[Blommen]

I think what is happening in this thread is what happens in 2 channel all the time. I even spoke with Suyang from EA about this. It's that we are told by manufacturers HOW audio SHOULD sound. Then tailor this SOUND to what THEY are giving us and not what true audio should sound like. YEs we all heard differently, but if a transducer is good, it will be pretty close to neutral and not be fatiguing. Fatigue can be in both the highs (harshness) lows (WAY too much of a good thing or with NO articulation or in the mids when why are so far forward, that you THINK they sound like you are there, but if you really were there, you wouldn't have the lead singer sitting on your lap (unless it's Diana Krall and in that case EE or anyone, needs to come up with a virtual......oh wait, this isn't Pornhub it's Head-fi.org, sorry).

I think the Phantom's are the first IEM that is going in the direction of honest portrayal of what you may hear at a real live music event. That's scary to some as they won't want that for many reasons. For many of us, it gets us closer to the holy grail of realistic audio production in an IEM/CIEM. JMHO

I am not sure I agree or maybe I just don't understand your point.

What is an "honest portrayal" ? I think this is a dangerous road to think that any sound system has the capability of portraying all music as "it should be". Why are audiophiles so obsessed with this? I think that if you ask EE or Nic they will also say that there are some genres that the Phantom is not the best for. That doesn't take away from what it is great at, there are just some genres that are better with other monitors. A lot of the live shows I attend at, they use Orange amps for their guitars and bass, they want that meaty crunchy sound. Other bands use Marshall. A lot of blues is on tube amps. Drums is a whole other can of worms. Why should personal audio be any different? You need to use a monitor best suited to the genres you listen to, and sometimes you need more than one if you have a wide taste. There is no end all, be all.

I am sure the Phantom is great but let's not get too caught up in the hype (that I otherwise enjoy)

 

[fiascogarcia]

That's true, but @ctsooner22 also touched on the fact that personal perception has been slowly shifted through decades of manufacturer input. Nowadays, there's a very large percentage of audiophiles who consider ultra-crisp treble and articulative detail their reference, because of an obsessive need for the very best micro-detail retrieval rather than an accurate (or life-like) tone. They've been conditioned to think, "The more I hear, the closer it is to real life," while that rarely is the case. A realistic signature is comprised of a myriad of elements including vocal density, sufficient body, precise imaging, a linear harmonic presentation, timbre, etc. balanced with detail and clarity. Although no one's stopping you from enjoying one or the other, words like natural and/or realistic should be strictly reserved for those who deserve them.

The discussion of what is natural and realistic will continue to be a topic of discussion as everyone has their own perception. And I don't think it all falls on the feet of headphone and iem companies. They're not necessarily the ones telling you what is realistic, the guys behind these are, so enjoy what you enjoy:

 

[Deezel177]

I am not sure I agree or maybe I just don't understand your point.

What is an "honest portrayal" ? I think this is a dangerous road to think that any sound system has the capability of portraying all music as "it should be". Why are audiophiles so obsessed with this? I think that if you ask EE or Nic they will also say that there are some genres that the Phantom is not the best for. That doesn't take away from what it is great at, there are just some genres that are better with other monitors. A lot of the live shows I attend at, they use Orange amps for their guitars and bass, they want that meaty crunchy sound. Other bands use Marshall. A lot of blues is on tube amps. Drums is a whole other can of worms. Why should personal audio be any different? You need to use a monitor best suited to the genres you listen to, and sometimes you need more than one if you have a wide taste. There is no end all, be all.

I am sure the Phantom is great but let's not get too caught up in the hype (that I otherwise enjoy)

I think portraying music as it should be is a real and urgent concern, especially for audio professionals like myself. There's no worse feeling than mixing and mastering a project on headphones/IEMs that you thought sounded natural or reference, only to show up to church the next day and realise that it sounds nothing like the real thing. I've run my mixes through tens of headphones and IEMs, and they all give me a different representation of real life, and I've realised that how much they emotionally resonate with me depends on how close I can get them to sound like the live instruments. While many manufacturers tout headphones like the HD800S or IEMs like the Tia Fourte as being reference or mastering quality, I find them near unworkable due to how tonally bright they are. Sure, they're brilliant for editing because of how much information they reproduce, but I wouldn't go anywhere near an EQ with those transducers on. I trust monitors with a frequency response that emulates real life as much as possible, and I work best in them too - my brain accepts them as what real life would sound like, so fatigue settles in much slower. Among audiophiles, there are those who'd rather sacrifice this quality for - as you said - crunchier guitars or more kick and that's absolutely fine. I love listening to IEMs like the Custom Art FIBAE 3 and the Nocturnal Audio Avalon even though I wouldn't mix in them. But, when it comes to professional work, a natural-sounding monitor that brings you as close as possible to the real thing is darn near priceless. I'm not disagreeing with you in any way; just my two cents.

