Yeah, I think I understood your point. I was only able to see what's "incorrect" about that photo because I recently took a photo course and immediately homed in on the wrongness of the hand. Which is to say I've got some training and experience that others probably don't have. So some people see "grey!" others see "green!" some see "what's wrong with that photo?!" and I see "needs to be re-white-balanced."
Perhaps people with more experience and audio training than I have are able to hear speakers and full-sized headphones as being more "correct" than IEMs. I guess I just feel lucky to enjoy all three equally.
But to reintroduce my point, the brain has to have small areas to grasp to define what reality is. After that it’s bias and interpretation will produce a perception which we accept as correct.
It's probably steering off topic at this point, but that famous image of the dress is one that really bothered me because as a photographer, I know there are two 'right' answers to the colour.
The true colour in real life = blue and black
The photo colour with the disgustingly incorrect white balance = brown and some kind of pastel blue/green/yellow... or whatever people on the internet were saying.
My point is, as a photographer, I am experienced enough to know both the answers so when it comes to digital editing, I am able to discern what currently is, and what it should be. Which is why the whole internet argument was flawed from the start, because half the people were saying what it is, and the other half saying what it should be (after white balance compensation in their 'brain').
So my point is, people who critically listen to music and sound for 10, 15 or 20+ years, should be able to give some critically accurate opinions on sound, through practice or training or just long enough exposure/experience.
The problem is that sound and hearing has more influencing variables than sight and vision. Maybe 20 years isn't enough to fully appreciate all those variables.
I could be talking out my arse, but it's an interesting discussion nonetheless.
It's probably steering off topic at this point, but that famous image of the dress is one that really bothered me because as a photographer, I know there are two 'right' answers to the colour.
The true colour in real life = blue and black
The photo colour with the disgustingly incorrect white balance = brown and some kind of pastel blue/green/yellow... or whatever people on the internet were saying.
My point is, as a photographer, I am experienced enough to know both the answers so when it comes to digital editing, I am able to discern what currently is, and what it should be. Which is why the whole internet argument was flawed from the start, because half the people were saying what it is, and the other half saying what it should be (after white balance compensation in their 'brain').
So my point is, people who critically listen to music and sound for 10, 15 or 20+ years, should be able to give some critically accurate opinions on sound, through practice or training or just long enough exposure/experience.
The problem is that sound and hearing has more influencing variables than sight and vision. Maybe 20 years isn't enough to fully appreciate all those variables.
I could be talking out my arse, but it's an interesting discussion nonetheless.
I don’t how the internet argument was flawed as it’s simply folks perception delineating what they thought reality is. Their perception is simply what it is? Same with the shoe and same with both grey squares looking like different shades of gray?
All three examples I listed are simply photographs/drawing which stir up confusion and point out the possible flaws in perception. But.....more importantly showed how humans are very confident in their perception. Lol
The fact that our perception is what’s flawed. But more so to prove the point that perception can be manipulated.
My only point here is actually in relation to the title of the thread and the original OP’s question. Simply showing optical perception confusion to illustrate the phenomenon of how either full-size headphones or IEMs could generate a believable and workable response regardless of technicality and ability. And.......to directly answer the question, IEMs can surpass a comparably priced headphone in some price brackets. IMO
But again.......it’s more inline with if a person was open to believing in the playback and willing to “believe”.
It would be fascinating if someday equipment could actually measure and graph out imaging maps of headphone playback. The full-size headphones would produce a broader map. Though the IEM map would show an inclusion of elements making the soundstage less outside but more with imaging between your ears....visualized “behind” the ears.
But besides the imaging placement it’s the fact that some prefer their stage to be smaller and easier to read.....like book size. Others are OK to feel like being front row in the cinema; even though it may be harder to grasp. Again it’s the subjective will of the listener to accept the soundstage. With this concept it’s difficult to judge which style of transducer is really better as they are apples and oranges; not comparable. IMO
Still it’s a difficult question to answer for the OP due to preference, and it seems we may have difficulty finding someone who is 50% full-size and 50% IEM listening. I’m listening to the $199 BGVP DM6 IEM right now and don’t know of a full-size headphone that sounds as good for $199? But again, that’s me?
