[Kunlun]

Thank you, flysweep.

 

[Inks]

The Hidition NT-6 is more neutral them the UERM, the UERM isn't that neutral, IMO it's all marketing.

 

[DutchDoctor]

Quote:

The Hidition NT-6 is more neutral them the UERM, the UERM isn't that neutral, IMO it's all marketing.

The only measured data I can scrounge from the net suggests a fairly flat response, with a slightly increased bass response - But with a massive bump at ~10khz.
I'm sure that sounds nice, but it isn't flat.
 
Just to clarify, when I say flat - I'm not talking about "sounds clean, neutral and balanced to my ears". I'm talking about reference flat. The kind of flat that studio monitors are designed to be. The kind that sounds ugly and revealing, likely requiring EQ for pleasurable listening.
 
While most measurements should be taken with a grain of salt, most UERM measurements depict what UE claim, relatively flat with a bump in the 3-4khz region (by design).
This bump is required for a perceived "flat response" due to bypassing the outer ear which amplifies this range.
 
Though I can't be sure until I try them... most user feedback I have read seems solid. People that actually have mixes successfully translate from the UERMs to studio monitors.

 

[Inks]

Quote:

The only measured data I can scrounge from the net suggests a fairly flat response, with a slightly increased bass response - But with a massive bump at ~10khz.
I'm sure that sounds nice, but it isn't flat.
 
Just to clarify, when I say flat - I'm not talking about "sounds clean, neutral and balanced to my ears". I'm talking about reference flat. The kind of flat that studio monitors are designed to be. The kind that sounds ugly and revealing, likely requiring EQ for pleasurable listening.
 
While most measurements should be taken with a grain of salt, most UERM measurements depict what UE claim, relatively flat with a bump in the 3-4khz region (by design).
This bump is required for a perceived "flat response" due to bypassing the outer ear which amplifies this range.
 
Though I can't be sure until I try them... most user feedback I have read seems solid. People that actually have mixes successfully translate from the UERMs to studio monitors.

A flat IEM will have it's biggest bump at 3k to overcome the ear's resonance. The UERM's biggest bump is in the 9-10k range and doesn't have enough 3k to put it in line to be flat. Reference flat doesn't sound ugly at all, there's a bad habit in Headfi of masking a harsh IEM into saying it's "revealing" IMO. It's a popular IEM and surely for studio monitoring due to it's marketing, but it doesn't completely do what it's suppose to...

 

[DutchDoctor]

Quote:

A flat IEM will have it's biggest bump at 3k to overcome the ear's resonance. The UERM's biggest bump is in the 9-10k range and doesn't have enough 3k to put it in line to be flat. Reference flat doesn't sound ugly at all, there's a bad habit in Headfi of masking a harsh IEM into saying it's "revealing" IMO. It's a popular IEM and surely for studio monitoring due to it's marketing, but it doesn't completely do what it's suppose to...

 
Well consider me interested in your opinion. Do you come from a hobbyist or professional background? At least in your usage of IEMs.
I'd really love some first hand accounts of successful mixing/mastering using IEMs. I know it should be possible.
 
Yeah I've seen that UERM 10khz bump show up in a few tests, while beyond the sibilance area - it was a concern.
I've read so many reviews on so many IEMs, most of which are just subjective nonsense that doesn't give me the answers I seek. The UERM is the only IEM I've read testimonials from audio engineer's from.
 
It IS weird that some frequency test results depict the UERM as lacking in the 3-4khz area, despite the UERM website mentioning very specifically that area will measure as "enhanced" using objective tests.
 
In Purin's recent factory tour/interview of the UE factory and CEO, they talked about the 3-4khz bump as well. Surely it's there and tuned properly...

 

[Inks]

Hobbyst but I have worked with professionals, most don't use IEMs though. If you want to go custom Hidition NT-6 with a grey knowles dampers on it's nozzle is pretty flat. On a budget, you can check out Etymotic HF series, Hifiman RE400, TDK BA200, Vsonic GR07 and Phonak 1 series
 
The bump is there, but not enough to match any standard, neither diffuse-field or a downsloaping form. I only tried the Universal, but according to the owner, it matches the Custom in most areas [which is also proven in graphs]. This graph was spot-on with my perception of these, it's certainly missing some 3k presence..

