[ctsooner22]

So just some further musings on how I personally view sound, and how our tastes in music shape our subjective differences; i.e. my way is not the only way. I'm gonna tag @giorgio_lantos since he instigated a similar discussion with me on THL, two birds and all.

The reason I find timbre so important, is because I listen to a lot of easy listening and (soft) rock music. With this type of music, you are mainly listening for the 'beauty of the sound', which is comprised of a simple setup of a few main instruments accompanying a vocal; e.g. a violin, sax, and of course (several) acoustic or electric guitars. As some of you might know, I especially adore the sound of a gently played electric guitar; probably my favorite type of sound of all. Take a classic as November Rain. When listening to such a track, I roughly want to hear the positioning of the three electric guitars, the drums in the back coherently within the sound, but not dominating it, and the lead vocal upfront. But the most important of all for me, is the tone of Slash's Gibson guitar. Is it possible there is a minor detail in the back left corner? Maybe. But who gives a crap? I just want to hear Slash playing his heart out. I mean, I'm barely even paying attention to Axl singing most of the time. Another example would be Wicked Game. A song you listen to for the warm, deep, and heartbroken voice of Chris Isaak, accompanied by, incidentally, another Gibson guitar. There would literally be no point in listening to such an emotional song with a clinical, 'reference' monitor for detail.

But there is also a completely different way of listening to music. For instance, when you listen to electronic music, tone becomes infinitely less important. Instead, resolution, separation, stage, and sub-bass speed and impact for example are the highest priorities. Most of all, detail is important: the beauty of a track now lies in its complexity; the way it evolves by adding and changing different melodies, bass lines, or other components. Often, treble notes determine the rhythm and pace of the music. This might also extrapolate to other synthetic-based genres like anime or K-pop (or whatever them kids are listening to nowadays). I used to listen a lot of electronic music, but far less since I busted my shoulders and can't go to the gym anymore. As a result, there was a shift in the relative importance of different genres to me. Or maybe I'm just aging fast in the course of this PhD.

So, nowadays I find timbre very important because of the music I listen to. It's the reason the Phantom is my soulmate, and I chose the Ultima CU over the SS. But I still have this mode of listening in me, which is why I can truly say I also understand when people have a completely different preference, and I can equally appreciate those iems. Just look at the review of Samba for instance, it's basically one long ode to the power of precision. So the point I guess is just that we need to be aware of what we find important, and why we find that important; it will help to give insight in our taste for iems, as well as why others can have such different opinions - a basic understanding I feel is sometimes easily neglected.

And another reason why we seem to like the same products in all of audio...Hmmmm.....you always mention shooting the sound into our brains....Are you shooting your listening habits and musical likes into MY brain? We also seem to like listening to almost any kind of music.....DARN YOU MAN....GET OUT OF MY BRAIN!!!!! HA ha ha

 

[Deezel177]

So just some further musings on how I personally view sound, and how our tastes in music shape our subjective differences; i.e. my way is not the only way. I'm gonna tag @giorgio_lantos since he instigated a similar discussion with me on THL, two birds and all.

The reason I find timbre so important, is because I listen to a lot of easy listening and (soft) rock music. With this type of music, you are mainly listening for the 'beauty of the sound', which is comprised of a simple setup of a few main instruments accompanying a vocal; e.g. a violin, sax, and of course (several) acoustic or electric guitars. As some of you might know, I especially adore the sound of a gently played electric guitar; probably my favorite type of sound of all. Take a classic as November Rain. When listening to such a track, I roughly want to hear the positioning of the three electric guitars, the drums in the back coherently within the sound, but not dominating it, and the lead vocal upfront. But the most important of all for me, is the tone of Slash's Gibson guitar. Is it possible there is a minor detail in the back left corner? Maybe. But who gives a crap? I just want to hear Slash playing his heart out. I mean, I'm barely even paying attention to Axl singing most of the time. Another example would be Wicked Game. A song you listen to for the warm, deep, and heartbroken voice of Chris Isaak, accompanied by, incidentally, another Gibson guitar. There would literally be no point in listening to such an emotional song with a clinical, 'reference' monitor for detail.

But there is also a completely different way of listening to music. For instance, when you listen to electronic music, tone becomes infinitely less important. Instead, resolution, separation, stage, and sub-bass speed and impact for example are the highest priorities. Most of all, detail is important: the beauty of a track now lies in its complexity; the way it evolves by adding and changing different melodies, bass lines, or other components. Often, treble notes determine the rhythm and pace of the music. This might also extrapolate to other synthetic-based genres like anime or K-pop (or whatever them kids are listening to nowadays). I used to listen a lot of electronic music, but far less since I busted my shoulders and can't go to the gym anymore. As a result, there was a shift in the relative importance of different genres to me. Or maybe I'm just aging fast in the course of this PhD.