The discussion of what is natural and realistic will continue to be a topic of discussion as everyone has their own perception. And I don't think it all falls on the feet of headphone and iem companies. They're not necessarily the ones telling you what is realistic, the guys behind these are, so enjoy what you enjoy:

Speak of the devil.

 

[ctsooner22]

Guys, if you follow my posts since I joined (doubt you have nor should you, lol), you would realize that I have always said that we also hear differently. I have produced in the past and have always made statements about 'what was laid down' etc... I do however believe if a transducer is accurate and you feed it a top notch signal, that it should give you all that you desire. Those of us who have gobs of money tied up in our 2 channel systems want it to be able to play all music and sound like it was put down by the board guys. I can listen to rock from any era regardless of how poorly it is recorded, all day long. I can listen to it on nearly any system and enjoy as I love music (same wiht most of you I"m sure).

The point is to get a discussion going. I am not the be all, end all and I don't pretend to be. I do love a devils advocate type of back and forth. Hype? If I find something that I really really like and feel others will also, I will share. I was honestly let down a bit at CJ NYC. I thought that I would really love most of the offerings and that it would open up a ton of opps for new toys. I found a sub 500 IEM that will come to market eventually from Advance that I liked for the price, but for 100 more, I did like the EE offering much better. Others won't. I wanted to like so many of the other IEM's and cans, but only found a few, and most weren't close to the most expensive that I could live with daily. That's me.

I spoke with many who liked the stuff I didn't. As I've always said, it's 'personal audio' to me and I refer to if that way fro a reason. I just love to type and share my thoughts. I'm opinionated and always have been. I also have and won't ever say that I'm totally correct. I do however feel that when I talk about live performances, I try and think about stuff that is striped down a fair amount. I FULLY get amps and sources ...I fully agree with you on that topic, but that's not what this thread is about, so I post those comments on other threads. Not sure if I clouded things up more or shared where I'm coming from. Sorry if not.

 

[ctsooner22]

I think portraying music as it should be is a real and urgent concern, especially for audio professionals like myself. There's no worse feeling than mixing and mastering a project on headphones/IEMs that you thought sounded natural or reference, only to show up to church the next day and realise that it sounds nothing like the real thing. I've run my mixes through tens of headphones and IEMs, and they all give me a different representation of real life, and I've realised that how much they emotionally resonate with me depends on how close I can get them to sound like the live instruments. While many manufacturers tout headphones like the HD800S or IEMs like the Tia Fourte as being reference or mastering quality, I find them near unworkable due to how tonally bright they are. Sure, they're brilliant for editing because of how much information they reproduce, but I wouldn't go anywhere near an EQ with those transducers on. I trust monitors with a frequency response that emulates real life as much as possible, and I work best in them too - my brain accepts them as what real life would sound like, so fatigue settles in much slower. Among audiophiles, there are those who'd rather sacrifice this quality for - as you said - crunchier guitars or more kick and that's absolutely fine. I love listening to IEMs like the Custom Art FIBAE 3 and the Nocturnal Audio Avalon even though I wouldn't mix in them. But, when it comes to professional work, a natural-sounding monitor that brings you as close as possible to the real thing is darn near priceless. I'm not disagreeing with you in any way; just my two cents.



Speak of the devil.

One of my favorite posts on any board I've read in AGES! Great response and SOOOOOO much better than I put it or could put it. Wow. Thanks for sharing. If anyone asks me, THIS is what I am talking about. I hated mixing with the cans we had in the 70/80's. they all sucked, including my Stax Lambda Pro's. I used to be get pissed at everyone when they'd tell me their $20 Koss headphones were perfect for mixing. heck, they liked their Nakamishi Dragon cassette decks too ....I was into reels back then. I also hated digital for years and years.

I love the new ZMF Auteurs right now better than most of the headphones I have heard too (I am selling my ZMF Ori's as I'm going to only use CIEM's now as they are easier for me) as they get the tonality down great. The Kennerton Odin's (the newest light weight ones) are my favorites though.

 

[Kerouac]

Now, why didn't I think of the above, the last time somebody asked me 'What do you want for your birthday?'

