[crinacle]

I am 150% sure what I am talking about. Any ill designed dynamic earphone has that kind of sound. Simple, just put your hand phone speaker playing some song facing an empty coke can opening. You will get what I mean. Well, I cannot tolerate such sound so it doesn't work for me.

 
Not sure how significant the issue is, it could be an issue of coherency which few people can even detect but as far as I'm concerned I'm also 150% sure that there isn't any horrid design flaw in AAW's stuff.

 

[Mimouille]

Not sure how significant the issue is, it could be an issue of coherency which few people can even detect but as far as I'm concerned I'm also 150% sure that there isn't any horrid design flaw in AAW's stuff.

And Jelt who compared 100 ciems didn't seem to think so either. But like he says, whatever works for you.

 

[ziixtreme]

And Jelt who compared 100 ciems didn't seem to think so either. But like he says, whatever works for you.

Yep, the end line is whatever work for you.

 

[ziixtreme]

Not sure how significant the issue is, it could be an issue of coherency which few people can even detect but as far as I'm concerned I'm also 150% sure that there isn't any horrid design flaw in AAW's stuff.

Eg. W300. Dynamic + 2X29689

 

[crinacle]

Eg. W300. Dynamic + 2X29689

 
Not sure what that issue is though. I too have data sheets on AAW's driver details but you're not explaining the underlying problem.

 

[ziixtreme]

Not sure what that issue is though. I too have data sheets on AAW's driver details but you're not explaining the underlying problem.

You need to check data sheet from the drivers manufacturer not AAW. Check Knowles Acoustic ED-29689

 

[crinacle]

You need to check data sheet from the drivers manufacturer not AAW. Check Knowles Acoustic ED-29689

 
That's exactly what I'm saying. I know my stuff as well so no need to beat around the bush and explain what the issue is.

 

[ziixtreme]

That's exactly what I'm saying. I know my stuff as well so no need to beat around the bush and explain what the issue is.

ED-29689 doesn't go high enough. Some sparkle lost due to loss of high frequency. And same driver together will result in significant acoustic phase cancelation. You can go + - + with the dynamic or - + -, but one of the ED will always have cancelation with the dynamic. Anyway, one man's poison is another man's food, maybe just my preference.

 

[crinacle]

ED-29689 doesn't go high enough. Some sparkle lost due to loss of high frequency. And same driver together will result in significant acoustic phase cancelation. You can go + - + with the dynamic or - + -, but one of the ED will always have cancelation with the dynamic.

 
I'll concede the point on the ED not having enough treble extension, that has always been the issue with the W500 and has been said by numerous reviewers already. As for the crossover specifics, I'll leave it to @DrGraceW to clarify but it sounds like you're doing more guesswork than actual testing.

 

[jelt2359]

I've found in this hobby that context matters. I see you joined this site less than two months ago and have posted only in two threads so it's a bit difficult for us to understand where you're coming from. I see also that you're trying to build your own iem which is probably a very different mindset from us.

That being said I have auditioned a fair number of speakers now since my Chord Dave works even better on a full speaker setup and for anyone to compare any sound to a speaker without elaborating on which speaker specifically you are referring to is extremely difficult for me to relate to. Speaker sounds vary hugely, from floorstanders to bookshelves, carbon fibre to paper, multi crossover to single driver, high efficiency to low, rear ported to side, and so on and so forth.

I also have a tonne of experience with dynamic drivers now, as I own the Utopia, the HD800/S, HD650/600, and many more. The w900 sounds closer to these full size cans than the w500 did. The w500 seemed to be a guilty indulgence, almost going for an audeze-like deep bass (but not quite planar depth), whereas the w900 goes for more classic dynamic strengths- fast, clean, resolving.

Perhaps you could raise your points in the w500/w300 threads if those are the iems you're referring to. Then owners of those iems could chime in. I think the w900 is quite different- better, in my opinion.

 

[ziixtreme]

I've found in this hobby that context matters. I see you joined this site less than two months ago and have posted only in two threads so it's a bit difficult for us to understand where you're coming from. I see also that you're trying to build your own iem which is probably a very different mindset from us.

That being said I have auditioned a fair number of speakers now since my Chord Dave works even better on a full speaker setup and for anyone to compare any sound to a speaker without elaborating on which speaker specifically you are referring to is extremely difficult for me to relate to. Speaker sounds vary hugely, from floorstanders to bookshelves, carbon fibre to paper, multi crossover to single driver, high efficiency to low, rear ported to side, and so on and so forth.

I also have a tonne of experience with dynamic drivers now, as I own the Utopia, the HD800/S, HD650/600, and many more. The w900 sounds closer to these full size cans than the w500 did. The w500 seemed to be a guilty indulgence, almost going for an audeze-like deep bass (but not quite planar depth), whereas the w900 goes for more classic dynamic strengths- fast, clean, resolving.

Perhaps you could raise your points in the w500/w300 threads if those are the iems you're referring to. Then owners of those iems could chime in. I think the w900 is quite different- better, in my opinion.

