[Kenyon]

Sorry that's what you got out of that whole thing. you should reread what I've written as your statements are factually incorrect. It could very easily be viewed in an entirely different light. I've gotten a few PMs saying the exact opposite thing... initially I was just hoping to correct an error regarding basic acoustics by the designer that could actually help him in the future, then it went to exposing predatory sales tactics. Some people appreciated it, others won't. Much like bright earbuds. It depends on what side of the wall you are on.

Whilst on a quick 'back of the fag packet' calc looking at optimal acoustic treatment - I would agree and not expect diffusion to be a big deal here due to the size and volumes involved - however to simply dismiss the results & concept when presented with graphed measurements is rather dogmatic. In addition to the over-ear headphone previously mentioned you can also see internal diffusion inside the JBL Paragon speaker system - so it is not a completely new idea.

I would have also preferred @RikudouGoku to not use the word "diffusion" unless he had a theoretical and measured basis for changes being the direct result of diffusion (hard to conduct for buds - pressure / reverb times) - whilst @RikudouGoku graphs do indicate an FR difference we are unsure why that difference is seen or how it would be repeatable or amendable according to a diffusion model. Without being able to measure the diffusion effect are we not problematically asking him to measure bud technicalities? The purported benefits of the Soundsphere Rikubuds Gen 3 system are said to be mainly soundstage related and I was unaware there was hard and fast rules to interpreting FR for soundstage...

Moreover, correct me if I am mistaken, but isnt your historical stance that bud makers should not give away their secrets - something you actively campaigned against @WoodyLuvr for when he enquired about the results of a graph you published...???

Further, before making any conclusions I would urge you to:

1) Consider the idea of quarter wavelength rules/impact and how that applies to positioning of a diffuser/absorber including it's angled positions.

In room acoustics, it is preferred to capture/fit all of the wavelength (rarely done in practise as hard to get rooms around the 60foot mark) within the space. When that is not possible quarter wavelength rules apply as they still cover the amplitude impact due to their shape. Fitting the wavelength in the space provides fully optimal performance in negating the residual effect that would otherwise occur in timing/phase - but as buds are minimum phase transducer these issues do not hold such importance.

https://www.acousticfields.com/quarter-wavelength-rule-applies-room-acoustics/

2) Understand what are the targeted wavelengths to be diffused. No one should be looking to diffuse full spectrum as previously suggested - diffusion is traditionally used for mids to low treble whilst absorption (itself questionable if used in isolation) for bass (as a generalized rule)

3) Understand the materials used here and how that density affects the diffusion/absorption

4) Account for QRD & similar design principles - how that can create diffusion differences (including to FR) dependant on size, positioning and structure as well as use of pipes & resonators as evident in this prototype

https://www.subwoofer-builder.com/qrd.htm

5) the use of curved space has also been shown to affect diffusion/absorption - and here the diffusor sits inside a curved shell with the diffusors themselves also angled.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0003682X17303146

Throughout you have not asked @RikudouGoku if the desired affect is targeted for specific frequencies yet you talked about 20khz frequencies and modals - whilst statistical models not modals are mainly used in audio for anything other than low frequencies. If (and I am not making a definitive answer for @RikudouGoku just a potential thought experiment) @RikudouGoku is purporting to use these nubs akin to an 'air' diffusor (like how EST are referred to as 'air drivers') targeted at higher frequencies (unusual to do & harder to diffuse) and using the quarter frequency rule (standard procedure in small spaces) inside a resonator (standard procedure for small spaces) which contains damping/tuning material, QRD and different shell densities - It becomes a novelish idea which has some mathematical feasability (though far from optimal) that there could be an effect -
20khz = 17mm wavelength or 4.25mm quarter wavelength
19khz = 18mm wavelength or 4.5mm quarter wavelength
18khz = 19mm wavelength or 4.75mm quarter wavelength
17khz = 20mm wavelength or 5.00mm quarter wavelength
Etc...
And that is solely in air - something that is not the case in this prototype as other materials and nub placement patterns are used. Whether this is audible - a different arguement...

