[fnkcow]

Quote:

If Yeats had anything to say about it, I think he would say they were made out of crushed dreams and aspirations.
 
I even found a $30.00 IEM with an included frequency response graph, and it actually uses Silver cables!  It seems none of the products you mentioned include these features.  Prices aside it doesn't appear like there is any scientific reason to buy the K3003, let alone the RE-600, in favour of this IEM or the Etymotic ER-4.  When I see it I'll pay.
 

Lol Vsonic R02 Pro II! I had one of those! Didnt realise it uses silver cables! 
Ahh have had good times with it (Till I've discovered better ones out there that is) 

 

[gnarlsagan]

Like what.

Stuff like time delay can make bass sound more emphasized than what the FR graph would show. For time delay you need a different graph.

 

[fnkcow]

Hey gnarlsagan,
 
Sorry for derailing the thread but I see that you have UHA-6S MKII. Is it better than JDS Labs C5 or comparable to O2/ODAC?

 

[tigon_ridge]

Quote:

 
Like what.

"Nearly identical" would be difficult to pull off without EQing one of them, so similar would be a better word to use I suppose. For starter, my EQ'd ER4S and EQ'd RE-400 have the same tonality for the most part, but the 4S still sounds thin/dry and has flat  soundstage. It still lacks body and height, and in that regard, doesn't quite have fully accurate resolution. It's like comparing two LCD monitors that are both 1080p capable, but one of them have better contrast and color accuracy than the other. My EQ'd RE-400 just renders sounds with more realism.

 

[gnarlsagan]

Are you using filters on the ER4S now tigon?

 

[Theta Alpha 1]

Quote:

For starter, my EQ'd ER4S and EQ'd RE-400 have the same tonality for the most part, but the 4S still sounds thin/dry and has flat  soundstage. It still lacks body and height, and in that regard, doesn't quite have fully accurate resolution.
It still lacks body and height, and in that regard, doesn't quite have fully accurate resolution. It's like comparing two LCD monitors that are both 1080p capable, but one of them have better contrast and color accuracy than the other. My EQ'd RE-400 just renders sounds with more realism.

 
So where can I find the measurements of thin / dry, flat sound-stage, less resolution, body, height, contrast, color accuracy and realism.
 
Is it in some kind of telepathic channel or is it air.

 

[tigon_ridge]

Quote:

Where are the spikes on the ER4S? I want to see if I can hear them. I didn't notice them last time I ran a sine sweep.

Definitely weird. Do you use a controlled/manual sweeper, or is it just a sound file that you play? It's definitely easier to tell with a manual sweeper. Regardless, I do hear that the spikes on the RE-400 are less pronounced than those on the 4S.

 

[tigon_ridge]

Quote:

 
So where can I find the measurements of thin / dry, flat sound-stage, less resolution, body, height, contrast, color accuracy and realism.
 
Is it in some kind of telepathic channel or is it air.

Measurements for these don't quite exist, yet. You'll just have to use your ears. No scientific instrument should have the final say. Tyll really respects this concept, which is why I like his blogs. He's not pure left-brain objectivists like some people are who would think they can listen to graphs.

 

[Theta Alpha 1]

Quote:

Measurements for these don't quite exist, yet.

 
How convenient.
 
Let me know when Buddha awakens.

 

[Muzeick]

Measurements for these don't quite exist, yet. You'll just have to use your ears. No scientific instrument should have the final say. Tyll really respects this concept, which is why I like his blogs. He's not pure left-brain objectivists like some people are who would think they can listen to graphs.

How come nobody has ever managed to invent an interesting graph?

 

[tigon_ridge]

Quote:

 
How convenient.
 
Let me know when Buddha awakens.

I'm not sure what you mean by that metaphor. o_O?
 
