I was looking at some old BA vs dynamic threads and there were references to even older threads mentioning that BA struggle with Bass reproduction but are generally more accurate than dynamics.
The response was mixed as to whether the newer BA driver IEMs that existed at the time the thread was made still had this problem, but it was explained that its related to the BA drivers limited bandwidth and with dual driver BA IEMs shouldnt have this issue... now with even more advances to BA drivers and up to 5 driver in an IEMs can dynamics compete anymore?
I havent seen any impressions of KZ 5 BA driver IEMs that werent overwhelmingly positive
Most IEMs are bad, dynamic or BA.
IEMs are popular because of the excellent passive noise isolation, but there are so many compromises involved that it's quite easy to settle with the mediocrity of half-decent sounding IEMs and sing their praises.
Take into context that most IEMs sound bad, and it's easy to get excited over a cheap IEM that sounds much less bad.
The fact is, there are $10 ear buds that sound better than most IEMs, but because they're not fit for purpose, these comparisons are never made.
To answer the question directly, a single full-range dynamic driver will always more easily produce a more homogeneous sound than 5 separate drivers trying to work in unison.
(the same can be observed in multi-driver headphones and loudspeakers).
This is why the only 'good' IEMs are insanely expensive.
from my point of view BA drivers are cool because they allow full seal of the ear canal, giving the isolation from outside noises that comes with a good seal(which is a very big deal to me!!!!!!!). but that and the ability to make tiny IEMs, are about the only positive points I have for BA driver. if isolation was a non issue, I probably wouldn't own any BA driver IEM. plus, multi BA IEMs remove the tiny size factor :'(
I'm probably sort of an oddball here, but I always felt that BA IEMs were competing in a class of their own: stuff with good isolation that try to sound ok. and with passing years, they did. but would I consider them superior to dynamic driver overall? no. I own several BA IEM but it's once again because they isolate so damn well. and I'm forever grateful for that.
I'm also not a huge fan of crossovers(and roller coaster impedance curves typically caused by them). I understand the benefits when using BA drivers, but instead of making audio better, to me they really mitigate the existing weaknesses of BA. which is a small but relevant difference.
with that said, if I like the FR of an IEM and the shell doesn't hurt my ear, then I'll usually like the IEM. I talked about general principles and personal opinion, but in the end we're looking for a sound we like, if that's achieved by sacrificing virgins to the IEM god, so be it.
I find this interesting because I have been reading many reviews searching for a newer iem. I was out of the hobby since the ue superfi days and only really into over ear stuff. Bought a noble x off Ebay to try it and it's ok. Dont need tons of isolation and not impressed with the bass it provides. It think it does well for guitar rock though. Was thinking about spending more for a hybrid but so many options. Now I'm thinking to get a dynamic only to try. I have a jotunheim and audioquest dragonfly red. Suggestions. Can spend some but not looking to spend a grand or anything. saw a UM Martian for $499 that is tempting.
From my personal point of view, and from what I’ve experienced so far is that BAs are best used in conjunction with a DD - a hybrid IEM. And IMO the better implementations utilise the DD for both bass and midrange, leaving the treble to the BA - while there’s still a crossover it remains relatively simple.
IMO again, having to stuff 5 separate transducers into an IEM to get a decent full range means that BA technology is probably not suited to full range audio reproduction.
In all honesty, and this will not be popular, I find that the DD $50 Sony MDR EX450AP outperforms most multiple BA IEMs up to $500 in terms of overall coherency, detail, and musicality - the treble can be a bit on the metallic side, but at $50 I can forgive that.
It’s true that BA technology is moving forward fast.
My humble collection has given me some insight, and though I have done short listens in shops of various IEMs, I don’t feel confident judging stuff I don’t own.
I own only two DD hybrids, everything else is BA:
Sony XBA-100 IEM single full-range balanced armature
Sony Z5 IEM 1 dynamic and 2 BA=Hybrid
Sony N3 IEM Single dynamic and single BA=Hybrid
BGVP DM6 5 BA IEM
Noble K-10 Encore 10 BA IEM
qdc Anole V3 3 BA IEM
Magaosi K5 5 BA IEM
Of the seven IEMs I own I probably like the Noble K10 Encore the best. Though it is missing a slight bit of bass texture which ends up being easy to get from DD implementation. So even though I like it the best and even though it was a company flagship up until about 60 days ago, it’s not perfect.
