No, they didn't. You've probably placeboed yourself into thinking that they did though. If a company could just play a couple songs through their earphones and magically make them sound much better you can bet yourself they would do it. After all, why let everyone's first impressions be bad?
Well, sound is a very subjective thing. Some do not think cables or burn in make any difference, others (like me), think they do. Just take a look at some of the experiences of others using the Densen disc in online reviews. It's quite interesting. Whether these things can be scientifically proved is another thing.
Well, sound is a very subjective thing. Some do not think cables or burn in make any difference, others (like me), think they do. Just take a look at some of the experiences of others using the Densen disc in online reviews. It's quite interesting. Whether these things can be scientifically proved is another thing.
No, sound is not subjective. We can objectively measure sound to insane degrees and thoroughly understand the physics behind it. How you interpret the sound is subjective. While I'm not going to get into the hard science that proves these things don't change anything, I will at least say this: humans are deeply flawed and biased creatures, and the psychology of hearing is incredibly complex. Look into the sunken-ship fallacy, expectation bias, confirmation bias, and how expectation bias plays into our perception of frequency response. These are the mechanisms that have changed how you heard that IEM, not some voodoo mp3 file.
No, sound is not subjective. We can objectively measure sound to insane degrees and thoroughly understand the physics behind it. How you interpret the sound is subjective. While I'm not going to get into the hard science that proves these things don't change anything, I will at least say this: humans are deeply flawed and biased creatures, and the psychology of hearing is incredibly complex. Look into the sunken-ship fallacy, expectation bias, confirmation bias, and how expectation bias plays into our perception of frequency response. These are the mechanisms that have changed how you heard that IEM, not some voodoo mp3 file.
No, sound is not subjective. We can objectively measure sound to insane degrees and thoroughly understand the physics behind it. How you interpret the sound is subjective. While I'm not going to get into the hard science that proves these things don't change anything, I will at least say this: humans are deeply flawed and biased creatures, and the psychology of hearing is incredibly complex. Look into the sunken-ship fallacy, expectation bias, confirmation bias, and how expectation bias plays into our perception of frequency response. These are the mechanisms that have changed how you heard that IEM, not some voodoo mp3 file.
Personally i really like the pairing of the DM5 with the ifi idsd BL. Really lets them shine. I could never have thought that something which sounded so meh OFTB could sound like this after burn in (brain)
I have a question I hope someone will be able to answer. The typical frequency response of a DAP or CD player is basically a straight line between 20Hz and 20kHz. However the typical frequency curve of an IEM has a gentle hump from 20Hz to 1kHz and after this looks more like a seismograph trace of a major earthquake! How does this result in anything like an accurate representation of the original sound?
I have a question I hope someone will be able to answer. The typical frequency response of a DAP or CD player is basically a straight line between 20Hz and 20kHz. However the typical frequency curve of an IEM has a gentle hump from 20Hz to 1kHz and after this looks more like a seismograph trace of a major earthquake! How does this result in anything like an accurate representation of the original sound?
simply put loud speakers are ideally tuned to reproduce a flat FR curve but what you usually see on an iem is what the fr curve would look like when it hits the ear lobes. so therefore to get the sound one hears from a flat tuned speaker at the ear is endeavoured to be reached by artificially creating that FR curve. Did i make sense?
I have a question I hope someone will be able to answer. The typical frequency response of a DAP or CD player is basically a straight line between 20Hz and 20kHz. However the typical frequency curve of an IEM has a gentle hump from 20Hz to 1kHz and after this looks more like a seismograph trace of a major earthquake! How does this result in anything like an accurate representation of the original sound?
Thank you and Superuser1. I just wondered if it might be more useful for manufacturers to publish a compensated FR curve representing what you hear so it would be easier to adjust EQ if you needed to.
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.
