[tinyman392]

Based on that text, it sounds like crinacle is merely normalizing the graphs at 8kHz, which is perfectly fine. That has less to do with taking data and more to do with presenting data. For example, on the measurements I presented of the four couplers, I normalized the data at 1kHz to make up for sensitivity differences in the individual microphone used.

Yes, couplers do have resonances, but IEC60318-4 has definitive limits up to 10kHz. If this coupler has it's resonance at 8khz, that severely limits its usefulness and likely takes it out of conformance with the IEC standard. The original GRAS and Zwislocki couplers have coupler resonances well past 10kHz. If I order some of the cheaper couplers, we'll run a transfer impedance measurement on the couplers and see how they do.

And, just to be clear, I'm not not in any way discouraging folks from making measurements, inexpensive coupler or otherwise. I think that it's great that folks are so invested in the hobby and it's always great to see folks taking a scientific approach. I can't help but comment if something looks out of place to me; I hope that it's that it's taken as helpful, which is my intent.

I'd probably still trust these knockoff couplers more than my DIY rig I made years back with a piece of plastic pipe and a calibrated microphone I saw a bunch of the knockoff couplers pop up on my AliExpress recommendations not too long ago, I'd put money that they all are pushed out of the same factory.

 

[Makahl]

I'm more curious when compared to Harman IE

WPD is your friend.

EVO RA-0045 x Harman IE:

Spoiler

Normalized at 500Hz.

EVO RA0045 x EVO Precog (just for fun):

Spoiler

Normalized at 500Hz.

 

[SilverEars]

WPD is your friend.

EVO RA-0045 x Harman IE:

Spoiler

Normalized at 500Hz.

EVO RA0045 x EVO Precog (just for fun):

Spoiler

Normalized at 500Hz.

Please overlap the EVO with ER3/4.

 

[AnyDave]

I'd probably still trust these knockoff couplers more than my DIY rig I made years back with a piece of plastic pipe and a calibrated microphone I saw a bunch of the knockoff couplers pop up on my AliExpress recommendations not too long ago, I'd put money that they all are pushed out of the same factory.

Did you calibrate the plastic pipe? Perhaps that was the problem.

 

[tinyman392]

Did you calibrate the plastic pipe? Perhaps that was the problem.

LOL. I had to do weird compensation to get things working. I aimed at matching Innerfidelity's compensated plots. For that, it actually worked decently. The raw plots looked... Well a bit weird. I wish I had some plots left from back in the day (this was like a decade ago), but I can't seem to find any I've also lost said rig :/

 

[SilverEars]

I'd probably still trust these knockoff couplers more than my DIY rig I made years back with a piece of plastic pipe and a calibrated microphone I saw a bunch of the knockoff couplers pop up on my AliExpress recommendations not too long ago, I'd put money that they all are pushed out of the same factory.

I get pissed off when I see reviewers publishing DIY rig measurements. They shouldn't share that stuff in public. 711 couplers are much more trustworthy of course, but they also must be aware of it's limitations when sharing the measurements. Like when there is a peak that obviously shouldn't be there, and the insertion depth causing it. I think that was the first thing I was taught when I was measuring with a clone. It's best to be aware of the limitations of the rig.

Hearing is of course very important as well. You may see a peak in the measurement, but not hear it there. I think of hearing and measurements for checking each other.

With the full-sized headphone rigs, this ran rampant, and there's been countless times people would analyze with DIY rigs like it's legit. It causes confusion with other members that have no idea about measurements, etc.. Sorry to say, it actually still goes on.

 

[donthuang]

That's really a question, beside FR measure discuss at cross purposes.

Headphonia review says Evo have some staging wide and deep, rather different to Precog's description "the EVO seems to maintain the compressed center-image (therefore, lack of depth)"

I believe they both true to their ears, but what makes their perceive so different?

 

[redrol]

The difference to me is one type of tuning (overt wide) is done by tuning trickery. The other is done by reproducing the actual encoded spatial queues correctly. This leads to good recordings with excellent reverb sounding amazing and correct and on the more overtly wide set, it will be arbitrary and likely not what was intended as mixed.

 

[miserybeforethemusic]

That's really a question, beside FR measure discuss at cross purposes.

Headphonia review says Evo have some staging wide and deep, rather different to Precog's description "the EVO seems to maintain the compressed center-image (therefore, lack of depth)"

I believe they both true to their ears, but what makes their perceive so different?

