[KinGensai]

Some manufacturers deliberately design wacky phase responses as function of impedance and frequency in order to delay some of the frequencies and make them appear distant and spatial by nature (Just look at Campfire Audio's marketing with their IEMs). Also, tips such as the Pentaconn Corier Brass somehow at least based on listening allows for CSD of transient response to reverberate longer due to metal reflecting rather than absorbing the reflections leading to a more speaker-like resonances.

Oh, that's something I didn't even consider, interesting. That seems to be a polarizing effect prima facie because that phase differential would throw off spatial cues that were already included in a track wouldn't it? I think I saw mention of something like this with the MEST MK2 when I was looking to settle on an endgame.

With those brass tips, do you get any noticable 3rd order harmonics in the transient response?

 

[theveterans]

Oh, that's something I didn't even consider, interesting. That seems to be a polarizing effect prima facie because that phase differential would throw off spatial cues that were already included in a track wouldn't it? I think I saw mention of something like this with the MEST MK2 when I was looking to settle on an endgame.

With those brass tips, do you get any noticable 3rd order harmonics in the transient response?

I do not have an IEC coupler so I'm just going by swapping eartips from standard CP145 Spinfit against the Pentaconn Corier Brass. It could be that the fundamental peak reflection just hitting the eardrum at millisecond rate leading to a very slight reverb effect in the decay of the transients compared to the silicone which absorbs the reflections on lower treble frequencies. Would love to see an objective FR measurement, preferably with least amount of smoothing, of an IEM with silicone against the Corier Brass with the same IEM if given enough Patreon support on those reviewers with IEC couplers. As for phase effect, campfire audio touts these in their IEM design:

Phase Harmony Engineering​

At Campfire Audio, our philosophy regarding driver treatment informs a considered approach that emphasizes quality over quantity. In the arms-race to fit a higher and higher number of drivers into an earphone, we find that a results-driven technique to driver treatment produces superior results with less room for pitfalls and ever-expanding variables that can undermine product consistency.
One of the products of this approach is our Phase Harmony Engineering, that allows us to segment the frequency spectrum and assign these segments to specific drivers, and allows those drivers to apply their strengths to that area. But it doesn’t end there, using a combination of precision engineered driver housings and shell geometry, coupled with custom damping values we are able to physically shape the tuning and response of the drivers, and further, their interaction with one another. This driver-to-driver interaction is crucial to eliminating points of potential phase cancellation and creating the intangibles that don’t show on a frequency response curve; imaging, separation, resolution, and soundstage.

The is an impedance/phase graph of Campfire Andromeda out there which shows wild swings of phase response as function of frequency and impedance and while FR won't show these, your ears can expect a delay/phase shift to image some frequencies closer or farther than a linear phase driver would image.

 

[old tech]

My view on the free market is informed by Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard, amongst other scholars of the Mises Institute and more loosely of the Austrian school of economics, so I guess you can direct your critique of the definition of free market economics to them. I'm primarily working on the heuristic of praxeology in conjunction with my formal education in psychology, so hopefully that puts my thoughts into some context.

The purpose of ethics is to determine how a body politic will normatively govern the use of force, whether that normative standard is teleologically based or deontologically based is the main paradigm up for debate. You correctly identify that discrimination as an action is not force, yet it is not self evident that such an action is not ethical in any way, thus you have to make an argument as to why you believe it should be teleologically unethical. I think the deontological argument for deeming discrimination unethical is unsustainable because the very argument is predicated on discrimination in order to stop it, in effect one must discriminate against discrimination because discrimination is unethical, thus one must not discriminate against discrimination because discrimination is unethical. This is an internal logical contradiction.

Ontologically speaking, discrimination can not be unethical because it is a requisite action necessary to exercise individual property rights, specifically free association. Modernist society normatively emphasizes advocacy for enfranchisement of the minority, with most modernist societies then arguing that the individual is the smallest minority. Deeming discrimination unethical would complicate other areas of ethics because it interferes with free association, then runs afoul of the non aggression principle that is one of the premises of capitalism.

No, force exists as a fact of nature, ethical systems only normatively govern how moral agents will utilize it.

The Austrian school of economics and their ilk are right wing nonsense and very much on the fringe of society and economics. The same can be said about your verbose views on ethics.

 

[KinGensai]

The Austrian school of economics and their ilk are right wing nonsense and very much on the fringe of society and economics. The same can be said about your verbose views on ethics.

That's a shame, I was hoping for an argument. Have a nice day.

 

[bigshot]

I tend to go with horse sense, but I'm not trying to impress anyone.

 

[SCYJ]

There are only 2 things that matter with tips, and keep in mind this is coming from tuning IEMs. I don't have any skin in the game as far as types/brands.
1. Internal Tip Diameter
2. Tip insertion depth as it works with your ear canals.

1. will cause treble roll off and then a peak or higher SPL above 10k
2. will affect ear gain (as measured) around 2500hz. Deeper will produce less gain, shallow more.

The materials don't matter, so Foam vs whatever. Foam might leak a hair more air allowing less pressure build up, but the greatest reason they change things is the foam at the end of the tip can 'bunch' up in the ear canal leading to less 2500hz ear gain by filling more of the canal itself.

Can you explain why shallower insert = more gain around 2.5khz? Genuinely curious of the science behind it.

 

[KinGensai]

Can you explain why shallower insert = more gain around 2.5khz? Genuinely curious of the science behind it.

I don't know what conditions he used to reach that conclusion, the M9's measurements don't seem to show that effect at 2.5k, so that's a good question. @redrol could you elaborate?

 

[redrol]

Simply because the ear canal adds gain in at around 2.5k which is #5 on this chart.

 

[KinGensai]

Simply because the ear canal adds gain in at around 2.5k which is #5 on this chart.

Ok, interesting that didn't show in freeryder's graph, I suppose that's due to that region being less sensitive than treble due to the lower frequency being less sensitive to phase cancellation.

 

[SCYJ]

Simply because the ear canal adds gain in at around 2.5k which is #5 on this chart.

Doesnt this mean that with the same IEM, a shallow fit would enhance vocals while a deeper fit would reduce it? Can't say I've noticed such a difference, but might just be me

 

[redrol]

Yes pretty much! It also affects treble from 2.5k to around 6k but sometimes thats enough to put an iem in the perfect place depending on its actual ear gain SPL. For this reason I prefer around 6DB of ear gain so I don't have to shove the things half way through my skull.. and use more of my natural ear canal resonance.

 

[redrol]

Ok, interesting that didn't show in freeryder's graph, I suppose that's due to that region being less sensitive than treble due to the lower frequency being less sensitive to phase cancellation.

Phase cancelation could happen if you have more than one driver with phase differences. I can't answer that.

 

[SCYJ]

Yes pretty much! It also affects treble from 2.5k to around 6k but sometimes thats enough to put an iem in the perfect place depending on its actual ear gain SPL. For this reason I prefer around 6DB of ear gain so I don't have to shove the things half way through my skull.. and use more of my natural ear canal resonance.

Ahh. This might explain why I find female vocals on the Elysian Diva overly forward for my tastes. On graph it shouldn't be that shouty but it has a shallow fit that I dislike. I love shoving IEMs deep into my canal tho, past the 2nd bend until the bone narrowing of my canal (like the Z1R or Uni FF GM)

 

[redrol]

Jeez! I cant do anything but fit the Z1R shallow and it's shouty like that. I can shove deeper and the pain sets in.

 

[Jhwong]

For iems, I think they can only twist the sound a little bit. I used tips from Moondrop, Final, Vision Ears, Sennheiser and some other brands, cannot tell a lot difference.