Am I (sonically) blind

[Redcarmoose]

I am pretty sure it’s not accurate enough. More accurate would have been comparing two different coffees as @old tech explained.



There’s not enough information to really answer that question. There are several possible reasons, for example, even with the volume setting lower, the amount of acoustic energy reaching your ears could be higher (due to a more powerful amp), it might just be a certain frequency range that is higher, if the amp in the new dongle has a different impedance than the amp in the previous dongle and your particular IEMs are sensitive to it. And, unless we devise tests specifically to eliminate them, we can never be sure that it isn’t some form of bias or other perceptual effect. For example, maybe you are concentrating on listening more intently with this new dongle and obviously, more focused concentration is more fatiguing or maybe it’s just pure placebo.


No it’s not. Assuming that “sound quality” means high-fidelity, a more than fair assumption as that’s in the definition of an audiophile, then it’s entirely objective, not subjective!

No, within that there are not choices. It’s either “an even and correct frequency response” OR it isn’t. More bass, more treble or a boosted midrange are by definition a different frequency response and therefore NOT “an even and correct frequency response”! How many times have you stated this falsehood, been corrected and yet pop up in another thread and repeat that same falsehood all over again?

However, how we arrive at an even and correct frequency response can be quite convoluted. HPs and IEMs typically do not have an “even and correct frequency response” they commonly have an uneven (not linear/flat) response. This is to compensate for their presentation, for having the drivers right next to or inside the ear.

G

We are talking about IEMs here? They all are different. This would also relate to the independent individual frequency response generated, but I’m speaking of IEMs. So they would actually each sound slightly different depending on how they are tuned. They have departures in an area showing graphically what their response is. Thus one with more bass would show different (response curve) than one with less bass. Rudimentary.

Depending on the person, some may like more bass or less. That is the subjective part. I’m explaining how each of the sub-$50 IEMs would need to be heard as they offer a slightly different FR. You could get an idea from a FR graph, but nothing replaces hearing them. This is because graphs only give a partial story. Things like imaging, decay, soundstage etc etc can’t be fully graphed out.

Of course there are many FRs, but with-in a range they can still show balance. Thus the evenness is still with-in limits. Thus a response can still be thought of as accurate, and be a slight difference in response, from varying degrees, one IEM, compared to another. An extreme response would be different. That’s basically how we interpret IEMs. Individual fit is a huge variation in how we interpret each IEM. At times the nozzle is farther in the ear, or simply how the air-tight fit is or isn’t achieved!

But the human ear also hears a variation. The KBEAR Lark as an example was reviewed completely different by another reviewer. The question is is there unit variation or is it coupling to the brain. Meaning each reviewer has a chance they will hear the IEM differently. Maybe a little different or maybe a lot.

Coupling differences could be from ear drum distance, seal, make-up of ear canal lining, etc etc. It could be the angle of the ear canal or the angle of the IEM. It could be physiological changes with result to volume. Even variation in ear drum shape and angle affect the tone. Thus even volume levels affect frequency response. Also distortion is created by our own ear/brain in relation to volume. So there are many variations as to why someone hears something the way they do. And tone preferences obviously!

Also contrast. The contrast of the last IEM they used. Or what they are used to. If heavy bass IEM is used, the next one could sound almost bass reduced, when in fact they are also bass heavy. It’s all about what the person is ultimately personally used to!

FR is maybe 80% of why a person likes an IEM. But remember that FR is both the IEMs FR and the actual interpretation FR, which is a physiological phenomenon of human hearing.

Thus my KBEAR Lark could be understood as warm or cooler depending on possibly unit variables, but it’s most likely IEM tips changing the sound and personal ear canal design/physiology............mental variables, taste, subjective differences from what the person is used to. Also source personality affects the final tone, thus warm or cool source, cable material.....all that stuff (you) always find questionable if I post about it in SS.

But the amp will definitely make a difference in an IEMs tone. A DAPs personality could very well be affected by firmware. I’ve tried 40 different firmwares the last 5 years. Some more treble, some more midrange, some more bass. It’s the full combination of DAP, cable and IEM that creates the end sound. The variation of transistors and capacitors variation between DAPs makes one warmer, one cooler. The end sound is the combination of everything.