So, nowadays I find timbre very important because of the music I listen to. It's the reason the Phantom is my soulmate, and I chose the Ultima CU over the SS. But I still have this mode of listening in me, which is why I can truly say I also understand when people have a completely different preference, and I can equally appreciate those iems. Just look at the review of Samba for instance, it's basically one long ode to the power of precision. So the point I guess is just that we need to be aware of what we find important, and why we find that important; it will help to give insight in our taste for iems, as well as why others can have such different opinions - a basic understanding I feel is sometimes easily neglected.

You just hit the nail right on the head, bud!

This afternoon, I spent my entire flight to Singapore listening to jazz, rock and ballad pop albums through the Phantom’s; utterly in love with how beautifully they reproduce the hue of real-life instruments to a tee. I came to appreciate records like David Foster classics (Because You Love Me, A Love That Will Last, I Will Always Love You, Through the Fire) infinitely more, because of how much care he put into mixing both powerhouse and gentler vocals - as well as the instruments around them - in terms of EQ, reverb, compression, etc. Drummer-focused tracks like Alyn Cosker’s That’s the Ticket or Dennis Chambers’s Elroy came alive in a way I’ve never heard before. They’re mixed and mastered more for tone than for transient attack or “crispness”. Whereas, albums like Anderson Silva’s Just In Time place a lot of focus in upper-treble energy to maximise transient attack, and they end up sounding bright, ill-balanced and off-colour - especially on the snare drum.

But then, I turned to electronic albums like Anomalie’s Metropole and I was left wanting more energy and clarity. He’s a classically-trained pianist who loves creating EDM, so it’s a hybrid of jazz-y classical piano and tons of synthetic work. I found myself appreciating the pianos that’d start/break every few tracks, but I was asking for more separation when the bass lines kicked in. Then, it hit me - “Why am I listening to digitally-inclined music with a timbre-first monitor?” I realised how counter-intuitive it was and immediately switched to Daft Punk’s Random Access Memories; also a hybrid of organic and synthetic music, but mixed/mastered with more analog sensibilities.

I found - through these experiences - that the Phantom’s affinity for tonal accuracy can’t cater to everyone. Although it’s by no means technically-deficient, its emphasis on timbre definitely puts facets like transience and speed in the backseat; just like how clarity-focused neutral monitors sacrifice tone for detail. It was a worthwhile experience that only left me admiring the Phantom’s sensibilities more - I’m sure my not-so-subtle air-drumming caught the attention of a few other passengers on the flight - but I think it’ll also help temper expectations when it comes to the its sonic characteristics. One will be disappointed if he/she’s looking for an absolutely clinical-sounding IEM, but lovers of a pure, humane and analog tone will gush over the Phantom with pure bliss.

And another reason why we seem to like the same products in all of audio...Hmmmm.....you always mention shooting the sound into our brains....Are you shooting your listening habits and musical likes into MY brain? We also seem to like listening to almost any kind of music.....DARN YOU MAN....GET OUT OF MY BRAIN!!!!! HA ha ha

Especially after listening to the Phantom’s, these are the thoughts that keep me up at night.

 

[Pepito]

But there is also a completely different way of listening to music. For instance, when you listen to electronic music, tone becomes infinitely less important. Instead, resolution, separation, stage, and sub-bass speed and impact for example are the highest priorities. Most of all, detail is important: the beauty of a track now lies in its complexity; the way it evolves by adding and changing different melodies, bass lines, or other components. Often, treble notes determine the rhythm and pace of the music. This might also extrapolate to other synthetic-based genres like anime or K-pop (or whatever them kids are listening to nowadays). I used to listen a lot of electronic music, but far less since I busted my shoulders and can't go to the gym anymore. As a result, there was a shift in the relative importance of different genres to me. Or maybe I'm just aging fast in the course of this PhD.

I have to disagree, tone is very important in electronic music. The very back bone of techno is creating interesting, complex sounds, where everything you listed is important and accurate reproduction is what we strive for on head-fi. I don't think using x genre vs y genre is a good way of comparing how you listen to music. There's a reason why many clubs that strictly play techno/house have some of the best sound systems in the world ie. Berghain, Stereo, Fabric etc.

