[proedros]

  Pianist you must have had a magical set of RE-400s, it seems impossible to me that anyone could say they have better detail than the 272, the difference between them is massive by earphone standards to my ears. Not having agao, just think it's amazing how differently we can hear things.

 
i love pianist's posts - goes to show how subjective listening is

imho , RE272 simple demolished re400

as for technical abilities i think RE600 is the best of the 4 HM iems (262/272/400/600) but its high price does not come with such a sonic difference from the 262/272

272 is one great iem , especially when amped and maybe beefed up a bit bass-wise

i also have 262 and EQ5 and it is my fav of the 3 and the one to go last to the FS forums

 

[luisdent]

I have to be honest, I think I'm going to like the 272 better. I only say this because compared to the er4s I hear things differently. The 272 to me is just a tight and fast in bass as the er4s, but the improved "something" makes the bass seem more real and present. So to me, I listen to the er4s without eq and I find sooner or later I'm wanting more sub bass and bass presence, but not warmth. With the 272 I never get that impression. In fact, more often than not I wonder if I left a bass boost on or something, because it sounds so good. Not loud, boosted bass. I'm just not used to a neutral iem like these two having bass that isn't lacking in some way.
 
Now I would say they are very similar and the 272 still lacks sub bass, but I find it lacks sub bass even a little lower than the er4s. In other words, if I were to eq the er4s I might boost the 50-60hz range, whereas on the 272 I might only boost the 30-40hz range. Add to that that the treble is more refined to my ears, meaning details stand out more, i hear into the sound more, etc. etc. I'm finding it hard to believe the re400 could be better, as it appears to have more bass. But to me, much more bass than the 40hz range is going to make them too warm. But time will tell. I'm going to give them a shot.
 
What they need to do is team up and make a dynamic/ba hybrid that uses the ety design for isolation and construction and whatnot and the hifiman 272-like signature but with the best sub bass ever in terms of flat response. mmmmm. They could call it the ER272.

 

[Pianist]

  I have to be honest, I think I'm going to like the 272 better. I only say this because compared to the er4s I hear things differently. The 272 to me is just a tight and fast in bass as the er4s, but the improved "something" makes the bass seem more real and present. So to me, I listen to the er4s without eq and I find sooner or later I'm wanting more sub bass and bass presence, but not warmth. With the 272 I never get that impression. In fact, more often than not I wonder if I left a bass boost on or something, because it sounds so good. Not loud, boosted bass. I'm just not used to a neutral iem like these two having bass that isn't lacking in some way.
 
Now I would say they are very similar and the 272 still lacks sub bass, but I find it lacks sub bass even a little lower than the er4s. In other words, if I were to eq the er4s I might boost the 50-60hz range, whereas on the 272 I might only boost the 30-40hz range. Add to that that the treble is more refined to my ears, meaning details stand out more, i hear into the sound more, etc. etc. I'm finding it hard to believe the re400 could be better, as it appears to have more bass. But to me, much more bass than the 40hz range is going to make them too warm. But time will tell. I'm going to give them a shot.
 
What they need to do is team up and make a dynamic/ba hybrid that uses the ety design for isolation and construction and whatnot and the hifiman 272-like signature but with the best sub bass ever in terms of flat response. mmmmm. They could call it the ER272.

 
Well, look at the RE400 measurements. They are pretty much flat from 20Hz or even below that, to about 2 kHz. Then they have the natural roll off in the highs, albeit perhaps a little excessive. But compared to RE262 and 272, RE400 actually has a little more treble presence, at least based on the measurements at Innerfidelity. My own impression is that RE400 is warmer than RE272 and 262 though, but not necessarily in terms of  frequency response. I think they seem warmer because of a tighter, deeper fit and a fuller sound.
 
I am not sure why you think RE272 has a more refined treble than ER4S. perhaps it is slightly more delicate, but that's just the nature of dynamic drivers vs BAs. Even some cheap dynamics have a more delicate treble. However, I find ER4S to have a more defined/precise treble than RE272 or any other dynamic IEM I've heard with more apparent micro detail, faster transients and better clarity.

