Quote:
You know, I normally quite respect most things you have to say, but you always seem to lose sight of what is at hand and speak contentiously for the sake of contention. All this time, if you really read what I've written, we've been stating the same exact things, but you tend to want to spin it as though I were slamming the ER4 or needlessly defending FAD without merit. I don't appreciate that.
I never said it was wrong that the ED driver has that limitation; I also expressly said that Etymotic made a great choice in implementing it as their primary driver. My statement was merely addressing the fact that there are other drivers with more headroom for other applications that are less than completely flat in response. With regard to sound tube length and diameter, I suggest you go read Knowles' technical bulletins.
All I have to say about transparency, and this is the last time I'll address it, is that the term 'transparency' is in of itself a subjective term, because it is a projection of the visual definition of transparency onto audible sound.
A shame it's getting personal. Why do you assume it's for my content? I try to be as informative as I can that is why my posts are well-laid out and in depth. There were some disagreements that is why I replied with my knowledge and interpretations. I'v been backing up what I kept saying with different information, that's what happening. I am being informative not personal, I hope you can be the same. I do know that you agreeing in some points, but I'm trying to paint a fuller picture of the things you mention.
It's wrong if it's a limitation, it's a strength if it works, the gradual dip simply works and there's plenty of air. Yes there are drivers like that, but uning should be everything, no point in using a carbon-nanotube diaphragm if it can't be done right. Sorry, what is it about Knowles' technical bulletins that I should read? If anything I would think Etymotic will know more of it's tube diameter and length since they are the ones with the reasoning behind it.
Thing is when you get something like the FAD-SS you really aren't paying purely for performance, you're paying for that specific sound. I heard it and I do think it's quite competent, but hardly one of the best universals I've heard but...
People loosely speak of what's better, without any guidelines, a basis that can be objectively looked upon would yield the best system of rating. This is why I rate technical ability with transparency, the closest response to flat with HRTF in mind. With this, you know exactly what I'm looking for and there are actually studies backing up the HRTF in the treble, so it's closest the closest thing to being objective. One can think any other colored IEM is better, that's fine, but there is objective reasoning if trying to rate an IEM without a personal matter.
I don't think you understand the concept. Think of a transparent DAP, what's it's function? To keep the purity of the recording/listening chain as closely as you can without adding or taking away anything, as if it weren't there, transparent. Something like the 601 via it's HO isn't transparent because it roll-offs the treble in the chain, it's adding color by subtracting something. Flat spearkers are transparent because they're flat, they compromise the least because they distribute every frequency as evenly as possible. Because of how even the response is, the nature of the recording is kept as closely as possible, so it's transparent to the chain. IEMs can also be close to it (though never to the same level as speakers due to the missing 6db rule) but you need HRTF. There are rules, there's a science, there's a process of what to look for, so I don't understand why it's laid out as simply subjective. Yes there can be two speaker set-ups that are transparent that sound a bit different, but when there's transparency differences are much slighter and both will still be labeled as transparent despite a preference of one over the other. Nothing is perfect, but it's about getting close here.
Certain IEMs can also be very transparent in certain regions despite not being so as a whole. The new batch Apple buds with Fostex drivers have a pretty transparent lower midrange despite being far from transparent as whole.