 

[hakunamakaka]

High fidelity is for the folks who truly believe getting closer to the sound as an artist intended. What sounds nice to human ear is completely different. Good sounding system can be very far off from high fidelity

 

[bigshot]

And high fidelity can sound perfect. It all depends on the quality of the engineering. I have a few albums that sound harsh or muffled that I EQ to sound better when I play them. But the vast majority of my collection sounds best from a point of calibration for maximum fidelity. Funky engineering is more common in pre-hifi recordings. They didn't have an RIAA curve yet at that time.

 

[Dogmatrix]

the pursuit of ever higher fidelity as a goal is a flawed assumption

 

[bigshot]

There is something to be said for playing a recording on the machine it was designed to be played on. For instance, acoustic 78s sound best on a good acoustic machine. And early coarse groove 45s sound great on old tube amp hi fi consoles. But most people today listen to digital audio files in one form or another. They sound best on modern equipment. I've seen experiments where they attach a headphone to the neck of an acoustic phonograph and play a CD through the horn. Sounds like a dog's breakfast!

 

[Dogmatrix]

Indeed .
In this case the fundamental is value
Only the OP can answer their question
To do that they must examine their motivation
Do they seek a singularity with the artist , bigger spend will help but as has been adequately covered buyer beware
Do they seek the primordial joy of banging two rocks together , just spend the 50 bucks on something that doesn't anger your ears

 

[bigshot]

Generally, if you prefer a custom coloration to match your hearing, it’s best to do that across all sources with an equalization curve applied at the amplification stage. My hearing is a little sensitive to loud sounds centered around 2-3 kHz. So I have a -2dB cut in my equalization in that range. I don’t doubt that I’m hearing what the artist intended, I’m just correcting for a small deviation in my ears.

 

[timechaser]

Indeed .
In this case the fundamental is value
Only the OP can answer their question
To do that they must examine their motivation
Do they seek a singularity with the artist , bigger spend will help but as has been adequately covered buyer beware
Do they seek the primordial joy of banging two rocks together , just spend the 50 bucks on something that doesn't anger your ears

Thank you. Leaves me with questions, but...

1. Singularity with the artist: you are suggesting I must experiment and be prepared to spend?

2. Banging rocks: buy anything cheap-o long as it doesn't give me a headache?

While the first route seems to be more palatable, how would I go about it. Let's assume I don't want to spend more on my IEMs.

Which leaves me with:

1. Source: DAP? Change from Android to iOS? From Spotify to Tidal or Apple?

2. DAC: where do I even begin?

Thanks you! And wish you all a very happy new year.

 

[bigshot]

Assuming that the music itself is recorded, mixed and mastered well, digital audio is pretty much plug and play. Most DACs and amps sound great and there really isn't any difference between them unless they are being used wrong, defective, or not the right tool for the job. So your focus should be on the end of the chain... the headphones/speakers. If you go with headphones, the way they sound depends a lot on the shape of your head and ear canals, so someone else can't tell you what will sound good to you. The best thing to do is audition a lot and see what you like. Most people will like cans that come close to the Harman Curve, but that isn't a given with everyone. If you go with speakers, the room you put them in makes a big difference. You need to make sure the sound isn't being detrimentally affected by the shape of the room. It takes some research and experimentation to put together a good installation.

One thing I've learned is that cost doesn't directly relate to quality. There's a lot of midrange headphones and speakers that sound fantastic, and there are expensive ones that don't. You have to do your homework and resist the upsell by salespeople and posters on the internet who are eager to help you spend too much money on stuff that makes no difference.

Define your goal and then do your homework to figure out how to reach it.

 

[Redcarmoose]

Thank you. Leaves me with questions, but...

1. Singularity with the artist: you are suggesting I must experiment and be prepared to spend?

2. Banging rocks: buy anything cheap-o long as it doesn't give me a headache?

While the first route seems to be more palatable, how would I go about it. Let's assume I don't want to spend more on my IEMs.

Which leaves me with:

1. Source: DAP? Change from Android to iOS? From Spotify to Tidal or Apple?

2. DAC: where do I even begin?

Thanks you! And wish you all a very happy new year.

Agreed. Just remember, these are the same ‘engineers’ who claim things like wires all sound the same and only measurements count. I always laugh when someone plays the engineer card, as if it makes their opinion law. Given the manifestly poor quality of so many commercial recordings - all professionally engineered - I think the opposite is more likely.

1) Not sure if you really do need to spend? It’s primarily finding your personal sound signature. Which you probably already know? But you need to get into testing a bunch of IEMs to either have that confidence confirmation......or a new sound could be your preference? There may in fact be a signature (IEM response personality) which suits you better than everything you own or have tried! Again it depends on the music you listen to and how many genres you actually use. Meaning there are IEMs which are great at one or two genres then there are others that are excellent with all genres. And remember the frequency response is both how the IEM interfaces with your ear/mind, your preference in sound signature and the IEMs actual sound signature.