Could be any number of factors, not limited to:

• Their basis for comparison (aka what other similar pairs they've tried)
• Gear being used (which, luckily, they mention well enough)
• Source tracks being tested
• Ear anatomy of the reviewer
• Time spent listening
• Insertion depth (this makes the biggest difference for me)

Listening impressions really are just that; the subjective opinion of the reviewer. Precog and Yagiz have different ways of describing what they're hearing.

 

[Makahl]

Please overlap the EVO with ER3/4.

https://precog.squig.link/

 

[tinyman392]

Please overlap the EVO with ER3/4.

https://precog.squig.link/?share=Precog_Target,Etymotic_ER4XR,Etymotic_ER2XR,Etymotic_EVO_10kHz

Not ER4, just ER4XR and ER2XR in his database.

 

[Precogvision]

Did you mean the review unit didn't come with the standard triple flange tips or that they are not usable with EVO for you?

I find my measurements match the ones from Etymotic only when using the triple flange tips and inserting till the eartip is at the reference plane.

Hey, yes, it only included double-flange tips so I used those. I can certainly try triple-flange when I have more time. The 10kHz measurement is from when the earphone is inserted at the reference plane.

The EVO ships with 2-flange and 3-flange eartips.

Spoiler: Tips Included

I mean…this is what I received, so it’s what I used for the measurements. You can see they’re all double-flanged haha. Maybe the retail package will include both?

Based on that text, it sounds like crinacle is merely normalizing the graphs at 8kHz, which is perfectly fine. That has less to do with taking data and more to do with presenting data. For example, on the measurements I presented of the four couplers, I normalized the data at 1kHz to make up for sensitivity differences in the individual microphone used.

Yes, couplers do have resonances, but IEC60318-4 has definitive limits up to 10kHz. If this coupler has it's resonance at 8khz, that severely limits its usefulness and likely takes it out of conformance with the IEC standard. The original GRAS and Zwislocki couplers have coupler resonances well past 10kHz. If I order some of the cheaper couplers, we'll run a transfer impedance measurement on the couplers and see how they do.

And, just to be clear, I'm not not in any way discouraging folks from making measurements, inexpensive coupler or otherwise. I think that it's great that folks are so invested in the hobby and it's always great to see folks taking a scientific approach. I can't help but comment if something looks out of place to me; I hope that it's that it's taken as helpful, which is my intent.

Well, I'm certainly no expert! As was explained to me by someone else who is (at least much more so than myself), there is quite the discrepancy between the shape of the IEC711 and actual ear anatomy. Only when the ear is past the second bend is it similar to that of a straight similar. In this context, the Etymotic IEMs are interesting because the deep fit closely mimics (by force) what an IEC711 coupler would be shaped like. That is, straight and cylindrical for the remaining portion of the rear ear canal. So the measurements actually tend to be quite consistent and predictable! That said, while I think that the coupler generally reflects what I hear anecdotally up until around 10kHz, I don't trust anything after that point and always make sure to note that.

Well, it is well known that peaks are shifted from differences in depth of the coupler. I have no idea how you've inserted in your ears. Since there is a tour, we'll see how people's general impressions are.

The highs with those 711s are not reliable. The new high res couplers addresses such issues.

Sometimes, reviewers are influenced by measurements, but the measurement may not in reality reflect what they are actually hearing. I saw this a lot with Youtube reviewers.

I believe the newer couplers are not necessarily accurate post-10kHz either, or at least they still have variability in that region. The one Resolve uses, the GRAS RA0402 for example, simply dampens the normal resonance peak area for better readability post-10kHz. Because of this, it can actually show less quantity than there should be, if there's a peak in that region. I also mentioned earlier that I sine sweep by ear to corroborate (or sometimes counter) what the measurements are showing.

If I understand your third comment, I agree that "sometimes reviewers are influenced by measurements". Ultimately though, there's no way for you to know what these reviewers (or I, for that matter) are actually hearing beyond what they tell you. So I'm not sure if what you're saying makes sense; logically, there seems to be the underlying pretense of what you are hearing as being the only correct interpretation. It sounds more like you want to hear it for yourself which is dandy because you're on the tour too

That's really a question, beside FR measure discuss at cross purposes.

Headphonia review says Evo have some staging wide and deep, rather different to Precog's description "the EVO seems to maintain the compressed center-image (therefore, lack of depth)"

I believe they both true to their ears, but what makes their perceive so different?

