b0dhi
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2005
- Posts
- 2,070
- Likes
- 23
Various earbud/canalphone dynamics:
Upper end armatures:
Upper end armatures:
Opinion on type of IEM Drivers - Armature vs. Dynamic?
- Thread starter sionghchan
- Start date
dura
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2004
- Posts
- 1,659
- Likes
- 14
I love them both, here is a comparison I made between the Denon C700 (dynamic) and the Shure 4G (arnmature):
Quote:
Have to add though, I paid twice as much for the Shures, which make the Denons a price/quality winner for me.
Quote:
| They (the Shures)do not have the bass of the Denons, and in some music that is a serious miss, but .... for acoustic music they are fantastastic. Listening to the Shures is like listening to a very well designed small two-way speaker; the music sounds very together because of the midrange-accent and the message gets through clearly. The denons sound like big threeways; the prominent and very slightly impure treble and the nice deep big bass stand out, making them excellent allrounders, especially with the treble toned down a little bit. I like them both and will definately keep them |
Have to add though, I paid twice as much for the Shures, which make the Denons a price/quality winner for me.
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2006
- Posts
- 12,932
- Likes
- 1,080
i started with armatures and found that my ears could not handle a single one i tried - just a reaction. i had e500 (on loan)for a bit, um2 for a long time and had the er4s for a bit as well.
the dual and triple armatures seemed to either be too fast or too slow. the er4s was too piercing but wonderfully paced. the um2 and e500 were both too slow for my tastes (with regard to trance bass reproduction) and still bothered my ears with fatigue.
i sold them all after getting the atrio m5 which had one problem: the plastic housing created a strange vibration for mid mids or high highs but kept pace a bit better than um2 and did not nearly fatigue as much as the armatures.
overall, i think it is just different tastes.
the atrio had the best resolution of bass i have ever heard and gave it a more natural sound like a headphone or speaker where the reproduction of the driver moving is tangible. i also like that they are not as expensive as multiple driver armatures - i believe that the claim that they make on their site may be true for some part, but it is marketting nonetheless.
in any case, i am very happy to have found them - it fully stopped my rampage on the perfect multiple driver iem search.
the dual and triple armatures seemed to either be too fast or too slow. the er4s was too piercing but wonderfully paced. the um2 and e500 were both too slow for my tastes (with regard to trance bass reproduction) and still bothered my ears with fatigue.
i sold them all after getting the atrio m5 which had one problem: the plastic housing created a strange vibration for mid mids or high highs but kept pace a bit better than um2 and did not nearly fatigue as much as the armatures.
overall, i think it is just different tastes.
the atrio had the best resolution of bass i have ever heard and gave it a more natural sound like a headphone or speaker where the reproduction of the driver moving is tangible. i also like that they are not as expensive as multiple driver armatures - i believe that the claim that they make on their site may be true for some part, but it is marketting nonetheless.
in any case, i am very happy to have found them - it fully stopped my rampage on the perfect multiple driver iem search.
I just came into this thread, so I would like to share my view.
Quote:
Beside the fact that those claim is pure marketing, Future Sonics does selectively ignore the fact that BA moves a lot less air than dynamic, regardless of how many BA you can stuff inside an IEM.
Be mindful that human doesn't hear low end sound very effectively with out the sense of touch (air vibration felt by skin, or in term, bass impact, plus the physical vibration of the transducer). Even when using small hearing device such as IEM, the impact of air movement can still be clearly felt by the skin of your ear canal (plus the physical vibration transmits to your ear). By the nature of its design, dynamic transducer moves a lot more air on bass note and create a much larger vibration (basically the whole diaphragm has to move from one end to another). In contrast, BA too move its diaphragm from one end to another, but DO NOT forget that BA's diaphragm can only move less than 0.5mm (probably even less) over a surface less than 1/5 (or less) of a dynamic transducer, in order to create the same bass note. If you can 'magically' take away the vibrating sensation of a dynamic transducer, it will not more than what a BA can produce.
Like FS has claimed, BA design does tend to employ 'bass boost' equalization. However, what FS doesn't say, it that such EQ is necessarily in order to compensate for the lack of vibration in BA design. It is not because BA can not accurately or effectively reproduce bass note, just not the bass impact (skin sensation).
Quote:
Cost and effectiveness trades off here. Dynamic transducers are easier to find and cheaper to use.
Quote:
BA is not worth it because it is more expensive, not because it has a narrow frequency response. For more explanation, see my 'basic guide to IEM' in my sig.