 

[luisdent]

 

  I have to be honest, I think I'm going to like the 272 better. I only say this because compared to the er4s I hear things differently. The 272 to me is just a tight and fast in bass as the er4s, but the improved "something" makes the bass seem more real and present. So to me, I listen to the er4s without eq and I find sooner or later I'm wanting more sub bass and bass presence, but not warmth. With the 272 I never get that impression. In fact, more often than not I wonder if I left a bass boost on or something, because it sounds so good. Not loud, boosted bass. I'm just not used to a neutral iem like these two having bass that isn't lacking in some way.
 
Now I would say they are very similar and the 272 still lacks sub bass, but I find it lacks sub bass even a little lower than the er4s. In other words, if I were to eq the er4s I might boost the 50-60hz range, whereas on the 272 I might only boost the 30-40hz range. Add to that that the treble is more refined to my ears, meaning details stand out more, i hear into the sound more, etc. etc. I'm finding it hard to believe the re400 could be better, as it appears to have more bass. But to me, much more bass than the 40hz range is going to make them too warm. But time will tell. I'm going to give them a shot.
 
What they need to do is team up and make a dynamic/ba hybrid that uses the ety design for isolation and construction and whatnot and the hifiman 272-like signature but with the best sub bass ever in terms of flat response. mmmmm. They could call it the ER272.

 
Well, look at the RE400 measurements. They are pretty much flat from 20Hz or even below that, to about 2 kHz. Then they have the natural roll off in the highs, albeit perhaps a little excessive. But compared to RE262 and 272, RE400 actually has a little more treble presence, at least based on the measurements at Innerfidelity. My own impression is that RE400 is warmer than RE272 and 262 though, but not necessarily in terms of  frequency response. I think they seem warmer because of a tighter, deeper fit and a fuller sound.
 
I am not sure why you think RE272 has a more refined treble than ER4S. perhaps it is slightly more delicate, but that's just the nature of dynamic drivers vs BAs. Even some cheap dynamics have a more delicate treble. However, I find ER4S to have a more defined/precise treble than RE272 or any other dynamic IEM I've heard with more apparent micro detail, faster transients and better clarity.

 
I find the treble more refined, because it sounds more like the treble of the er4s and other iems after all of the eq I use based on graphs that actually improve the sound for me. The 272 is closer to that eq'd perfection in that it opens up the treble spaciousness and clarity. The er4s is smoother in a sense, but it actually isn't that crisp in terms of razor sharp detail. Things don't really stick out of the sound field in the same type of distinct way. I can only say to try my eq, and the 272 is more like that treble without the bass points adjusted.  It's more that the er4s is so smooth and relatively flat in response that it has very little masking of details that you would get with peaks. However, the 272 has none of the hump in the 2khz for me, and the 7khz region is low on the er4s for me but not the 272. Those to things alone make a noticeable, albeit small, difference in the overall treble.
 
I wouldn't say it is better or more accurate. They're pretty similar in accuracy in my opinion. The er4s has a hump and a dip in the treble and the 272 has a hump or dip or two as well, but they are less pronounced in my listening and also in better areas. I get a good seal with the 272, and it results in an almost identical low end to the er4s, but the treble differences and other technical aspect result in a more believable bass to my ears. Noticeably so, even thought they compare well side by side.
 
But I'm by no means saying the 272 is better than the er4s. You might argue the er4s is more technically accurate. I just find the 272 "sounds" more real and natural to my ears. I'll let you know how the re400 compares to me. I believe, like the er4s, the 272 could improve from more sub bass. But otherwise these are really impressing me. If they were mine I would say I have the two best earphones I've ever heard in my possession.
 
I can easily see how different people would prefer either one over the other though. They are so similar in linearity, but different in small aspects here and there that give them different tones and presentation.

 

[Pianist]

  But I'm by no means saying the 272 is better than the er4s. You might argue the er4s is more technically accurate. I just find the 272 "sounds" more real and natural to my ears. I'll let you know how the re400 compares to me. I believe, like the er4s, the 272 could improve from more sub bass. But otherwise these are really impressing me. If they were mine I would say I have the two best earphones I've ever heard in my possession.
 