With that said, the actual real measurements of FR don’t matter because it’s truly what we hear is the final FR.

Fit is super important in this quest! Fit at times makes or breaks the value of an IEM. But with so many great IEMs now out there I would simply get your feet wet. Find out how the BLON BL-03 works in your personal listening genres, as well as how it fits (physically) and how it works with your desired sound signature. Also finally how the BLON BL-03 fits your ear/mental interface! So no, really not much money is needed to start.

2. Yes, it’s super important how one frequency band can cause issues. So take for example the treble/midrange. You could have 2 under $50 IEMs that have close to the same sound signature. Also if these two IEMs they both fit well, and have a general good interface with you. You actually like both sound signatures and they are relatively close to being the same. The problem is one has a slight brightness in the treble/midrange which bugs you. You actually need to spend time with that particular IEM. As the brightness may be something you learn to adore or it can go completely the other direction, where it truly does give you a headache. The response needs to not have sibilance or stridency but have enough detail and excitement! So it’s a fine line we walk at times.

The confusion that cheap IEMs give you a headache is besides the point. As expensive and low cost are able to do that. It really depends on how you tolerate the end signature.

As far as DAPs vs Apple Dongle goes:

There is a wide wide world of products out there now. The most important part is finding synergy. Synergy between components will take $100 worth of listening devices and make them sound like $1000. Again it’s mixing and matching gear in relation to your personal genres, hearing and sound signature preference. But most importantly it’s getting synergy between the IEM and player!

DAPs or Phones/Dongles contain many similarities and differences. They come with many different power outputs and user interfaces. Much of this comes down to what your used to and maybe what new changes your willing to accept. Again it’s dependent on the whole picture. Meaning the sound comes from everything used. Your sound is only as good as the weakest link in the signal chain. That said I’ve also found IEMs that sound superior in a phone use situation. Meaning a specific IEM didn’t sound right with my DAPs. If your attempting to match an IEM with a DAP source it depends on what you want to achieve. The DAPs can offer an expanded soundstage over the regular Apple Dongle. But......imagine if even though soundstage is great the sound-signature was to dark or muddy. So you have to spend time listening. The darker sound of the DAP may actually work out in the end with a given IEM after acclimation on your part?

 

[Dogmatrix]

Thank you. Leaves me with questions, but...

1. Singularity with the artist: you are suggesting I must experiment and be prepared to spend?

2. Banging rocks: buy anything cheap-o long as it doesn't give me a headache?

While the first route seems to be more palatable, how would I go about it. Let's assume I don't want to spend more on my IEMs.

Which leaves me with:

1. Source: DAP? Change from Android to iOS? From Spotify to Tidal or Apple?

2. DAC: where do I even begin?

Thanks you! And wish you all a very happy new year.

1. Yes and 2. Yes

Thanks @bigshot "Define your goal and then do your homework to figure out how to reach it."

This is key

A little soul searching is required to define what you want from the listening experience

I quite recently took myself on that journey and discovered I was looking for emotions triggered by past memories and so the "fidelity" of the sound is secondary

 

[timechaser]

Thank you to you both. I need to think, and as you said experiment to find out where MY personal sweet spot is.

 

[hakunamakaka]

As an artist intended is only possible if you are in recording studio with musicians. Even the final master differs from what they recorded in studio. Artist simply wants their music to be enjoyed no matter which path you choose.

You can trick yourself with an idea that with high fidelity you are hearing exact or close to artist intentions, but in reality it is just another approach to the sound that you hear, nothing more

 

[bigshot]

The final master is usually approved by the band, so that would be artist's intent. If you play it on a properly built speaker system with a calibrated response, you will be hearing what the artists approved.

 

[Dogmatrix]

As an artist intended is only possible if you are in recording studio with musicians. Even the final master differs from what they recorded in studio. Artist simply wants their music to be enjoyed no matter which path you choose.

You can trick yourself with an idea that with high fidelity you are hearing exact or close to artist intentions, but in reality it is just another approach to the sound that you hear, nothing more

Is the artists intent accurately predictable ?

Could we interpret the existence of the live performance as the artists recognition of the limits of the recording process ?

So another path to explore around value would be the futility of the audiophiles quest to achieve something the artist never intended