I appreciate you bringing a theoretical basis into this discussion but you have made a jump from optimal generalized theory to saying something doesn't work at all (though I see you have now upon reflection walked that and a few other early accusations back) when you have not looked at the individual circumstances, wider acoustic studies and @RikudouGoku statements to the contrary. Yes the labelling as 'diffusion' is likely to be technically incorrect at worst and whilst the buds themselves could be great regarding SQ - regarding diffusion they can only be said to be incomplete at best - yet you compound these measurement drawbacks by labelling something as snake oil which assumes persuasive intentions to knowingly tell an untruth in order to provide a gain for personal service - without knowing @RikudouGoku motivations or reasoning. In life I personally find it best to not automatically attribute something you may not fully understand (someone else's buds & design) or something @RikudouGoku may have made an accidental error in attributing an effect to (that is impossible to measure in this circumstance) to malice. This, as @o0genesis0o, kindly alluded to is the logical fallacy of affirming the consequent - and is logic 101.

 

[Pylaczynski]

https://card.weibo.com/article/m/show/id/2309404882468615618682

If anyone is interested you could take a look on this patent from Softears with somewhat similar design/geometry that they use in their single DD custom IEM Tremolo. They call it sound absorbing baffle though

https://www.patentguru.com/CN218336373U

 

[WoodyLuvr]

Whilst on a quick 'back of the fag packet' calc looking at optimal acoustic treatment...

...

@Kenyon @Pylaczynski - You are awesome gents! Two (2) extremely thoughtful posts in a row and offering some very interesting possible explanations (with data) as to why/what may be happening inside @RikudouGoku's new GEN3 RG39 shells. @silverszi also has some relevant thoughts about it as well which I hope he shares as they do seem to fall in line with the above offered explanations.

Positivity and helpfulness at it's finest!

 

[emusic13]

It’s nice to learn about all this new tech. Whether the sound changes are positive or negative, I believe those nubs for sure must change the sound to some extent. But if one can hear changes from a tiny sound pyramid, surely they can also hear how a cable can affect the sound

 

[Ronion]

I've had Kenyon on ignore for a long time, but Woody's post prompted me to look. When you read his post you can tell I've angered him but he fully agrees with me on the facts. I mean he's tried to change my argument and he also tries the red herring approach, but he fully agrees with me. An immensely long set of red herrings I might add. I don't want to play psychologist today, but wow is this getting out of hand. Why can't we just say the designer in question didn't make anything like what he said he made and even perhaps what he thought he made. His nubbins did make the bud measure much brighter, the error is simple to correct, and it should have been done as soon as it was realized a few days ago? End of story. The size and shape of his shell is not even unique in any meaningful way. And as far as sharing secrets goes, the designer isn't trying to hide what he's done, he was actually using what he thought he had done but didn't even do anything remotely similar to his claim as a selling point. I mean the whole argument is massively nuts at this point. He does have the right to say whatever he wants as we all do, but that doesn't mean we should. I thought we would all want honesty from a businesses. If Sony was advertising a regular old picture tube television as an in home coffee maker, would anyone come fervently to their defense?

 

[samandhi]

@RikudouGoku makes good buds. I have had two of his, still have the Grand Rider 2, and I will buy again from him because I have faith in his tuning, his ears, and his statements. I believe it is quite a stupidity to cry wolf and holding strong opinions without ever experiencing the product the way it is intended to - by ears, not by eyes.

@Ronion , this is a very hospitable community. Your unnecessary hostile conducts are not at all welcomed here. You have not heard it. Even when presented with proofs that those nubs do alter the sound signature, you started to take things out of context and focused on an entirely different aspect - whereas it was already put in disclaimer that the measurements are not that of the final product, just taken to show the effects of the nubs.

