[fevers end]

Ok so what are the leading theories behind the subjective experience of technicalities(dynamics, note texture, note weight, detail, etc...)?

1. FR at eardrum +_ tasteful coloration

2. Combination of different measurements (including but not limited to FR) that we currently have, although we do not have the ability to discern which parts of which measurements are responsible for the subjective effect?

or....?

Just from personal experience, I have messed around with Storm and EQ. I had a -5db shelf from 5k-->20k and subjectively felt that the "detail" and "dynamics" were mostly intact, although of course timbre was slightly affected(from the usual Storm signature that I've become used to).

 

[bigshot]

Subjective impressions are unique to the individual. They are governed by the sensory abilities, tastes and biases of the person doing the perceiving. The equipment has little or nothing to do with it. If you are looking for measurements of equipment to explain subjective experiences, you're looking in the wrong place.

 

[gryphonos]

Also mods, I think this discussion is an interesting and healthy one to have but I'd like to humbly request it be moved to a separate thread if it continues so as not to detract from the STORM discussion

I have to agree very much and would also kindly suggest to move the last ongoing discussion in case of its continuation into a separate thread.
This thread has already or is at least going to loose its intended focus.

 

[bigshot]

Didn’t they already do that?

 

[gryphonos]

Didn’t they already do that?

My impression is they didn't, because some managed to let the main topic "Subtonic STORM" completely disappear from this thread.

Just my 2 cents

 

[bigshot]

Toto, I don’t think we’re in Kansas any more..

 

[theveterans]

Subjective impressions are unique to the individual. They are governed by the sensory abilities, tastes and biases of the person doing the perceiving. The equipment has little or nothing to do with it. If you are looking for measurements of equipment to explain subjective experiences, you're looking in the wrong place.

This is exactly why I keep saying you can’t correlate subjective impressions/preferences to the threshold of audibility, no matter how you slice and dice them up

 

[castleofargh]

My impression is they didn't, because some managed to let the main topic "Subtonic STORM" completely disappear from this thread.

Just my 2 cents

The thread on the Storm remains, and this one isn't it. This part has been moved here as off-topic because it wasn't about that IEM.

 

[KinGensai]

Ok so what are the leading theories behind the subjective experience of technicalities(dynamics, note texture, note weight, detail, etc...)?

1. FR at eardrum +_ tasteful coloration

2. Combination of different measurements (including but not limited to FR) that we currently have, although we do not have the ability to discern which parts of which measurements are responsible for the subjective effect?

or....?

Just from personal experience, I have messed around with Storm and EQ. I had a -5db shelf from 5k-->20k and subjectively felt that the "detail" and "dynamics" were mostly intact, although of course timbre was slightly affected(from the usual Storm signature that I've become used to).

Tonality is dictated by FR and THD profiles that exceed audibility thresholds during music playback. I test at -39dB as my threshold in music, so I use stuff that measures below 1% THD (well below in the case of my current stuff) to avoid detectable noise. Odd order biased harmonics are perceived at lower levels compared to even order biased harmonics, so THD by itself isn't enough to make a judgement.

Dynamics is dictated by IMD (which is influenced by impulse response as seen in a CSD graph), if IMD is below audibility the transducer will not negatively affect dynamics. Some IEMs struggle with this, so peaks and valleys will sound closer than they should as the IMD ramps up during playback. This is a more common problem with single driver IEMs, multi-driver IEMs typically don't have a problem here.

That other stuff typically has to do with FR mostly. Bass might be special, infrasonic extension (<20Hz) and impulse response change the presentation of the low end in subtle ways which isn't really discussed much that I can see, but low end feels preferable to many people when the extension goes below 10Hz and the IR is a bit extended (2.5ms+). MSE for instance has both those things (MSE actually extends down to 4Hz that I can detect) and it's pretty popular due to that bass response and tonal balance. BA IEMs tend to struggle on this part because the bass response decays too quickly, doesn't extend as far, and tends to have odd order biased harmonics, it makes the whole package sound subtly unnatural.

 

[Doltonius]

Tonality is dictated by FR and THD profiles that exceed audibility thresholds during music playback. I test at -39dB as my threshold in music, so I use stuff that measures below 1% THD (well below in the case of my current stuff) to avoid detectable noise. Odd order biased harmonics are perceived at lower levels compared to even order biased harmonics, so THD by itself isn't enough to make a judgement.

Dynamics is dictated by IMD (which is influenced by impulse response as seen in a CSD graph), if IMD is below audibility the transducer will not negatively affect dynamics. Some IEMs struggle with this, so peaks and valleys will sound closer than they should as the IMD ramps up during playback. This is a more common problem with single driver IEMs, multi-driver IEMs typically don't have a problem here.

That other stuff typically has to do with FR mostly. Bass might be special, infrasonic extension (<20Hz) and impulse response change the presentation of the low end in subtle ways which isn't really discussed much that I can see, but low end feels preferable to many people when the extension goes below 10Hz and the IR is a bit extended (2.5ms+). MSE for instance has both those things (MSE actually extends down to 4Hz that I can detect) and it's pretty popular due to that bass response and tonal balance. BA IEMs tend to struggle on this part because the bass response decays too quickly, doesn't extend as far, and tends to have odd order biased harmonics, it makes the whole package sound subtly unnatural.

Decay time is still dictated by FR. Transients (both abrupt starting and abrupt stopping of vibrations) can be Fourier-transformed into lots of higher frequency sine waves, and the relative amplitude of these components compared to the fundamental pitch determine how fast the note starts and decays. All else equal, more bass quantity means slower decay times; and keeping the bass level unchanged, boosting high frequencies will shorten decay time. Also 5128, with more realistic acoustic impedance, reveals differences between the FR of BA bass and DD bass that were previously undetectable on the 711 couplers; and DD and BA bass measuring similarly on the 711 couplers become different on 5128, with DD bass getting noticeably higher levels. This can sort of explain the difference between DD and BA bass, i.e., in decay time, that was previously thought to not be due to FR (since they graphed the same way on the 711). This was discussed in Listener's article, I think.

 

[KinGensai]

Decay time is still dictated by FR. Transients (both abrupt starting and abrupt stopping of vibrations) can be Fourier-transformed into lots of higher frequency sine waves, and the relative amplitude of these components compared to the fundamental pitch determine how fast the note starts and decays. All else equal, more bass quantity means slower decay times; and keeping the bass level unchanged, boosting high frequencies will shorten decay time. Also 5128, with more realistic acoustic impedance, reveals differences between the FR of BA bass and DD bass that were previously undetectable on the 711 couplers; and DD and BA bass measuring similarly on the 711 couplers become different on 5128, with DD bass getting noticeably higher levels. This can sort of explain the difference between DD and BA bass, i.e., in decay time, that was previously thought to not be due to FR (since they graphed the same way on the 711). This was discussed in Listener's article, I think.

That makes sense in theory, but it's rather difficult to parse that information out by just reading the FR because each of those frequency ranges contains information originating from both the IR of lower frequencies and fundamentals/lower order harmonics of higher frequencies. A CSD is easier to read thanks to the inclusion of the time domain as well as targeted tests like square wave response graphs. The causal link between FR elevation at certain frequencies is unclear because the signal is either not composed of a single tone (pink noise) or is not factoring in the time domain and is thus unclear how much of that sum amplitude is due to the the IR vs other causes.

 

[bigshot]

To break sound down to its essence, it is frequencies at amplitudes arrayed in time. In its most basic form, frequencies are what we hear, and distortion is simply inaccuracy with frequencies. So I guess everything, aside from timing, comes down to frequencies.

 

[Doltonius]

That makes sense in theory, but it's rather difficult to parse that information out by just reading the FR because each of those frequency ranges contains information originating from both the IR of lower frequencies and fundamentals/lower order harmonics of higher frequencies. A CSD is easier to read thanks to the inclusion of the time domain as well as targeted tests like square wave response graphs. The causal link between FR elevation at certain frequencies is unclear because the signal is either not composed of a single tone (pink noise) or is not factoring in the time domain and is thus unclear how much of that sum amplitude is due to the the IR vs other causes.

The causal link exists; if you change the FR, the CSD graph also changes. It is indeed true that CSD graphs show the information that we want more directly and straightforwardly. But that doesn't mean that the information is not already contained in the FR.

For IEMs, the time domain is determined by the FR, because they are basically minimum-phase systems, unless there are horrendous phase-mismatch between the drivers in a multi-driver setup or if baroque housing structures cause a lot of internal reflections before reaching your eardrums, among other things. These generally don't happen.

Fourier transform decomposes any waveform into pure sine waves of different frequencies, to a certain precision in reality. The human inner ear does just that, even with pink noise.

 

[Somafunk]

The discussion around BA bass and DD bass is interesting as I have the Sony XBA-N3 with 1dd/1ba and Symphonium Meteors with 4ba as my two favourite iems and the bass response of each iem as measured by Precogvision below is practically identical from 300hz down, listening to them both I get a more impactful sound from the Sony with the DD, I’ll be keen to to view/read the research from Resolve with the BK5128 as to why this is, I think it must be the decay time/volume of air/pressurisation of the ear canal with the Sony’s DD.

https://precog.squig.link/?share=Precog_Target,Sony_XBA-N3,Symphonium_Meteor

 

[Doltonius]

The discussion around BA bass and DD bass is interesting as I have the Sony XBA-N3 with 1dd/1ba and Symphonium Meteors with 4ba as my two favourite iems and the bass response of each iem as measured by Precogvision below is practically identical from 300hz down, listening to them both I get a more impactful sound from the Sony with the DD, I’ll be keen to to view/read the research from Resolve with the BK5128 as to why this is, I think it must be the decay time/volume of air/pressurisation of the ear canal with the Sony’s DD.

https://precog.squig.link/?share=Precog_Target,Sony_XBA-N3,Symphonium_Meteor

Should wait for the 5128 measurements. On 711 couplers, the Softears Studio 4 (4BA) and Moondrop Blessing 3 (2DD, 4BA) has similar levels of bass. However, people often comment that Blessing 3's bass is more impactful and slower in decay. In 5128 measurements, there is a clear difference in bass level that is not shown on the 711. See attached graphs.

Also, the Sony N3 has more energy in the upper frequencies than the Meteor. This improves bass transients, which could also correlate with "impactfulness".