[Inks]

To note, The EX1000s bass depth and decay consistency are gorgeous.(2nd pic down)

 

[DMinor]

I am confused. So the charts are telling something different from what the K3003 owners are hearing. Does this mean the K3003 owners have impaired hearing or are these charts faulty?

 

[lee730]

Quote:

I am confused. So the charts are telling something different from what the K3003 owners are hearing. Does this mean the K3003 owners have impaired hearing or are these charts faulty?

lmao DMinor you have to keep in mind the charts will not always agree with human hearing. This is the exact case with the Sony EX1000.

 

[DMinor]

Quote:

lmao DMinor you have to keep in mind the charts will not always agree with human hearing. This is the exact case with the Sony EX1000.

Are you saying those who can't hear the difference will blame on the charts?

 

[purrin]

Quote:

Here are 5 graphs.  They are of the K3003, DBA-02, EX1000, Grado G10 and an Etymotic ER6.  I've never heard anyone accuse the other IEMs of being slow or incoherent.
 
 

 
 
 

 

 

 
It's inconclusive. Obviously one IEM has more bass than the others (it's off the charts.) The bass levels need to be normalized to properly assess the decay.

 

[lee730]

Quote:

Are you saying those who can't hear the difference will blame on the charts?

Not necessarily DMinor. My point is the charts for the EX1000 when translated would point out that the EX1000 would be a sibilant IEM. Now most just don't see that or hear it for that matter. Now I agree with that very chart but I am the minority in this (there are some others who agree as well). Do you see my point? Just because a chart says otherwise doesn't mean the human ear is gonna perceive what that charts says 100% of the time. You're kidding yourself if you just follow a chart blindly. There's more to it than meets the eye. It may be a good point of reference but that doesn't mean the results will be applicable.

 

[Anaxilus]

Can we avoid a lot of this by looking at IR or no?
 
Still, these wouldn't account for tonal differences percieved between driver types which is the other consideration.

 

[DMinor]

So the consensus is the K3003 has a fundamental flaw in its technical design?

 

[music_4321]

Quote:

So the consensus is the K3003 has a fundamental flaw in its technical design?

No, definitely not.
 
Instead of asking such questions, if you have a real interest in a product that costs $1,300 - $1,500, why don't you go back to page one of this thread and read all the links to reviews and impressions posted there. Perhaps also go back and re-read posts #129 & #189. Then reach your own conclusions.

 

[Inks]

Quote:

Not necessarily DMinor. My point is the charts for the EX1000 when translated would point out that the EX1000 would be a sibilant IEM. Now most just don't see that or hear it for that matter. Now I agree with that very chart but I am the minority in this (there are some others who agree as well). Do you see my point? Just because a chart says otherwise doesn't mean the human ear is gonna perceive what that charts says 100% of the time. You're kidding yourself if you just follow a chart blindly. There's more to it than meets the eye. It may be a good point of reference but that doesn't mean the results will be applicable.

A proper graph of the EX1000 shows that it's mainly offensive because of one relatively big spike in the midhigh 5.5k region, a sensitive area of the ear that reproduces sibilance. Most actually do state that the EX1000 can be sibilant, those that don't find it offensive at all are actually the minority IME. The spike is very well behaved in lower-mid volume levels as the ear's loudness curve changes the FR a bit in that sensitive area, that's the changing factor. I have yet to see a case where something very clear on a proper FR is not heard at all...The results are applicable but there are relative matters to consider, it's not as simple as just hearing it or not. Consider loudness curve, impedance OI/IEM phase changes, recording coloration and at times insertion depth (most graphs just assume a reference plane insertion is done). 

 

[DMinor]

Quote:

No, definitely not.
 
Instead of asking such questions, if you have a real interest in a product that costs $1,300 - $1,500, why don't you go back to page one of this thread and read all the links to reviews and impressions posted there. Perhaps also go back and re-read posts #129 & #189. Then reach your own conclusions.

It's perfectly OK that some people may not be able to hear the "flaw" as each one responds to sound differently. In fact you may be a lucky guy who can naturally bypass it and enjoy the 1500 lbs gorilla.

 

[lee730]

Quote:

It's perfectly OK that some people may not be able to hear the "flaw" as each one responds to sound differently. In fact you may be a lucky guy who can naturally bypass it and enjoy the 1500 lbs gorilla.

Thing is DMinor most people are uncomfortable with the possibility that their hearing may be going bad. Nothing new there. Heck I'm mad as hell that I'm young and my vision is shot...

Generally speaking the damage usually starts in the treble region and then works its way down. Treble is also the most damaging of all the frequencies (noise-pollution etc.)

 

[Anaxilus]

I don't think it's always necessary to point to hearing acuity (except for maybe unrecognized major deviations).  It's really more about how our ears and brain respond to certain aspects of sound.  For example, two people can see the same painting and respond completely different based on what's pleasing or repulsive to their personal tastes.  Those personal values get amplified by personal preferences, biases and experiences.  It's not really a matter of one person being blind or not blind.  

 

[Inks]

Yeah, it will have to be a severe case to place that in, naturally only extension in the very high regions is lost. 
 
Agreed with Anax, a lot of matters are relative, while two may hear the same thing, those same people could classify certain things differently based on prior experience, biases and recordings used. 

 

[lee730]

Quote:

I don't think it's always necessary to point to hearing acuity (except for maybe unrecognized major deviations).  It's really more about how our ears and brain respond to certain aspects of sound.  For example, two people can see the same painting and respond completely different based on what's pleasing or repulsive to their personal tastes.  Those personal values get amplified by personal preferences, biases and experiences.  It's not really a matter of one person being blind or not blind.  

You have a point anaxilus but I don't think that's always the case to be honest.
 
@ inks, its not necessarily only high up in the treble regions where people may be losing their hearing. The damage can also take place in the sub-regions. But it's much more likely to happen in the treble region as you had pointed out. There are many factors that contribute to this though. Then again guys I'm not saying this has anything to do with the AKGs themselves. It's just a generalization. Personally while I may not have been 100% pleased with the coherency it's not a complete deal breaker for me with these IEMs. I can understand it being so with others however.