Quote:
It is my belief too that BA doesn't have problem with frequency response. The problem is, most people actually believe that a headphone capable of producing 30kHz is much better those with 20kHz with out ever realizing they can't even hear both (or don't need to hear both)
Quote:
I also want to point out that, most of the earliest IEM producer, and most noticeable those which develop or OEM'ed BA based IEM, are companies that are in the hearing aid business as well (ie. Etymotic, Westone, etc). Those are the companies that spent a great deal of resource and time in R&D of hearing instrument miniaturization (ie. BA transducers), therefore it was natural for them to choose BA over dynamic when they were asked to produce hearing instrument for musician.
Quote:
Again, I believe this has more to do with bass impact than frequency reproduction. While dynamic transducer has spare room for lesser air movement in low volume, BA has already used up what was no enough to begin with.
One thing that worth mentioning is, BA doesn't always have to suffer from the lack of bass impact, or employ a dedicated BA for woofer. Take E4c as an example: Shure use their Tuned Port design to channel the air inside the BA for an more effective reverberation thus gives a better bass impact, although E4c is only an one-way IEM. For another example, Sleek Audio use a semi-open design (in their Bass+ port) instead of the more conventional close design in their SA6 to allow air movement. This results in a strong and clear bass with out sacrificing isolation.
Quote:
I am just curious: why compare their harmonic distortion instead of freq. response?
Long-ish reply, Sorry
Quote:
| Originally Posted by sionghchan /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hmmm...I haven't being able to try IEMs with dynamic drivers, so, I cannot comment, however, here is what Future Sonics has to say: Q: Why does Future Sonics use dynamic speakers vs. armature drivers? A: Atrio Series™ products, and all of our professional earphones, price out much lower then any two/three way armature device and we offer ours with better quality of sound -- even in our universal products which will outperform any of the armatures which cannot accurately or effectively reproduce frequencies below 150Hz. Our dynamic product achieve these deeper tones naturally and without any "bass boost," or "extended bass" tricks found in some other brands.... My question then is, what makes Future Sonics dynamic drivers different? So different that no other IEM Dynamic Drivers can match? |
Beside the fact that those claim is pure marketing, Future Sonics does selectively ignore the fact that BA moves a lot less air than dynamic, regardless of how many BA you can stuff inside an IEM.
Be mindful that human doesn't hear low end sound very effectively with out the sense of touch (air vibration felt by skin, or in term, bass impact, plus the physical vibration of the transducer). Even when using small hearing device such as IEM, the impact of air movement can still be clearly felt by the skin of your ear canal (plus the physical vibration transmits to your ear). By the nature of its design, dynamic transducer moves a lot more air on bass note and create a much larger vibration (basically the whole diaphragm has to move from one end to another). In contrast, BA too move its diaphragm from one end to another, but DO NOT forget that BA's diaphragm can only move less than 0.5mm (probably even less) over a surface less than 1/5 (or less) of a dynamic transducer, in order to create the same bass note. If you can 'magically' take away the vibrating sensation of a dynamic transducer, it will not more than what a BA can produce.
Like FS has claimed, BA design does tend to employ 'bass boost' equalization. However, what FS doesn't say, it that such EQ is necessarily in order to compensate for the lack of vibration in BA design. It is not because BA can not accurately or effectively reproduce bass note, just not the bass impact (skin sensation).
Quote:
| Originally Posted by sionghchan /img/forum/go_quote.gif However, if you notice, these companies only makes their lower end phones with dynamic drivers and the higher end phones are all armature designs. |
Cost and effectiveness trades off here. Dynamic transducers are easier to find and cheaper to use.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Aevum /img/forum/go_quote.gif lately we have seen groups of dynamic driver IEM´s making it to the market challanging armature based IEM´s, the C700, the Atrio M5, were seeing that some manufacturers have decided that armature drivers might not be worth it becuase of the narrow response frequency, |
BA is not worth it because it is more expensive, not because it has a narrow frequency response. For more explanation, see my 'basic guide to IEM' in my sig.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by PiccoloNamek /img/forum/go_quote.gif One, armature drivers do not have a narrow frequency response. It is possible for an armature to have a nearly flat response from 20 to 16kHz. Above 16kHz the response drops sharply, but it is not a disastrous effect. |
It is my belief too that BA doesn't have problem with frequency response. The problem is, most people actually believe that a headphone capable of producing 30kHz is much better those with 20kHz with out ever realizing they can't even hear both (or don't need to hear both)
Quote:
| Originally Posted by IPodPJ /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think the main reason balanced armatures are utilized is to keep pretty good SQ in a small earphone. |
I also want to point out that, most of the earliest IEM producer, and most noticeable those which develop or OEM'ed BA based IEM, are companies that are in the hearing aid business as well (ie. Etymotic, Westone, etc). Those are the companies that spent a great deal of resource and time in R&D of hearing instrument miniaturization (ie. BA transducers), therefore it was natural for them to choose BA over dynamic when they were asked to produce hearing instrument for musician.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by navmau /img/forum/go_quote.gif Also, I do agree with the comment that dynamic drivers sound better at lower volumes, I found the lower freq's of BA's dropped off when the volume was low whereas the FS IEMs retain the lower end perfectly fine. |
Again, I believe this has more to do with bass impact than frequency reproduction. While dynamic transducer has spare room for lesser air movement in low volume, BA has already used up what was no enough to begin with.
