Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › The $999 vs $99 Challenge Tour!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The $999 vs $99 Challenge Tour! - Page 33

post #481 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post

Inks, I don't know when you got unbanned, but hope you will let me keep this topic going in a civil manner. I have something worthy going on here that I don't want to see spiraling into a mess of put-downs on everything led by a moving target of what constitutes good measurements. Hopefully your modus operandi has changed since I last met you.

Joe I don't understand what you're trying here ?because I'm just saying it how it is, saying the MC5 is a Rin favorite "now" is misinformation, it was back then when he had only experience with the likes of the UE400 and sony EX85 lol.here's why. MC5 is smooth in the midrange but basically had terrible bandwidth, something no EQ is going to fix. Bass is the main thing that can be deceiving in FR as CSD is really important there, the MC5 had a short decaying bass with roll off and the treble has nothing on Even the HF5
post #482 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

Joe I don't understand what you're trying here ?because I'm just saying it how it is, saying the MC5 is a Rin favorite "now" is misinformation, it was back then when he had only experience with the likes of the UE400 and sony EX85 lol.here's why. MC5 is smooth in the midrange but basically had terrible bandwidth, something no EQ is going to fix. Bass is the main thing that can be deceiving in FR as CSD is really important there, the MC5 had a short decaying bass with roll off and the treble has nothing on Even the HF5

Sorry
post #483 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post

AFAICT from looking at the impressions compilation (assuming they are in chronological order), you started the trend yourself, in bold letters no less wink.gif

 

Wut? I haven't even heard the TFRM yet, let alone posted impressions. :confused:

 

Joe, no offense, but did you take the time to read the original post properly? This thread has never been about absolute sound quality, but simply about the question whether the UERM was just a "tweaked TF10" (as Rin insinuated), or something entirely different. I challenged him to proof his point by modding a TF10 into an UERM, and he accepted.

 

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around what you're actually proposing, but me thinks it has nothing to do with the main topic of this thread. If you're just pushing your same old agenda, that you can turn a SHE3580 into the best phone on the planet by EQ, then, sorry to say, I'm not interested. This will inevitably turn into the same old tedious debate about objective criteria for sound quality to support this claim, and frankly speaking, I'm tired of it.

 

I thought for a moment your point was that digital compensation could make a better job than Rin's hardware tweaking, meaning you could take "phone A" and make it sound like "phone B" simply by software compensation. Now that would have been both interesting and on topic for this thread, and it would have kept the controversy on sound quality criteria out of it. To proof this point, it (theoretically) wouldn't matter whether "phone B" was an UE700 or UERM and I would have gladly played along. But seems to me this was just a wrong interpretation on my side, so sorry for that.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

Joe I don't understand what you're trying here ?because I'm just saying it how it is, saying the MC5 is a Rin favorite "now" is misinformation, it was back then when he had only experience with the likes of the UE400 and sony EX85 lol.here's why. MC5 is smooth in the midrange but basically had terrible bandwidth, something no EQ is going to fix. Bass is the main thing that can be deceiving in FR as CSD is really important there, the MC5 had a short decaying bass with roll off and the treble has nothing on Even the HF5

 

Thanks for clarifying. Thing is, Rin's blog post and "best bang for the buck" recommendation is still out there and it seems he never bothered to post an update.

post #484 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by james444 View Post

Wut? I haven't even heard the TFRM yet, let alone posted impressions. confused.gif

Sorry, that was eke2k6, I mixed up you two, dunno how I did that but I did redface.gif

Will reply to the rest of your post below
post #485 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by james444 View Post


Joe, no offense, but did you take the time to read the original post properly? This thread has never been about absolute sound quality, but simply about the question whether the UERM was just a "tweaked TF10" (as Rin insinuated), or something entirely different. I challenged him to proof his point by modding a TF10 into an UERM, and he accepted.

I quote some of your words from the opening (I didn't mix you and somebody else up this time did I? redface.gif )
Quote:
Needless to say, I was more than just a little bewildered. The UERM is one of the most highly regarded IEMs I know and costs a whopping $999 (even more in the EU, where I live), whereas the TF10 can be had for as little as $99 during Black Friday sales. Had I been ripped off big time by Ultimate Ears?
Quote:
So, now that modding and measurements have been completed, how will our esteemed fellow Head-Fier's ears relate to Rin's results? Well, that's what the "$990 vs $99 Challenge Tour" is meant for, to collect a sizeable number of subjective listening impressions and let the collective mind evaluate whether the $99 IEM has really been turned into a $999 one.