It seems to me that you are a person who loves to declare that you hold the absolute truth, and loves to wave it around to everyone with loud disclaimers: "Look, this is the absolute truth! You must accept it! No no do not come at me with any other statements, this is the absolute truth! You must know it too! You might not realise it, but deep down you have to know that my truth is the very final absolute truth. Do not question."

This is very irritating and cluttering this otherwise wonderful community of discussion with unnecessary useless blabber. Please stop.

I will try and keep this post as civil as I can yet get my point across, because I feel like @Ronion might be getting misunderstood here. While it might seem that he is being hostile, I would argue that everyone has the right to voice their opinion (fact or not). In this case it is my belief that he is simply calling out a manufacturer on behalf of consumers about a claim that is known to be false. I have known Ronion for a long while now, and also know he is a very busy person. Sometimes his first comments CAN come across as rude, but not because it actually is, but because he gets straight to the point, and doesn't always take into account other's feelings in the way it is worded... Normally he will come back and readdress those that might have been offended or misunderstood how he comes across.

I don't believe that he ever said that Riku's buds aren't good. And I also don't believe that he needs to experience the sound of them to know of what he speaks. The ONLY issue here is that Riku claims that those nibs are for diffusion, which is NOT what Riku answered back with, when questioned about it; he simply said that they sounded different when listening with the nibs as opposed to without. Ronion is arguing that Riku is announcing to the public that he successfully is the first person in the world to offer proper diffusion in an earbud, and nothing else. Well, to be fair, he didn't advertise all of that, but using diffusion anywhere in the title or description of these buds is a false claim. I don't believe that he ever argued that those nibs couldn't change the sound coming out of the shell. This is why I commented that this could be misleading at best and devious at worst, because it all depends on if it was an innocent mistake in wording or not. I don't offer my opinion on which of these it is, because I can't know for sure. I suppose we will know if they are continued to be advertised as "difussion" or not in the future.

Ronion has been around here for a long time and is normally one of the most hospitable people I know. If he didn't call this out, I believe he would be doing the consumer a disservice. If it were FiiO that made this claim, I don't think anyone here would have an issue with him making the comments?! I also don't think this was a personal attack on Riku.

Anyhow, I am not trying to keep any sort of animosity going here, I just didn't want anyone to have hard feelings towards any of the current people that have been here for a while, because of an issue that someone (legitimately) has strong feelings about. So, for all those involved, please try and read comments with a bit of understanding. There IS room for civil debate (civil being the key words here).

 

[Pylaczynski]

It’s nice to learn about all this new tech. Whether the sound changes are positive or negative, I believe those nubs for sure must change the sound to some extent. But if one can hear changes from a tiny sound pyramid, surely they can also hear how a cable can affect the sound

If you could send me links to 2 cables that differs measurably by even half of the difference on the graph I shared before I would be very grateful and would buy them immediately

 

[emusic13]

If you could send me links to 2 cables that differs measurably by even half of the difference on the graph I shared before I would be very grateful and would buy them immediately

Might be hard getting measurements from the manufacturers. Perhaps you could measure them when attached to a bud like the shells with your measuring rig?

These are some popular cables you could try.

 

[RikudouGoku]

This tech, soundsphere was created because small shells (low volume) struggles with soundstage size and this solution helps that weakness in my experience. While it is not concluded in the community if and how to measure the soundstage I see measurable significant differences in the frequency response with the pyramids or without them applied in the shell so calling them snake oil is also inappropriate. Disclaimer: the differences in the shell volume with and without them is below 5% in worst case scenario and while it definitely is also a factor it is discussable whether this would cause that significant difference.

I don't really mind removing the single usage of ”diffusers” in my description of it, as the main point is that it helps the soundstage and in my opinion it does. I used the term diffusers/scattering because it is the most fitting cause of what I heard and measured (and is also backed up by other sources).

I don't think that all of above is a reason to call me a con man and that I am using malice practice in my marketing, but it is up for the community to decide.