 

[Deezel177]

I have to disagree, tone is very important in electronic music. The very back bone of techno is creating interesting, complex sounds, where everything you listed is important and accurate reproduction is what we strive for on head-fi. I don't think using x genre vs y genre is a good way of comparing how you listen to music. There's a reason why many clubs that strictly play techno/house have some of the best sound systems in the world ie. Berghain, Stereo, Fabric etc.

But, would you say that tone in electronic music is more important than separation, dynamic performance, impact and detail retrieval? I think, by nature of the music being synthetic, you get more from the vibes of techno - through shifts in dynamic structure, melody layering, micro-accents, etc. - than the timbre of the sounds themselves. And, those qualities inherently favour clearer and crisper monitors, that often sacrifice some degree of tonal accuracy in pursuit of precision (even though that's not always true). On the other hand, the beauty in organic music to me is how realistically the performers are portrayed. I love hearing an accurately coloured track, even if it's not the most crisp or "hi-def" - as they say. Of course, to each their own and I'd understand if you disagreed. These are just my two cents.

 

[ctsooner22]

Guys, dovetailing the last posts by the three of you, I propose that tone is important to everything. What we often are talking about with tone is the actually sound we are producing vs what the true instrument and voice sound like and hoesntly, that's mostly acoustic when you think about it. That takes nothing away from electronic music etc... We all know that mics, cables, mixing boards, room acoustics etc... enter into this along with what the producer is HEARING through their monitors or CIEM's. That's the process of anything that's recorded. (yes, much more goes into it, but I'm a simpleton, plus my MS is kicked in full force this weekend and the cognitive is off so bear wiht me PLEASE). Thanks ahead of time.

What I"m getting out of my PHantom's now that I have over 100 hours on them is the MICRO and MACRO detail that I have not heard from others. The tone of my test records vs my high end 2 channel system is soooo close that it's a bit scary. I am playing with my ultra high end DAC/amp and it takes these to a level that very few will ever heard, unless you have an ultra high end DAC/amp combo. I wish I had a cable wiht the Pono connections for a balanced signal.

I am finding myself listening to more blues than normal. My Joe Bonamassa from Carnegie Hall is acoustic as I've mentioned before and I cna't stop listening. My Steely Dan stuff, Private Investigator from Dire Straights in in the rotation again. Ricky Lee Jones, Pop Pop...An obscure Polish singer, Radka Tonnoff is EARILY good. She's here in the freaking room folks. This isn't hyperbole either, it's real. It's the tone of everything and it's all separate just like in a live venue.

I have some very complex music that I don't even know the name of. Lot's of DSDX2 orchestral recordings. The Phantom's separate so well, that there is NO congestion when playing anything so far. The Sheffield records are all audiophile and well recorded stuff.....Just superb. My reference isn't using a DAC, it's my 2 channel system as well as other's that are much better than anything I could ever afford. I'm just saying that these Phantom's really are that special.

Changes to them? IF it can be done, I'd want a dynamic sub for a bit more quantity of subterranean bass, but only a bit of it for electronic and organ music. I never have felt it's lacking though. The upper mid peak that is there is the other 'compromise' Dean had to make. I have yet to hear any harshness that is fatiguing for me. Just not there. I keep a bunch of high res music on my iPhone 6s Plus and even that sounds very good. Right now the tenor sax is biting and resonating the way I'm used to it hearing.

The point is, that all sounds are tone. We don't know what's put down, unless we are there. This is why Daniel's words are SOO important to me. I'm hearing what everyone else is hearing and to me, that's what matters most.

As I posted earlier, I too am listening to tracks that aren't always recorded well and enjoying them. I hear the warts, but love the music. Loving this thread too. Great folks here and I'm glad we don't always agree on everything as that's boring. . Thanks.

 

[Pepito]

But, would you say that tone in electronic music is more important than separation, dynamic performance, impact and detail retrieval? I think, by nature of the music being synthetic, you get more from the vibes of techno - through shifts in dynamic structure, melody layering, micro-accents, etc. - than the timbre of the sounds themselves. And, those qualities inherently favour clearer and crisper monitors, that often sacrifice some degree of tonal accuracy in pursuit of precision (even though that's not always true). On the other hand, the beauty in organic music to me is how realistically the performers are portrayed. I love hearing an accurately coloured track, even if it's not the most crisp or "hi-def" - as they say. Of course, to each their own and I'd understand if you disagreed. These are just my two cents.