Yeah, I think I understood your point. I was only able to see what's "incorrect" about that photo because I recently took a photo course and immediately homed in on the wrongness of the hand. Which is to say I've got some training and experience that others probably don't have. So some people see "grey!" others see "green!" some see "what's wrong with that photo?!" and I see "needs to be re-white-balanced."
Perhaps people with more experience and audio training than I have are able to hear speakers and full-sized headphones as being more "correct" than IEMs. I guess I just feel lucky to enjoy all three equally.
Well there have been folks posting at Head-Fi who are have employment in city or national classical music instrument playback. And you would think a headphone listener who is at the symphony all day would get a fairly good idea into instrument tone and character. At least they would be able to quickly identify what sounded correct. But again part of success at Head-Fi is learning yourself too. As somehow this playback personality is still different for everyone. We can still chart peoples progress in reaching happiness in purchases. And of course if you read enough posts you will come across the “searchers” who are at a position of their trajectory......maybe one purchase away from sonic happiness maybe 50 purchases away? But they could lack the expertise of a professional musician who knows more of what they are looking for? I don’t know........except everyone has their own journey here. And....... we do have a bunch of great choices.
Maybe you seeing correct or “off” in the photos is like a professional musician and their ability to quickly hear “issues” with IEM or headphone playback. Most of my personal listening is rock, metal or electronic so I simply searched out those IEMs and headphones that made me get musically involved. Most of my success has been in finding just a few IEMs and headphones that I can listen to for prolonged time spans. I have no idea what is right or wrong? It’s actually something that’s is achieved without too much over thinking? IMO
Folks do though seem to learn themselves and what “sound” would keep them occupied. IMO
Well there have been folks posting at Head-Fi who are have employment in city or national classical music instrument playback. And you would think a headphone listener who is at the symphony all day would get a fairly good idea into instrument tone and character. At least they would be able to quickly identify what sounded correct. But again part of success at Head-Fi is learning yourself too. As somehow this playback personality is still different for everyone. We can still chart peoples progress in reaching happiness in purchases. And of course if you read enough posts you will come across the “searchers” who are at a position of their trajectory......maybe one purchase away from sonic happiness maybe 50 purchases away? But they could lack the expertise of a professional musician who knows more of what they are looking for? I don’t know........except everyone has their own journey here. And....... we do have a bunch of great choices.
Maybe you seeing correct or “off” in the photos is like a professional musician and their ability to quickly hear “issues” with IEM or headphone playback. Most of my personal listening is rock, metal or electronic so I simply searched out those IEMs and headphones that made me get musically involved. Most of my success has been in finding just a few IEMs and headphones that I can listen to for prolonged time spans. I have no idea what is right or wrong? It’s actually something that’s is achieved without too much over thinking? IMO
Folks do though seem to learn themselves and what “sound” would keep them occupied. IMO
Ironically the sound of live music can sound very different between the perspective of a performer and someone in the audience, so even then what sounds 'right' is somewhat subjective.
I've seen arguments between live performers and frequent live-music goers as to what sounds right or correct, but I feel like neither are wrong.
When you've got all the instruments around you playing in very different positions and volumes and sound is coming from all kinds of directions, it can never sound the same as when it's all coming from the same general direction in front of you at some distance.
I'm not saying one is right or wrong, it's just different, so technically both are the 'right' answer.
Hah, I wish I was one purchase away from sonic happiness before I started this nonsense.
I keep thinking up good replies to this thread, but then having trouble writing them out... and then somebody else comes along and says what I was trying to say, only more succinctly.
Nicely said, @GREQ!