 

[samandhi]

This tech, soundsphere was created because small shells (low volume) struggles with soundstage size and this solution helps that weakness in my experience. While it is not concluded in the community if and how to measure the soundstage I see measurable significant differences in the frequency response with the pyramids or without them applied in the shell so calling them snake oil is also inappropriate. Disclaimer: the differences in the shell volume with and without them is below 5% in worst case scenario and while it definitely is also a factor it is discussable whether this would cause that significant difference.

I don't really mind removing the single usage of ”diffusers” in my description of it, as the main point is that it helps the soundstage and in my opinion it does. I used the term diffusers/scattering because it is the most fitting cause of what I heard and measured (and is also backed up by other sources).

I don't think that all of above is a reason to call me a con man and that I am using malice practice in my marketing, but it is up for the community to decide.

For your innovativeness, I applaud you. That it helps with the soundstage is also a wonderful thing. I also don't think that you added in the wording of diffusion as a thing of malice. I just think you didn't know any better. I still am not sure you are understanding why (from your comments) the term "snake oil" was applied. It wasn't because of any doubt that sound staging was changed, or that the FR readings changed, it was the claim that diffusion was happening. Maybe Ronion gave you the benefit of the doubt that he thought that you should know better, in which case it COULD be called "snake oil", because you would have attached that claim knowing that diffusion wasn't what was happening at this level. As mentioned, I don't think you did this knowingly to draw in customers (that don't know any better) just to turn a profit. Having said that, I do, in fact think you should change how this is termed. You may not be a licensed business, but if you were, you could be held accountable for that simple mistake (well, maybe not in China ).

Maybe you should, instead focus your wording of the product more on the line of what you DO see as a difference, which is the sound staging?! I couldn't regurgitate the science, but I would bet quite a bit that a 5% difference in this shell space (at this size of head gear) would indeed cause a difference in the size of staging. But, having said that, I would also have thought that making the shell space smaller (with the nibs) would also make it smaller.

It seems as though in your wording (also from your comments), you are mistaking the word diffusion with soundstage:

Diffusion, in architectural acoustics, is the spreading of sound energy evenly in a given environment. A perfectly diffusive sound space is one in which the reverberation time is the same at any listening position. Most interior spaces are non-diffusive; the reverberation time is considerably different around the room. At low frequencies, they suffer from prominent resonances called room modes.

The point is that if you are going to sell as if you were a manufacturer, you should be able to KNOW what is true and what is postulation of your innovations. This doesn't make the idea bad at all, but it DOES make you responsible for any such claims in your wording of the product. Truly, I find your new buds to look amazing!

 

[Kenyon]

When you read his post you can tell I've angered him but he fully agrees with me on the facts. I mean he's tried to change my argument and he also tries the red herring approach, but he fully agrees with me. An immensely long set of red herrings I might add.

So nothing constructive to add...

I don't want to play psychologist today,

If you do, look up confirmation bias...

His nubbins did make the bud measure much brighter, the error is simple to correct, and it should have been done as soon as it was realized a few days ago

It is worrying how little you actually read or listen to what people have said

But you do realize that those are apple to apple measurements during the validation of the proof of concept whether those pyramids do work or not?

This is not the measurements of the final product

 

[digititus]

Dear Flatheaders. All views have been aired and duly noted. I think we should move forward before we descend into personal nonsense. Both @Ronion and @RikudouGoku have made fair points and my personal conclusions are that certain terminology was not intended as malicious advertising, whilst being technically incorrect. This has been addressed. Both members are stellar contributors.

 

[Ronion]

I will try and keep this post as civil as I can yet get my point across, because I feel like @Ronion might be getting misunderstood here. While it might seem that he is being hostile, I would argue that everyone has the right to voice their opinion (fact or not). In this case it is my belief that he is simply calling out a manufacturer on behalf of consumers about a claim that is known to be false. I have known Ronion for a long while now, and also know he is a very busy person. Sometimes his first comments CAN come across as rude, but not because it actually is, but because he gets straight to the point, and doesn't always take into account other's feelings in the way it is worded... Normally he will come back and readdress those that might have been offended or misunderstood how he comes across.

