[davidmolliere]

It is of course possible to read the term as being "resolving detail" ie. referring to detail retrieval, rather than resolution. The terms "resolution" and "detail" are of course often used interchangeably, but the way I am learning it now (and I am just a grasshopper) is that the two are referring to different aspects of the sound.

Interesting, would you classify texture as detail?
To me resolving also factors in the ability to render texture but it’s not what I would generally categorize as detail retrieval.

 

[491326]

To me resolving also factors in the ability to render texture but it’s not what I would generally categorize as detail retrieval.

i do this too, texture is actually my number one priority

 

[Wyville]

Interesting, would you classify texture as detail?
To me resolving also factors in the ability to render texture but it’s not what I would generally categorize as detail retrieval.

Oh, but I personally don't read it as "resolving detail" (referring to detail retrieval), but I think some people might, which could be causing the conflicting impressions @fuhransahis mentioned.

I see it similar to you that the ability to render texture is related to resolution, like Daniel explained it (much better than I can), there is more to a note than just an articulate note, but I am still learning all of this. For now I feel I lack the experience to hear and explain it as well as Daniel. I am starting to develop a bit of feeling for it, though.

ps. Sorry Daniel, but it seems that now Nic is taking it easy, you are our new victim guiding light resident expert and it seems that it is becoming inevitable that 2019 will be another shootout year with Deezel's...
"Please don't make me rank all 19 TOTL IEM shootout"

 

[davidmolliere]

Oh, but I personally don't read it as "resolving detail" (referring to detail retrieval), but I think some people might, which could be causing the conflicting impressions @fuhransahis mentioned.

I see it similar to you that the ability to render texture is related to resolution, like Daniel explained it (much better than I can), there is more to a note than just an articulate note, but I am still learning all of this. For now I feel I lack the experience to hear and explain it as well as Daniel. I am starting to develop a bit of feeling for it, though.

Good point, not meaning to derail the topic but one area I feel is not mentioned enough is attack and decay and it sure influences a signature in a big way too. Maybe there is a topic dedicated to all this...

 

[Deezel177]

Thanks! And the question was open to all of course, I was just teasing a bit

Wasn't aware that resolution and resolving were the same terms.

In my glossary, 'resolution' means the IEM's ability to resolve. I don't know if it's the same for others, but that's definitely how I'd use the term(s).

Interesting, would you classify texture as detail?
To me resolving also factors in the ability to render texture but it’s not what I would generally categorize as detail retrieval.

Texture is interesting to me because I consider it to be equal parts dependent on the track and the transducer. Much like with regards to editing photos in Adobe Lightroom - for example - boosting the Clarity parameter adds what can be perceived as extra "texture" into the photo. For example, if I have a photo of wood (which, by now, would number in the fifty's ), boosting Clarity would emphasise the graininess of the wood. To some, this could look more detailed or refined, while it can look unnatural to to others, especially if it's been heavily accentuated. So, how much clarity the IEM possesses (from upper-treble tuning, usually) will determine whether or not the texture of the instruments within the track is perceived as natural or not (of course, overall naturalness would also take aspects like tone into account). But, due to the huge variety of instruments and mixes present in music today, the amount of clarity and texture you can push before it starts sounding artificial varies from track to track, in my experience. So, I think replicating texture in a detailed yet natural way, will depend on the clarity of the IEM plus the quality of the track. Then, combine this with a realistic tone and a coherently-formed stage, and you have yourself a naturally-resolving IEM.

Oh, but I personally don't read it as "resolving detail" (referring to detail retrieval), but I think some people might, which could be causing the conflicting impressions @fuhransahis mentioned.

I see it similar to you that the ability to render texture is related to resolution, like Daniel explained it (much better than I can), there is more to a note than just an articulate note, but I am still learning all of this. For now I feel I lack the experience to hear and explain it as well as Daniel. I am starting to develop a bit of feeling for it, though.

ps. Sorry Daniel, but it seems that now Nic is taking it easy, you are our new victim guiding light resident expert and it seems that it is becoming inevitable that 2019 will be another shootout year with Deezel's...
"Please don't make me rank all 19 TOTL IEM shootout"

Yeah, I tend to separate detail retrieval (or clarity/articulation) from resolution as two separate - but certainly interlinked - aspects. Please, answering you guys' queries is my pleasure (to a degree ). Besides, 19 is such an ugly number. Though, I do have a certain affinity for the number 24... ...please take that as a joke - I'd literally have to unemployed to endure such stress.

 

[Wyville]

Yeah, I tend to separate detail retrieval (or clarity/articulation) from resolution as two separate - but certainly interlinked - aspects. Please, answering you guys' queries is my pleasure (to a degree ). Besides, 19 is such an ugly number. Though, I do have a certain affinity for the number 24... ...please take that as a joke - I'd literally have to unemployed to endure such stress.

Oh no, you're not getting away that easy! We'll drop the number 19 and adopt the number 24 so we can turn it into a YouTube series named "24 - THL edition". One episode a week dedicated to one IEM, each episode will be an hour and in the final episode there will be the grand discussion of the rankings. So that would be only 23 IEMs and should take less than half a year.

 

[PinkyPowers]

Ah, this is confusing. I use "resolution" to describe how sharply defined the instruments are. If I feel I can practically see the strings on the guitar being plucked before me. If I can hear the strings vibrating off the frets. Make out the smacking of lips. The better these things are rendered, the higher the resolution in my book.

I describe "fullness of notes" and "overtones" as fullness of notes and overtones.

 

[Layman1]

Ah, this is confusing. I use "resolution" to describe how sharply defined the instruments are. If I feel I can practically see the strings on the guitar being plucked before me. If I can hear the strings vibrating off the frets. Make out the smacking of lips. The better these things are rendered, the higher the resolution in my book.

I describe "fullness of notes" and "overtones" as fullness of notes and overtones.

I recall a cartoon in which a cat is shouting "Oi! No-balls!" repeatedly to another (annoyed looking) cat.
The caption underneath read "Tabby always believed in calling a spade a spade"

 

[Deezel177]

Ah, this is confusing. I use "resolution" to describe how sharply defined the instruments are. If I feel I can practically see the strings on the guitar being plucked before me. If I can hear the strings vibrating off the frets. Make out the smacking of lips. The better these things are rendered, the higher the resolution in my book.

I describe "fullness of notes" and "overtones" as fullness of notes and overtones.

Well, yeah, but the feeling of immersion doesn't just stem from sharp definition. You have to have the echoes of the strings, the reverberations of the nylon against the wooden fret, the decay of the smacking lips as they blend into the background, etc. Otherwise, it's all just treble-y nonsense under the guise of detail.

 

[Deezel177]

Oh no, you're not getting away that easy! We'll drop the number 19 and adopt the number 24 so we can turn it into a YouTube series named "24 - THL edition". One episode a week dedicated to one IEM, each episode will be an hour and in the final episode there will be the grand discussion of the rankings. So that would be only 23 IEMs and should take less than half a year.

Honestly, that sounds like a lot of fun! Writing is an immensely arduous process, but I would love to talk about IEMs in video form. Cinematography and filmmaking is probably my next greatest passion after audio, so I'd definitely put as much (if not more) effort into it as I do my reviews. Besides, there's a severe lack in high-quality, cinematic and informative audiophile videos on the Internet anyway, so I'd certainly love to be one of the few to fill that gap.

 

[natemact]

So I finally get over to the EE dealer here in Toronto last week to listen to the flagships...really just the Phantoms...at $3K the LXs are out of my price range anyway...well good god these Phantoms are superb! So much so that I put an end to my many months of searching for an iem with just one swipe of my debit card and took home a pair. Unfortunately, I ended up finding later that there was a small shell defect where either the glue wasn't fully cleaned off after affixing the faceplate or the lacquer wasn't smoothed over, hard to tell, camera shy as well. This is all getting sorted with EE. I can attest to their CS!



I won't go into impressions as I found Nick and Daniel's to be spot on and who the hell am I right lol? What I will say though - but probably obvious to many of you - it you're the type to be moved by a gut-wrenching vocal over say a wanking guitar solo then I'd say get a pair of Phantoms over LXs. Where I found the LXs instrumentally captivating, it was the Phantoms that made me feel the singer's emotives more. The LXs got my foot stomping where the Phantom got my face smiling... K there was some tapping in there too! Oh, how 'bout this meaningless analogy...

Phantoms = Steinway & Sons piano

LXs = stained glass shattering pipe organ

Clearly exaggerated to make my point, but not complete folklore.

But here's why I'm posting to this thread instead of EE...

Now that the KSE1200 was announced, am I crazy to want to go back to the shop where I bought the Phantoms (still can exchange) to audition the KSE1500 with my dac? As per Jude 1500/1200 same SQ. Wrote 1500 off due to price and redundant dac that I'm not going to use. I've always enjoyed 009s, just not the best for more aggressive music I found. Can't see that really being a problem with these though. Would these two iems be near polar opposites from one another? Honestly, sound signatures aside as I find my brain can adjust to and appreciate many, I just want the most engaging and captivating musical experience that I can get for up to $2K. You're probably gonna laugh at me but on a whole I would rather listen to these Phantoms than my Utopias (stock cable and driven by Stellar DAC, very good combo considering cost) which is why I just sold them!!!

I just want someone to tell me I'm nuts and if I love the Phantoms than I won't the KSE1200/1500...right?

 

[Wyville]

Honestly, that sounds like a lot of fun! Writing is an immensely arduous process, but I would love to talk about IEMs in video form. Cinematography and filmmaking is probably my next greatest passion after audio, so I'd definitely put as much (if not more) effort into it as I do my reviews. Besides, there's a severe lack in high-quality, cinematic and informative audiophile videos on the Internet anyway, so I'd certainly love to be one of the few to fill that gap.

In all seriousness, I think THL could benefit tremendously from video reviews, as those are becoming increasingly more popular with other things (think of game reviews, camera reviews). But it does require someone with the right skills and equipment to do it at a level that would be on par with the written reviews. Perhaps something to discuss internally. Would be really nice! (But don't stretch yourself even more! )

 

[Deezel177]

In all seriousness, I think THL could benefit tremendously from video reviews, as those are becoming increasingly more popular with other things (think of game reviews, camera reviews). But it does require someone with the right skills and equipment to do it at a level that would be on par with the written reviews. Perhaps something to discuss internally. Would be really nice! (But don't stretch yourself even more! )

I'd most likely have to give one up in favour of the other. If only there was some way for me to create a video review for public scrutiny, so the community could tell me which medium they'd prefer...

 

[flinkenick]

Resolution is a complext subject. The most simple way to view it for me, is the definition of a (midrange) note; i.e. the number of 'audio pixels' that construct a single note, which can be seen as analogous to high or low definition of video. This is why treble extension, rather than quantity, plays a role in determining the completeness of a note. For instance, imagine a picture of a setting sun. The core of the sun might be predominantly red or orange, but towards the edges are diminishing traces of yellow. These might have a relative small contribution to the main body, but they increase the overall realism of the image. If you were to remove these outer contours, you would end up with a simple unidimensional figure, that lacks realism. This applies in a way to how treble extension contributes to the definition of a midrange note.

The linearity of a signature contributes to the totality of information presented. If a note for example were to have its main body between 2-5 KHz, and the signature has a sharp dip between 1-3 KHz, there is a loss of (possible) information (or if a note is presented within 1-3 KHz, it might not even be reproduced at all).

A friend of mine used to use an even more comlex definition, by combining this with an iem's ability to maintain its definition under high speed. That is, when iems have lower resolution they might struggle to provide resolved notes in faster sections. But this is perhaps a bit too advanced as a general definition hehe.

Background blackness can be correlated to high resolution, but is nevertheless a distinct technical construct. That is, an iem/cable/dap can provide high resolution and/or a black background, but there can be noticeable differences in background blackness between those that offer high resolution.

Or, to answer @fuhransahis original question: resolved is just the past tense verb of resolution. They mean exactly the same.

 

[davidcotton]

So I finally get over to the EE dealer here in Toronto last week to listen to the flagships...really just the Phantoms...at $3K the LXs are out of my price range anyway...well good god these Phantoms are superb! So much so that I put an end to my many months of searching for an iem with just one swipe of my debit card and took home a pair. Unfortunately, I ended up finding later that there was a small shell defect where either the glue wasn't fully cleaned off after affixing the faceplate or the lacquer wasn't smoothed over, hard to tell, camera shy as well. This is all getting sorted with EE. I can attest to their CS!



I won't go into impressions as I found Nick and Daniel's to be spot on and who the hell am I right lol? What I will say though - but probably obvious to many of you - it you're the type to be moved by a gut-wrenching vocal over say a wanking guitar solo then I'd say get a pair of Phantoms over LXs. Where I found the LXs instrumentally captivating, it was the Phantoms that made me feel the singer's emotives more. The LXs got my foot stomping where the Phantom got my face smiling... K there was some tapping in there too! Oh, how 'bout this meaningless analogy...

Phantoms = Steinway & Sons piano

LXs = stained glass shattering pipe organ

Clearly exaggerated to make my point, but not complete folklore.

But here's why I'm posting to this thread instead of EE...

Now that the KSE1200 was announced, am I crazy to want to go back to the shop where I bought the Phantoms (still can exchange) to audition the KSE1500 with my dac? As per Jude 1500/1200 same SQ. Wrote 1500 off due to price and redundant dac that I'm not going to use. I've always enjoyed 009s, just not the best for more aggressive music I found. Can't see that really being a problem with these though. Would these two iems be near polar opposites from one another? Honestly, sound signatures aside as I find my brain can adjust to and appreciate many, I just want the most engaging and captivating musical experience that I can get for up to $2K. You're probably gonna laugh at me but on a whole I would rather listen to these Phantoms than my Utopias (stock cable and driven by Stellar DAC, very good combo considering cost) which is why I just sold them!!!

I just want someone to tell me I'm nuts and if I love the Phantoms than I won't the KSE1200/1500...right?

If you can have a free demo with no obligation to buy then I say go for it. That way you can decide once and for all if you are right about the choice you just made. The money you are talking about is no small change, so it's important to make the correct decision for you. Nothing worse than having a small nagging voice in the back of your mind going "yes, but you could of...." (well there is, it's the little voice saying, "what the hell, buy both").


I just wish my right ear would play nicely with universals so I could try some of these