[monoethylene]

 
After reading a lot in this forum, I ask myself what is the real difference between IEM's and fullsize headphones within the portable gear? Of course and it is obvious that the size, weight, noise cancelling etc. is an advantage of the IEM's but are there any significant advantages in sound quality? 

 

I hope everybody understand it and my schoolboy english but I ask this because I am thinking about buying one pair of universal fit IEM's and for me one point of decision is the advantage of more flexibility I will get with them. But I think that this cannot be all??

 

[JackKontney]

Properly designed IEMs are based on the idea of eliminating unwanted sound by isolating the ear canal, then pumping in the desired content into the 1cc "room" this creates. By eliminating outside sound via fully sealing the ear canal directly (far more effective than any external muff/earcups), IEMs reduce the noise floor, thus increasing the signal-to-noise ratio. Which is the holy grail in terms of hearing music.
 
This -- the increase in S/N ratio -- is in essence, the biggest benefit of IEMs over any other form of reproduction, IMHO.
 
The biggest issue is getting and maintaining a full seal. If the seal "breaks," there is a huge loss of bass energy, making even expensive IEMs sound tinny and cheap. So manufacturers overcome this limitation by pumping up the bass.
 
Another limitation is more related to conventional loudspeakers than to standard earphones: By doing audio as "direct injection" to the ear canal, the acoustic sensation of bone conduction (again, typically associated with Big Bass) is eliminated. But the same can be said of traditional cans.

 

[monoethylene]

 
Quote:

Properly designed IEMs are based on the idea of eliminating unwanted sound by isolating the ear canal, then pumping in the desired content into the 1cc "room" this creates. By eliminating outside sound via fully sealing the ear canal directly (far more effective than any external muff/earcups), IEMs reduce the noise floor, thus increasing the signal-to-noise ratio. Which is the holy grail in terms of hearing music.
 
This -- the increase in S/N ratio -- is in essence, the biggest benefit of IEMs over any other form of reproduction, IMHO.
 
The biggest issue is getting and maintaining a full seal. If the seal "breaks," there is a huge loss of bass energy, making even expensive IEMs sound tinny and cheap. So manufacturers overcome this limitation by pumping up the bass.
 
Another limitation is more related to conventional loudspeakers than to standard earphones: By doing audio as "direct injection" to the ear canal, the acoustic sensation of bone conduction (again, typically associated with Big Bass) is eliminated. But the same can be said of traditional cans.

"This -- the increase in S/N ratio -- is in essence, the biggest benefit of IEMs over any other form of reproduction, IMHO."
 
This means that the sound quality of the IEM's increases with the level of fully sealing the ear canal?
 
 

 

[stevenswall]

Essentially, yes, as the detail you are able to hear will increase over the background noise which will decrease. I don't think IEMs have any inherent advantage over full size earphones, but they will have a smaller soundstage, or sense of space and air in the music.

 

[monoethylene]

This means, I think IEMs are more analytical and colder as fullsize headphones? And as a conclusion they forgive much less regarding the source quality?

 

[stevenswall]

They are often tinny sounding if they are cheap, but I don't think they are in general. I'd say they are just as diverse and different sounding as full size headphones. Price to performance, I'd say that dollar for dollar Etymotic IEMs in particular are more revealing than similarly priced full size cans, but other than that, You'd have to get someone with more experience to answer, as I've only listened to a handful of IEMs.

 

[ProtegeManiac]

It's not that all IEMs - or that IEMs in general - are more analytical and colder than full-size headphones as a group. Both come in all flavours. It's just that even a full-size with a circumaural pad and a closed-back/sealed enclosure design generally cannot compete with the isolation of IEMs in general provided the listener comparing both has the right ear tips. The ear pads just cannot seal as well on the parts of the head that it has contact with, given a human skull has a complex shape, as opposed to a smallerhole that is essentially dammed up by an appropriate size ear plug; much more so with a custom IEM.
 
So going back to steven's take on it, the superior isolation allows you to hear less of the ambient noise and more of the recording through the IEM.  So it's not that they are more analytical and colder than full-size cans, but that even an IEM that can be described as"musical" more than it is "analytical" can be expected to provide a level of detail retrieval/resolution that is generally (although not absolutely) superior to full-size headphones that have a similar sound signature. This means that they won't necessarily be "less forgiving," either, in that a musical IEM does not bring out that much more detail the way an IEM or headphone that is generally described as "analytical" does, which is that the design of the drivers themselves were made for as much transparency that the technology can allow for the audio signal that is passed through it.
 
Put it another way, a cold, analytical transducer - whether it's a headphone, IEM or speaker - compared to a musical one may be producing nearly every sound in the recording, but the way they present the sound may emphasize what you actually hear. A very musical speaker may produce the same sound you usually might only hear from a headphone or an IEM, but you will only hear it by putting your ear near the speaker but not from your listening chair. Same with a full size can vs an IEM. The former may produce as close as possible response graph to the IEM, but the very distance from your ear will have effects on the overall sound presentation.

 

[JackKontney]

Not quite, but close.
 
Quote:

 
Quote:

Properly designed IEMs are based on the idea of eliminating unwanted sound by isolating the ear canal, then pumping in the desired content into the 1cc "room" this creates. By eliminating outside sound via fully sealing the ear canal directly (far more effective than any external muff/earcups), IEMs reduce the noise floor, thus increasing the signal-to-noise ratio. Which is the holy grail in terms of hearing music.
 
This -- the increase in S/N ratio -- is in essence, the biggest benefit of IEMs over any other form of reproduction, IMHO.
 
The biggest issue is getting and maintaining a full seal. If the seal "breaks," there is a huge loss of bass energy, making even expensive IEMs sound tinny and cheap. So manufacturers overcome this limitation by pumping up the bass.
 
Another limitation is more related to conventional loudspeakers than to standard earphones: By doing audio as "direct injection" to the ear canal, the acoustic sensation of bone conduction (again, typically associated with Big Bass) is eliminated. But the same can be said of traditional cans.

"This -- the increase in S/N ratio -- is in essence, the biggest benefit of IEMs over any other form of reproduction, IMHO."
 
This means that the sound quality of the IEM's increases with the level of fully sealing the ear canal?
 
 

 
Not quite.

While some would disagree, from my POV, the ear canal is either sealed through proper fit, or it's not.
If it's not, your IEMs will sound thin (we're talking air passage). If it is sealed, your IEMs will sound the way they were intended to.
 
The thing that comes in degrees would be: isolation. The more isolation you have, the better the S/N ratio and thus, sound quality.
 

 

[monoethylene]

Thanks a lot for your answers and now my mind is a little bit clearer and the question "Why the hell almost everybody is wearing IEMs?" is resolved a little.
 
"Same with a full size can vs an IEM. The former may produce as close as possible response graph to the IEM, but the very distance from your ear will have effects on the overall sound presentation."
--> This is it I want to say with the "colder" and "analytical". 
 
When I am right, the sealing of the plug is essential to get the advantages of the IEMs. My problem was that I still used the stock in ear phones which cam with the player as well as I ve bought some cheap ones. This actions always caused ear-pain and the sealing wasnt perfect. So I ve decided to go with fullsize headphones (HD650) with my portable gear. I really lovin' it but sometimes the cable dissappoints me. (It is selfmade out of mogami with some cardas connectors --> too heavy). 
 
And there was always the question in my mind if it is worth to buy some good good IEMs. Within this thread I think I will give them a try and then I can decide whether I will go with th HD 650 or the IEMs
 
Philipp 

 

[sfdoddsy]

If the theories mentioned above are correct, then you can duplicate the effect simply by listening to your current headphones in a dead quiet room.
 
I suspect the differences between the sound of headphones and IEMs is not related to S/N, but more to how they transmit the sound. Much like the difference between regular cans and speakers is due to the difference in the way they transfer the sound - speakers via the air and room, cans via the air and directly.

 

[mark2410]

right now im using my HD600 but for out and about with anyone else around you cant beat IEM's, they make it just you and the music no matter what else is going on.
 
 
oh and IEM's can do deep lows better than any headphone ive heard, especially open ones.

 

[monoethylene]

"right now im using my HD600 but for out and about with anyone else around you cant beat IEM's, they make it just you and the music no matter what else is going on."
 
Thats absolutely right!! I still havent decided