Though other BA only IEMs in my collection even have slighly better bass than the Noble Encore. The Anole V3 has smoother and richer bass and the amazing $199 DM6 has great bass. So it’s not that BA bass is totally inferior to DD bass. It’s just that every IEM ends up with it’s own signature sound, and their own flaws and attributes. IMO
If you would have asked me 3 years ago I would not be at all interested in BA IEMs, but somehow I’ve gravitated to them.
BAs are faster and have their own addictive sound. But at heart I think much of this hobby is mental. It’s perception. Our perception is far greater at changing and adapting than we give it credit for. Most of Head-Fi seems to be based on measurement and the truth in measurement. When it’s also clear that there are groups which with-in that group feel they have the best sound? But there is no perfect sound, no perfect IEM or headphone. There is only character of reproduction. And some IEMs do some stuff better and others do other different stuff better. So there is no way to make a generalization like the thread title.
Single dynamic driver and single BA IEMs offer a nice coherent response. Still it may be said that adding drivers is a way to add technical savvy at the expense of coherence? Crossovers also at the expense of coherence. One of the biggest issues with home theater is trying to get the subwoofer to blend with the rest of the speakers. But it gets added because it’s more entertaining, but adds issues to be overcome. Again stuff just has to be entertaining not perfect.
Coherence:
It’s the reason that some folks love those single driver, zero crossover home speakers; coherence. They are limited by bass and need those super long horns to get the bass, but that’s what those listeners value.
And who knows, we could very easily see new DD materials and applications which create amazing single DD flagship IEMs with capabilities not as yet dreamed of. In the end it’s the tuning and unique personality which is endearing. We don’t fall in love with an IEM for it’s perfection, we fall in love with it’s character; which in many ways is related to it’s inherent flaws. Not saying there is not a bunch of technical greatness but it’s both unique character with great sound in the end, that makes good IEMs have personality.
Edit:
It could probably be said that DD installments have better decay, and a more natural tone. I do slightly agree with that. Still BA implementation offers it’s own character. It’s faster and possibly slightly metallic. DD comes off warmer also can be maybe slighly darker? Again though it’s getting used to something and being entertained. It’s all about finding something you can put in your ears and not want to take out and it does not matter how it’s made.
I was looking at some old BA vs dynamic threads and there were references to even older threads mentioning that BA struggle with Bass reproduction but are generally more accurate than dynamics.
The response was mixed as to whether the newer BA driver IEMs that existed at the time the thread was made still had this problem, but it was explained that its related to the BA drivers limited bandwidth and with dual driver BA IEMs shouldnt have this issue... now with even more advances to BA drivers and up to 5 driver in an IEMs can dynamics compete anymore?
As much as there are inherent characteristics, both positive and negative in either, ultimately it depends on the particular driver.
It's very difficult to design a single driver that can play fullrange and have a smooth response.
In other cases, whether BA or DD or any design, you can design a driver for smooth response within a narrow range, but then how do you integrate them properly so that the crossover doesn't becomes the source of problems in the response as well as have all the driver units' output arrive at the eardrums at the same time?
So while you have an IEM, or for that matter, headphones and speakers, that have a single driver, you have a lot of design considerations. IEMs may roll off at the top end with a large driver, or roll off at the low end too early with a smaller driver. Try to widen the response and you lose sensitivity or introduce peaks. They're easy to use though - you just put on headphones or sit in front of single driver speakers, worrying only about toe-in angles (including angled drivers on headphones), and not much about how high your seat is. The IEM wouldn't have to have a complex crossover nor perfectly measured geometry in the chamber out to the bore.
