[Ronion]

i already did that
i know what was causing the crackle though
still cant fix the sibilance though and it's killing my enjoyment of them.

For sibilants, try reducing the output centered around 8kHz.

 

[o0genesis0o]

I would not consider earbud measurements any more unreliable than any other poorly contrived measurements. They are all unreliable. The propagation of this myth isn’t healthy for the hobby and I’m attempting to refute it. It makes the hobby seem like utter voodoo and it’s not. The reason the FiiO sound so good is because of careful measurements and engineering. No luck or voodoo involved. It’s understanding acoustics and psychoacoustics (Which is the title of a very good book on the subject).

in the situation above, the transducers are used in 2 completely different ways yet measured the same. If you were able to EQ them to the same target response, you can be certain that they would not sound the same in use. Going inside the concha changes everything.

By unreliable, I mean the lack repeatability and a common standard for comparison. For example, if I measure IEMs on my IEC711 coupler, I can repeat the measure and achieve the same results consistently (if I align the resonance peak at the same place). Moreover, the results is more or less similar to others who also use IEC711. Sure, there are a couple db difference here and there, but they are within ballpark. So when I see a graph with IEC711, I know what to expect.

As far as I know, there is no similar standard for ear buds. Perhaps the best we can do, which I plan to do, is attach a standard artificial ears on an IEC711 coupler to sit ear buds. Still, even in that case, I don't have much faith in repeatability of the measurements due to the way they fit. Given how FF3 sounds, I also have a bit of doubt about Fiio's graph because if the graph is right (15db ear gain, significantly rolled off at both ends), these earbuds wouldn't sound that right.

Anyhow, the pressure is on Fiio for not mucking up the FF5 If they do, I guess I'll try the DIY from TGXear. The one with speaker-like image sounds very interesting.

 

[Ronion]

My Bell-Lbs/Lbbs is dead. At first I thought it was the cable which is usually the culprit in most fixed cabled earphones. But after recabling there was still no sound from one of the drivers which led me to using my multimeter to confirm that the driver was indeed dead.

Lasted 8 months only. For $48.48 including shipping, it was an expensive earbud which didn't live up to its hype. I wish I did the multimeter check first, I would have taken it up with NiceHCK store where I bought it from.

You may be able to upgrade that driver. It’s a cool little shell that I’d bet you could get to sound better. Maybe @FranQL would offer some guidance…

 

[samandhi]

By unreliable, I mean the lack repeatability and a common standard for comparison. For example, if I measure IEMs on my IEC711 coupler, I can repeat the measure and achieve the same results consistently (if I align the resonance peak at the same place). Moreover, the results is more or less similar to others who also use IEC711. Sure, there are a couple db difference here and there, but they are within ballpark. So when I see a graph with IEC711, I know what to expect.

As far as I know, there is no similar standard for ear buds. Perhaps the best we can do, which I plan to do, is attach a standard artificial ears on an IEC711 coupler to sit ear buds. Still, even in that case, I don't have much faith in repeatability of the measurements due to the way they fit. Given how FF3 sounds, I also have a bit of doubt about Fiio's graph because if the graph is right (15db ear gain, significantly rolled off at both ends), these earbuds wouldn't sound that right.

Anyhow, the pressure is on Fiio for not mucking up the FF5 If they do, I guess I'll try the DIY from TGXear. The one with speaker-like image sounds very interesting.

I think that what @Ronion was alluding to is that each person's concha is completely different, and where that matters is the fact that our concha, where earbuds are concerned act like a speaker housing or headphone cups. Each one will have different acoustics and etc... (a WHOLE lot more so than IEMs and headphones, which either totally cover your ears or go into your ears).

If you want (semi) reliable measurements, you might need to have a custom ear made (of your ear) for there to be both consistent, and reliable measurements at the same time. Putting earbuds up to a microphone will tell you basically nothing, because they will never be in your ear that way.

Also, I have noticed that reading a graph for headphones/IEMs is totally different than with earbuds. You really need a good bassline to see what is good and what is bad for reading it. You almost need to unlearn everything that you have learned about graphs for other head gear (other than that you are reading sound in a written form).

Just my blah... blah... blah... LOL

 

[assassin10000]

If you want (semi) reliable measurements, you might need to have a custom ear made (of your ear) for there to be both consistent, and reliable measurements at the same time. Putting earbuds up to a microphone will tell you basically nothing, because they will never be in your ear that way.

This.

I did that and actually got graphs similar to IEMs. Then made a custom adapter for repeatability, which is more important for tuning than what the graph actually looks like.

 

[Ronion]

By unreliable, I mean the lack repeatability and a common standard for comparison. For example, if I measure IEMs on my IEC711 coupler, I can repeat the measure and achieve the same results consistently (if I align the resonance peak at the same place). Moreover, the results is more or less similar to others who also use IEC711. Sure, there are a couple db difference here and there, but they are within ballpark. So when I see a graph with IEC711, I know what to expect.