I don't believe that he ever said that Riku's buds aren't good. And I also don't believe that he needs to experience the sound of them to know of what he speaks. The ONLY issue here is that Riku claims that those nibs are for diffusion, which is NOT what Riku answered back with, when questioned about it; he simply said that they sounded different when listening with the nibs as opposed to without. Ronion is arguing that Riku is announcing to the public that he successfully is the first person in the world to offer proper diffusion in an earbud, and nothing else. Well, to be fair, he didn't advertise all of that, but using diffusion anywhere in the title or description of these buds is a false claim. I don't believe that he ever argued that those nibs couldn't change the sound coming out of the shell. This is why I commented that this could be misleading at best and devious at worst, because it all depends on if it was an innocent mistake in wording or not. I don't offer my opinion on which of these it is, because I can't know for sure. I suppose we will know if they are continued to be advertised as "difussion" or not in the future.

Ronion has been around here for a long time and is normally one of the most hospitable people I know. If he didn't call this out, I believe he would be doing the consumer a disservice. If it were FiiO that made this claim, I don't think anyone here would have an issue with him making the comments?! I also don't think this was a personal attack on Riku.

Anyhow, I am not trying to keep any sort of animosity going here, I just didn't want anyone to have hard feelings towards any of the current people that have been here for a while, because of an issue that someone (legitimately) has strong feelings about. So, for all those involved, please try and read comments with a bit of understanding. There IS room for civil debate (civil being the key words here).

This is exactly correct. If FiiO had make the claim I would have called it out as well. I never claimed that the nibs wouldn’t alter the sound. I’ve tuned to many earbuds to think that. I didn’t say that they would probably make it a bit brighter and change the shape of the treble. That you @samandhi. You get me and you are right, I’m super busy today and yours is the only post I’ve seen this afternoon. I would describe the SMABAT ST20 pro similarly to the description that’s been offered her of the bud in question. SMABAT uses a totally different technology to get the treble slanted sound and ends up with an insane soundstage. I could easily put out a positive review based on that but you all know what I’ve said about those buds and I devised an EQ to make them listenable, but it does make their soundstage more normal. I would have used better analogies this morning, but I have little time. Peace-out people. FWIW I have refrained from these engagements several times (even though I’ve seen some pretty stupid things) because of where they go. I could show you all several things, but depending on which side of the wall you live, you will love me or hate me. Be careful out there.

Oh, one other thing: if I had to choose between these 2 buds, it would be the ones that started the discussion in the first place. They are cheaper and far more ergonomic. Either can be EQed. Of course I never got the SMABAT fully to my liking but these should be easier to EQ. The SMABAT don’t have a lot of efficiency once you remove the “ice pick”. I would think these would fare better in that regard…

 

[Ronion]

Of course I also didn’t sell the ST20 pro because I felt like the sound was so terrible it would be wrong to inflict it on others.

 

[silverszi]

@Kenyon @Pylaczynski - You are awesome gents! Two (2) extremely thoughtful posts in a row and offering some very interesting possible explanations (with data) as to why/what may be happening inside @RikudouGoku's new GEN3 RG39 shells. @silverszi also has some relevant thoughts about it as well which I hope he shares as they do seem to fall in line with the above offered explanations.

Positivity and helpfulness at it's finest!

I have looked at riku's measurements and also tried to work this out in terms of how it's affecting the helmholtz resonance between the backplate and the shell chamber, there is a phase difference between pyramid and non pyramid (unsurprisingly) but in terms of actual explanation of what the nubs are doing, (and the effect of any ventilation through the cable hole, which i deal with a lot) i do not know, it is somewhat similar to the effect i get when blocking the shell vents of a PK but smaller in magnitude.

The truth is, I don't know, and simulations alone won't help, but more data from multiple different configurations is necessary to make any accurate analysis.