[Otto Motor]

KZ ES4 vs. KZ ZS10

According to the phonograph, the KZ ES4 has the more recessed mids.
Here my thoughts on "bathtub" signatures in general - if you had missed it before:
https://goo.gl/8wPg4q

P.S. Well, this belongs to the KZ thread, but I don't have posting privileges there...

 

[Wiljen]

ON MEASUREMENTS IN REVIEWS

As you see, I have not done any of the measurements myself - which does not make them any less useful. In the end it does not matter where the information comes from as long as it is reliable.

In summary, measurements characterize the technical capabilities of an earphone [albeit not completely] and therefore add value to any review. And they are essential for comparison purposes. And measurements also add a component of "unbiased...honest" as stated in many disclaimers - and therefore credibility.

I agree that measurements can add to a review, the problem is when measurements come from as many different un-calibrated and un-corrolated sources as they do, and conditions under which the measurements are made are not kept equal, the idea that they are essential for comparison purposes falls flat. The differences in measurement setups, environmental noise, procedure, etc.. all play a role in results making comparisons invalid if using two different reviewers data and possibly invalid even when using a single reviewers data done at different times. Your example of Tyll was a good one in that he also preached the use of calibrated systems so that comparisons between them was retained. That takes a good bit more than $55 to pull off. Realistically, creating a truly silent chamber in which to conduct measurements so that ambient noises don't play a roll in the outcome is a several thousand dollar proposition. For Us home users, are you really controlling the environment so that the outside noises reaching the measuring device are exactly the same every time? As I write this, I can hear the ice maker, birds chirping outside, and a low hum of a fluorescent that needs a new ballast. The measuring equipment is a small piece of the overall equation if you really want results that lend themselves to comparisons with others results and retain validity.

 

[Dobrescu George]

I agree that measurements can add to a review, the problem is when measurements come from as many different un-calibrated and un-corrolated sources as they do, and conditions under which the measurements are made are not kept equal, the idea that they are essential for comparison purposes falls flat. The differences in measurement setups, environmental noise, procedure, etc.. all play a role in results making comparisons invalid if using two different reviewers data and possibly invalid even when using a single reviewers data done at different times. Your example of Tyll was a good one in that he also preached the use of calibrated systems so that comparisons between them was retained. That takes a good bit more than $55 to pull off. Realistically, creating a truly silent chamber in which to conduct measurements so that ambient noises don't play a roll in the outcome is a several thousand dollar proposition. For Us home users, are you really controlling the environment so that the outside noises reaching the measuring device are exactly the same every time? As I write this, I can hear the ice maker, birds chirping outside, and a low hum of a fluorescent that needs a new ballast. The measuring equipment is a small piece of the overall equation if you really want results that lend themselves to comparisons with others results and retain validity.

This comment explains well why novices should never do measurements, basically, if everyone has a different rig and different conditions, you get awfully varied FRs that have nothing to do with the actual response, for a measurement to make sense, everyone would need proper measurement etiquette.

Not to mention that most cheap measurement devices are trash at recovering proper data above or below a certain point, especially until you hit around a certain price point, which is more than most invest in the headphones themselves.

Microphones are the same, good microphones are pretty expensive, so something that can do proper measurements is pretty expensive as well.

The only truly reliable measurement device in the whole Romania is at Meze's Headquarters, and it costed well above 10.000 USD if my understanding is correct

 

[mbwilson111]

well then, why not stop the measuring and just trust our ears? I can tell if I like something or not...if my music sounds the way the way it should. In many cases I have seen the artists that I like perform. I know what they sound like. I know their voices. I know their guitars. I know what a piano sounds like....etc...

To be honest I just scroll past the graphs and I wish they would all be put inside of spoilers for those who want to look at them.

P.S. Well, this belongs to the KZ thread, but I don't have posting privileges there...

well... KZ is an IEM so of course it belongs here....I do like the bathtub reference (even though I ignored the graph...lol)

 

[Dobrescu George]

well then, why not stop the measuring and just trust our ears? I can tell if I like something or not...if my music sounds the way the way it should. In many cases I have seen the artists that I like perform. I know what they sound like. I know their voices. I know their guitars. I know what a piano sounds like....etc...

To be honest I just scroll past the graphs and I wish they would all be put inside of spoilers for those who want to look at them.



well... KZ is an IEM so of course it belongs here....I do like the bathtub reference (even though I ignored the graph...lol)

Measurements are very useful when a proper pro does it with proper equipmnet

Which takes huge amounts of energy and money and effort.

