[listenerwww]

So don't you think that making a 20 minute video review of the Storm and then comparing it to two sets that are like 5 to 10 times cheaper but only really diving into the comparisons of their "similar" frequency response is sort of missing the entire point of a Storm review to begin with?

Nope, that’s generally how I would’ve reviewed it too. As close as I am with the Subconc boys, Storm is still just an IEM and should be judged on the same merits that consumers will judge other IEMs by. Fwiw I agree with Resolve that I’d take sets that are much cheaper than Storm over it, and it ultimately comes down to Storm having frequency response issues that, regardless of whatever magic is claimed to be in there by its adherents, makes the magic not there for me.

Even if Storm tends to attract the buyer that doesn’t care as much about FR because they’ve got the money to throw around such that they don’t need to be super careful with buying something they may not like long-term, a review should absolutely talk about these things; it’s a way to gauge performance as well as worth in the wider context of the market.

An additional issue is, of course, most ultra-expensive IEMs are tuned way worse than Storm, so comparing it to its peers in price is pretty unfair

They sounded overall similar to me in how they present music with the U4s being a tad brighter in the low treble area, it was too much for me personally, but where I felt they were vastly different was how each IEM presented music. To me it just goes deeper than a frequency response can show. The drivers used, the implementation, how dampened they are, etc.

Again, I think there’s a difference between frequency response as something that empirically exists and “the graphs we have available to us.” I think the analysis of many starts and stops at the measurements like the ones you’ve posted, but the reality is that FR at your eardrum listening to these same IEMs almost certainly deviates significantly (and potentially deviates more dramatically between sets than the deviations shown on a typical comparative 711 coupler measurement).

 

[listenerwww]

But what I'm really curious to know is, does detail come simply from good treble extension and how our unique HRTF perceives it?

I actually disagree with Precog’s take here, I think the direction of attention people call detail could be due to basically any FR feature. Makes it harder to discuss with finality but it’s closer to the truth, as I understand it.

Does electrical/acoustic engineering, driver implementation, internal wiring, crossovers, dampening, acoustic chamber, shell material, nozzle, etc. not have any effect on it?

Most of these things would also effect FR, no?

Because see if tuning or FR is simply what makes Technicalities as in details, resolution, transparency etc. apparent or prominent, then 5 years ago, we'd have been able to have the same level of tech as now, say like STORM level of tech, just that manufacturers back then weren't capable or competent enough to find the right balance in FR to give us the same experience?

I think this is likely very close to the truth. IMO Storm isn’t a market-redefining IEM because of previously unattainable science or some unexplained properties; it’s a market-redefining IEM because Subtonic has some of the best ears in the business, and knew how to tune their product to seemingly find the ideal balance to offer something natural-sounding as well as (clearly) subjectively impressive in all of the ways people buying $5k IEMs care most about.

 

[aaf evo]

But when it comes to the other aspects you just referenced, all of that shows up in FR as well. And quite frankly, I'm not bothered if people who are interested in a $5k IEM don't get that FR is responsible for their experience.

Fair enough, I think it is part of it but not all of it so we can agree to disagree here. I do find this a tad condescending but I am also not here to make friends.

Nope, that’s generally how I would’ve reviewed it too. As close as I am with the Subconc boys, Storm is still just an IEM and should be judged on the same merits that consumers will judge other IEMs by. Fwiw I agree with Resolve that I’d take sets that are much cheaper than Storm over it, and it ultimately comes down to Storm having frequency response issues that, regardless of whatever magic is claimed to be in there by its adherents, makes the magic not there for me.

Even if Storm tends to attract the buyer that doesn’t care as much about FR because they’ve got the money to throw around such that they don’t need to be super careful with buying something they may not like long-term, a review should absolutely talk about these things; it’s a way to gauge performance as well as worth in the wider context of the market.

Gotcha, I guess we don't see eye to eye in terms of review content and that is okay.

I think consumers (or least those that are playing in this price bracket?) are looking beyond things than just the frequency response though otherwise we would just buy something with a similar tuning that is cheaper, no? But perhaps I am the one who is mistaken here. Again, I am not defending the Storm nor do I care who likes it or not. For all I know I'll sell mine next week and buy something else, who cares. I just think the amount of weight being put into FR is overblown from my own experiences. I would be having this same debate whether or not I owned the Storm. FR will never tell you things like texture, decay, punchiness, etc. If there is a way to know this by looking at a FR then please tell me, I am wanting to learn.