I can easily see how different people would prefer either one over the other though. They are so similar in linearity, but different in small aspects here and there that give them different tones and presentation.

 
Well, I actually thought that RE272 bass was pretty darn near bottomless, but a little low in volume. Just look at the measurements. RE272 is flat to below 20Hz and has the near perfect 30Hz square wave response, like the best headphones out there. You probably just want more bass volume overall, not sub bass volume, nor extension. RE400 provides just that IMO - more bass volume for a more realistic bass experience. I always thought that Hifiman IEMs weren't well suited for bass oriented genres like trance, but RE400 totally changed my mind because not only it is well suited for that music, but it actually reproduces the lowest notes with more authority and quality than most headphones I've heard. I think you will be pretty impressed at least with RE400's sub bass reproduction.
 
Oh and BTW - do you still think that Sony EX85 is on the same level of detail as the ER4S? If that's the case I wonder what Sony EX1000 will be like for you then. hehe

 

[luisdent]

 

  But I'm by no means saying the 272 is better than the er4s. You might argue the er4s is more technically accurate. I just find the 272 "sounds" more real and natural to my ears. I'll let you know how the re400 compares to me. I believe, like the er4s, the 272 could improve from more sub bass. But otherwise these are really impressing me. If they were mine I would say I have the two best earphones I've ever heard in my possession.
 
I can easily see how different people would prefer either one over the other though. They are so similar in linearity, but different in small aspects here and there that give them different tones and presentation.

 
Well, I actually thought that RE272 bass was pretty darn near bottomless, but a little low in volume. Just look at the measurements. RE272 is flat to below 20Hz and has the near perfect 30Hz square wave response, like the best headphones out there. You probably just want more bass volume overall, not sub bass volume, nor extension. RE400 provides just that IMO - more bass volume for a more realistic bass experience. I always thought that Hifiman IEMs weren't well suited for bass oriented genres like trance, but RE400 totally changed my mind because not only it is well suited for that music, but it actually reproduces the lowest notes with more authority and quality than most headphones I've heard. I think you will be pretty impressed at least with RE400's sub bass reproduction.
 
Oh and BTW - do you still think that Sony EX85 is on the same level of detail as the ER4S? If that's the case I wonder what Sony EX1000 will be like for you then. hehe

 
We'll have to see.  Sometimes I'm listening to the 272 and the bass really amazes me in depth, extension and volume. It just sounds more reference than anything I've ever heard, albeit being on the neutral "light" side of thing for most people. However, I have played around very briefly with eq on the 272 and find i only boost the 30hz area a few db. I'm thinking maybe I just personally prefer a tad extra really low bass, because I find it simulates a speaker better, as opposed to the whole +6db bass region thing. Not sure. The er4s bass sounds amazing when eq'd to the goldenears standard and they use the +6db rule. So who knows. I think bass is a little less critical for me than treble. I can do with a little less bass or a little more, but if the treble has noticeable peaks or unevenness I usually can't stand it.
 
As for the ex85, first off, remember I never said it was the same level of detail as the er4s stock. With eq, I think it's very similar. I was thinking of sending it on a tour with my sansa zip clip set to the eq I made. That way everyone could hear what i hear (minus any changes in ear acoustics) and see what they think. The er4s is still smoother, but the ex85 is more like the 272 or something more dry sounding. But the low distortion and large driver seem to allow them to handle eq very well.

 

[redrich2000]

   
Nothing crazy about this. Hope you will like RE400 and will find it superior to RE272 sound wise and fit wise like I did. RE400 does have a bit more bass, but because it is much easier to fit than RE272, I get a lot more bass out of it than I did with RE272 actually. With RE272, I always felt the bass was a bit on the lean side, not unlike the Etys, but not as tight and clear as with the Etys. The first time I heard RE400, they almost sounded like basshead headphones to me until I realized that I was just hearing powerful impact and sub bass presence due to a very tight seal that I couldn't achieve with earlier Hifiman IEM models. The bass on RE400 also sounds a bit more composed and clearer to me than it did on the previous Hifimans. I think bass is probably the main strength of RE400 with a nice dip fit. Going back to Etys is pretty hard after listening to trance or any other music with low end focus through the RE400s. I do think ER4 has a slightly clearer and tighter bass than RE400 though, but RE400 likely has the best bass I ever heard out of a dynamic IEM and most, if not all dynamic full sized cans. RE400's bass can compete with cans like LCD2 and well tuned multi driver IEMs in bass linearity, depth and impact, although perhaps lacks some clarity and resolution compared to the best armatures and planars. Nothing I heard can match the speed and tightness of ER4 bass though.