I have a viewpoint that comes from a producer, and techno producers that know what they're doing put a lot of effort into each sound to create the timbre/tone that they want. For example, Objekt, a UK dub-techno producer uses over 20 different sounds to create one kick drum. Synthetic doesn't equate to inaccurate tone/timbre. I think most people think of EDM as a wall of sound and lump all electronic music into one pile. This is not the case. There are many different ways to produce and listen to music, which is why there are so many different preferences for sound signatures in IEM's. Different strokes for different folks rings true for all genres, I just wouldn't use x genres to guide y sound signature, it's a slippery slope.

 

[flinkenick]

I have to disagree, tone is very important in electronic music. The very back bone of techno is creating interesting, complex sounds, where everything you listed is important and accurate reproduction is what we strive for on head-fi. I don't think using x genre vs y genre is a good way of comparing how you listen to music. There's a reason why many clubs that strictly play techno/house have some of the best sound systems in the world ie. Berghain, Stereo, Fabric etc.

Well, the point I was trying to make is that there are differences in music that shape individual preference for iems. And consequentially, that understanding and respecting these differences will help to further understand why we all appreciate different things. It was also written as a personal account, so I don't think there can be a question of right and wrong. If anything, that was the point.

Electronic music is as varied as any other genre. I also happen to primarily listen ro melody-based electronic music, where tone is very important. So of course, I don't disagree with you. It might have helped if I had written 'relatively less important', rather than 'infinitely less important', but I would like to think a slight dramatization is sometimes warranted when making an argument.

Since you mention the Berghain specifically, I would not equate that type of raw and dark minimal techno to tonal accuracy, but then again it is not my music

 

[Pepito]

Well, the point I was trying to make is that there are differences in music that shape individual preference for iems. And consequentially, that understanding and respecting these differences will help to further understand why we all appreciate different things. It was also written as a personal account, so I don't think there can be a question of right and wrong. If anything, that was the point.

Electronic music is as varied as any other genre. I also happen to primarily listen ro melody-based electronic music, where tone is very important. So of course, I don't disagree with you. It might have helped if I had written 'relatively less important', rather than 'infinitely less important', but I would like to think a slight dramatization is sometimes warranted when making an argument.

Since you mention the Berghain specifically, I would not equate that type of raw and dark minimal techno to tonal accuracy, but then again it is not my music

My comment directly above your post is in agreement with the subjectivity of how we listen to music. Your comment at the end also is personal opinion, but to say that tone isn't accurate in an entire genre is blasphemy. @ctsooner22 is correct in stating that tone is important in ALL music. I just don't like how people tend to clump all electronic music into EDM, that just isn't the case.

 

[Deezel177]

I have a viewpoint that comes from a producer, and techno producers that know what they're doing put a lot of effort into each sound to create the timbre/tone that they want. For example, Objekt, a UK dub-techno producer uses over 20 different sounds to create one kick drum. Synthetic doesn't equate to inaccurate tone/timbre. I think most people think of EDM as a wall of sound and lump all electronic music into one pile. This is not the case. There are many different ways to produce and listen to music, which is why there are so many different preferences for sound signatures in IEM's. Different strokes for different folks rings true for all genres, I just wouldn't use x genres to guide y sound signature, it's a slippery slope.

I hope I'm not coming across as ignorant towards electronic music. I personally listen to artists like Bershken, Aquilo and Bonobo - where beautiful, complex melodies almost overtake the "thump-y-ness" that's become stereotypical of electronic music - so that was not at all my intention. When we get to artists like them, I start categorising them into Indie, Indie-Folk, Neo-Soul, etc., even though they're still electronic in nature. I think my sentiments were more targeted towards synthetic instruments within EDM tracks, so I should've been more specific.

 

[twister6]

I have a viewpoint that comes from a producer, and techno producers that know what they're doing put a lot of effort into each sound to create the timbre/tone that they want. For example, Objekt, a UK dub-techno producer uses over 20 different sounds to create one kick drum. Synthetic doesn't equate to inaccurate tone/timbre. I think most people think of EDM as a wall of sound and lump all electronic music into one pile. This is not the case. There are many different ways to produce and listen to music, which is why there are so many different preferences for sound signatures in IEM's. Different strokes for different folks rings true for all genres, I just wouldn't use x genres to guide y sound signature, it's a slippery slope.