I'd also add that a person might have experience with live music as a musician or an audience member, and thus know what an instrument "should" sound like according to their frames of reference, but we should keep in mind that we're not talking about live music, but recorded... Which, of course, involves all sorts of other frames of reference from all the people involved in making the recording, not to mention the gear that they're using and what sort of gear they're expecting the listener to be using. I guess you could argue that there are also sound engineers and producers and yada yada yada that could also tell us what a certain instrument "should" sound like... But there ends up being so many different frames of reference that I really can't see a logical argument for an absolute "Better" or "Worse," maybe "better at some things, worse at others", or maybe only "like" or "dislike."
The other concept which is maybe a little bit important to note is IEM and headphone history. And while both processes are always being reinvented and refined all the time; I’m pretty sure IEMs have seen a more intense “coming of age” the last 10 years?
Meaning, in 2010 the world was already into entertaining a range of headphones and various manufacturers had their flagships in production. In 2010 there seemed to be less advanced flagship IEM production? In 2010 I myself was more concentrated in full size headphones.....but I can remember friends starting to buy expensive flagship IEMs and they were nothing like they are now? With that stated, of course prices were also more grounded across the board for flagships, both full-size and of IEM style.
So my viewpoint is viewing a concept that IEM development has been more colorful the last ten years? That’s just me maybe? Clearly the OP feels IEMs are not a value and is asking if they ever will contain value.
“Do you think an IEM can ever sound as good as a comparably priced full size headphone?”
That should go without saying, but I'm glad you said it. Certainly puts things into better perspective, and almost certainly answers the question in of itself.
10 years ago it was basically between Etymotic, Shure and maybe Sony?... I don't even know... and today it's more like who isn't making IEMs? including a small army of new companies/brands.
It’s hard to imagine too, that besides the HiFiMan DAP, and IPod......it was mostly amps as I remember?
My focus was not portable audio then only having the $70 HiFiMan Re0 IEM. But I just remember it being a different time. There was only the IPod, Ray Samuels had portable amps, HiFi man just came out with a $749 DAP which was very strange at the time? Monster had a $350 flagship IEM? It was a vary different time to me?
With the above said, it just seemed like full-size headphones in 2010 were already fully substantiated and like they are now?
It’s maybe safe to say the cellphone has helped the progress of IEM technology and integration into daily life. There is obviously way more IEMs sold today than 10 years ago.
That should go without saying, but I'm glad you said it. Certainly puts things into better perspective, and almost certainly answers the question in of itself.
10 years ago it was basically between Etymotic, Shure and maybe Sony?... I don't even know... and today it's more like who isn't making IEMs? including a small army of new companies/brands.
I don't understand what that quote means? That the performance-price ratio for IEMs should be higher than for full-sized? So buying an IEM should be more "bang for the buck?" I don't understand why that should be. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding what was meant.
Ten years ago there was also JAYS, Westone, Ultimate Ears, Jerry Harvey... That's when I was just getting into all of this tomfoolery! (Git offa ma lawn, ya dang whippersnappers!)
speakers, headphones, IEMs, they all have issues and advantages, several of them are sort of unique to the type of product. so to decide if IEMs can sound as good as headphones or speakers, it's important to first decide what "sounding good" means to us. I prefer speakers anytime I have a choice. but when there is a problem with using speakers(like at night), I always prefer headphones over IEMs. except on the go or in a noisy environment where the ability for some IEMs to isolate strongly from outside noises is IMO one of the most hifi features ever invented. to me it's that simple. at home in a quiet room, it wouldn't even cross my mind to use IEMs. but to someone else, the criteria will be different and so will be his/her preferences and opinion as a result. which is normal.
I don't understand what that quote means? That the performance-price ratio for IEMs should be higher than for full-sized? So buying an IEM should be more "bang for the buck?" I don't understand why that should be. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding what was meant.