As far as I know, there is no similar standard for ear buds. Perhaps the best we can do, which I plan to do, is attach a standard artificial ears on an IEC711 coupler to sit ear buds. Still, even in that case, I don't have much faith in repeatability of the measurements due to the way they fit. Given how FF3 sounds, I also have a bit of doubt about Fiio's graph because if the graph is right (15db ear gain, significantly rolled off at both ends), these earbuds wouldn't sound that right.

Anyhow, the pressure is on Fiio for not mucking up the FF5 If they do, I guess I'll try the DIY from TGXear. The one with speaker-like image sounds very interesting.

That part is true—no one is measuring many buds and posting them and I don’t know of any sort of repository. With that said, buds are no different than any other headphone in their repeatability and reliability. Just like all of them, you just have to understand what you are doing and what their limitations are.

Even if you attach a coupler to an ear, you are going to have to learn how to calibrate it and you won’t be able to do that without a dummy head and torso and an exceptionally well designed room and stereo. The other option would be to buy a HATS or similar device.

FiiO‘s graph is extremely accurate. You have to read their measurement conditions and then read the several posts where I’ve posted the graphs with and without foams and then the post where I showed the graphs with different types of foams. All this has been posted in the last couple weeks and I thought you had read them. in any case, when I saw their graph, I knew roughly what to expect and it was dead on. I’ve tried this with other buds and the rtings site. Same results. How it lined up with their target is essentially how it lined up with my calibrated target in my rig. it also aligns very well with how I hear them. I listened for days before I measured and I was dead on.

 

[o0genesis0o]

That part is true—no one is measuring many buds and posting them and I don’t know of any sort of repository. With that said, buds are no different than any other headphone in their repeatability and reliability. Just like all of them, you just have to understand what you are doing and what their limitations are.

Even if you attach a coupler to an ear, you are going to have to learn how to calibrate it and you won’t be able to do that without a dummy head and torso and an exceptionally well designed room and stereo. The other option would be to buy a HATS or similar device.

FiiO‘s graph is extremely accurate. You have to read their measurement conditions and then read the several posts where I’ve posted the graphs with and without foams and then the post where I showed the graphs with different types of foams. All this has been posted in the last couple weeks and I thought you had read them. in any case, when I saw their graph, I knew roughly what to expect and it was dead on. I’ve tried this with other buds and the rtings site. Same results. How it lined up with their target is essentially how it lined up with my calibrated target in my rig. it also aligns very well with how I hear them. I listened for days before I measured and I was dead on.

Perhaps @samandhi is right, I still look at graph from an IEM perspective. In IEM world, 15db ear gain is deadly. FF3 has around 15db ear gain according to Fiio. It sounds more like 10db gain of Moondrop's VDSF target rather than 12db of Harman target, and certainly not 15db. That's why I say "I have skepticism about FF3 measurement". If Fiio's earbuds measurement rig is dead-on accurate, and their IEM measurement rig is also dead-on accurate, then it means that I interpret the graph incorrectly, 15db ear gain with buds feel different from 10db ear gain with IEMs.

Funny enough, I did not see your post about Fiio's graph. Maybe it was before I started following this thread?

 

[samandhi]

That part is true—no one is measuring many buds and posting them and I don’t know of any sort of repository. With that said, buds are no different than any other headphone in their repeatability and reliability. Just like all of them, you just have to understand what you are doing and what their limitations are.

Even if you attach a coupler to an ear, you are going to have to learn how to calibrate it and you won’t be able to do that without a dummy head and torso and an exceptionally well designed room and stereo. The other option would be to buy a HATS or similar device.

FiiO‘s graph is extremely accurate. You have to read their measurement conditions and then read the several posts where I’ve posted the graphs with and without foams and then the post where I showed the graphs with different types of foams. All this has been posted in the last couple weeks and I thought you had read them. in any case, when I saw their graph, I knew roughly what to expect and it was dead on. I’ve tried this with other buds and the rtings site. Same results. How it lined up with their target is essentially how it lined up with my calibrated target in my rig. it also aligns very well with how I hear them. I listened for days before I measured and I was dead on.

I have read that the calibration is the "not so fun" part?!

Thats a good idea to listen to them quite a bit, even before looking at graphs. IMO they CAN poison your opinion before ever hearing them.

This is why marketing is still a huge thing, because Bose (for instance) have NEVER been worth the asking price, yet people keep thinking they are the "greatest" because that is what they are told...over, and over, and over. Lol

 

[o0genesis0o]

I have read that the calibration is the "not so fun" part?!

Thats a good idea to listen to them quite a bit, even before looking at graphs. IMO they CAN poison your opinion before ever hearing them.

This is why marketing is still a huge thing, because Bose (for instance) have NEVER been worth the asking price, yet people keep thinking they are the "greatest" because that is what they are told...over, and over, and over. Lol

My father used to tell me Sony and Bose are the best.

I don't know, Bose QC45 does sound quite decent.

 

[Ronion]

I think that what @Ronion was alluding to is that each person's concha is completely different, and where that matters is the fact that our concha, where earbuds are concerned act like a speaker housing or headphone cups. Each one will have different acoustics and etc... (a WHOLE lot more so than IEMs and headphones, which either totally cover your ears or go into your ears).

