[ChrisOc]

Wonder what the changes are on the pro though.



This is what I asked them an entire year ago.

They look quite similar on the graph!

I suspect the graph would not look much different, if they were two sets of the same model with marginal unit variance.

We will find out if there is any difference, of note, in listening to them.

We will no doubt find out soon.

 

[baskingshark]

Wonder what the changes are on the pro though.



This is what I asked them an entire year ago.

I think even if you give feedback now, the units are probably already made and assembled and they can't do much to change the FR.

The TRI I3 really is quite coherent for a mishmash of 1 DD + 1 planar + 1 BA, very unique set in my collection, I still use it now and then. The planar mids are really lush and thick when amped. It has a soundstage in width/height/depth approaching earbuds, when amped, truly quite a big soundstage at the $100 region, but I suspect this had to do with the huge shells. So if the Pro has a smaller shell, I wonder how the soundstage will be affected.

Indeed, the original TRI I3 had a 3 kHz peak indeed, it could be jarring in poorly recorded material or with louder volumes (fletcher munson curve), but I'm sensitive to this area and by and large it is still okay for me. The 8 kHz area you see above is not too apparent in actual listening, I think that is a resonance artefact coupler peak on Crin's graph. The TRI I3 actually has a rolled off treble approaching dark treble, and is very suited for treble sensitive folks.

As for the 1 kHz dip, that's perhaps the crossover point or where the BA takes over from the planar driver. But in practice I think the planar may actually span a wide range of frequencies and the 1 kHz dip is not heard in listening. Perhaps planar graphs can't be interpreted the same as traditional DD/BA graphs? The planar mids as discussed above, are really thick and lush in the TRI I3, even at the 1 kHz area.

 

[RikudouGoku]

I think even if you give feedback now, the units are probably already made and assembled and they can't do much to change the FR.

The TRI I3 really is quite coherent for a mishmash of 1 DD + 1 planar + 1 BA, very unique set in my collection, I still use it now and then. The planar mids are really lush and thick when amped. It has a soundstage in width/height/depth approaching earbuds, when amped, truly quite a big soundstage at the $100 region, but I suspect this had to do with the huge shells. So if the Pro has a smaller shell, I wonder how the soundstage will be affected.

Indeed, the original TRI I3 had a 3 kHz peak indeed, it could be jarring in poorly recorded material or with louder volumes (fletcher munson curve), but I'm sensitive to this area and by and large it is still okay for me. The 8 kHz area you see above is not too apparent in actual listening, I think that is a resonance artefact coupler peak on Crin's graph. The TRI I3 actually has a rolled off treble approaching dark treble, and is very suited for treble sensitive folks.

As for the 1 kHz dip, that's perhaps the crossover point or where the BA takes over from the planar driver. But in practice I think the planar may actually span a wide range of frequencies and the 1 kHz dip is not heard in listening. Perhaps planar graphs can't be interpreted the same as traditional DD/BA graphs? The planar mids as discussed above, are really thick and lush in the TRI I3, even at the 1 kHz area.

oh, dont worry. That feedback was given to them a year ago lol.

As for the 1 kHz dip, that's perhaps the crossover point or where the BA takes over from the planar driver. But in practice I think the planar may actually span a wide range of frequencies and the 1 kHz dip is not heard in listening. Perhaps planar graphs can't be interpreted the same as traditional DD/BA graphs? The planar mids as discussed above, are really thick and lush in the TRI I3, even at the 1 kHz area.

Not sure about that dip though. Because if thats the area where the BA takes over, the female vocals are using the BA instead. And if it really is the BA, it sure doesnt look very coherent.

 

[warbles]

Wow~ what a great translation

So Wendy, can we expect the text on the Robin's promotional material to be altered accordingly?

 

[warbles]

#audio

My hopeful desire, when I hear them.

On another note, the blue looks so cool!

Funny though, it's far from robin's egg blue

 

[Nimweth]

OK @WendyLi here is my attempt:
KBEAR Earphones:
1. Opal
2. F1
3. KB10
4. KB06
5. Hi7
6. KB04
7. Diamond
8. KS2
9. Lark
10. Believe
11. Stellar
12. ST1
13. KS1
14. Neon
15. Robin

 

[PhonoPhi]

OK @WendyLi here is my attempt:
KBEAR Earphones:
1. Opal
2. F1
3. KB10
4. KB06
5. Hi7
6. KB04
7. Diamond
8. KS2
9. Lark
10. Believe
11. Stellar
12. ST1
13. KS1
14. Neon
15. Robin

A great list that you put together.
I definitely forgot Hi7.

My favourite of the few that I have is... KB10 - just love it with the plucked strings (and I do have two A10s, so it is my only IEM design that I have in a triplicate form )

 

[WendyLi]

So Wendy, can we expect the text on the Robin's promotional material to be altered accordingly?

emmm, considering

 

[warbles]

emmm, considering

Do it! You *know* you want to...

 

[WendyLi]

Wonder what the changes are on the pro though.



This is what I asked them an entire year ago.

Actually the true sound is not exactly same as you show in the picture, but I think i3 pro will not let you down.

 

[WendyLi]

1. Smaller 2. Tomorrow 3. $169 (First 5 days) 4. Planar

 

[mndless]

1. Smaller 2. Tomorrow 3. $169 (First 5 days) 4. Planar

Do you have a frequency response graph for the i3 Pro that you can share with us?

 

[WendyLi]

The FR of i3 pro.

 

[ChrisOc]

The FR of i3 pro.

Before I comment on the graph, I have to declare my skepticism about graphs. Do I check graphs out? Yes, I do, because they can be loosely indicative of what to expect from the sound, but my reservation is on the over reliance on them despite their inherent inaccuracies.

That is not to say that we should discourage those who make the effort to capture a representation of sound....hopefully with a greater degree of accuracy in the future.

Enough of the preamble!

Looking at the two graphs (with the usual caveats) the one @RikudouGoku posted comparing the two versions of the TRI I3, and the graph @WendyLi posted, I am delighted that the sub-bass of the original I3 is undisturbed according to both graphs.

What remains remains to be heard is whether there is indeed a gouge around 850Hz to 1kHz. Then there are the peaks at 3k and 8k with a huge trough which appear in the first graph but, apart from the huge trough between 3k and 8k, the gouge and peaks do not appear on the second graph. I hope the second graph is more indicative of what we will hear.

 

[RikudouGoku]

What remains remains to be heard is whether there is indeed a gouge around 850Hz to 1kHz. Then there are the peaks at 3k and 8k with a huge trough which appear in the first graph but, apart from the huge trough between 3k and 8k, the gouge and peaks do not appear on the second graph. I hope the second graph is more indicative of what we will hear.

The 850-1k area looks fine to me. 8k, is the typical coupler resonance peak. 3k, looks to be a gain of around 7.5db, which is pretty normal I say (same gain as the Oxygen has).

The dip between 3-7k is what I am a bit worried about.

Similar to what the Tea is doing, except it is a wider dip, which might cause it to sound dark or warmer than it should.

Guess I find out when I get it.