 

 
If it's all in my head, then it's all in the heads of everyone else whose ever heard these. I reckon you never got the 272 to seal properly or you had a defective unit. I've never seen an opinion so at odds with so many other opinions on head-fi. And I don't really care about your graphs.

 

[Pianist]

Quote:

   
If it's all in my head, then it's all in the heads of everyone else whose ever heard these. I reckon you never got the 272 to seal properly or you had a defective unit. I've never seen an opinion so at odds with so many other opinions on head-fi. And I don't really care about your graphs.

 
So you don't care at all about graphs? What if I say that I think Beats sound better HD800? How can you argue that I am wrong if you don't make reference to anything objective?

 

[Pianist]

   
We'll have to see.  Sometimes I'm listening to the 272 and the bass really amazes me in depth, extension and volume. It just sounds more reference than anything I've ever heard, albeit being on the neutral "light" side of thing for most people. However, I have played around very briefly with eq on the 272 and find i only boost the 30hz area a few db. I'm thinking maybe I just personally prefer a tad extra really low bass, because I find it simulates a speaker better, as opposed to the whole +6db bass region thing. Not sure. The er4s bass sounds amazing when eq'd to the goldenears standard and they use the +6db rule. So who knows. I think bass is a little less critical for me than treble. I can do with a little less bass or a little more, but if the treble has noticeable peaks or unevenness I usually can't stand it.

 
I think I also prefer more bass than neutral amount with headphones. I think it does add realism to the sound. That's why NAD HP50 and Shure SRH1540 are next on my headphone purchase list. I really want to try cans that follow the new Olive Welti FR target to see if they may create a more realistic and more fun listening experience for me, compared to the usual diffuse field equalized headphones.
 
 
Quote:

  As for the ex85, first off, remember I never said it was the same level of detail as the er4s stock. With eq, I think it's very similar. I was thinking of sending it on a tour with my sansa zip clip set to the eq I made. That way everyone could hear what i hear (minus any changes in ear acoustics) and see what they think. The er4s is still smoother, but the ex85 is more like the 272 or something more dry sounding. But the low distortion and large driver seem to allow them to handle eq very well.

 
Wait, are you saying that EQ can increase resolution?

 

 

[luisdent]

 
As for the ex85, first off, remember I never said it was the same level of detail as the er4s stock. With eq, I think it's very similar. I was thinking of sending it on a tour with my sansa zip clip set to the eq I made. That way everyone could hear what i hear (minus any changes in ear acoustics) and see what they think. The er4s is still smoother, but the ex85 is more like the 272 or something more dry sounding. But the low distortion and large driver seem to allow them to handle eq very well.

Wait, are you saying that EQ can increase resolution? :confused_face_2:  

Not directly maybe, but evening the frequency response unmasks details that were otherwise overshadowed by dips and peaks. The details become easier to hear and things become smoother and more accurate. So if you define resolution as the amount of fine detail you can hear, then yes eq can improve that. If you think of resolution as the physical limit of how much detail an iem can ever resolve, then no, eq can't help that.

Like the pfe112, eq can't decrese the distortion level, so it can only sound so good. But with an earphone that has good specs and capabilities, eq can definitely bring out details you didn't hear before if the frequency response was less than ideal.

 

[redrich2000]

  Quote:
 
So you don't care at all about graphs? What if I say that I think Beats sound better HD800? How can you argue that I am wrong if you don't make reference to anything objective?