The emphasis on the prices of the units seems to imply to me that making the cheap phone sound like an expensive phone would be just as important as making them sound like the expensive phone in the comparison--the UERM. While I'm sure you could say that the headline of your thread, "The $999 vs $99 Challenge Tour!", was devised just to grab attention, you cannot wash your hands totally clean when people's attention are directed to the disparity in price and how the cheap pair aspire to match the expensive pair...

I mean if making something cheap sound better didn't matter at all, this tour could have just as well been about modding the UERM to sound like the TF10 instead of the other way around wink.gif

But I guess you and shotgunshane had a point when you said I could just as well ask you guys to buy the cheapos I'm listening to and give you the digital filters to try out. This would land me in the disadvantage of not hearing what kind of sound you guys consider worth forking over big bucks for (the main reason I hoped to have a pair shipped), but involves less cost for all involved. So without further ado, I will be posting about the cheapos for which I have made the best profiles for in my own thread:
http://www.head-fi.org/t/672375/great-news-for-rooted-android-users-viper4android/15#post_10498206
Quote:
I'm still trying to wrap my mind around what you're actually proposing, but me thinks it has nothing to do with the main topic of this thread. If you're just pushing your same old agenda, that you can turn a SHE3580 into the best phone on the planet by EQ, then, sorry to say, I'm not interested. This will inevitably turn into the same old tedious debate about objective criteria for sound quality to support this claim, and frankly speaking, I'm tired of it.

I thought for a moment your point was that digital compensation could make a better job than Rin's hardware tweaking, meaning you could take "phone A" and make it sound like "phone B" simply by software compensation. Now that would have been both interesting and on topic for this thread, and it would have kept the controversy on sound quality criteria out of it. To proof this point, it (theoretically) wouldn't matter whether "phone B" was an UE700 or UERM and I would have gladly played along. But seems to me this was just a wrong interpretation on my side, so sorry for that.

If you are interested, I could do all three variations on the cheapo(s):
1. Sounding like a UE700, warts 'n all
2. Sounding like a UE700, but smoother
3. Sounding as good as I think it could
post #486 of 524
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post


I quote some of your words from the opening (I didn't mix you and somebody else up this time did I? redface.gif )

The emphasis on the prices of the units seems to imply to me that making the cheap phone sound like an expensive phone would be just as important as making them sound like the expensive phone in the comparison--the UERM. While I'm sure you could say that the headline of your thread, "The $999 vs $99 Challenge Tour!", was devised just to grab attention, you cannot wash your hands totally clean when people's attention are directed to the disparity in price and how the cheap pair aspire to match the expensive pair...

I mean if making something cheap sound better didn't matter at all, this tour could have just as well been about modding the UERM to sound like the TF10 instead of the other way around wink.gif
 

 

 

And here's where our biases show up when reading/comprehending others' words.

 

The UERM is widely regarded as one of the best phones on the planet. Rin's statement that the TF10 could sound just as good was interesting because of the assumption that UE is charging an extra $800+ for the same phone in a custom shell. This is the crux of the tour. The TF10, a $99 on black Friday phone with crappy crossovers and poor bandwidth, vs the studio mastering device that is the UE Reference Monitor.

 

I owned the TF10...twice. To me, it's not even close to being worth its original price. That's the main assumption. I'd point you to Rin's original remarks, but head-fi rules disallow referrals to the site in question. The idea of value is an ever present part of audio. Sure, the SHE3850 sounds decent, but I wouldn't pay a cent over $20 for it. The same principle applies to the TF10, Cardas EM5813, Earsonics EM6, and several other phones.

 

All I see is the twisting of words to fit various agendas. The tour is what it is. The motives have been clearly stated. The impressions are in. All that I can say as a co-organizer of the tour is "take it or leave it."


Edited by eke2k6 - 4/28/14 at 1:14pm
post #487 of 524
Joe, I don't have an android device. Is this not something I can do with standard parametric eq on my idevice or laptop?
post #488 of 524

I do want to add that the title is misleading...  The TF-10 retailed for 400, not 100.  Comparing a street price to a retail price isn't the most fair IMO. 

post #489 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinyman392 View Post

I do want to add that the title is misleading...  The TF-10 retailed for 400, not 100.  Comparing a street price to a retail price isn't the most fair IMO. 

Street price of UERM is $999 tongue.gif
post #490 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by vwinter View Post


Street price of UERM is $999 tongue.gif

 

I am aware of that...  But the title of the thread makes it sound like the prices of the TF10 and UERM are 10-fold...  When comparing MSRP directly, it's closer to 2. 

post #491 of 524
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinyman392 View Post
 

 

I am aware of that...  But the title of the thread makes it sound like the prices of the TF10 and UERM are 10-fold...  When comparing MSRP directly, it's closer to 2. 