I am concern about the dynamic only. I really and do wish and hope they really make one dynamic without such issue. And 2BA 1 Dynamic, TWFK-30017 works miles better. I make my own iem so I know what I am talking about.

 

[ziixtreme]

I've found in this hobby that context matters. I see you joined this site less than two months ago and have posted only in two threads so it's a bit difficult for us to understand where you're coming from. I see also that you're trying to build your own iem which is probably a very different mindset from us.

That being said I have auditioned a fair number of speakers now since my Chord Dave works even better on a full speaker setup and for anyone to compare any sound to a speaker without elaborating on which speaker specifically you are referring to is extremely difficult for me to relate to. Speaker sounds vary hugely, from floorstanders to bookshelves, carbon fibre to paper, multi crossover to single driver, high efficiency to low, rear ported to side, and so on and so forth.

I also have a tonne of experience with dynamic drivers now, as I own the Utopia, the HD800/S, HD650/600, and many more. The w900 sounds closer to these full size cans than the w500 did. The w500 seemed to be a guilty indulgence, almost going for an audeze-like deep bass (but not quite planar depth), whereas the w900 goes for more classic dynamic strengths- fast, clean, resolving.

Perhaps you could raise your points in the w500/w300 threads if those are the iems you're referring to. Then owners of those iems could chime in. I think the w900 is quite different- better, in my opinion.

Noted. And I am pointing out about the dynamic back flow problem. It's significant in the W300 and w500, that is why I am very curious in the w900, does it suffer from this issue.

 

[crinacle]

I am concern about the dynamic only. I really and do wish and hope they really make one dynamic without such issue. And 2BA 1 Dynamic, TWFK-30017 works miles better. I make my own iem so I know what I am talking about.

 
Look into the AAW A3H, though the TWFK+DD combo is super common nowadays. FLC8, IT03, A83 etc.
 
W900 also stacks TWFKs for mids, but uses SWFKs as tweeters.

 

[ziixtreme]

Look into the AAW A3H, though the TWFK+DD combo is super common nowadays. FLC8, IT03, A83 etc.

W900 also stacks TWFKs for mids, but uses SWFKs as tweeters.

Yes, you are correct. Common doesn't mean it will be the same. A3H also suffer from the dynamic back flow problem. The same drivers different crossover will give very different sound. You can look at VE4 and Fitear 334, both are the same drivers but sounded different. It's all up to the crossover setup on how it works.

 

[DrGraceW]

   
I'll concede the point on the ED not having enough treble extension, that has always been the issue with the W500 and has been said by numerous reviewers already. As for the crossover specifics, I'll leave it to @DrGraceW to clarify but it sounds like you're doing more guesswork than actual testing.

ED-29689 doesn't go high enough. Some sparkle lost due to loss of high frequency. And same driver together will result in significant acoustic phase cancelation. You can go + - + with the dynamic or - + -, but one of the ED will always have cancelation with the dynamic. Anyway, one man's poison is another man's food, maybe just my preference.

Interesting discussion here on the W300/500, I am not sure I am following the dynamic flow back thing given I've yet personally to perceive it anywhere. Maybe you can shed some light on how it is to be avoided or even better how to purposely make it manifest? That aside i think there is some misunderstanding here on ED series driver, phasing problem and IEM designs. In a classic 3 way system, - + - is definitely a no go, you do not want your dynamic diaphragm to vibrate the wrong way, nor do you want a big BA such as CI's diaphragm in a similar behavior. + - + on the other hand, well in multi-BA IEM designs, rarely there is ppl doing that nowadays. + + - would be the more practical way to avoid introducing too much phase problem, given how current BA driver's characteristics. @ziixtreme Good luck in your venture of building IEMs, it is a fun route.
 
So how is W900's crossover built to improved hybrid coherence? The trick is + + + +, that's what we called TruXross, there is absolutely no RC network involved nor any driver flipped polarity. Key is in controlling the dynamic and BA driver's own frequency range, a combined efforts of dynamic diaphagm manipulation, front chamber design and of course support from BA supplier made that possible.
 
The ED vs TWFK argument has been going on for some time, with a proper front chamber design, ED can sustain decent sound pressure up to 14~16kHz, which is a respectable performance and almost sufficient for human hearing range. Of course it is not as far reaching as TWFK/SWFK, as you can see our version is hitting 20kHz with consistent sound pressure. However, some ppl find the TWFK a bit mechanical sounding and prefer ED over it, just ask the ER4 royal fan base. With design intent factored in, W900 did not use ED, however, if we are designing a single/dual/triple driver involving these 2 drivers? I think our designer will be going for the ED again as he is one of those ER4 nuts

 

I also have a tonne of experience with dynamic drivers now, as I own the Utopia, the HD800/S, HD650/600, and many more. The w900 sounds closer to these full size cans than the w500 did. The w500 seemed to be a guilty indulgence, almost going for an audeze-like deep bass (but not quite planar depth), whereas the w900 goes for more classic dynamic strengths- fast, clean, resolving.

What this guys said