 

[listenerwww]

FR will never tell you things like texture, decay, punchiness, etc. If there is a way to know this by looking at a FR then please tell me, I am wanting to learn.

I suggest using EQ and playing with the balance between fundamental and overtone on things like drums or bass. The results may surprise you.

Most people who make or produce music are generally more open to the idea of FR being responsible for how these things impress upon us, because we EQ to aid in our control of presenting these aspects rather regularly.

 

[aaf evo]

I suggest using EQ and playing with the balance between fundamental and overtone on things like drums or bass. The results may surprise you.

Most people who make or produce music are generally more open to the idea of FR being responsible for how these things impress upon us, because we EQ to aid in our control of presenting these aspects rather regularly.

I see, but I'm not interested in EQ'ing. I want to be able to see a read a FR gaph and extrapolate these characteristics from it. How can I read a graph and determine how fast the bass decays or how textured it would be?

Can you explain to me which of the following IEMs below will reproduce a more authentic kick drum?

 

[ilikebananafudge]

I just think the amount of weight being put into FR is overblown from my own experiences. I would be having this same debate whether or not I owned the Storm. FR will never tell you things like texture, decay, punchiness, etc. If there is a way to know this by looking at a FR then please tell me, I am wanting to learn.

Yeah, I don't really use IEMs and I don't really care about the Storm one way or the other, but I also find it highly unlikely that FR is responsible for everything that we hear based on my experiences in this hobby.

Let's move into the world of headphones for a minute because it's a bit less complicated. If FR is the only thing that matters, then why doesn't everyone buy $10 headphones and then EQ them to have the same FR as the Utopia or Susvara? That would make the $10 headphones technically equivalent to the Utopia or Susvara right? One argument against this is that some headphones don't take EQ well because it would increase distortion, but considering distortion defeats your own argument that FR is all that matters, because harmonic distortion is not contained within a FR plot in a meaningful way.

I guess a simpler way to state this is that I'm highly skeptical that two headphones or IEMs that have been EQed to the same FR will sound exactly the same. Obviously, they will sound similar because obviously FR is important, but I have a strong suspicion that there are other things happening with the sound waves that aren't captured by a FR plot.

 

[jude]

This reminds me of a little discussion I had with Konstantin (@oratory1990) at CanJam New York -- Konstantin being one of my favorite people to talk about these things with, and to debate with -- which we ended up doing a little (debating).

As I recall, a nice gentleman asked us both (at the end of one of the seminars, after most people had left the room) about essentially what's being discussed here now (or at least something that led to essentially what's being discussed here now).

I think Konstantin offered the position that if one could measure drum pressure (as a function of frequency) -- so, frequency response -- on a given individual (Person 1) with headphone/earphone A and ended up with frequency response X, and then did so with headphone/earphone B and also ended up with frequency response X, then they (A and B with frequency response response X) should be completely indistinguishable to Person 1, in terms of anything and everything we're talking about here (detail retrieval, impact, etc.).

NOTE: Though Konstantin offered the position, I wasn't clear how much conviction he was conveying that he believes this to be absolutely true. He can comment here if he likes, of course. Sometimes, in discussions and debates, a position is offered for the sake of interesting discussion and debate.

It's important to make a distinction here -- which we briefly agreed on in this mini-debate we had -- that we're talking about something that can't really be done (and so can't really be reasonably proven either way).

In other words, if device under test C (DUT C) and DUT D both had frequency response Y on a Brüel & Kjær Type 5128 manikin, they (DUT C and DUT D) would almost certainly not have the same measured frequency response (if it was reasonably possible to capture a human's eardrum response) at a particular human's eardrum.

Anyway, I disagreed (that if, in theory, we could actually do this, that two devices with the exact same frequency response at someone's eardrum would sound completely indistinguishable from one another to that someone), we had an enjoyable little mini-debate, and then chuckled as we both conceded that we were debating something that (again) couldn't reasonably be proven.

You guys are just having the exact same debate right now.

For what it's worth -- and this is all subjective -- the Subtonic Storm is probably (to my ears, for me, in my opinion, for my tastes, etc.) the best overall IEM I've yet heard. I think it's spectacular. And, for what it's worth, what cursory measurement I did of the Subtonic Storm (one position) looked different from Andrew's in his video (which I'm assuming was probably an average of several positions). Andrew (@Resolve), did any of your Storm seatings look like the dotted line in this one (below)? (I was using whatever single-dome silicone tip came installed on it, as sent to me by Subtonic.) I also did a single pass each on both the launch and standard editions (using the same eartips), and they were the same.


Fig.1 (above): Frequency responses of FiiO FA19 with SednaEarfit Short eartips, in switch-off setting (solid black line) and Subtonic Storm with its stock eartips (dotted gray line)

This is an interesting discussion, and I have thoughts I'll share when I have a little more time.

EDIT 2024-04-23 1700 EDT: Added caption under the measurement to show what was being represented. The FiiO FA19 has nothing to do with this discussion. I just lazily copied that measurement comparison from another post I made in another (unrelated) thread.

 

[kajetanjazz]

Can you explain to me which of the following IEMs below will reproduce a more authentic kick drum?

Thisss
Exactly the issue - people seek justifications in the FR for the sound features that they describe. Doing it the other way around is pure guessing

 

[listenerwww]

I see, but I'm not interested in EQ'ing. I want to be able to see a read a FR gaph and extrapolate these characteristics from it. How can I read a graph and determine how fast the bass decays or how textured it would be?

Can you explain to me which of the following IEMs below will reproduce a more authentic kick drum?

I’ve given you the answer to figure it out for yourself, can lead a horse to water etc.: If ya don’t wish to use EQ, then that’s fine, but that is the way to unlock a bit of the understanding I’m talking about.

And to answer your question, I couldn’t make that assumption, at least not for you or anyone who isn’t me. I’d likely say both of those wouldn’t have an exceedingly “authentic” response for kick drum in my ear due to their early pinna compensation rise, though. Likely too snappy/clappy and focused on attack vs decay. The former being mostly contained in overtones, with the latter being mostly contained in fundamentals (and lower overtones).

 

[aaf evo]

I’ve given you the answer to figure it out for yourself, can lead a horse to water etc.: If ya don’t wish to use EQ, then that’s fine, but that is the way to unlock a bit of the understanding I’m talking about.

And to answer your question, I couldn’t make that assumption, at least not for you or anyone who isn’t me. I’d likely say both of those wouldn’t have an exceedingly “authentic” response for kick drum in my ear due to their early pinna compensation rise, though. Likely too snappy/clappy and focused on attack vs decay. The former being mostly contained in overtones, with the latter being mostly contained in fundamentals (and lower overtones).

"can lead a horse to water" lol, alright. The claims of FR being the reason why we have such experiences are farfetched. Again, you can't look at a graph and tell me what the bass texture is like right? As far as I know I don't think anyone really enjoys IEMs that have poor bass texturing, but neither of us can look at a squig and determine that.

I don't really have anything else to add here.

 

[listenerwww]

Hiya Jude! Fancy seeing you here

Anyway, I disagreed (that if, in theory, we could actually do this, that two devices with the exact same frequency response at someone's eardrum would sound completely indistinguishable from one another to that someone), we had an enjoyable little mini-debate, and then chuckled as we both conceded that we were debating something that (again) couldn't reasonably be proven.

Indeed this is a perennially-continuing conversation in our discourse, one I rather enjoy when it’s had in good faith (which is the case here, from everything I can see).

So yes, the issue is largely that we cannot prove this to be the case yet, as measuring in-situ on a human being is Damn Hard, and human beings are the only ones that can confirm if things that measure the same actually sound the same. I’d say “I wish rigs could speak,” but they might not have very nice things to say to us after some of the things we put them through

As someone who is greatly interested in anything you have to say on the subject, I would love to hear more about your disagreement with the theoretical argument of “equivalent/identical SPL at the eardrum means equal sound.”

And, for what it's worth, what cursory measurement I did of the Subtonic Storm (one position) looked different from Andrew's in his video (which I'm assuming was probably an average of several positions). Andrew (@Resolve), did any of your Storm seatings look like the dotted line in this one (below)? (I was using whatever single-dome silicone tip came installed on it, as sent to me by Subtonic.) I also did a single pass each on both the launch and standard editions (using the same eartips), and they were the same.

