[cskippy]

@crinacle I'm looking at getting a decent set of IEMs for out and about listening, was considering Andromeda but didn't love the slight V-shape. I like a really reference quality sound as I would probably also use them for recording/mixing. I used to have a 64 Audio U8 but didn't like the mid bass boost and weird mids, I guess it was the 2kHz wobble and uneven trebe. The FLC 8s has peaked my interest, I'm just not sure if there is anything else I should be looking at. Is there anything better around $1000? Also, I would prefer universal IEMs as I've never done customs. Last thing, my ears are weird and my left ear doesn't like to keep a seal. Only IEMs that I've had success with are Shure SE215 silicon tips and HEM4 Silicon tips. Thanks!

 

[crinacle]

@crinacle I'm looking at getting a decent set of IEMs for out and about listening, was considering Andromeda but didn't love the slight V-shape. I like a really reference quality sound as I would probably also use them for recording/mixing. I used to have a 64 Audio U8 but didn't like the mid bass boost and weird mids, I guess it was the 2kHz wobble and uneven trebe. The FLC 8s has peaked my interest, I'm just not sure if there is anything else I should be looking at. Is there anything better around $1000? Also, I would prefer universal IEMs as I've never done customs. Last thing, my ears are weird and my left ear doesn't like to keep a seal. Only IEMs that I've had success with are Shure SE215 silicon tips and HEM4 Silicon tips. Thanks!

I've been meaning to do this for a while anyways, but here's the list of measurably objective reference IEMs (presentation may vary due to differing opinions on metrics like diffuse field etc.) within this database alone.

• Etymotic ER4 Series (PT, S, SR, XR etc.)
• FitEar F111
• InEar Prophile-8
• Jomo Audio 6R
• Kumitate KL-REF
• Shure KSE1500
• Ultimate Ears Reference Monitor
• Ultimate Ears UE18+ Pro
• VSonic GR07X
• Hidition NT6
• Hidition Viento-Reference
  
• Noble K10 Encore

Debatables:

• 64 Audio A10
• AAW W900 (universal)
• ACS Encore
• Audio Technica ATH-IM02
• Campfire Orion
• Empire Ears Zeus-R
• Final Audio Design 7200
• Final Audio Design Heaven VII
• Heygears Anora
• Noble Katana
• Ultimate Ears Reference Remastered
• Unique Melody Legacy
• Unique Melody Maestro V2
• VSonic GR09
• Westone ES60
• InEar Stagediver 2
• Vision Ears VE8

If you're having issues with a specific ear, maybe you should try for customs one of the days. My recommendation is to save up for a Prophile-8 but if you are to "settle", there's the above list of reference-class IEMs for you to pick out from.

 

[cskippy]

The GR09 actually looks really good. I'm not sure if there would be too much sub bass but I do prefer extra sub bass vs mid bass. The rest of the frequency response above 2kHz looks very similar to UERM. Do you know which version you listened to? The gold and white versions are ceramic housing and the silver version is plastic.

 

[bartzky]

My recommendation is to save up for a Prophile-8

I like to second that recommendation. It's a great reference IEM.

 

[Glebuzzz]

My last update before I return back to Australia and have a potentially long hiatus with this measuring business. Glad to be back home for a bit.

?????
Audio Technica ATH-CKR70
Audio Technica ATH-IM01
Focal Sphear
Mass Kobo BCE-1B
Pai Audio MR2
Pai Audio MR3
Sony MDR7550
Sony XBA-Z5

Notes and impressions:

• The Frankenstein earbud-converted-IEM only classified as "?????" is amazing. Never before have I heard something so alien in my life. It truly is an art to be this bad while still being in full working condition.
• A rare oddity, the bone-conducting BCE-1B is hard to measure accurately so do take the provided graph with a grain of salt. A wonderful novelty item but ultimately sounded horrid anyways.
• The MDR7550 (successor to the EX1000) gets my recommendation. I actually prefer it over the Z5.

FRG of Focal Sphear looks very good. Can you share your listening experience?

 

[crinacle]

The GR09 actually looks really good. I'm not sure if there would be too much sub bass but I do prefer extra sub bass vs mid bass. The rest of the frequency response above 2kHz looks very similar to UERM. Do you know which version you listened to? The gold and white versions are ceramic housing and the silver version is plastic.

Definitely the ceramic one. It was very heavy (compared to other IEMs) and had a lot of heft to it.

FRG of Focal Sphear looks very good. Can you share your listening experience?

Didn't really spend too much on the Sphere to be honest. Was not my kind of sound but it was sounded decent-ish for the price.

 

[crinacle]

Been procrastinating for a while, but I finally got the front post fully updated with all the recent measurements.

Also a final tally: 306 IEMs measured as of 11/06/17. Hope I get more opportunities in Melbourne too, so if anyone's curious to measure their own gear just hit me up.

 

[datranz]

What you are doing is great. It's so useful and takes a lot of hard work and dedication. I can't thank you enough. But if you are able to take water fall graphs to show decay and harmonics. I feel are just as important as frequency response. It would absolutely take it to the next level because it would tell everything about an iem. Such as sound signature and how long a note lingers and so on.

