I appreciate the graph. I was considering the CKX, but crinacle hasn't got a graph so I can compare to my C12 and see if they fix the 2.5k bump issue I have with them. However, looking at crinacle's NM2+ vs. both IEF Neutral and Harman, I see a suckout (comparatively) from 800 to 2k of several db. And per your graph (again, thanks), the CKX is even more sucked out in the 800-1.5k region than the NM2+, so I ended up buying Moondrop Starfield instead.
Yea TBH, I don't like the NM2+. It is 70% as good as the CKX but about 3 - 4 times the price. I should have aligned the curves at 1K first thou. The CKX is kind of vivid and bright so I guess it is a matter of preference.
I’m going to drag a bit off topic, but from my past observations, audiophile with age of 40+ have tendencies to highly praising NM2+ which I feel is too bright. That brings me a assumption of high frequency hearing depletion may play a role on the perception of NM2+.
I’m going to drag a bit off topic, but from my past observations, audiophile with age of 40+ have tendencies to highly praising NM2+ which I feel is too bright. That brings me a assumption of high frequency hearing depletion may play a role on the perception of NM2+.
I’m going to drag a bit off topic, but from my past observations, audiophile with age of 40+ have tendencies to highly praising NM2+ which I feel is too bright. That brings me a assumption of high frequency hearing depletion may play a role on the perception of NM2+.
Not only for people over 40, most sound engineers also have hearing loss of some sort and when they mix for live/studio, it tends to sound really harsh on the treble, but of course for him/her, it sounded good.
Not only for people over 40, most sound engineers also have hearing loss of some sort and when they mix for live/studio, it tends to sound really harsh on the treble, but of course for him/her, it sounded good.
I’m going to drag a bit off topic, but from my past observations, audiophile with age of 40+ have tendencies to highly praising NM2+ which I feel is too bright. That brings me a assumption of high frequency hearing depletion may play a role on the perception of NM2+.
It's not only hearing health, which is not only age related, but also due to occupational or leisure exposure. But generally yeah, as we age, the higher frequencies are usually the first to go. But a few other factors influence treble sensitivity/trebleheadedness:
1) Volume played at - AKA Fletcher Munson Curve. The sound is perceived to be more V shaped (ie more boosted treble and bass) at louder volumes, whereas sound is perceived to be more U shaped at lower volumes. Hardly anyone mentions the volume they use their gear at, so this could be a big confounding area.
2) Pinna gain/ear anatomy - this can influence sound a lot, especially perception of the upper mids area. We all have different ear anatomies, so YMMV.
3) Different eartips/sources - they definitely influence perception of the treble.
Of course some folks are by default trebleheads/treble sensitive, and perhaps the music genres we listen to (or even the mastering eg poorly recorded materials) may influence the upper mids/treble area.
I received the Starfields. The small supplied tips fit me best.
Something strange though... I am assuming the Starfields need a few dozen hours of burn in, cuz the bass in the Starfields out of the box is much less than the bass from the C12, even when the C12 is EQ'd 3 db down at both 60 and 150 hz. They graph within 1db of each other from 50-100, and 2db of each other from 100-200. From that graph I would have predicted that I would have found the Starfields still with more bass than I would prefer, but that is not the case at all... the Starfield has less bass that I prefer. The Starfield's bass does sound a lot cleaner.
I'm just going to assume it is a question of burn in time for the Starfield's driver to loosen up.
I received the Starfields. The small supplied tips fit me best.
Something strange though... I am assuming the Starfields need a few dozen hours of burn in, cuz the bass in the Starfields out of the box is much less than the bass from the C12, even when the C12 is EQ'd 3 db down at both 60 and 150 hz. They graph within 1db of each other from 50-100, and 2db of each other from 100-200. From that graph I would have predicted that I would have found the Starfields still with more bass than I would prefer, but that is not the case at all... the Starfield has less bass that I prefer. The Starfield's bass does sound a lot cleaner.
I'm just going to assume it is a question of burn in time for the Starfield's driver to loosen up.
Although it’s a controversial topic. The burn-in, I feel DD might get slight change, as the moving parts do deplete as it runs, so bass will be the scope of burn-in.