Thanks for sharing the measurement! Can you detail which of these measurements is which? The dotted line looks more like what I’d expect. Andrew did not do multiple positions, a suggestion of yours I’ve bolded. Please feel free to bully him into doing more measurements of positional variation on the 4620, as my attempts have largely been unsuccessful

Back to the Storm, it is indeed an exceptionally-tuned IEM, and full credit to Subtonic for providing something I can say is truly worthy of the title “flagship,” even if it’s not my cuppa.

 

[slumberman]

I suggest using EQ and playing with the balance between fundamental and overtone on things like drums or bass. The results may surprise you.

Most people who make or produce music are generally more open to the idea of FR being responsible for how these things impress upon us, because we EQ to aid in our control of presenting these aspects rather regularly.

Frequency obviously has to do with how an instrument is portrayed, but a graph will never show you the whole story on how these instruments work together in the context of speaker/iem reproduction.

No IEMs, headphones or speakers that graph the same will ever sound identical, unless based on the same array and geometry/components (I.E. cloned).

 

[listenerwww]

"can lead a horse to water" lol, alright. The claims of FR being the reason why we have such experiences are farfetched. Again, you can't look at a graph and tell me what the bass texture is like right? As far as I know I don't think anyone really enjoys IEMs that have poor bass texturing, but neither of us can look at a squig and determine that.

I don't really have anything else to add here.

I mean I can tell you what the bass texture might be like for me, but not for you. People—due to the reasons already mentioned—are bound to unpack the same thing in a different way. I could tell you the bass texture on both of those IEMs might be a bit forward and intense, but I certainly don’t know if that would be in a good way or a bad way for me until I hear it, and I’d obviously have to defer to you on your judgment.

Fwiw, I could also see many IEMs which are lacking in this textural quality being preferable; FR is a balance wherein by calling positive attention to one thing, you may negatively overemphasize another. I tend to go for signatures that minimize the latter instead of maximizing the former, if that makes sense.

 

[aaf evo]

I mean I can tell you what the bass texture might be like for me, but not for you. People—due to the reasons already mentioned—are bound to unpack the same thing in a different way. I could tell you the bass texture on both of those IEMs might be a bit forward and intense, but I certainly don’t know if that would be in a good way or a bad way for me until I hear it, and I’d obviously have to defer to you on your judgment.

Fwiw, I could also see many IEMs which are lacking in this textural quality being preferable; FR is a balance wherein by calling positive attention to one thing, you may negatively overemphasize another. I tend to go for signatures that minimize the latter instead of maximizing the former, if that makes sense.

Honestly I think we are just on way different wavelengths. I have never heard of anyone describe bass texture using the words "forward" or "intense" but rather adjectives like "rich, dry, deep, plasticky, one noted, bloated" etc. So we might be describing different things. What I am referring to as "bass texture" will never be able to be understood by reading from a graph, and to me that is part of the listening experience and is something that you cannot determine until you push play... Just like how driver coherency is part of the experience but also doesn't show up on a graph, or how an IEM may occupy headspace. Some may feel more localized in the forehead, some out of head, some behind the head, etc.

 

[listenerwww]

Honestly I think we are just on way different wavelengths. I have never heard of anyone describe bass texture using the words "forward" or "intense" but rather adjectives like "rich, dry, deep, plasticky, one noted, bloated" etc. So we might be describing different things. What I am referring to as "bass texture" will never be able to be understood by reading from a graph, and to me that is part of the listening experience and is something that you cannot determine until you push play... Just like how driver coherency is part of the experience but also doesn't show up on a graph, or how an IEM may occupy headspace. Some may feel more localized in the forehead, some out of head, some behind the head, etc.

Totally fair, I was more so referring to how the bass texture may be brought "forward" enough or is "intense" enough to be a noticeable part of the experience, that's all. I could use words like "crackly" or "effervescent," but despite being a reviewer I try to keep a bit of the flowery language in check when I can Mostly just because in my time in the hobby, I've found other people's usage of words like these to be confusing more often than they're illustrative.

Anyways, we can wrap this up. Thanks for keeping the conversation respectful, I know it can be a contentious topic. See ya round!