 
I would never argue you're wrong in what you prefer. Also, graphs are not objective. Your insistence that they produce truth is not objective either, it demonstrates a subjective preference for graphical data. It's fine if you're into that, I'm not and never have been. It's annoying and disrespectful though to assert you're right and others are wrong because you claim to have graphs proving your opinion that practically no one agrees with. My initial post was just remarking on how wide the range of experience of different phones is. You then suggested you were right and my impression was just "in my head".

 

[Pianist]

Not directly maybe, but evening the frequency response unmasks details that were otherwise overshadowed by dips and peaks. The details become easier to hear and things become smoother and more accurate. So if you define resolution as the amount of fine detail you can hear, then yes eq can improve that. If you think of resolution as the physical limit of how much detail an iem can ever resolve, then no, eq can't help that.

Like the pfe112, eq can't decrese the distortion level, so it can only sound so good. But with an earphone that has good specs and capabilities, eq can definitely bring out details you didn't hear before...

 
Ok, but there's no way EX85 can match ER4S. Sorry, I just don't believe that and, no offense, but it seems pretty ridiculous to me. EX85 is a low end dynamic IEM. Do you think Sony really put a lot of effort into making it? I highly doubt it. You can EQ it to match any frequency response you want with the a great EQ, but I don't think it has the technical chops to compete at ER4S level. I have an EX85 actually - it came included with my Sony Walkman DAP that I bought a few years ago. It's OK sounding, but the bass is not very tight and quite bloated - a far cry from the super tight and detailed ER4 bass -  while the mids and highs lack refinement and clarity even compared to a decent $100 headphone/IEM. To really believe I need to see some measurements for EX85 first. I bet it measures like a typical low end dynamic IEM with roller coaster frequency response, ugly looking square wave graphs, slow impulse response, etc. Again, no offense - I am not saying that you can't tell what good sound is, but I do think you went a too far with the EX85 claims. Maybe you are too easily influenced by placebo.

 

[gnarlsagan]

Ok, but there's no way EX85 can match ER4S. Sorry, I just don't believe that and, no offense, but it seems pretty ridiculous to me. EX85 is a low end dynamic IEM. Do you think Sony really put a lot of effort into making it? I highly doubt it. You can EQ it to match any frequency response you want with the a great EQ, but I don't think it has the technical chops to compete at ER4S level. I have an EX85 actually - it came included with my Sony Walkman DAP that I bought a few years ago. It's OK sounding, but the bass is not very tight and quite bloated - a far cry from the super tight and detailed ER4 bass -  while the mids and highs lack refinement and clarity even compared to a decent $100 headphone/IEM. To really believe I need to see some measurements for EX85 first. I bet it measures like a typical low end dynamic IEM with roller coaster frequency response, ugly looking square wave graphs, slow impulse response, etc. Again, no offense - I am not saying that you can't tell what good sound is, but I do think you went a too far with the EX85 claims. Maybe you are too easily influenced by placebo.

Luisdent is applying a generous amount of eq to the ex85. Tough to say how square wave is affected by eq without a before/after graph. Rin has the ex85 graphed on his site, and the results aren't terrible.

Maybe give luisdent's eq a shot and see what you think? I'm pretty curious. I'll likely try it myself soon. Need an ex85 first though.

 

[luisdent]

 

Not directly maybe, but evening the frequency response unmasks details that were otherwise overshadowed by dips and peaks. The details become easier to hear and things become smoother and more accurate. So if you define resolution as the amount of fine detail you can hear, then yes eq can improve that. If you think of resolution as the physical limit of how much detail an iem can ever resolve, then no, eq can't help that.

Like the pfe112, eq can't decrese the distortion level, so it can only sound so good. But with an earphone that has good specs and capabilities, eq can definitely bring out details you didn't hear before...

 
Ok, but there's no way EX85 can match ER4S. Sorry, I just don't believe that and, no offense, but it seems pretty ridiculous to me. EX85 is a low end dynamic IEM. Do you think Sony really put a lot of effort into making it? I highly doubt it. You can EQ it to match any frequency response you want with the a great EQ, but I don't think it has the technical chops to compete at ER4S level. I have an EX85 actually - it came included with my Sony Walkman DAP that I bought a few years ago. It's OK sounding, but the bass is not very tight and quite bloated - a far cry from the super tight and detailed ER4 bass -  while the mids and highs lack refinement and clarity even compared to a decent $100 headphone/IEM. To really believe I need to see some measurements for EX85 first. I bet it measures like a typical low end dynamic IEM with roller coaster frequency response, ugly looking square wave graphs, slow impulse response, etc. Again, no offense - I am not saying that you can't tell what good sound is, but I do think you went a too far with the EX85 claims. Maybe you are too easily influenced by placebo.