 

The TF10 hasn't sold at MSRP in over 2 years. And the UERM's price doesn't even factor in impressions from a good audiologist to minimize the chance of refits, nor the cost of shipping.

post #492 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by shotgunshane View Post

Joe, I don't have an android device. Is this not something I can do with standard parametric eq on my idevice or laptop?

It can be, actually. The "digital acoustic correction" moniker just reflects my belief that these parametric corrections when performed on a minimum phase EQ correct both frequency and time domain response (assuming good acoustic match with your ears). Is your laptop a Mac or PC? You could load the exact same EQ program I'm using on a PC, or I could just send you the EQ parameters.

However, I've noted that lack of volume matching between EQed and unEQed profiles can mess with listening impressions a lot. You see this in action in the FiiO X5 thread, where many people complain that the sound is veiled as soon as you add any EQ. (the EQ in the X5 adds a 6dB pre-cut to avoid clipping, and the reduction in volume is perceived by most people as a "veil" when compared to no EQ) To avoid this, ideally you should have a parametric EQ that allows A/Bing where B can be set to a simple bypass but with a pre-cut roughly matching the volume of the adjustment EQ in A.

http://www.head-fi.org/t/661411/fiio-x5-thread-info-updated-on-jan-17th-2014/7905#post_10498683
Edited by Joe Bloggs - 4/28/14 at 7:40pm
post #493 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post

...  you cannot wash your hands totally clean when people's attention are directed to the disparity in price and how the cheap pair aspire to match the expensive pair...

 

Agreed, I'm not free of price bias (let him who is cast the first stone ;)). So I assumed the UERM had to be better than the TF10, I'll give you that. But for the record, I don't regard the UERM as some kind of uber-phone, and I have a few significantly less expensive phones that I like better.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post


But I guess you and shotgunshane had a point when you said I could just as well ask you guys to buy the cheapos I'm listening to and give you the digital filters to try out. This would land me in the disadvantage of not hearing what kind of sound you guys consider worth forking over big bucks for (the main reason I hoped to have a pair shipped), but involves less cost for all involved. So without further ado, I will be posting about the cheapos for which I have made the best profiles for in my own thread:
http://www.head-fi.org/t/672375/great-news-for-rooted-android-users-viper4android/15#post_10498206
If you are interested, I could do all three variations on the cheapo(s):
1. Sounding like a UE700, warts 'n all
2. Sounding like a UE700, but smoother
3. Sounding as good as I think it could

 

Alright, Joe. 1. is mandatory, since tour members will be asked to compare your cheapos to the real UE700 and rate (on a scale from 1 to 10) how well the digital approximation works. (Of course you can optionally do 2. and 3. too). If your wizardry manages to score 3 similarity ratings of 8/10 or higher, I'll send you the UERM.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tinyman392 View Post
 

I do want to add that the title is misleading...  The TF-10 retailed for 400, not 100.  Comparing a street price to a retail price isn't the most fair IMO. 

 

This has already been mentioned on page #2 of the thread.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by james444 View Post
 

Given the fact that I was actually charged €1139 for my UERM from Germany, which roughly translates into $1500, I don't feel bad at all about calling it a $999 vs $99 challenge. wink.gif

post #494 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by james444 View Post

Agreed, I'm not free of price bias (let him who is cast the first stone wink.gif ). So I assumed the UERM had to be better than the TF10, I'll give you that. But for the record, I don't regard the UERM as some kind of uber-phone, and I have a few significantly less expensive phones that I like better.


Alright, Joe. 1. is mandatory, since tour members will be asked to compare your cheapos to the real UE700 and rate (on a scale from 1 to 10) how well the digital approximation works. (Of course you can optionally do 2. and 3. too). If your wizardry manages to score 3 similarity ratings of 8/10 or higher, I'll send you the UERM.

Thanks James. I sent you my address particulars in a pm yesterday. So... 3 in a row? Or 3 out of, say, 5?
post #495 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post

So... 3 in a row? Or 3 out of, say, 5?

 

3 out of all tour members (assuming we get at least 5 volunteers). Not related by blood or marriage with you. ;)

 

Joking aside, as I said earlier I don't think that mimicking an armature driver with a dynamic via EQ will work at all. But I'm keeping an open mind. So, if your approximation can convince at least 3 independant tour members to rate it 8/10 or better, Im going to take my hat off to you and rethink my stance. :smile_phones: 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › The $999 vs $99 Challenge Tour!