One thing that worth mentioning is, BA doesn't always have to suffer from the lack of bass impact, or employ a dedicated BA for woofer. Take E4c as an example: Shure use their Tuned Port design to channel the air inside the BA for an more effective reverberation thus gives a better bass impact, although E4c is only an one-way IEM. For another example, Sleek Audio use a semi-open design (in their Bass+ port) instead of the more conventional close design in their SA6 to allow air movement. This results in a strong and clear bass with out sacrificing isolation.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by b0dhi /img/forum/go_quote.gif Various earbud/canalphone dynamics: ... Upper end armatures: ... |
I am just curious: why compare their harmonic distortion instead of freq. response?
Long-ish reply, Sorry
FrederikS|TPU
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2007
- Posts
- 1,298
- Likes
- 12
Making a versatile small dynamic transducer is harder than doing a small balanced armature. The main selling point for armatures is the fact that they are smaller than a normal dynamic one. Balanced armatures are a bit more expensive to produce (generally speaking), however, when size is of the issue most in-ear producing firms often opt for the armature solutions.
I do not think you can generalize and say that the firms using dynamic drivers in their in-ears do it because of their cost. A good dynamic transducer is easily as expensive as a good balanced one. When it comes to being cost efficient a low end dynamic transducer will sound better compared to the cost of it.
A lot of dynamic based earphones are surfacing now, I bet that Yuin will make some godly sound in-ears based on their brilliant dynamic drivers.
I do not think you can generalize and say that the firms using dynamic drivers in their in-ears do it because of their cost. A good dynamic transducer is easily as expensive as a good balanced one. When it comes to being cost efficient a low end dynamic transducer will sound better compared to the cost of it.
A lot of dynamic based earphones are surfacing now, I bet that Yuin will make some godly sound in-ears based on their brilliant dynamic drivers.
Quote:
Maybe, but I doubt they will provide sufficient isolation in noisy environment (which defeat the point of using IEM in the first place). I will still get one but I am more interested in using it as earbud.
| Originally Posted by FrederikS|TPU /img/forum/go_quote.gif A lot of dynamic based earphones are surfacing now, I bet that Yuin will make some godly sound in-ears based on their brilliant dynamic drivers. |
Maybe, but I doubt they will provide sufficient isolation in noisy environment (which defeat the point of using IEM in the first place). I will still get one but I am more interested in using it as earbud.
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2006
- Posts
- 12,932
- Likes
- 1,080
my next purchase is most likely the em from futuresonics after being 'nearly' floored by the atrio m5.
the mere fact that ba don't move as much air at low volumes, no matter that they may respond to bass but we cannot hear it, the effect is that i can listen to lower volumes and be happier with the atrio for instance as it still gives me adequate bass and a tangible signal.
interesting guide clieOS - i wish you would have mentioned that one of the first customs however was from futuresonics who also used armatures but found the dynammic more to their liking. they also make atrio. other high quality dynammics are from kenwood, victor and denon and naturally sony.
the mere fact that ba don't move as much air at low volumes, no matter that they may respond to bass but we cannot hear it, the effect is that i can listen to lower volumes and be happier with the atrio for instance as it still gives me adequate bass and a tangible signal.
interesting guide clieOS - i wish you would have mentioned that one of the first customs however was from futuresonics who also used armatures but found the dynammic more to their liking. they also make atrio. other high quality dynammics are from kenwood, victor and denon and naturally sony.
Quote:
My research does end up suggesting FS as one of the first IEM producer, if not the first. Unfortunately no one seems to keep a reliable history on IEM development, thus making thing a bit difficult to determine.
| Originally Posted by shigzeo /img/forum/go_quote.gif interesting guide clieOS - i wish you would have mentioned that one of the first customs however was from futuresonics who also used armatures but found the dynammic more to their liking. they also make atrio. other high quality dynammics are from kenwood, victor and denon and naturally sony. |
My research does end up suggesting FS as one of the first IEM producer, if not the first. Unfortunately no one seems to keep a reliable history on IEM development, thus making thing a bit difficult to determine.
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2006
- Posts
- 12,932
- Likes
- 1,080
how did i miss that? sorry. no it seems that iem development is a strange case.
as far as driving power is concerned, i found that some portable players were unable to drive the very low imp phones other than to volume. i have used an amp with my iems in the past to alleviate problems in the drive-chain.
for instance, sound stage seems to be greatly affected many lower imp iems of ab and dynammic drivers. one of my former players had no end of trouble pushing any of my iems to good stereo imaging with fast paced bass-driven music.
an imp adapter helped out but i have not owned one, just borrowed one. however, my amp, however small was way too big to carry with me so i just suffered with poor sounding trance music. eventually i sold it and hte new owner loves it - he also listens to different musics.
my current daps all give a better stage that does not muddy up like that one but both suffer similar bass-roll off.
iems can be driven to volume by daps but very rarely can they be driven to anything near potential of sq from a portable with an amp.
as far as driving power is concerned, i found that some portable players were unable to drive the very low imp phones other than to volume. i have used an amp with my iems in the past to alleviate problems in the drive-chain.
for instance, sound stage seems to be greatly affected many lower imp iems of ab and dynammic drivers. one of my former players had no end of trouble pushing any of my iems to good stereo imaging with fast paced bass-driven music.
an imp adapter helped out but i have not owned one, just borrowed one. however, my amp, however small was way too big to carry with me so i just suffered with poor sounding trance music. eventually i sold it and hte new owner loves it - he also listens to different musics.
my current daps all give a better stage that does not muddy up like that one but both suffer similar bass-roll off.
iems can be driven to volume by daps but very rarely can they be driven to anything near potential of sq from a portable with an amp.
navmau
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2007
- Posts
- 805
- Likes
- 19
Quote:
Nicely said! This is exactly what I was trying to say!!
| Originally Posted by shigzeo /img/forum/go_quote.gif the mere fact that ba don't move as much air at low volumes, no matter that they may respond to bass but we cannot hear it, the effect is that i can listen to lower volumes and be happier with the atrio for instance as it still gives me adequate bass and a tangible signal. |
Nicely said! This is exactly what I was trying to say!!
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2006
- Posts
- 12,932
- Likes
- 1,080
yes navmau, regarding the fs, i know we agree on many things.
i am finding the victor fx500 to best the atrio at all non-bass related elements of sound however. but, isolation, comfort and smaller footprint (well, it sticks out less) makes the atrio quite a better portable solution.
still though overall sound only, the victor hp-fx500 are my favourite not only armature, but favourite iem/canalphone of any price.
i am finding the victor fx500 to best the atrio at all non-bass related elements of sound however. but, isolation, comfort and smaller footprint (well, it sticks out less) makes the atrio quite a better portable solution.
still though overall sound only, the victor hp-fx500 are my favourite not only armature, but favourite iem/canalphone of any price.
navmau
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2007
- Posts
- 805
- Likes
- 19
Quote:
Yeah, the fx500 look awesome! I unfortunately can't use canalphones/shallow IEMs as Sydney buses roar too loud, I need deep fitting IEMs and the FS double flange tips are great for this, after months of use, they have softened up and are now super comfy.
| Originally Posted by shigzeo /img/forum/go_quote.gif yes navmau, regarding the fs, i know we agree on many things. i am finding the victor fx500 to best the atrio at all non-bass related elements of sound however. but, isolation, comfort and smaller footprint (well, it sticks out less) makes the atrio quite a better portable solution. still though overall sound only, the victor hp-fx500 are my favourite not only armature, but favourite iem/canalphone of any price. |
Yeah, the fx500 look awesome! I unfortunately can't use canalphones/shallow IEMs as Sydney buses roar too loud, I need deep fitting IEMs and the FS double flange tips are great for this, after months of use, they have softened up and are now super comfy.
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2006
- Posts
- 12,932
- Likes
- 1,080
yes the dual flange for the atrio are great - i used the smallest size and got a great non-boomy sound with good detail. lovely phones.
b0dhi
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2005
- Posts
- 2,070
- Likes
- 23
Quote:
A "good" frequency response is subjective. The graphs were meant to demonstrate the objective technical superiority of dynamic drivers over balanced ones.
| Originally Posted by ClieOS /img/forum/go_quote.gif I am just curious: why compare their harmonic distortion instead of freq. response? |
A "good" frequency response is subjective. The graphs were meant to demonstrate the objective technical superiority of dynamic drivers over balanced ones.
Quote:
Oh, okay.
| Originally Posted by b0dhi /img/forum/go_quote.gif A "good" frequency response is subjective. The graphs were meant to demonstrate the objective technical superiority of dynamic drivers over balanced ones. |
Oh, okay.
Users who are viewing this thread