Add drivers and you add complexity. Multi driver speakers introduce time alignment as a variable, which is why car audio systems need time alignment correction DSP (which only works for one seating position at a time), and home speakers that have enough drivers have t o be humongous not just to accommodate the drivers and their air volume but to circumvent time alignment issues by either angling the baffle or in the case of some Dynaudios, Focals, etc, you mirror some if not all the drivers so the identical driver on top pulls up the image of the output of the driver with that freequency, if not both mirroring some drivers while angling them all (look at the Focal Grande Utopia with the mirrored midrange and the midbass up top and the woofer below, all angled towards the line from the centered tweeter). And while some single fullrange drivers can have low efficiency in free air, their efficiency can be increased and their low end extended with the proper cabinet design, while multiple driver systems can end up demanding not just power in watts but higher current as the complex load makes the impedance jump all over the place depending on what frequency is playing. It's the same with IEMs, which is why, as much as the cheap ZST et al are great for their price, the response is problematic compared to, say, a Westone, or even a good single driver, except it boils down to diminishing returns over paying $300 for a Westone or an Aurisonics/Fender.
So again, in sum...it depends. Even if you control for price. Some are better designed, or there are compromises that had to be made and buyers who think they are choosing "flavors" are actually choosing which compromises are acceptable (including paying more).
As much as there are inherent characteristics, both positive and negative in either, ultimately it depends on the particular driver.
It's very difficult to design a single driver that can play fullrange and have a smooth response.
In other cases, whether BA or DD or any design, you can design a driver for smooth response within a narrow range, but then how do you integrate them properly so that the crossover doesn't becomes the source of problems in the response as well as have all the driver units' output arrive at the eardrums at the same time?
So while you have an IEM, or for that matter, headphones and speakers, that have a single driver, you have a lot of design considerations. IEMs may roll off at the top end with a large driver, or roll off at the low end too early with a smaller driver. Try to widen the response and you lose sensitivity or introduce peaks. They're easy to use though - you just put on headphones or sit in front of single driver speakers, worrying only about toe-in angles (including angled drivers on headphones), and not much about how high your seat is. The IEM wouldn't have to have a complex crossover nor perfectly measured geometry in the chamber out to the bore.
Add drivers and you add complexity. Multi driver speakers introduce time alignment as a variable, which is why car audio systems need time alignment correction DSP (which only works for one seating position at a time), and home speakers that have enough drivers have t o be humongous not just to accommodate the drivers and their air volume but to circumvent time alignment issues by either angling the baffle or in the case of some Dynaudios, Focals, etc, you mirror some if not all the drivers so the identical driver on top pulls up the image of the output of the driver with that freequency, if not both mirroring some drivers while angling them all (look at the Focal Grande Utopia with the mirrored midrange and the midbass up top and the woofer below, all angled towards the line from the centered tweeter). And while some single fullrange drivers can have low efficiency in free air, their efficiency can be increased and their low end extended with the proper cabinet design, while multiple driver systems can end up demanding not just power in watts but higher current as the complex load makes the impedance jump all over the place depending on what frequency is playing. It's the same with IEMs, which is why, as much as the cheap ZST et al are great for their price, the response is problematic compared to, say, a Westone, or even a good single driver, except it boils down to diminishing returns over paying $300 for a Westone or an Aurisonics/Fender.
So again, in sum...it depends. Even if you control for price. Some are better designed, or there are compromises that had to be made and buyers who think they are choosing "flavors" are actually choosing which compromises are acceptable (including paying more).
I don't know if I would draw the parallel between speakers headphones and IEMs. the volumes of air to move to provide the music, and the space to do it, are so different that they should IMO be treated as independent situations. even looking at speaker vs headphones(which are way closer in behavior compared to IEMs), it's pretty much a consensus that we can gain from using crossovers in speakers(even get an extra sub), while it's also pretty much a consensus that multidriver headphones are... "meh". now consider even smaller stuff, the issue of sealed vs open, the fact that BA drivers are simply a different tech with fairly specific pros&cons, and we really don't have a all lot of similarities with speakers or even headphones. of course the laws of physics didn't just change, IEMs aren't that small ^_^. but a lot is still factually different.
I don't know if I would draw the parallel between speakers headphones and IEMs. the volumes of air to move to provide the music, and the space to do it, are so different that they should IMO be treated as independent situations. even looking at speaker vs headphones(which are way closer in behavior compared to IEMs), it's pretty much a consensus that we can gain from using crossovers in speakers(even get an extra sub), while it's also pretty much a consensus that multidriver headphones are... "meh". now consider even smaller stuff, the issue of sealed vs open, the fact that BA drivers are simply a different tech with fairly specific pros&cons, and we really don't have a all lot of similarities with speakers or even headphones. of course the laws of physics didn't just change, IEMs aren't that small ^_^. but a lot is still factually different.