You have a valid point, and there is a lot of work that goes into every sound (even with majority of EDM and other producers still using good-old Vengeance samples) and into crafting of every VSTi preset. As a producer, you create a unique sound to stand out in the mix, you carve the EQ space so it doesn't overlap, you apply effects so it doesn't sound dry, you work on your compression to keep dynamics alive, etc. Then, a listener hears the mix, they appreciate the unique nature of the sound timbre, but they don't have any way to judge if it's accurate or not because it's a synthesized sound. It's unique, it stands out, it could be like no other sound out othere, but nothing to use as a reference to determine the accuracy, right? So, people listening to EDM genres will appreciate the sound, but don't care as much about the accuracy in this case. When you are listening to music with natural instruments, you have a different point of reference and comparison where it's easier to spot if piano or a guitar or some other string or wind instruments sound unnatural.

The point I'm trying to make, just based on my own personal experience, I can enjoy EDM music with different IEMs that gonna color the sound in their own unique sound sig way. But when it comes to music with natural instruments I prefer to use IEMs with a more balanced natural tonality because in that case it will be easier to spot innaccuracy of timbre.

 

[davidmolliere]

The reason I find timbre so important, is because I listen to a lot of easy listening and (soft) rock music. With this type of music, you are mainly listening for the 'beauty of the sound', which is comprised of a simple setup of a few main instruments accompanying a vocal; e.g. a violin, sax, and of course (several) acoustic or electric guitars. As some of you might know, I especially adore the sound of a gently played electric guitar; probably my favorite type of sound of all. (...) But there is also a completely different way of listening to music. For instance, when you listen to electronic music, tone becomes infinitely less important. Instead, resolution, separation, stage, and sub-bass speed and impact for example are the highest priorities. Most of all, detail is important: the beauty of a track now lies in its complexity; the way it evolves by adding and changing different melodies, bass lines, or other components. Often, treble notes determine the rhythm and pace of the music. (...)
So, nowadays I find timbre very important because of the music I listen to. It's the reason the Phantom is my soulmate, and I chose the Ultima CU over the SS. But I still have this mode of listening in me, which is why I can truly say I also understand when people have a completely different preference, and I can equally appreciate those iems. Just look at the review of Samba for instance, it's basically one long ode to the power of precision. So the point I guess is just that we need to be aware of what we find important, and why we find that important; it will help to give insight in our taste for iems, as well as why others can have such different opinions - a basic understanding I feel is sometimes easily neglected.

Great read
This speaks to me completely, I have a much better understanding of what I want and why I want it, not as articulate as yours though! And it took some wandering across IEMs and headphones before I started thinking like this.

On the flipside I have found some IEMs attributes to bring me back to musical genres I had left on the side, just an example the VE8 has me back on Rock and some Metal

Reading your post so glad I pulled the trigger on the Phantom as it will match my musical preferences very well from what I read here

 

[Pepito]

You have a valid point, and there is a lot of work that goes into every sound (even with majority of EDM and other producers still using good-old Vengeance samples) and into crafting of every VSTi preset. As a producer, you create a unique sound to stand out in the mix, you carve the EQ space so it doesn't overlap, you apply effects so it doesn't sound dry, you work on your compression to keep dynamics alive, etc. Then, a listener hears the mix, they appreciate the unique nature of the sound timbre, but they don't have any way to judge if it's accurate or not because it's a synthesized sound. It's unique, it stands out, it could be like no other sound out othere, but nothing to use as a reference to determine the accuracy, right? So, people listening to EDM genres will appreciate the sound, but don't care as much about the accuracy in this case. When you are listening to music with natural instruments, you have a different point of reference and comparison where it's easier to spot if piano or a guitar or some other string or wind instruments sound unnatural.

The point I'm trying to make, just based on my own personal experience, I can enjoy EDM music with different IEMs that gonna color the sound in their own unique sound sig way. But when it comes to music with natural instruments I prefer to use IEMs with a more balanced natural tonality because in that case it will be easier to spot innaccuracy of timbre.

That is very true, thank you for putting it so eloquently. You'll never know what the intended outcome of an electronic track is, unless you pick the brain of the artist themselves. The reference that I use is Stereo, as I have spent many nights and days there as well as having the pleasure to play on such a system. Many producers/DJ's that have rolled through state that it's one of the best sound systems in the world. There will never be a solid reference point, so accuracy in the classical sense goes out the window. Many people don't have the reference point that I have, and are stating that tone in electronic music isn't important which just isn't true.

 

[Mimouille]

Wow so much text without any GIFs...make me dizzy

 

[491326]

On the flipside I have found some IEMs attributes to bring me back to musical genres I had left on the side

this happened to me too, I started listening to jazz and other acoustic recordings

 

[491326]

Anomalie’s Metropole

Oh Yeah