 
Believe what you will. First and foremost I never said it was an identical match for the er4s in any situation. But as far as frequency response goes, I personally think it is one of the most important aspects of any audio device whether it be speaker or earphone. If frequency response was perfectly flat with every device, than obviously the other specs would be larger determining factors. However, this is not the case.
 
I would take an eq'd ex85 over a non eq'd er4s. Plain and simple. With my eq, to my ears, the ex85 is just as revealing in details as the er4s. The bass bloat is completely removed by the eq, thus MAKING it tighter. People talk about tightness and speed and all this other stuff... While they are definitely related to specifications, etc. they are also very closely tied into the frequency response. When the bass is bloated and the treble reduced, the sound will be muffled and bass will sound slow and muddy. The treble affects the bass as much as the bass affects the bass. That may sound silly, but when someone plucks a note on a bass guitar it isn't just bass frequencies being produced. You have the transient attack of the string with all the associated high frequency noises, even if they aren't in large proportion to the bass, they are there, and they add something to the bass. The er4s has "tight" bass, not only because of the specifications, but also because the low frequencies are flat if not a bit recessed in the sub bass region. While the high frequencies are essentially more present. Therefore bass instruments sound "tight". The physical specifications also play a part in the sound as well, but don't underestimate frequency response.
 
No, you can't eq a crappy earphone to sound like the er4s. But the ex85 isn't a crappy earphone. Yes it is bass heavy, but by no means is it crappy. It's not far from the mh1 in my opinion. It has a bit more scooped out treble in areas, but nothing as bad as some of the more expensive earphones I've tried that have peaks and troughs I'm amazed people put up with. The ex85 specs are actually very good:
 
http://rinchoi.blogspot.com/2012/04/sony-mdr-ex85.html
 
Distortion levels at least as good, if not better than the er4s. Good impulse response. Not the best ever, but by no means bad. Rin even notes that the resonance in the sibilant region is even less than the ex700 and ex1000. Are there some flaws? Sure, but you'd probably believe the pfe112 is a better earphone because it costs $180 new? I would take the ex85 eq'd hands down. The distortion is obvious in comparison to the ex85 and masks the openness and depth a good amount once they are both eq'd to be more neutral.
 
Needless to say, the eq brings the ex85 to a much more neutral level, which in my opinion is flatter than the er4s with no eq. I don't mind that other people might disagree, even if they've never heard it. That's there decision. I personally wouldn't close my mind to the possibility of something "cheap" sounding as good as something "expensive". Did you know that it used to retail for $90 when it was new? I wouldn't call that expensive, but it's not really cheap either. The hifiman re400 you like is $99. Is that junk because it's cheap? :-o
 
Here's a bit of detail as to what I hear comparing the two. The ex85 has better openness and overall balance when eq'd comparing it to the er4s not eq'd. Instruments stand in their own space more naturally and distinctly. They sound more "there" when you listen to where something would be in a room for instance. Now, if you apply eq to the er4s that's another story. Then they become closer in sound, but the er4s is a bit smoother and has a bit more resolving power in that the fine frequency response accuracy and specifications lend to a very smooth sound from low to high. The ex85 still does extremely well, but like the hifiman 272 even, it sounds drier and more airy. However, the original claim was that I liked it eq'd better than the er4s with no eq. And I stand by that.
 
