olear
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2011
- Posts
- 804
- Likes
- 13
I understand the W4 has less bass quantity compared with the EX1000, otherwise I would be more interested.
Previously the cable for my EX600 broke at the very end. I have the feeling the cable for my EX1000 will likely follow the suit just a matter of time. I keep thinking and believe the cable is going thru stresses from twisting at the end due to restraint. Those stresses are perhaps the primary cause. I also notice the two cables are not twisted to the same degree - meaning my ears are not produced symmetrically.
I still disagree, IME the EX1000 has slightly less bass quantity than the UERM. If you want to say the UERM has bloated or exaggerated bass feel free. The K3003 certainly seems to have more bass than the EX1000 to me as well w/ reference filters but less than the GR07. I would say that if someone became psychoacoustically adjusted to the lesser bass quantity of another phone anything more than that will sound overdone. Same goes for the other direction. I'm also not sure why you are discounting the use of gear and tips to explain differences in perception and making such an absolute crusade out of this EX1000 V-shape thing as if it's absolute. If the ER4 and diffuse field is your reference for neutral then we just simply disagree on what neutral is. That's fine. I simply don't think the ER4 graph is what I'd consider neutral. The HD800 uses diffuse field too and has more measured and produced bass. You can see how they graph versus the LCD2 or 009. Senn and Beyer simply have a different interpretation of neutral compared to Audeze and Stax. I like to call it anechoic versus acoustic gain.
I like that second article and am inclined to agree that everything in theory can be measured. In practice, good luck finding measurements on a driver's power response and its interaction with the IEM'S chamber, not to mention that interaction with a statistically relevant model of the average human ear canal, to figure out an IEM's soundstage.
Besides, the average buyer doesn't have the time nor the patience to learn how to understand such measurements, where to find them, and actually read and understand them.
Good read though
The most relevant factors in performance can be measured, only smaller ones like soundstage size can't be. You don't need a measurement of a driver's power response with IEM's chamber, that sounds like unneeded work. what's the point? We aren't trying to create an IEM. There is a relavent model of the average human ear's in relation to response to headphones by Moller and Hammershoi as pictured in my post above. Not for soundstage size no, but I argue transient response aka soundstage imaging is far more important and that can be measured.
Yes, that is why the average consumer is buying Beats and Bose. It is those who actually have more dedication in regards to this hobby that should place the more productive practice.
What I was trying to say, and hopefully I'm not being too presumtuous in that it seems like you might agree, is that we need to pick and choose our target audience with how we describe sound. If everyone here spoke about sound in purely measurable terms, this would obviously be a different place. Unfortunately this would probably leave a lot of people who could be experiencing possibly good sound scratching their heads and out of luck.
Relevance is unfortunately a subjective factor. Soundstage characteristics might be deathly relevant to some, more so than even say sound signature. And the article while dancing around it a bit doesn't really go into the point that while speakers are reproductive, it's not just the preferences of the engineer that come into play, but the overall goal of the product or system, or what they, who are making it, want it to sound like and for who. I liken it to a camera and different filters or different films. The camera is a reproductive system but people want it to reproduce in a certain way, and if that's the goal, then I don't see how it can be spoken about negatively if it meets that goal. The most accurate reproduction possible at a given price point might be the goal for one set of speakers for one set of end users.
does anyone where I could get a replacement cable for ex1000?
I am using ex600's cable at the moment .
I heard that ex800's cable offers more bass and ex1000's cable has a bigger sound stage and warmer and sweeter mid
Is that true???
Wow. I've mentioned I did perceive a very slight difference but nothing drastic like you mention. It was just an ever so slight enhancement to a narrow peak in the EX1000 that may have enhanced a sense of separation and air within that band and it's harmonics. Very very slight though, maybe real or imagined. I'll let others determine the validity of my senses since I'm obviously unqualified and third parties are much more so.