Ten years ago there was also JAYS, Westone, Ultimate Ears, Jerry Harvey... That's when I was just getting into all of this tomfoolery! (Git offa ma lawn, ya dang whippersnappers!)
I think he is just referring to how many there are on the market now; which I have to agree as it’s on the edge of an unfathomable amount. A person can’t actually keep track of how many. Note each reviewer who even attempts to create a large ranking list actually ends up to have part of the list shared with other reviewer lists, but then there’s even a side of the list which is individual to the reviewer, as no one can hear them all. No one person can rank them all. IMO
In my humble opinion the price to performance ratio is swinging over to IEMs? But again, and just like what everyone is posting........ the “value” is totally subjective as the two are almost not comparable.
I do know the Sony full-size Z1R flagship is priced the same as the IER-Z1R; the Sony IEM flagship. It’s also a matter of opinion which would be better.....as they both do different things due to their individual intrinsic nature. So it’s seems we are lost in a sea of unquantifiable subjectivity.
Not to go off topic really but one parallel for me has been the differences (in concept) between headphones and guitars. I’ve had guitars my whole life though I’m no total expert. But what I have learned is there are beautiful and technically proficient guitars, just like technically proficient headphones. But, at times a producer will have someone drive across town and borrow some style of guitar as his imagination tells him the song requires it. It’s not that that guitar is any better than what the studio has in their collection, but it has a tone which is unique.
And amazingly I have found there are no perfect guitars, only some which are way way better than others. Headphones will follow along in this style of categorizing. Arch-top guitars have missing bass emphasis but are easer to record due to a consistent volume and even tone characteristic. Still with these qualities there can be an entertaining experience even though it’s not technically perfect. What’s really difficult to understand is when you play a song people know they may actually hear it sounding different than it’s actually played because their mind fills in the missing bass frequencies. Though when playing in a band the arch-top leaves room for the bass player and cuts across the top of the mix as it’s not bass centered. If a Les Paul guitar was put in place it would offer completely different mechanics into the song, which even though maybe judged by some to be more complete/correct.......would actually be less rewarding in the final mix. Just the fact that arch-top guitars found their place in older band music was a result of people needing and wanting that style of guitar tone reproduction at the time. Whatever frequency the arch top displayed ended up becoming an accepted and reliable way to do that style of 1940s-1950s-1960s orchestra music. And besides frequency..........it’s of course the sound personality where a guitar offers both a rhythm and note character; making it different than some instruments.
So ten years from now or even twenty years from now it actually could be clearly noted by audio historians that IEMs and headphones from our present era are used and loved not for their ability but even lack of complete ability?
I think he is just referring to how many there are on the market now; which I have to agree as it’s on the edge of an unfathomable amount. A person can’t actually keep track of how many. Note each reviewer who even attempts to create a large ranking list actually ends up to have part of the list shared with other reviewer lists, but then there’s even a side of the list which is individual to the reviewer, as no one can hear them all. No one person can rank them all. IMO
In my humble opinion the price to performance ratio is swinging over to IEMs? But again, and just like what everyone is posting........ the “value” is totally subjective as the two are almost not comparable.
I do know the Sony full-size Z1R flagship is priced the same as the IER-Z1R; the Sony IEM flagship. It’s also a matter of opinion which would be better.....as they both do different things due to their individual intrinsic nature. So it’s seems we are lost in a sea of unquantifiable subjectivity.
Ah, okay. That makes sense. It does seem like everybody and their mother is getting in on the IEM game these days. I can't quite imagine that the market will support so many different brands for long, though for now hopefully the saturated market is helping to keep the prices down... of course, if that's the case, once the market reaches the point of instability and some of the brands disappear, prices will start to go up again. That's my guess, anyway. I'm willing to bet most of the "Chi-Fi*" brands that are really hot now won't be around to see the end of the 2020s.
*Can we please, for the love of all that is good in the world, find a new name for this?
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.