It's also true that many scientific experiments and analyses are done on scaled down models.
Of course the values are different, but as you say, the physics doesn't change.
An interesting comparison would be between an IEM and a loudspeaker that relies on multiple drivers housed within a box, with a single port for projecting the sound.. which is of course ridiculous ... it's not really apples and oranges, more like apples and sesame seeds.
Ultimately, I don't know if the right question is "can X technology compete with Y technology?" since that avoids the question of what unique traits each of the technologies bring to the party that the others don't. When it comes to BA drivers, the best one I've ever heard (Noble K10U) sounded very smooth, very clean, and very refined. But it was still a bit dry even though it was arguably the best BA implementation I'd ever heard. The big advantage of BA drivers is you can cram a bunch into the space of an IEM. DD don't enjoy that level of flexibility. I guess if what you're asking is can you pack 5 DDs into an IEM like a BA to fix the limitations of the technology, then the answer is no.
But even the remarkably polished Noble lacked a certain euphonic characteristic that I've come to chase in all my recent gear acquisitions. I just got the Planamic IEM and it's quickly become my IEM of choice to pair with the Shanling M5s. It really doesn't sound like any IEM I've ever heard, dynamic driver or hybrid. Sure, there is room to improve the tightness (although it's tighter than any DD I've heard in its price range) and the strange tuning (fixable with a solid EQ), but I wouldn't trade the liquid smooth timbre of a single planamic driver for 10 balanced armatures.
Ultimately, I don't know if the right question is "can X technology compete with Y technology?" since that avoids the question of what unique traits each of the technologies bring to the party that the others don't. When it comes to BA drivers, the best one I've ever heard (Noble K10U) sounded very smooth, very clean, and very refined. But it was still a bit dry even though it was arguably the best BA implementation I'd ever heard. The big advantage of BA drivers is you can cram a bunch into the space of an IEM. DD don't enjoy that level of flexibility. I guess if what you're asking is can you pack 5 DDs into an IEM like a BA to fix the limitations of the technology, then the answer is no.
But even the remarkably polished Noble lacked a certain euphonic characteristic that I've come to chase in all my recent gear acquisitions. I just got the Planamic IEM and it's quickly become my IEM of choice to pair with the Shanling M5s. It really doesn't sound like any IEM I've ever heard, dynamic driver or hybrid. Sure, there is room to improve the tightness (although it's tighter than any DD I've heard in its price range) and the strange tuning (fixable with a solid EQ), but I wouldn't trade the liquid smooth timbre of a single planamic driver for 10 balanced armatures.
I don't know if I would draw the parallel between speakers headphones and IEMs. the volumes of air to move to provide the music, and the space to do it, are so different that they should IMO be treated as independent situations. even looking at speaker vs headphones(which are way closer in behavior compared to IEMs), it's pretty much a consensus that we can gain from using crossovers in speakers(even get an extra sub), while it's also pretty much a consensus that multidriver headphones are... "meh". now consider even smaller stuff, the issue of sealed vs open, the fact that BA drivers are simply a different tech with fairly specific pros&cons, and we really don't have a all lot of similarities with speakers or even headphones. of course the laws of physics didn't just change, IEMs aren't that small ^_^. but a lot is still factually different.
Bottomline though is that either way there are advantages and compromises that need to be taken advantage of and mitigated, ie, if a particular implementation fails horribly in one or the other, the end result will suck. That or it's going to be expensive ad possibly impractical.
Bottomline though is that either way there are advantages and compromises that need to be taken advantage of and mitigated, ie, if a particular implementation fails horribly in one or the other, the end result will suck. That or it's going to be expensive ad possibly impractical.
sure, we do agree on that. I posted simply so people wouldn't be tempted to just assume that a clear benefit for one setup will automatically and systematically translate into similar benefit for multi BA drivers(and same for flaws).
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
... it's not really apples and oranges, more like apples and sesame seeds.