I'm sure I won't convince you, because it sounds like your mind is already made up.  You're welcome to try my eq. I made a post about it on my blog: http://handtokey.blogspot.com/2014/03/my-sony-ex85lp-story-and-custom-eq.html
 
I'm sure people will disagree, while some might be impressed at how a "cheap" iem can be improved with eq. Either way, your mind is a very powerful thing, and although people usually won't admit it, you can easily hear something because you think you do. Same goes for me. I've been wrong many times on listening to many things. But I'm not afraid to say I was wrong and I do a LOT of listening and comparing. And I'm aware of this effect, so I try to be as unbiased as I can. In doing so, I believe that I am hearing a very accurate and balanced iem when there is eq applied to the ex85. There are no major lacking specifications, and this is based on rin's graphs themselves. I only add a very small amount of bass, as I don't find his graphs compensate that area well. This is probably what it would sound like if goldenears had adjusted the bass as they do on their graphs. And again, i'm in no way downplaying the importance of good specifications and measurements. If anything people here probably know me as the guy that won't shut up about graphs and such. haha But everything has to be taken into account relatively speaking. And sometimes a little change in frequency response can make a bigger difference in sound compared to a little change in a square wave response for example. However, if the square wave response was horrible that might be another story.
 
Anyway, it is what it is. We all have different ears, different opinions, different tastes. All I can say is that I've been listening to the ex85 with eq for a while now and find it very enjoyable. Is it the best i've heard? No. One of the best? Yes. I'd probably put crown to the er4s with eq or the re272 without. They just have a slightly better upper hand when you total every little aspect of the sound. But the ex85 gets almost all the way there just by adding some eq. And that's also why I prefer the 272 to the er4s. It doesn't require any eq for me. With eq the er4s can sound right up there with the 272. But without it, well, you know the difference I've already described.
 
I'll stop hear as I'm sure no one wants to read this much anyway. What say you piano man?!

 

[LibiSC]

 

Not directly maybe, but evening the frequency response unmasks details that were otherwise overshadowed by dips and peaks. The details become easier to hear and things become smoother and more accurate. So if you define resolution as the amount of fine detail you can hear, then yes eq can improve that. If you think of resolution as the physical limit of how much detail an iem can ever resolve, then no, eq can't help that.

Like the pfe112, eq can't decrese the distortion level, so it can only sound so good. But with an earphone that has good specs and capabilities, eq can definitely bring out details you didn't hear before...

 
Ok, but there's no way EX85 can match ER4S. Sorry, I just don't believe that and, no offense, but it seems pretty ridiculous to me. EX85 is a low end dynamic IEM. Do you think Sony really put a lot of effort into making it? I highly doubt it. You can EQ it to match any frequency response you want with the a great EQ, but I don't think it has the technical chops to compete at ER4S level. I have an EX85 actually - it came included with my Sony Walkman DAP that I bought a few years ago. It's OK sounding, but the bass is not very tight and quite bloated - a far cry from the super tight and detailed ER4 bass -  while the mids and highs lack refinement and clarity even compared to a decent $100 headphone/IEM. To really believe I need to see some measurements for EX85 first. I bet it measures like a typical low end dynamic IEM with roller coaster frequency response, ugly looking square wave graphs, slow impulse response, etc. Again, no offense - I am not saying that you can't tell what good sound is, but I do think you went a too far with the EX85 claims. Maybe you are too easily influenced by placebo.

 
Believe what you will. First and foremost I never said it was an identical match for the er4s in any situation. But as far as frequency response goes, I personally think it is one of the most important aspects of any audio device whether it be speaker or earphone. If frequency response was perfectly flat with every device, than obviously the other specs would be larger determining factors. However, this is not the case.
 
I would take an eq'd ex85 over a non eq'd er4s. Plain and simple. With my eq, to my ears, the ex85 is just as revealing in details as the er4s. The bass bloat is completely removed by the eq, thus MAKING it tighter. People talk about tightness and speed and all this other stuff... While they are definitely related to specifications, etc. they are also very closely tied into the frequency response. When the bass is bloated and the treble reduced, the sound will be muffled and bass will sound slow and muddy. The treble affects the bass as much as the bass affects the bass. That may sound silly, but when someone plucks a note on a bass guitar it isn't just bass frequencies being produced. You have the transient attack of the string with all the associated high frequency noises, even if they aren't in large proportion to the bass, they are there, and they add something to the bass. The er4s has "tight" bass, not only because of the specifications, but also because the low frequencies are flat if not a bit recessed in the sub bass region. While the high frequencies are essentially more present. Therefore bass instruments sound "tight". The physical specifications also play a part in the sound as well, but don't underestimate frequency response.
 