If you want (semi) reliable measurements, you might need to have a custom ear made (of your ear) for there to be both consistent, and reliable measurements at the same time. Putting earbuds up to a microphone will tell you basically nothing, because they will never be in your ear that way.

Also, I have noticed that reading a graph for headphones/IEMs is totally different than with earbuds. You really need a good bassline to see what is good and what is bad for reading it. You almost need to unlearn everything that you have learned about graphs for other head gear (other than that you are reading sound in a written form).

Just my blah... blah... blah... LOL

You’re close. What I’m really saying is that there isn’t much data available so when people see earbud measurements—even good ones—people won’t know how those translate into what they hear. When you see these measurements made with devices that have zero correlation to how a bud is used, all bets are off. They are likely worse than useless unless you are designing and tuning, but even then higher quality measurements are better.

basically when you see measurements made with a HATS or something similar, the measurements are going to translate similarly to how cans or IEMs translate. Problem is: rtings has one and FiiO has one. That’s our database. That’s . Especially because FiiO‘s is done in a way that would be a horror show of sound for most people, but it’s still a very useful measurement for anyone who knows what they are doing. Unfortunately, that’s a very small percentage of listeners.

in any case, good measurements will translate across listeners just as much as they do for other types of headphones. Everyone does have different ears and that will change measurements if we were able to measure inside everyone’s ears, but that doesn’t effect translation just like it doesn’t in speakers, headphones, organs, pianos, violins and voices. Fit is going to be important for everyone just as it is with other types of headphones and each present their own challenges. With IEMs you have insertion depth and bore width plus a myriad of other external ear issues. With cans you have head, jaw and neck undulations and pinna deformations and clamp tolerance. In buds you have how well is sits in the tragus and concha. They all have their remedies, buds are just remedied on the cheap and intuitively by comparison.

 

[samandhi]

You’re close. What I’m really saying is that there isn’t much data available so when people see earbud measurements—even good ones—people won’t know how those translate into what they hear. When you see these measurements made with devices that have zero correlation to how a bud is used, all bets are off. They are likely worse than useless unless you are designing and tuning, but even then higher quality measurements are better.

basically when you see measurements made with a HATS or something similar, the measurements are going to translate similarly to how cans or IEMs translate. Problem is: rtings has one and FiiO has one. That’s our database. That’s . Especially because FiiO‘s is done in a way that would be a horror show of sound for most people, but it’s still a very useful measurement for anyone who knows what they are doing. Unfortunately, that’s a very small percentage of listeners.

in any case, good measurements will translate across listeners just as much as they do for other types of headphones. Everyone does have different ears and that will change measurements if we were able to measure inside everyone’s ears, but that doesn’t effect translation just like it doesn’t in speakers, headphones, organs, pianos, violins and voices. Fit is going to be important for everyone just as it is with other types of headphones and each present their own challenges. With IEMs you have insertion depth and bore width plus a myriad of other external ear issues. With cans you have head, jaw and neck undulations and pinna deformations and clamp tolerance. In buds you have how well is sits in the tragus and concha. They all have their remedies, buds are just remedied on the cheap and intuitively by comparison.

Thanks for sharing that tidbit of information! I generally learn something new every day here. Today is no exception.

 

[Ronion]

I should add too that the better the shell designs, just like IEMs and cans are going to work better with more people’s heads and ears. You can see this on various sites with cans in particular: better designed cans work better on more rigs than worse ones. That doesn’t mean they’ll be more comfortable however. It just means that from an acoustics standpoint, you’ll get better translation unless your head and ears are well outside of typical.

in buds, the PK and Lite shells are easy to get repeatable measurements. The MX500 is harder but very doable. The FiiO are also very easy. This all could be different for different shaped ears, but most people seem to agree about shell fit for the most part. There are always some shapes that don’t work well for some people.

 

[samandhi]

I should add too that the better the shell designs, just like IEMs and cans are going to work better with more people’s heads and ears. You can see this on various sites with cans in particular: better designed cans work better on more rigs than worse ones. That doesn’t mean they’ll be more comfortable however. It just means that from an acoustics standpoint, you’ll get better translation unless your head and ears are well outside of typical.

in buds, the PK and Lite shells are easy to get repeatable measurements. The MX500 is harder but very doable. The FiiO are also very easy. This all could be different for different shaped ears, but most people seem to agree about shell fit for the most part. There are always some shapes that don’t work well for some people.

What type of shell, would you say is the hardest to "get repeatable"? Probably the "other" category, because of being an odd shape?

 

[Ronion]

What type of shell, would you say is the hardest to "get repeatable"? Probably the "other" category, because of being an odd shape?

SMABAT shells in general unless they are enhanced by hooks and fins and things.

 

[BCool]

Forgive me if this is a stupid question, but I'm curious: are there any earbuds that have better isolation? Or are they pretty much all the same due to limitations inherent in the form factor?
I say this because with open-back headphones, there are varying degrees of 'openness', my X2HRs are less open than my KSC75s for example.