 

[crabdog]

lol too many experts. Take it to the sound science forums guys.

 

[mbwilson111]

Measurements are very useful when a proper pro does it with proper equipmnet

Which takes huge amounts of energy and money and effort.

...and yet, I don't care....

lol too many experts. Take it to the sound science forums guys.

yes

 

[superuser1]

Have ordered these and they are yet to ship. 3 BAs per side, the switches look interesting. Though there is a FR Graph as a sign of civil disobedience i shan't post it : Tang and Song Custom Earphones for the Future -TSMR-Seven-Hinged Star 3 Unit 7 Tuning Full-motion Iron Headphones

 

[crabdog]

Have ordered these and they are yet to ship. 3 BAs per side, the switches look interesting. Though there is a FR Graph as a sign of civil disobedience i shan't post it : Tang and Song Custom Earphones for the Future -TSMR-Seven-Hinged Star 3 Unit 7 Tuning Full-motion Iron Headphones

Looking forward to your impressions of these.

 

[Otto Motor]

I agree that measurements can add to a review, the problem is when measurements come from as many different un-calibrated and un-corrolated sources as they do, and conditions under which the measurements are made are not kept equal, the idea that they are essential for comparison purposes falls flat. The differences in measurement setups, environmental noise, procedure, etc.. all play a role in results making comparisons invalid if using two different reviewers data and possibly invalid even when using a single reviewers data done at different times. Your example of Tyll was a good one in that he also preached the use of calibrated systems so that comparisons between them was retained. That takes a good bit more than $55 to pull off. Realistically, creating a truly silent chamber in which to conduct measurements so that ambient noises don't play a roll in the outcome is a several thousand dollar proposition. For Us home users, are you really controlling the environment so that the outside noises reaching the measuring device are exactly the same every time? As I write this, I can hear the ice maker, birds chirping outside, and a low hum of a fluorescent that needs a new ballast. The measuring equipment is a small piece of the overall equation if you really want results that lend themselves to comparisons with others results and retain validity.

You are 100% right in most points (and 80% in the others ) imo! The deal for the rest of us is therefore to use the same setup for all the different iems to spot the (relative) differences - with a grain of salt (see below). I once posted a bunch of graphs for the same earphone from different sources. There were small differences but the basic flavours were the same.

As to comparisons with the same system - my measuring friend wrote me: "...IEM curves obtained on the same measurement system relative to each other *might* be comparable, but even then different driver configurations can have different interactions with the system (resonances etc.). The test seems to be, if a system seems to be consistent with what you hear (esp in terms of treble peaks), you could start to trust it..." [the three superimposed FR graphs in my last post are certainly valid].

In any case, the error scenario of the measurements is part of the reporting. In addition, as said, I compared to measurements by others for validation.

But people who review $$$$$$ iems should have the appropriate technical knowledge and right setup as part of the game - and most do. The closest thing to measurements is trust in the reviewer's competence and familiarity with their taste.

Indirect use of frequency responses: Tyll determined competently with a calibrated system that the NAD Viso HP50 headphones have a frequency response very close to neutral. I used them as a sonic benchmark for relative comparison to other sets.

As to the ones of us who don't care about measurements. Fair enough, but that information should not be excluded to the ones who do.

 

[Otto Motor]

well then, why not stop the measuring and just trust our ears?

One does not exclude the other - they are complimentary. This guy makes good basic points - I hope you like his ice cream:
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/revamp-crinacles-iem-fr-measurement-database.830062/

Example: the famous treble peak of the ZS6 can be well read off the graph and may influence one's buying decision.

 

[mbwilson111]

As to the ones of us who don't care about measurements. Fair enough, but that information should not be excluded to the ones who do.

I understand that. My main point is that those graphs could be put inside of spoilers for those who want to see them. My eyes get tired

 

[Zerohour88]

lol too many experts. Take it to the sound science forums guys.

 

[B9Scrambler]

Finally got around to reviewing the King Pro:

The Contraptionist / Head-Fi

[URL='https://cdn.head-fi.org/a/10119614.jpg'] [/URL]​

 

[Otto Motor]

Finally got around to reviewing the King Pro:

The Contraptionist / Head-Fi

​

I'd say you brought the message across very well [finding your way through the sub-$200 offerings]. Well done!

King Pro = Exclusive King + $80.

$80 in beer and the Exclusive or no beer and the Pro?