No, you can't eq a crappy earphone to sound like the er4s. But the ex85 isn't a crappy earphone. Yes it is bass heavy, but by no means is it crappy. It's not far from the mh1 in my opinion. It has a bit more scooped out treble in areas, but nothing as bad as some of the more expensive earphones I've tried that have peaks and troughs I'm amazed people put up with. The ex85 specs are actually very good:
 
http://rinchoi.blogspot.com/2012/04/sony-mdr-ex85.html
 
Distortion levels at least as good, if not better than the er4s. Good impulse response. Not the best ever, but by no means bad. Rin even notes that the resonance in the sibilant region is even less than the ex700 and ex1000. Are there some flaws? Sure, but you'd probably believe the pfe112 is a better earphone because it costs $180 new? I would take the ex85 eq'd hands down. The distortion is obvious in comparison to the ex85 and masks the openness and depth a good amount once they are both eq'd to be more neutral.
 
Needless to say, the eq brings the ex85 to a much more neutral level, which in my opinion is flatter than the er4s with no eq. I don't mind that other people might disagree, even if they've never heard it. That's there decision. I personally wouldn't close my mind to the possibility of something "cheap" sounding as good as something "expensive". Did you know that it used to retail for $90 when it was new? I wouldn't call that expensive, but it's not really cheap either. The hifiman re400 you like is $99. Is that junk because it's cheap? :-o
 
Here's a bit of detail as to what I hear comparing the two. The ex85 has better openness and overall balance when eq'd comparing it to the er4s not eq'd. Instruments stand in their own space more naturally and distinctly. They sound more "there" when you listen to where something would be in a room for instance. Now, if you apply eq to the er4s that's another story. Then they become closer in sound, but the er4s is a bit smoother and has a bit more resolving power in that the fine frequency response accuracy and specifications lend to a very smooth sound from low to high. The ex85 still does extremely well, but like the hifiman 272 even, it sounds drier and more airy. However, the original claim was that I liked it eq'd better than the er4s with no eq. And I stand by that.
 
I'm sure I won't convince you, because it sounds like your mind is already made up.  You're welcome to try my eq. I made a post about it on my blog: http://handtokey.blogspot.com/2014/03/my-sony-ex85lp-story-and-custom-eq.html
 
I'm sure people will disagree, while some might be impressed at how a "cheap" iem can be improved with eq. Either way, your mind is a very powerful thing, and although people usually won't admit it, you can easily hear something because you think you do. Same goes for me. I've been wrong many times on listening to many things. But I'm not afraid to say I was wrong and I do a LOT of listening and comparing. And I'm aware of this effect, so I try to be as unbiased as I can. In doing so, I believe that I am hearing a very accurate and balanced iem when there is eq applied to the ex85. There are no major lacking specifications, and this is based on rin's graphs themselves. I only add a very small amount of bass, as I don't find his graphs compensate that area well. This is probably what it would sound like if goldenears had adjusted the bass as they do on their graphs. And again, i'm in no way downplaying the importance of good specifications and measurements. If anything people here probably know me as the guy that won't shut up about graphs and such. haha But everything has to be taken into account relatively speaking. And sometimes a little change in frequency response can make a bigger difference in sound compared to a little change in a square wave response for example. However, if the square wave response was horrible that might be another story.
 
Anyway, it is what it is. We all have different ears, different opinions, different tastes. All I can say is that I've been listening to the ex85 with eq for a while now and find it very enjoyable. Is it the best i've heard? No. One of the best? Yes. I'd probably put crown to the er4s with eq or the re272 without. They just have a slightly better upper hand when you total every little aspect of the sound. But the ex85 gets almost all the way there just by adding some eq. And that's also why I prefer the 272 to the er4s. It doesn't require any eq for me. With eq the er4s can sound right up there with the 272. But without it, well, you know the difference I've already described.
 
I'll stop hear as I'm sure no one wants to read this much anyway. What say you piano man?!

longest post evah

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk