sound to a natural level without excessive midbass and gives the low end a bit of much needed body. I'd say the balance between control and amplitude is good. I don't know about authority.

But more to a direct response, the only time I mentioned treble was to say that I wasn't talking about the treble. As a matter of fact, the treble is their strongest point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gnarlsagan View Post

When I get my Tenores back I'll try some eq to see how close I can get it to my ER4S and DBA-02 in the bass area. Of course those don't have a dedicated bass driver like a high-end multi BA a la UERM or JH13. We may have to rely on the talents of vwinter and James to get to the bottom of what they're describing.

I do agree there is a difference in presentation in the bass, at least with the JH13, but I didn't have enough time with it to rule out simple FR differences. Could there be differences in attack? Or is attack more important for higher frequencies? And have we really ruled out decay below 500Hz? I'm not saying the Tenore is worse or better than the UERM or JH13 in bass reproduction, but those iems might have less decay below 500Hz, which might account for James and maybe also vwinter's impressions.

I like the low end on the ER4S, it's much more linear and had great weight. The subbass boost on my set is more than is needed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by luisdent View Post

I have no issue with my bass. It's perfect, tight, clearly textured, deep when present, impactful, kick drums sound real...

I wonder if the bass on our sets is slightly different...

Thin, cool, midbass masked by subbass and upper mid bumps, any large drums sound unnatural due to lack of body.

I suspect they might be a bit different smile.gif
er4s to me is great between 80hz and 10/12khz. Outside of that there is noticeable dropoff. My tenores sound exactly the same overall but with the bass perfectly rectified and the treble extended. That's extremely flat to me. People may disagree on reference bass level, but mine is extremely linear and matches the sound of a studio monitor speaker very well. Some may find the bass overall a touch much if they get a bassier set. But then you're still only talking about a few db of low boost, when most iems aren't nearly as flat. And if they are in the bass, the treble is greatly flawed. Not to mention these are extremely linear, so even if you think the bass is a touch much, it smoothly transitions from low to high. No major peaks, no major dips. So when comparing the response to most other iems out there i say yes, it is extremely flat...

As for the way they sound to each person, there are a lot of factors. But for me the sound i hear is extremely flat. And that's based on my plethora of iems i've tried, years of mixing music in and out of studios, knowledge of graphing, targets, etc.
Edited by luisdent - 6/11/14 at 7:07pm
post #2618 of 5962
Quote:
Originally Posted by luisdent View Post

Er
er4s to me is great between 80hz and 10/12khz. Outside of that there is noticeable dropoff. My tenores sound exactly the same overall but with the bass perfectly rectified and the treble extended. That's extremely flat to me. People may disagree on reference bass level, but mine is extremely linear and matches the sound of a studio monitor speaker very well. Some may find the bass overall a touch much if they get a bassier set. But then you're still only talking about a few db of low boost, when most iems aren't nearly as flat. And if they are in the bass, the treble is greatly flawed. Not to mention these are extremely linear, so even if you think the bass is a touch much, it smoothly transitions from low to high. No major peaks, no major dips. So when comparing the response to most other iems out there i say yes, it is extremely flat...

As for the way they sound to each person, there are a lot of factors. But for me the sound i hear is extremely flat. And that's based on my plethora of iems i've tried, years of mixing music in and out of studios, knowledge of graphing, targets, etc.

If you hear noticeable drop off on the ER4S after 80hz, either you have a lack of sensitivity at the low end or I am extremely sensitive there, because when I had the ER4S, it was extremely linear to at least 35 with only moderate drop off after that point.

Extremely flat "relatively" makes no sense really. It's an objective phrase. It's flatter, but not flat.

I dunno you're comparing in ear and speaker. There is a lot of variable there IMO. But regarding the bolded, all that unfortunately doesn't mean much when someone has a 7dB stronger sensitivity at 5KHz than you do.

Edit: this probably will just be a useless back and forth so I'll just cut this line of discussion off now. You say potato, I say potato.


Cutting out a couple of dB between 2.5-4kHz helps with the roughness, but they are still aggressive sounding.
Edited by vwinter - 6/11/14 at 8:24pm
post #2619 of 5962
.

Edited by luisdent - 6/11/14 at 9:01pm
post #2620 of 5962
Quote:
Originally Posted by vwinter View Post

Yes! The lower mids were bugging me all day yesterday. I have no idea what it is. It's like a deflated balloon, like there's little substance and foundation behind them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vwinter View Post

Thin, cool, midbass masked by subbass and upper mid bumps, any large drums sound unnatural due to lack of body.

I suspect they might be a bit different smile.gif

 

Agreed. These are pretty good descriptions of how I heard them too. Might add that it seems more apparent imo when things get very busy, like with classical orchestral music.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

Finally someone that knows their stuff...

 

... and thus renders listening impressions of people (who don't know their stuff) obsolete? Is that what you're trying to say? :rolleyes:

 

 

On a different note, sorry for not following up yesterday's posts, but much to my consternation I found my loaner pair starting to disintegrate at the (fake) strain relief and had to sort things out with the owner. A quite embarrassing experience, as I treat borrowed gear with kid gloves and this is the first time ever a loaner went (almost) kaput on me. :o

 

 

post #2621 of 5962
Quote:
Originally Posted by james444 View Post

Agreed. These are pretty good descriptions of how I heard them too. Might add that it seems more apparent imo when things get very busy, like with classical orchestral music.


... and thus renders listening impressions of people (who don't know their stuff) obsolete? Is that what you're trying to say? rolleyes.gif


On a different note, sorry for not following up yesterday's posts, but much to my consternation I found my loaner pair starting to disintegrate at the (fake) strain relief and had to sort things out with the owner. A quite embarrassing experience, as I treat borrowed gear with kid gloves and this is the first time ever a loaner went (almost) kaput on me. redface.gif


 

Nope, just makes it more clear as to what an issue may be, Rather than just guessing, mostly pointed towards those that mention dynamic range. Timé domain issues are actually very rare for a single dynamic, it's just FR as it's distortion is low. I will agree that there is something going in the lower mids but it's minimal, but quite apparent cause it's otherwise very flat. Then again if compare it to the FX850, that lower midrange issue is a lot worse on the JVCs, this Tenore is pretty controlled for a slightly boosted bass
Edited by Inks - 6/12/14 at 12:09am
post #2622 of 5962
Also I think they likely sent it to you that way and both parties didn't notice. I don't baby mine at all and it still looks brand new 3 months in
post #2623 of 5962
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkiesOfAzel View Post
 

 

I just tested with single tones and you are right. Could what causing this be a lack of speed down there? Maybe it doesn't fare as well with multiple tones in close proximity.

 

As for dynamic range, my understanding is that the term describes the difference between the loudest and the most silent tone that can be produced. I've had iems with big dynamic drivers that offered a more noticeable difference between those two states than the Tenores. I am not saying those actually compress dynamic range, just that in comparison to bigger phones they may sound less authoritative.

I don't think it's a lack of speed, either. Mathematically, 'fast' bass tones are actually mid tones and the Tenores have no problem reproducing mids. Usually 'slow' sounding bass is actually related to FR.

For dynamics or authoritativeness, that is also likely to be an FR issue. While it's unlikely these earphones actually have less dynamic range, having an emphasis in particular regions e.g. high frequency transients can make earphones sound more 'dynamic'.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by james444 View Post
 

... and thus renders listening impressions of people (who don't know their stuff) obsolete? Is that what you're trying to say? :rolleyes:

As far as I'm concerned, objective measures can never replace subjective listening, because you can't say what something sounds like without a human ear to hear it.

 

The problem is communicating these differences properly. For example, I recently came across someone describing some earphones as "thick and tinny". Now, to me, thick means the opposite of tinny. If I thought these earphones were 'thick', is he agreeing with me or disagreeing?

 

When we use terms that are not calibrated to some sort of reference standard (e.g. an objectively measured difference, or a set of equipment both people have heard), or we use analogy (e.g. 'liquid mids'), there is no way of knowing whether the reader will interpret these terms to mean what we intended.

Thus, this can result in incorrect agreement or disagreement (it's easy to pick out bits of a written impression and interpret them to 'fit' what you heard due to expectation bias).

For example, I may be hearing the exact same issue vwinter heard, but I might incorrectly 'disagree' with his impression because I interpret "hollow" to mean something else.

 

 

Even worse is when people use specific, objective terminology (like 'dynamic range' here) where the technical definition doesn't actually apply. I have no doubt that people may be hearing a difference; it's just that 'dynamic range' is not the right term to use, and the only way we can communicate effectively over an internet forum is by carefully selecting our words.