As a disclaimer, I don't really think staging, or depth in particular, is worth talking about on most IEM/headphones. If you have heard a 2-channel system, there's really no contest, and that is what I use as my reference. Frequency response also plays a roll in how our perception of the stage is shaped. It's just a fact that reference-tuned IEMs like the Etymotics tend not to have much staging or depth because the pinna compensation and upper-midrange are brought forward so much. So even within the context of IEMs, I don't think the EVO has particularly noteworthy staging. I have heard very, very few IEMs that have the ability to project the center image even a couple inches out-of-head. Don't get me wrong, I don't doubt that Yagiz from Headphonia hears what he writes. There are a lot of other factors that can influence staging, and it might also just be because we have difference references for what qualifies depth.

 

[redrol]

For me its opposite, without the correct pinna gain the sound field is squashed into a 2D left to right type of sound. Its only DF ety type tuning that allows my brain to hear the 3rd dimension as encoded in the track.

And THIS is my biggest problem with so many TOTL sets. Wrong pinna gain for my western ears (I guess).

 

[tinyman392]

For me its opposite, without the correct pinna gain the sound field is squashed into a 2D left to right type of sound. Its only DF ety type tuning that allows my brain to hear the 3rd dimension as encoded in the track.

And THIS is my biggest problem with so many TOTL sets. Wrong pinna gain for my western ears (I guess).

Outside a true binaural recording, I've never actually heard anything more than 2D/left-right sound. I normally don't look at sound stage sizing as a whole, but will listen for instrumental separation and ability to layer.

 

[AnyDave]

Hey, yes, it only included double-flange tips so I used those. I can certainly try triple-flange when I have more time. The 10kHz measurement is from when the earphone is inserted at the reference plane.

Spoiler: Tips Included

I mean…this is what I received, so it’s what I used for the measurements. You can see they’re all double-flanged haha. Maybe the retail package will include both?



Well, I'm certainly no expert! As was explained to me by someone else who is (at least much more so than myself), there is quite the discrepancy between the shape of the IEC711 and actual ear anatomy. Only when the ear is past the second bend is it similar to that of a straight similar. In this context, the Etymotic IEMs are interesting because the deep fit closely mimics (by force) what an IEC711 coupler would be shaped like. That is, straight and cylindrical for the remaining portion of the rear ear canal. So the measurements actually tend to be quite consistent and predictable! That said, while I think that the coupler generally reflects what I hear anecdotally up until around 10kHz, I don't trust anything after that point and always make sure to note that.



I believe the newer couplers are not necessarily accurate post-10kHz either, or at least they still have variability in that region. The one Resolve uses, the GRAS RA0402 for example, simply dampens the normal resonance peak area for better readability post-10kHz. Because of this, it can actually show less quantity than there should be, if there's a peak in that region. I also mentioned earlier that I sine sweep by ear to corroborate (or sometimes counter) what the measurements are showing.

If I understand your third comment, I agree that "sometimes reviewers are influenced by measurements". Ultimately though, there's no way for you to know what these reviewers (or I, for that matter) are actually hearing beyond what they tell you. So I'm not sure if what you're saying makes sense; logically, there seems to be the underlying pretense of what you are hearing as being the only correct interpretation. It sounds more like you want to hear it for yourself which is dandy because you're on the tour too



As a disclaimer, I don't really think staging, or depth in particular, is worth talking about on most IEM/headphones. If you have heard a 2-channel system, there's really no contest, and that is what I use as my reference. Frequency response also plays a roll in how our perception of the stage is shaped. It's just a fact that reference-tuned IEMs like the Etymotics tend not to have much staging or depth because the pinna compensation and upper-midrange are brought forward so much. So even within the context of IEMs, I don't think the EVO has particularly noteworthy staging. I have heard very, very few IEMs that have the ability to project the center image even a couple inches out-of-head. Don't get me wrong, I don't doubt that Yagiz from Headphonia hears what he writes. There are a lot of other factors that can influence staging, and it might also just be because we have difference references for what qualifies depth.

The retail version does come with 2-flange and 3-flange eartips. I am sorry that your demo version did not.

A while back, G.R.A.S. put out a white paper on their new high-resolution couplers that surpress the 13kHz peak. I think you might find it interesting Not only does it explain the advantages of the new high res couplers, it also explains why it's crucial to measure at the reference plane of the microphone in an IEC711 coupler.

https://www.grasacoustics.com/files/793-RA0401 Whitepaper.pdf