 

[DutchDoctor]

I just can't win with frequency charts. There's no standard of measurement,
http://cdn.head-fi.org/b/bb/900x900px-LL-bb912947_b49f628d306d44c0f55ddc3275769a54.jpeg

This apparently came with someone's Hidition NT-6s. Very similar response to most UERMs, maybe there's something to that?
(This is from the thread starting with average_joe's review of them.

 

[Kunlun]

Quote:

I just can't win with frequency charts. There's no standard of measurement,
http://cdn.head-fi.org/b/bb/900x900px-LL-bb912947_b49f628d306d44c0f55ddc3275769a54.jpeg

This apparently came with someone's Hidition NT-6s. Very similar response to most UERMs, maybe there's something to that?
(This is from the thread starting with average_joe's review of them.

Don't tell that to James444!

 

[Inks]

Quote:

I just can't win with frequency charts. There's no standard of measurement,
http://cdn.head-fi.org/b/bb/900x900px-LL-bb912947_b49f628d306d44c0f55ddc3275769a54.jpeg

This apparently came with someone's Hidition NT-6s. Very similar response to most UERMs, maybe there's something to that?
(This is from the thread starting with average_joe's review of them.

There is, just get more info about the graph itself, many graphs using a cheap coupler graphs are not using the standard. That graph you posted is raw, you can't compare that to the compensated graph I posted, not only that but I think they just use a 6cc coupler, which is fine for testing  manufacturing consistency but not completely reliable for analysis. 

 

[DutchDoctor]

There is, just get more info about the graph itself, many graphs using a cheap coupler graphs are not using the standard. That graph you posted is raw, you can't compare that to the compensated graph I posted, not only that but I think they just use a 6cc coupler, which is fine for testing  manufacturing consistency but not completely reliable for analysis. 

Does everyone use the same compensation? From what I've read there a various compensation curves. A literal machine measurement is what I want for the sake of comparison.

 

[Inks]

Diffuse field is the ISO standard, just cause some don't use the standard doesn't mean there isn't one

 

[DutchDoctor]

Quote:

Diffuse field is the ISO standard, just cause some don't use the standard doesn't mean there isn't one

 
Yeah I worded that poorly, when I said there is "no standard" I was more talking about there being no agreed standard being used between manafacturers and many hobbyist reviewers.
 
I'm certain there are quite a few different scientifically certified standards that can be used.

 

[Marleybob217]

Quote:

 
I've actually been wondering whether maybe there has been a great deal of inconsistency in sound quality with the Frogbeats products (namely the C4).
Some very respected reviewers (one is even a mastering engineer of many years) absolutely loved it, and thought of it as clean and transparent with impressive extension in both the high and low end.
 
Other reviews say almost the complete opposite. Either everyone is having a SEVERELY different subjective experience... OR each C4 is not identical to the next.
Perhaps the custom moulding process isn't perfect? Perhaps quality control isn't so great with this "startup company"?
 
Either way, it makes the purchase way too risky for me, especially as a critical listening/reference CIEM.
It's a real shame though, because if it's just a matter of quality control, there's a chance I would get a superior product to the UERM. But also a chance I'll be sorely disappointed.
 
I haven't looked into the UE Miracle! I will do some reading about it.

I don't know man, I'd say they should be pretty consistent. I mean, the drivers should be pretty much identical in sound. The only thing that's left is the distance between the drivers and the tip of the bores I guess. I don't think there should be That big of a difference between models! Only if there is something wrong with the drivers :0
I should be getting a 4 driver model from cosmic ears next week, cheap but very neutral ciems.

 

[BoyChewingGum]

Yeah I thought about a potential inconsistency in quality control and whatnot with the C4s. Had a long email discussion with David (the Frogbeats owner/director). In the end I sent my pair back to be retested by their engineers - they found no faults. Therefore I can only assume that the sound signature of my pair are representative of the model. Disappointing.
 
PS if anyone wants to buy my C4s, pm me. Less than 6 months old.
 

 

[BoyChewingGum]

Quote:

 
Yeah I worded that poorly, when I said there is "no standard" I was more talking about there being no agreed standard being used between manafacturers and many hobbyist reviewers.
 
I'm certain there are quite a few different scientifically certified standards that can be used.

 
Is it me or are FR graphs never labelled properly? As in, what standard is being used.
It gets very very confusing if you're not sure whether you're looking at a compensated graph or a raw graph.
 
I agree with DD that non-compensated graphs make more sense for comparison. The compensated ones I see as being more for marketing purposes (as in, you don't want to put off potential customers by showing them a graph they can't interpret properly).