Current most neutral/accurate IEM?
Dec 20, 2009 at 5:23 AM Post #61 of 110
Quote:

Originally Posted by Lunatique /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Some people say that the K701 is not neutral--it is lacking some bass and has a slight spike in the treble region that makes them a bit sharp.


Actually, it's not their balance that most obviously mars their neutrality. What is wrong with them - like EVERY headphone using dynamic drivers I've heard (including HD650's) - is that they badly screw up timbre. I'm constantly amazed about how glorious-sounding instruments which make me swoon when I hear them live sound so goddam drab when reproduced through almost every transducer out there. It's as if that $3000 Martin has been transduced into a $100 box of crap.

And yet hardly anyone notices this! I see these audiophiles earnestly pondering the "soundstaging", the "midrange", the "highs", and all the other rot that audiophiles earnestly ponder - seemingly oblivious to the fact that the instruments as reproduced sound like cheap knockoffs. Frankly, there are very few transducers of any type that actually preserve the beauty of the original tone-colours.

And no, electrostatics don't really do the job. While they have a lovely sweet (if somewhat glue-like and plasticky) timbre they still sound reproduced - as if the original solid instrument has been replaced by a ghost-like wraith.

And dynamic drivers almost always wreck timbre. They darken and homogenize it, as if the shining colours of the original have been snuffed out and the open skies have given way to a darkened room with curtains drawn.

The only exceptions to this sorry tale are the best ribbons out there (unfortunately not available in current headphone design) and........the armatures in the Ultimate Ears Triple-Fi 10. Frankly, I was just amazed at how true to the original tonecolours this unimpressive-looking device is. For the first time I can hear violin timbre as I hear it live, clarinet as it should be, and the sound of drumstick-hitting-skin in that unmistakable way I hear from a live drumkit and which I'd despaired of ever hearing from a set of transducers. Every other headphone I've heard (and I own two sets of Stax stats) makes an acoustic drum kit sound relatively like a drum-machine.

Of course, they have their problems. They're too bassy (there goes their "neutrality"!), the image is far too in-the-head, and the balance is on the dull and mellow side (though not to the detriment of the tone-colours) but for timbre, and complete absence of grain and distortion they've been a revelation to this listener.
 
Dec 20, 2009 at 6:56 AM Post #62 of 110
^ Well, the OP asked about IEMs. I wonder which IEMs you've heard, because I believe that out of all my IEMs its the dynamic driver based top phones (IE8, FX500, Playaz N1) that do timbre best. Only lately I've got the Ortofon e-Q7, which is the first BA IEM (but its more like a BA/dynamic crossover) that can keep up with the top dynamics IMO. I have not heard the Triple.Fi though, had the SF5 Pro and was not that impressed.
 
Dec 20, 2009 at 3:48 PM Post #64 of 110
Maybe neutral/accurate wasn't the best way to ask the question, since it seems people disagree on what is neutral/accurate. So, I guess the more relevant questions would be, which IEMs are like a middle ground between the Westone 3 and the Shure E4C?

I find the W3's bass ridiculously hyped and the treble too rolled off, and I find the E4C's bass anemic and the treble a little sharp in the 10KHz region. I'd also prefer not to spend any more money on headphones (I already have 8 and really don't need more), so I'd like to trade my W3 here on head-fi for a similar priced one that fits the profile of what I'm looking for. But if there are models that fit my needs perfectly but are of a different price range, I'd consider it if I can find someone willing to trade that model and strike a fair deal of some sort.

And if I could find a pair of IEM that sounds very similar to the HD650 or ATH-M50, I'd be quite happy.

After looking around and considering the price range that's closest to the W3, it seems the SE530 and IE-8 are the closet to what I'm after? You guys agree? If so, which one is closer to what I'm after?
 
Dec 20, 2009 at 4:02 PM Post #67 of 110
Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif
To my ears the most neutral IEM I've heard is the Phonak Audéo. It benefits from a narrow 2 dB decrease around 10 kHz, though.

With the bass decreased by 10 or 12 dB and some additional lower-mids decrease (–3 dB) the IE8 sounds quite neutral and transparent, too, and very ear-friendly (smooth).

The ER-4P is still one of the most neutral IEMs, especially with slight EQing (–2 dB at 3 kHz, +2 dB at ~16 kHz).
.



Agree!
 
Dec 20, 2009 at 8:08 PM Post #68 of 110
Quote:

Originally Posted by mobbaddict /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Haha it took me a long time to understand their explanation
biggrin.gif

I think you're mixing up two different things. The boost you see on the curve is not in the high frequency (around 10 Khz) but rather in the upper mids (around 2,5 Khz). What Etymotic basically says is that commercial recordings usually have a treble boost around 10 Khz so in order to prevent harshness the ER4 have some treble roll off. I think that's a good idea as from my experience commercial recordings can sound too agressive with treble-oriented headphones.



Sure, but they roll-off too much in the treble region to be accurate. The reality is, no armature based iem is capable of producing frequencies past 16-17khz (the jh13 claims extension to 20khz, but I have never seen a response graph so it is impossible to verify.)