I think portraying music as it should be is a real and urgent concern, especially for audio professionals like myself. There's no worse feeling than mixing and mastering a project on headphones/IEMs that you thought sounded natural or reference, only to show up to church the next day and realise that it sounds nothing like the real thing. I've run my mixes through tens of headphones and IEMs, and they all give me a different representation of real life, and I've realised that how much they emotionally resonate with me depends on how close I can get them to sound like the live instruments. While many manufacturers tout headphones like the HD800S or IEMs like the Tia Fourte as being reference or mastering quality, I find them near unworkable due to how tonally bright they are. Sure, they're brilliant for editing because of how much information they reproduce, but I wouldn't go anywhere near an EQ with those transducers on. I trust monitors with a frequency response that emulates real life as much as possible, and I work best in them too - my brain accepts them as what real life would sound like, so fatigue settles in much slower. Among audiophiles, there are those who'd rather sacrifice this quality for - as you said - crunchier guitars or more kick and that's absolutely fine. I love listening to IEMs like the Custom Art FIBAE 3 and the Nocturnal Audio Avalon even though I wouldn't mix in them. But, when it comes to professional work, a natural-sounding monitor that brings you as close as possible to the real thing is darn near priceless. I'm not disagreeing with you in any way; just my two cents.

A very insightful post imo

'a natural-sounding monitor that brings you as close as possible to the real thing'
I think the Phantom might be the one, of only a few in-ear monitors, that comes closest to that description

 

[ctsooner22]

Deezel, what monitors are those? I used to love using the Proac Response 2's. Like so many monitors, they can be a tad bright on top, but they sing with a great tube amp like the Conrad Johnson or Quicksilver stuff. Audio Research is good with them also, but they AR is so quick and untubelike that it can be a spec bright at times. I"m already speaking with many of the 2 channel manufactures I know to see if they are willing to make a great headphone balanced amp with IEM's also in mind. A few have said they have interest but are concerned about too small a market. A few like Ayre have done a great amp with a great DAC like the 1800 Codex or even the brand new 8 series that they just showed in Holland or the top end QX5 that I own and will be selling as I have upgraded again...YIKES....lol

That's also a great looking board, lol.

 

[Deezel177]

Deezel, what monitors are those? I used to love using the Proac Response 2's. Like so many monitors, they can be a tad bright on top, but they sing with a great tube amp like the Conrad Johnson or Quicksilver stuff. Audio Research is good with them also, but they AR is so quick and untubelike that it can be a spec bright at times. I"m already speaking with many of the 2 channel manufactures I know to see if they are willing to make a great headphone balanced amp with IEM's also in mind. A few have said they have interest but are concerned about too small a market. A few like Ayre have done a great amp with a great DAC like the 1800 Codex or even the brand new 8 series that they just showed in Holland or the top end QX5 that I own and will be selling as I have upgraded again...YIKES....lol

That's also a great looking board, lol.

The ones in @fiascogarcia's photo are the infamous Yamaha NS-10's. They're well-renowned as the most unforgiving monitors in the world. They say if your mix sounds good on the NS-10's, they'll sound good anywhere. Personally, I prefer Genelec's products for mixing. I heard their 8030B's at Musik Messe last year and they sounded great. I'm sure the 8050B's would be fantastic as well. But, at home, the MrSpeaker's Aeon Flow Open never fail me - great cans with a generally accurate tone.

I almost mistook the board for a vintage Neve, but that looks like a classic EMI. I've never worked with one personally, but it sure looks bonkers!

 

[ctsooner22]

The ones in @fiascogarcia's photo are the infamous Yamaha NS-10's. They're well-renowned as the most unforgiving monitors in the world. They say if your mix sounds good on the NS-10's, they'll sound good anywhere. Personally, I prefer Genelec's products for mixing. I heard their 8030B's at Musik Messe last year and they sounded great. I'm sure the 8050B's would be fantastic as well. But, at home, the MrSpeaker's Aeon Flow Open never fail me - great cans with a generally accurate tone.

I almost mistook the board for a vintage Neve, but that looks like a classic EMI. I've never worked with one personally, but it sure looks bonkers!

Yes, of course. The NS-10's. That white mid bass gives it away. I have heard the Genelic's a few times. I can see why you would like them. Never heard the 8030's. Have you heard the ZMF line yet? The Auteurs and Ori's are my favorites by far. Just great tonality. My buddy is selling his Flows and Ori's (which he feels is better tonally) as well as his older, heavier Odin's and get the new lighter weight ones.

 

[hybridnut]

I'm interested in Legend x. Not sure if the size of universal version of legend x is too big cause the issue of putting into ear like JH audio or not.

 

[San Man]

edited wrong pic

 

[Deezel177]

I'm interested in Legend x. Not sure if the size of universal version of legend x is too big cause the issue of putting into ear like JH audio or not.

I've tried the universal and its ergonomics are nowhere near as bad as JH's universals. They're actually great!

A pic from Alex's review. Doesn't look that big, does it?

Uhh... that's not from the Legend X review. That's from his HiFi-Boy OS v3 review.

 

[San Man]

You beat me to my edit lol

 

[thebratts]

Got something today...

(unfortunately not 100% sure of the left fit... Pops out to easily)

 

[Deezel177]

Got something today...



(unfortunately not 100% sure of the left fit... Pops out to easily)

Sick grab, man! Hope the fit works out in the end.