 

[castleofargh]

What you are doing is great. It's so useful and takes a lot of hard work and dedication. I can't thank you enough. But if you are able to take water fall graphs to show decay and harmonics. I feel are just as important as frequency response. It would absolutely take it to the next level because it would tell everything about an iem. Such as sound signature and how long a note lingers and so on.

he'd need to change the way he's doing measurements. but beyond that "detail", be it waterfalls or distortions the stuff measured goes tens of dB below signal. meaning to be somehow reliable the measurement rig must be pretty good, and the environment very quiet. so a cheap mic into a cellphone in a store might not make for the absolute best conditions. ^_^

 

[crinacle]

What you are doing is great. It's so useful and takes a lot of hard work and dedication. I can't thank you enough. But if you are able to take water fall graphs to show decay and harmonics. I feel are just as important as frequency response. It would absolutely take it to the next level because it would tell everything about an iem. Such as sound signature and how long a note lingers and so on.

he'd need to change the way he's doing measurements. but beyond that "detail", be it waterfalls or distortions the stuff measured goes tens of dB below signal. meaning to be somehow reliable the measurement rig must be pretty good, and the environment very quiet. so a cheap mic into a cellphone in a store might not make for the absolute best conditions. ^_^

Currently looking into those, actually. I've ordered one of those Chinese IEC711 kits so I'll see where I can go with that. Also, gonna experiment with the IMM6 with a TRRS splitter jack into my desktop and see if the ARTA results are worth any salt.

I've conducted some experiments with the Surface Pro 4 due to its TRRS jack. The end results had a consistent bass rolloff for some reason that's not due to seal (I've checked). Anyone care to chime in?

 

[Brooko]

Most of the mics tend to measure the upper mid-range and lower treble on the light side. My advice would be to simply find a manufacturer who has a proper IEC711 set-up, and see if they would share info on measurements. When I was reviewing Ken Ball's CA range, we discussed why my measurements were so different to his, and when I asked, he agreed to help me with my set-up. It basically consisted of both measuring the exact same IEMs (I even sent some of mine for him to measure) and comparing data. He's got some great equipment (Gras) so for me was just a matter of building a compensation curve. Do that - and even with a cheap set-up, you can still deliver consistent and relatively accurate results.

 

[crinacle]

I think I've pretty much hit a wall with exploiting the cheap IMM6 to its fullest extent. I've done a lot of research and comparisons across many databases to get where the compensations are now, with any anomalies easily chalked up to variations in insert depth (see below). It's hard to arrange cooperation with big names like you @Brooko; most recently I've messaged Jude about providing some raw IEM curves but he's probably too busy to get back on that one, so I've pretty much resigned myself to going solo and referring to known databases such as Innerfidelity or Clarityfidelity to get the IMM6 up to spec. I'd say the compensated measurements are staggeringly close to the typical IEC711 results, but I only use them personally since this thread is all raws anyways (for reasons that @castleofargh and I have discussed a few pages back).

Anyways, with the Campfire Andromeda as reference, here's the reason why no one should ever take data above 7,000Hz seriously:

Spoiler: Large images warning: Andromeda graphs

Andromeda (deep, medium, shallow inserts respectively)

Officials for reference

FYI, the graph with the 7.5k/9k twin peaks was done at 20mm distance between mic and tip. A "deep insert" (first graph) would be at 8mm.

 

[Brooko]

Still possible to get overall consistency with your coupler - simply use same tips all the time, and same depth. It takes a bit of doing, but worth it. Personally I pretty much ignore anything above about 10 kHz - its not really important anyway. 7-9 kHz will affect cymbal decay, so its important to get it as right and consistent as you can. I'd keep pestering someone who has a properly calibrated set-up, and get actual data from their system and yours with the same IEM. After you do 3 or 4 of them, you'll be able to build a calibration easy. You have such a great resource there - so I really hope you continue with it.

 

[crinacle]

Still possible to get overall consistency with your coupler - simply use same tips all the time, and same depth. It takes a bit of doing, but worth it. Personally I pretty much ignore anything above about 10 kHz - its not really important anyway. 7-9 kHz will affect cymbal decay, so its important to get it as right and consistent as you can. I'd keep pestering someone who has a properly calibrated set-up, and get actual data from their system and yours with the same IEM. After you do 3 or 4 of them, you'll be able to build a calibration easy. You have such a great resource there - so I really hope you continue with it.

I'm also in this dilemma where, due to the nature of IEMs themselves, "consistency" may be introducing inaccuracy as well. Take things like the A&K T8iE/Beyerdynamic Xelento which are notorious for their extremely shallow fit, and then there's Etymotics with their recommended deep-inserting fits, and chuck in everyone else in between for good measure, and on top of that throw in variations in individual ear canal length for good measure. At that point, coupler depth (at least for this makeshift one) get so arbitrary that I can only guess what is the "appropriate" depth for the specific IEM used else I'll introduce a whole new can of worms into the credibility of this DIY rig.

At any case, insert depth really does part a huge part in the brightness of an IEM. My ears are abnormally huge so I'm able to do "deep inserts" on IEMs that aren't meant to accommodate, and in almost all the cases I experienced audible treble rolloff. For everyone else, I think the ER4 is already a perfect example of how insert depth matters; it's strainingly bright when not properly inserted and absolutely wonderful when fitted correctly. I hope people understand that's why FR measurements are not to be trusted above 7K due to huge variations are easily induced by individual biology and actions.

So yeah, current plan is to a) find someone with an industry-level setup that's willing to cooperate with a random guy on the internet, b) get a TRRS splitter jack and attempt some impulse/CSD/THD measurements with this battered IMM6, and c) wait for my bootleg IEC-711 rig and hopefully upgrade my measuring game.

 

[Glebuzzz]

Definitely the ceramic one. It was very heavy (compared to other IEMs) and had a lot of heft to it.



Didn't really spend too much on the Sphere to be honest. Was not my kind of sound but it was sounded decent-ish for the price.

Thanks for your answer!
Also, if you have an opportunity can you measure earsonics sm2 iFi or earsonics es2? Im very interested in their "beginners" line up