Quote:

The important thing here is that the ER4 try to recreate all the resonance and effects of a live performance. In order to do that they need to boost the upper mids. So they're not neutral. They just make live recordings sound as if you were in a concert hall. And what they call "listener's perceived response" is IMO not what you actually hear through the earphones (the upper mids can't be tamed this way as they are the most sensitive frequencies for the human hearing), it's rather a "projection" of how neutral they would sound compared to a real live performance.
That's how i understand it at least.


It is impossible to reproduce the acoustics of any given performance, because this will always vary significantly depending on the location. Also, given that iems are inserted into the ear, any upper frequency emphasis will be magnified greatly. In reality, etymotic probably consciously chose to color the frequency of the er-4 because they feel true neutrality is too boring (like pretty much every other audio company.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bína /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I think if lunatique think that hd650 is neutral, Sennheiser IE8 will be great neutral IEM.


If the op thinks w3 bass is too boomy, they will definitely find the IE8's bass too boomy. Also, the hd650 is nothing like the IE8-the hd650 is dark but still relatively accurate.

I recommended the um3x earlier in this thread, and I stand by my recommendation. Bass quantity is less than the w3, but still plentiful and the highs are somewhat rolled off. It's kind of a refined w3. Perfect for the op, I think.
 
Dec 20, 2009 at 10:04 PM Post #69 of 110
Don't get me wrong, UM3X is great but that up front in your face true stage monitor characteristic takes some getting use to. Some find it sort of congested. There is very little "air" between frequencies. Despite that it is very balanced sounding. Probably best for "analyizing" your music.
 
Dec 21, 2009 at 8:42 AM Post #70 of 110
Quote:

Originally Posted by Antony6555 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Sure, but they roll-off too much in the treble region to be accurate. The reality is, no armature based iem is capable of producing frequencies past 16-17khz (the jh13 claims extension to 20khz, but I have never seen a response graph so it is impossible to verify.)


I agree, i was more thinking of the 10 Khz region actually (i doubt you can really feel any harshness higher in the treble).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antony6555 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
It is impossible to reproduce the acoustics of any given performance, because this will always vary significantly depending on the location. Also, given that iems are inserted into the ear, any upper frequency emphasis will be magnified greatly. In reality, etymotic probably consciously chose to color the frequency of the er-4 because they feel true neutrality is too boring (like pretty much every other audio company.)


Well i agree that anyway all the effects of a live performance ARE in the recording anyway, so they just have to be rendered as good as possible, but the 2.5 Khz peak is also part of a real live performance (because of the human hearing), so i guess a peak in this region can help to recreate the same balance.
 
Dec 22, 2009 at 4:07 AM Post #71 of 110
Quote:

Originally Posted by Antony6555 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
If the op thinks w3 bass is too boomy, they will definitely find the IE8's bass too boomy. Also, the hd650 is nothing like the IE8-the hd650 is dark but still relatively accurate.

I recommended the um3x earlier in this thread, and I stand by my recommendation. Bass quantity is less than the w3, but still plentiful and the highs are somewhat rolled off. It's kind of a refined w3. Perfect for the op, I think.



I was looking at the frequency response chart at HeadRoom for the IE-8, and I have no idea if the bass region shown on the chart is for when the bass control is turned all the way up or to the minimum position. Anyone know? If that's the response of the minimum position, then it's definitely ridiculously hyped. I'd be very surprised if the minimum position is as hyped as the W3's bass.

So the UM3X has less bass, but what about the treble? The W3's treble is also quite rolled-off, so I'd want an IEM that has more neutral treble.
 
Dec 22, 2009 at 4:17 AM Post #72 of 110
Edit: link didn't work... trying to attach. This is the graph of both IE8 bass levels.
 
Dec 22, 2009 at 4:26 AM Post #73 of 110
Quote:

Originally Posted by Lunatique /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I was looking at the frequency response chart at HeadRoom for the IE-8, and I have no idea if the bass region shown on the chart is for when the bass control is turned all the way up or to the minimum position. Anyone know? If that's the response of the minimum position, then it's definitely ridiculously hyped. I'd be very surprised if the minimum position is as hyped as the W3's bass.

So the UM3X has less bass, but what about the treble? The W3's treble is also quite rolled-off, so I'd want an IEM that has more neutral treble.



If you think W3 treble is rolled off, you'll probably think UM3X has no treble at all.
 
Dec 22, 2009 at 4:35 AM Post #74 of 110
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sarah /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Edit: link didn't work... trying to attach. This is the graph of both IE8 bass levels.


BWAhahaha---omigod the minimum position is already ridiculous--the max position is just insane! My mind is reeling from looking at that graph. No way in hell that's anywhere close to the HD650 or M50.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pianist /img/forum/go_quote.gif
If you think W3 treble is rolled off, you'll probably think UM3X has no treble at all.


OK, the UM3X is out then. That leaves just the Shure SE530 as the closest candidate. Too bad I can't find a frequency response chart for the Ultimate Ears line of IEM's, since they seem to have good reputation too.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top