Also, bass is hugely relying on fit x eartip, the FR tells less, it changes drastically by how far is nozzle end to your eardrum, how wide is ear tip bore, and thickness/hardness of the tips.
note: base increases by tip size as well, small tip generally produce less bass, large, more base.
[edit] i see you like controlled bass, for that case try AZLA sednafit xelastic. It controls base very well.
I received the Starfields. The small supplied tips fit me best.
Something strange though... I am assuming the Starfields need a few dozen hours of burn in, cuz the bass in the Starfields out of the box is much less than the bass from the C12, even when the C12 is EQ'd 3 db down at both 60 and 150 hz. They graph within 1db of each other from 50-100, and 2db of each other from 100-200. From that graph I would have predicted that I would have found the Starfields still with more bass than I would prefer, but that is not the case at all... the Starfield has less bass that I prefer. The Starfield's bass does sound a lot cleaner.
I'm just going to assume it is a question of burn in time for the Starfield's driver to loosen up.
You assume correctly. Imho (and from many of years of personal experience), DD drivers; especially those that have very stiff diaphragms and surround materials; take at least 50-200ish hours to loosen up. Usually after that amount of time, things start to come into place.
I received the Starfields. The small supplied tips fit me best.
Something strange though... I am assuming the Starfields need a few dozen hours of burn in, cuz the bass in the Starfields out of the box is much less than the bass from the C12, even when the C12 is EQ'd 3 db down at both 60 and 150 hz. They graph within 1db of each other from 50-100, and 2db of each other from 100-200. From that graph I would have predicted that I would have found the Starfields still with more bass than I would prefer, but that is not the case at all... the Starfield has less bass that I prefer. The Starfield's bass does sound a lot cleaner.
I'm just going to assume it is a question of burn in time for the Starfield's driver to loosen up.
Well from my experience, the bass usually "lessen" or "tightened" after burn-in and not the other way around.
That is also why you can't judge iem just from looking at the FR graph.
You assume correctly. Imho (and from many of years of personal experience), DD drivers; especially those that have very stiff diaphragms and surround materials; take at least 50-200ish hours to loosen up. Usually after that amount of time, things start to come into place.
Although it’s a controversial topic. The burn-in, I feel DD might get slight change, as the moving parts do deplete as it runs, so bass will be the scope of burn-in.
Also, bass is hugely relying on fit x eartip, the FR tells less, it changes drastically by how far is nozzle end to your eardrum, how wide is ear tip bore, and thickness/hardness of the tips.
Good point. Tips are essential for a good seal and may require much experimentation to achieve that balance of seal and comfort. But I think that step is better left till later; after the driver(s) have had time to loosen up. Personally, when I get a brand new set; I only listen to them for about 5 minutes ootb, to make sure each channel is actually working. After that, I play signal/music through them for at least 72 hours before I begin to form any opinions or impressions.
right then. I'll let them burn in for a couple of days. My assumption with the graphs is that the IEMs are tested with the manufacturer supplied tips and cables. If that is not the case, graphs become... not very useful.
Oh, another puzzle. My C12s have sensitivity of 112db. The Starfields have 122db. Yet, when I swap back and forth between C12 and Starfield, the C12s are louder. Been a long time since I've considered such things, but could this be a result of C12s being 24 Ohm and Starfields being 32 Ohm?
right then. I'll let them burn in for a couple of days. My assumption with the graphs is that the IEMs are tested with the manufacturer supplied tips and cables. If that is not the case, graphs become... not very useful.
Oh, another puzzle. My C12s have sensitivity of 112db. The Starfields have 122db. Yet, when I swap back and forth between C12 and Starfield, the C12s are louder. Been a long time since I've considered such things, but could this be a result of C12s being 24 Ohm and Starfields being 32 Ohm?
Yes, current is lowered with higher impedence. So the current that passes to the Starfield is much lower than the c12. On the other hand, you need 1mW of power to get the sound level rated in sensitivity. Now the power increases with both the impedence and the current, but it depends more on the current than the impedence. Summary: lower db for Starfield.
Edit: Also from basic math, the db level for Starfield should be (3/4) x (122/112) times or about 80% @1khz @same voltage compared to c12.
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.