Edited by higbvuyb - 6/12/14 at 2:27am
post #2624 of 5962
Quote:
Originally Posted by higbvuyb View Post
 

I don't think it's a lack of speed, either. Mathematically, 'fast' bass tones are actually mid tones and the Tenores have no problem reproducing mids. Usually 'slow' sounding bass is actually related to FR.

For dynamics or authoritativeness, that is also likely to be an FR issue. While it's unlikely these earphones actually have less dynamic range, having an emphasis in particular regions e.g. high frequency transients can make earphones sound more 'dynamic'.

 

As far as I'm concerned, objective measures can never replace subjective listening, because you can't say what something sounds like without a human ear to hear it.

 

The problem is communicating these differences properly. For example, I recently came across someone describing some earphones as "thick and tinny". Now, to me, thick means the opposite of tinny. If I thought these earphones were 'thick', is he agreeing with me or disagreeing?

 

When we use terms that are not calibrated to some sort of reference standard (e.g. an objectively measured difference, or a set of equipment both people have heard), or we use analogy (e.g. 'liquid mids'), there is no way of knowing whether the reader will interpret these terms to mean what we intended.

Thus, this can result in incorrect agreement or disagreement (it's easy to pick out bits of a written impression and interpret them to 'fit' what you heard due to expectation bias).

For example, I may be hearing the exact same issue vwinter heard, but I might incorrectly 'disagree' with his impression because I interpret "hollow" to mean something else.

 

 

Even worse is when people use specific, objective terminology (like 'dynamic range' here) where the technical definition doesn't actually apply. I have no doubt that people may be hearing a difference; it's just that 'dynamic range' is not the right term to use, and the only way we can communicate effectively over an internet forum is by carefully selecting our words.

 

Sorry mom, it wont happen again, i swear :D! Seriously though, with music there are a lot of things that can mess with the perception of loudness, and that's where objective measurements can really help the less experienced. I used the term that was closer to what i thought i was hearing and i am glad i did, otherwise you wouldn't have corrected me and i'd know less than i do now. I am also glad i brought decay up, i'd never have thought to test with individual tones across the spectrum so this is another thing i've learned.

 

The fact that there is something weird going on with the bass doesn't bug me nearly as much as the fact i can't really put my finger on what's causing it. I've tested the 40-500hz region numerous times and it seems pretty linear to me. Decay isn't an issue. What i think i listen to is attack speed decreasing when the sound goes lower. Upper bass/lower mids attack speed sounds fine to me and i listen to plenty of metal which has a lot of stuff happening at those frequencies. That's why i'd love to see an objective measurement of these.

 

I also think there are serious variations with these. They can't be grainy without a lift around the 200hz area afaik and my pair is definitely not cold either (no dip). I've bought a second pair from smith, he got his from woodlandhills_cass who doesn't ship to Greece, so it was a good opportunity to get a pair from the same seller as the rest of you. This also increases the possibility that the new pair will come form a different batch than the one i currently own, so comparisons between the two are bound to be interesting.

 

[EDIT]

I probably wouldn't have noticed the issued if i only used the Tenores straight out of my DX2. It's a lot more pronounced when the source is a Nexus 5 which admittedly has a mediocre DAC that is known to mess up in the low region. So i think that source synergy is also a factor we should explore.


Edited by SkiesOfAzel - 6/12/14 at 6:06am
post #2625 of 5962

Curiosity killed the wallet again :evil:   ( I am sorry Peter123, this time I did it :P )

 

Hopefully only 56USD  ;)

 

The little thing on the left is a gift from the Japan ebay seller (toktyofreaks23). Nice idea. Coincidence: Candies are named as little twin stars (I have twin daughters) :p

Only 8 days to receive them (from JP to Turkey). Unbelievable! Highly recommended Tenore seller!

 

 

Out of the box: No driver flex, very linear sound, wide soundstage with good depth (some very slight emphasis on the sub sub bass region). According to what I have learned from this thread my pair should have the typical linear Tenore sound. Doesn't have any of the before-mentioned problems.

 

I haven't heard a phone sounding this close to Havi B3 Pro1 before. Although B3 is more clear and more linear (but I haven't burned-in my Tenore yet, also I will try some other tips).

 

Promising sound, lets see how it evolves...  :beerchug:

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Zero Audio - ZH-DX200 Carbo Tenore | ZH-DX210 Carbo Basso (Carbon & Aluminium IEM) thread