1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice

Hifiman IEM's: RE-400 and RE-600

First
 
Back
39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48
50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59
Next
 
Last
  1. FarCry
    Quote:
     
     
     
     
    actually they are similar. take a look at the grey lines which represent the raw data
     
     
    http://rinchoi.blogspot.gr/2013/02/final-audio-design-fi-ba-ss.html
     
     
    raw data are similar to rin.
     
  2. vwinter

    I'm more interested in this with regard to your earlier statement about tuning one to sound like the other. While I believe this can be done to an extent, I would be much less inclined to believe that it can be done for the whole nine yards.

    So, would this per chance be an oversimplification? What you said seems to imply that a BA and a dynamic can produce the same SPL. Let's assume that's correct (I have no idea if it is, but let's just assume it for arguments sake). That discounts so many variables to make it true that it's a borderline useless statement without more information. Can it be done mass for mass? How about size for size? Can they do it exactly the same way over a given length of time? Is it an average over time? I'm sure anyone inclined could think of a hundred more questions because the statement is way too broad reaching to even be considered accurate given the amount of possible microscopic issues.

    The truth of the matter is that they are different technologies trying to reach a similar goal and they do it in different ways yielding a similar result in that they reproduce sound to some degree of accuracy to life as well as it was recorded. I'd gamble that a lot of these inaudible measurements affect the way the brain processes sound wholistically as opposed to being audible or not in themselves. And I'd gamble that the "inaudible" ways that they differently produce sound has an affect on the sound produced as well in ways that are not even worth the cost of measuring.

    And studies don't usually prove anything. They just show that it's more likely to be true within a specific scope until a better study comes along. A study is not a law and a law is only a law until proven wrong.

    It just seems like an oversimplification to me.

    I guess /rant
     
  3. kyuuketsuki
    Quote:
     
    Or you could just look at the comparison between all four Shures from Innerfedelity. And the 215 (the only dynamic) and the three others have varying dB ratios. Again, the way the diaphragms are designed are different. The diaphragm of dynamic drivers can displace more air per driver (as you can see with the Shure line) than any single BA. They need to compensate this my modifying the bore of BA IEMs (or so I understand) to make the dB output more or less equal. I could compare different IEMs but each BA IEM uses the same method of increasing air pressure, which is to say a smaller or otherwise modified bore (smaller bore, less air can get through at any given time, thus pressure increases). However, in terms of what can move more air, do you really think a BA can even come remotely close to dynamic? A large dynamic driver can displace as much air as surface area of the moving diaphragm. The same cannot be said of BA. Just because measurements out of well designed headphones show similar attributes due to overall design, does not mean the capabilities of individual or differing drivers is the same. 
     
    Also, though I'm not 100% sure. I think that all FR graphs are normalized, making all measurements relative to the IEM, rather than an accurate representation of dB level in general.
     
  4. tinyman392
    Quote:
     
    I'm tired of arguing with you.  I show you proof, you ignore it.  You can believe what you want.  But you can't deny that the Phonak PFE232 and the Shure SE215 displace the same amount of air.  Shure isn't compensating anything.  They are tuning to a certain sound.  Their BAs tend to be more bass light, because they're tuned that way. 
     
    If you want to talk surface area, fine.  The dynamic has more surface area...  You forget pressure = force * surface area.  Force = 1/2 mv^2.  You can always compensate the BA's mass by it's velocity (it's acceleration really) to generate the same pressure.  The dynamic loses in terms of speed due to it's large size and air resistance. In terms of force, a small increase in velocity will create more force than the same increase in mass...  So yes, the dynamic has more surface area, the BA has more potential velocity it can reach.
     
  5. Pianist
    Quote:
     
    Rin measured the SS though, not SB. While extension may be good, it is certainly not an indicator of good quality. The highs may lack finesse and bass may lack definition, The sound may lack dynamics, distortion levels may be high, etc.
     
    Quote:
     
    Which ones?
     
  6. music_4321
    Quote:
     
    It doesn't always seem to be that way from several of his graphs I've seen (see below, too).
     
    Quote:
     
     
    Both raw and compensated data look different, and particularly the latter quite different.
     
    Measuring earphones seems to be more difficult / less precise than measuring full-sized headphones.
     
  7. FarCry
    Quote:
     
     
     
    Quote:
     
     
    the good thing about final design is that all models have similar FRs [​IMG]
     
  8. Pianist
    Quote:
     
    Measurements are far more reliable and useful than subjective impressions. Let's say I listen to the SS and find the treble lacking, even though measurements show plenty of treble energy. Could that it mean the graph is wrong and the SS indeed lacks treble? Of course not. That probably means that either I have hearing loss in the treble, had fit issues, or simply have a personal preference for a very bright sound. You seem to place too much value on subjective impressions. Do you really think many people have perfect hearing and are able to form completely unbiased views? Impossible.
     
    Quote:
     
    Ok.
     
  9. music_4321
    Quote:
     
    Please re-read my posts again, preferably more slowly... and think for a few minutes. Then, think again. And then, perhaps, think again.
     
    Quote:
     
    That's what it seems to you. (see above)
     
    That's it from my end for now as this is a HIfiman thread and not a FAD thread or the science forum.
     
  10. JosephKim
    ridiculous
     
  11. FarCry
    Rin would side with the RE 262/272 without a doubt
     
     
    also the channel mismatch is this. you have up to 4 db mismatch at around 7-8 KHz.
     
     
    WYG1ExP.png
     
  12. Inks

    Wait a minute, Rins graphs based in industrial standards while using a simulator that matches Tylls isn't accurate because of your personal impressions? Compensations are a tricky matter as Tylls is off and Rins is flat on the downslope IME. But the raw data are nearly identical, scale them properly and you'll see, Tylls scaling makes most iems seem more flat than what they actually are.

    Actually measuring IEMs is more precise than measuring full size headphones as results are more consistent, the only varying factor is insertion depth.
     
  13. Pianist
    Quote:
     
    I just don't see what I missed. You write that I speculate about headphones that I haven't heard and that it is a bad thing. I think you are wrong because I base my speculations on objective measurements that I feel are far more reliable and useful than subjective impressions anyway.
     
  14. EraserXIV
    A wise man once said, "Let's agree to disagree."
     
  15. music_4321
    Quote:
     
    No.
     
    Quote:
     
    Good.
     
    Quote:
     
    Not quite (the raw data). Yet the compensated data varies significantly.
     
    Quote:
     
    Does it? I don't think that's the case.
     
    Quote:
     
    Allow me to not so humbly disagree.
     
    ---------------
     
     
    Last post on the subject.
     
First
 
Back
39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48
50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59
Next
 
Last

Share This Page