My point is to keep an open mind about these things, and judge things by your ears, rather than jump to conclusions based on an incomplete set of measurement data. Judging a headphone based solely on its FR is a basic mistake as, for example, you are ignoring CSD plots. You are also ignoring other aspects for which the only effective measurement tool currently available are your own ears. You can sample summit-fi headphones without actually buying/keeping them, then correct their FR with good EQ software, then see for yourself how they would compare to your beloved Etys. My experience with my EQ'd HE-400, versus the EQ'd 4S, is that the planar is more resolving and has all the advantages that my EQ'd RE-400 has over my EQ'd 4S. (There's also the massively bigger soundstage, but that's a given - and, oh, there's no way to measure that either) ER4S seems to struggle with complex passages. With the HE-400, it's much easier to follow individual instruments during these passages. Obviously, that's a subjective experience, and I can't provide graphs for that; but I'm not trying to prove it to others - only to myself. Likewise, you don't need graphs to prove to yourself how good a headphone is.

 

[tigon_ridge]

Quote:

How come nobody has ever managed to invent an interesting graph?

Almost every graph is interesting to me, but I'm a math/engineering student. Of course, if you can't interpret a graph it wouldn't be interesting to you.

 

[Theta Alpha 1]

Quote:

You can sample summit-fi headphones without actually buying/keeping them, then correct their FR with good EQ software, then see for yourself how they would compare to your beloved Etys.

 
I think Rin Choi has already done that.  I noticed he uses the Etymotic ER-4B.  Why should every consumer like myself need to repeat the results of scientific findings?  Remind me next time I see someone walking into a chemist to buy a box of 500mg aspirin tablets, I tell them they need to compare it to every summit-medicine first, just in case "essence of Juju" tea and "haunted daisy stems" are 20% more efficient, you know, in undetectable ways.
 
 
Quote:

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.

 
Quote:

My point is to keep an open mind about these things, and judge things by your ears, rather than jump to conclusions based on an incomplete set of measurement data. Judging a headphone based solely on its FR is a basic mistake as, for example, you are ignoring CSD plots. You are also ignoring other aspects for which the only effective measurement tool currently available are your own ears.

My experience with my EQ'd HE-400, versus the EQ'd 4S, is that the planar is more resolving and has all the advantages that my EQ'd RE-400 has over my EQ'd 4S. (There's also the massively bigger soundstage, but that's a given - and, oh, there's no way to measure that either) ER4S seems to struggle with complex passages. With the HE-400, it's much easier to follow individual instruments during these passages. Obviously, that's a subjective experience, and I can't provide graphs for that; but I'm not trying to prove it to others - only to myself.

 
Clearly, you can't both be correct at the same time.
 
The ER-4B will have slightly better sound-stage than the HE-400 in binaural recordings, since the frequency response is more suited for that application.  Thus, sound-stage is in the frequency response.  CSD graphs are in the order of 1ms to 5ms, that's 1/1000 of a second, I'm sure it's entertaining to measure, but I haven't seen the documentation for whether it's humanly perceivable.
 
If it was, I'm sure manufacturers would use that fact in their advertising.
 
 
Quote:

Likewise, you don't need graphs to prove to yourself how good a headphone is.

 
Enjoy your Juju tea.

 

[eke2k6]

I think Rin Choi has already done that.  I noticed he uses the Etymotic ER-4B.  Why should every consumer like myself need to repeat the results of scientific findings?  Remind me next time I see someone walking into a chemist to buy a box of 500mg aspirin tablets, I tell them they need to compare it to every summit-medicine first, just in case "essence of Juju" tea and "haunted daisy stems" are 20% more efficient, you know, in undetectable ways.

If the ER4 is aspirin, what headphones would you designate as Lortab, Percocet, ibuprofen, naproxen, etc? All of which are more effective than aspirin.

Try not to be so dogmatic.

 

[Theta Alpha 1]

Well they have all been clinically proven.  When I see clinically proven results of the headphone equivalent to Naproxen, I will buy it.  As the average consumer without time to collect and study 10 products, that's all I'm asking for.