[Sebastien Chiu]

Interesting. . .I wonder if there are any tuning differences, with the old K10UA vs the newer Massdrop K10U? I sure don't hear any hard edges at all, and I am very sensitive to such things in the lower treble.

There are no sonic differences!

 

[N0BOX]

The only person Ive read that described the k10ua as im hearing it spot on was Twister6. You are right that the treble is sparkly but its also abit splashy and hard edged. Im abit curious how even brighter iem like khan sounds and how people can listen to them for long periods of time without getting serious fatigue.

Out of curiosity, what kind of music do you listen to? I've mentioned before that my experience with the Noble 3U was a tad bit shrill when I first started using it and I eventually either got used to it, it somehow toned itself down, or my use of EQ fixed the problem for me (honestly not sure which). Even the Dulce Bass, which has probably the least forward highs (according to others, anyway) of the Noble line-up can burn my ears with certain songs. I am kinda wondering if it isn't poorly-mastered music that causes me my problems. I listen to a lot of electronica (specifically drum&bass and similar sub-genres) and sometimes the recording has a constant cymbal and/or high hat shimmer, and it turns into this death-beam of high frequency noise pointed into my brain. I think if the cymbals and high hats were real (not electronically-created) or if they were a higher-resolution digital representation/recording the end product wouldn't be so painful. It almost seems like there is an additional layer of lossy compression-based artifacts or noise on top of already high-pitched sounds. It makes me wonder if one or more of three things are happening:

• The digital drum instruments were poor resolution or compressed in a lossy (MP3/AAC/OGG/?) fashion
• The tracks were poorly mastered
• Additional noise was generated when CDs, digital tracks, or records were mixed by the DJ, or the mixing decks or software used poor/lossy algorithms

Since I'm not a sound engineer, I'm only making guesses as to what might cause this. There is plenty of D&B/Dubstep/Drumstep/etc out there that plays beautifully to my ears even with lots of high hat or cymbal usage, and the music I'm talking about is FLAC-encoded using at least 16bit/44.1kHz sampling so I can't blame it on the final encoding format (I bought it that way; I didn't re-encode it).

If everything you listen too is too bright then I would be more likely to blame it on your ears. It's possible that Noble's signature sound is just uncomfortable to you, which would be a shame.

 

[Wes S]

There are no sonic differences!

Thanks!

 

[soundperfection]

I am at the opposite side of the spectrum, from my friend @mvvRAZ, and as someone who is super sensitive to high frequencies, I don't find the K10U treble splashy or hard edged at all using my Galaxy S10+ as the source. The treble has a just the right amount of sparkle, and more detail than I have ever heard before, so it took me some time to acclimate to hearing all that detail, but now it is just pure bliss. I have been listening with my K10U paired with my S10+ non stop since I got them, and have yet to get any fatigue. Perhaps a warmer source could help?

I have a warm source with chord mojo but maybe a copper cable will take some of that edge off.

I found the K10UA quite shrill as well when I first heard it in 2015, but I hadn't been active online then, so those impressions never found their way out. At that point, my friend and I were both debating getting a custom K10 after hearing its acrylic demo unit, particularly enjoying its warm, mellower top-end. Once we tried the K10UA, though, we were surprised by how strong its low-treble was, and it put serious doubt in the both of us, because we didn't know which version the custom would most closely resemble. The question was also brought up at the CIEMs panel at CanJam Singapore 2016, but John stated that given the internals' sealed system (from driver to tube), the change in chassis wouldn't translate sonically. To this day, I haven't given it another go, but I'd love to with different tips, because that could've been the difference maker that we hadn't thought about in our initial tests.

I can safely say, though, that the Khan won't sound harsher or splashier than the K10UA. It's on the brighter and leaner side, yes, but that's mostly because of its laid-back lower-mids, rather than any sharpness in the treble. It certainly doesn't have the hard edges that the K10UA had. So, if you could find one, I'd venture you give it a demo to see if it'll fit your tastes.

Yes thats what Im hearing with my k10ua aswell, you described it very well. Its also my first BA iem .Could also be that BA simply doesnt do upper registrers that well, isnt that why everyone has switch to electrostatic drivers that delivers highs smoother without that metallic shrill.

 

[soundperfection]

Out of curiosity, what kind of music do you listen to? I've mentioned before that my experience with the Noble 3U was a tad bit shrill when I first started using it and I eventually either got used to it, it somehow toned itself down, or my use of EQ fixed the problem for me (honestly not sure which). Even the Dulce Bass, which has probably the least forward highs (according to others, anyway) of the Noble line-up can burn my ears with certain songs. I am kinda wondering if it isn't poorly-mastered music that causes me my problems. I listen to a lot of electronica (specifically drum&bass and similar sub-genres) and sometimes the recording has a constant cymbal and/or high hat shimmer, and it turns into this death-beam of high frequency noise pointed into my brain. I think if the cymbals and high hats were real (not electronically-created) or if they were a higher-resolution digital representation/recording the end product wouldn't be so painful. It almost seems like there is an additional layer of lossy compression-based artifacts or noise on top of already high-pitched sounds. It makes me wonder if one or more of three things are happening:

• The digital drum instruments were poor resolution or compressed in a lossy (MP3/AAC/OGG/?) fashion
• The tracks were poorly mastered
• Additional noise was generated when CDs, digital tracks, or records were mixed by the DJ, or the mixing decks or software used poor/lossy algorithms

Since I'm not a sound engineer, I'm only making guesses as to what might cause this. There is plenty of D&B/Dubstep/Drumstep/etc out there that plays beautifully to my ears even with lots of high hat or cymbal usage, and the music I'm talking about is FLAC-encoded using at least 16bit/44.1kHz sampling so I can't blame it on the final encoding format (I bought it that way; I didn't re-encode it).

If everything you listen too is too bright then I would be more likely to blame it on your ears. It's possible that Noble's signature sound is just uncomfortable to you, which would be a shame.

Every music in my libery is cd quality or higher. I listen to almost every genre pop,rock,hiphop, electronic, classic, soundtracks...except jazz..uhh. Main reason I bought k10 was people said it was so good at any genre and really smooth but it wasnt.
Its an analytical sound that exaggerates the detail and drill them into your skull. It doesnt sound natural or pleasent so im gonna see if I can fix them with a copper cable and better tips.

 

[Wes S]

Every music in my libery is cd quality or higher. I listen to almost every genre pop,rock,hiphop, electronic, classic, soundtracks...except jazz..uhh. Main reason I bought k10 was people said it was so good at any genre and really smooth but it wasnt.
Its an analytical sound that exaggerates the detail and drill them into your skull. It doesnt sound natural or pleasent so im gonna see if I can fix them with a copper cable and better tips.

I would give the Final Audio the e tips a try, with the Maestro cable. They worked for me.

 

[Deezel177]

Out of curiosity, what kind of music do you listen to? I've mentioned before that my experience with the Noble 3U was a tad bit shrill when I first started using it and I eventually either got used to it, it somehow toned itself down, or my use of EQ fixed the problem for me (honestly not sure which). Even the Dulce Bass, which has probably the least forward highs (according to others, anyway) of the Noble line-up can burn my ears with certain songs. I am kinda wondering if it isn't poorly-mastered music that causes me my problems. I listen to a lot of electronica (specifically drum&bass and similar sub-genres) and sometimes the recording has a constant cymbal and/or high hat shimmer, and it turns into this death-beam of high frequency noise pointed into my brain. I think if the cymbals and high hats were real (not electronically-created) or if they were a higher-resolution digital representation/recording the end product wouldn't be so painful. It almost seems like there is an additional layer of lossy compression-based artifacts or noise on top of already high-pitched sounds. It makes me wonder if one or more of three things are happening:

• The digital drum instruments were poor resolution or compressed in a lossy (MP3/AAC/OGG/?) fashion
• The tracks were poorly mastered
• Additional noise was generated when CDs, digital tracks, or records were mixed by the DJ, or the mixing decks or software used poor/lossy algorithms

Since I'm not a sound engineer, I'm only making guesses as to what might cause this. There is plenty of D&B/Dubstep/Drumstep/etc out there that plays beautifully to my ears even with lots of high hat or cymbal usage, and the music I'm talking about is FLAC-encoded using at least 16bit/44.1kHz sampling so I can't blame it on the final encoding format (I bought it that way; I didn't re-encode it).

If everything you listen too is too bright then I would be more likely to blame it on your ears. It's possible that Noble's signature sound is just uncomfortable to you, which would be a shame.

Speaking as a sound engineer, I can safely say that the three theories you've mentioned are not what's happening. Both acoustically-recorded and synthetically-produced instruments have equal potential to sound harsh. The latter isn't inclined to sound more metallic than the former simply because it wasn't recorded with a microphone. And, keep in mind, most of the samples used in EDM or electronica (i.e. hi-hat shimmers, cymbal crashes, kick drums, etc.) are, in fact, samples taken from recordings of real-life instruments. The same goes for lossy formats and compression. While I've observed a free-er sound and greater impact with higher-resolution files (and, even then, the effect is only appreciable with tracks mixed and mastered with good dynamic range to begin with), I've never observed occurrences of harshness simply because of a lossier format. Funnily enough, compression is actually a tool we use in mixing to reduce harshness with hi-hats and cymbals. Compressing allows us to control how much they jump at the listener, so they don't stick out like a sore thumb compared to the rest of the ensemble. Noise coming from the gear also has very little truth to it. If your equipment has poor dynamic range or THD, it'll most likely manifest itself in hazy instruments, a dirty background and a lack of definition/separation. But, in the same way that certain amps and sources can colour sound going out, pre-amps and ADCs can also colour the sounds that are coming into a recording, so that can have something to do with it, even though it's in an entirely different context.

In my experience, the #1 reason for harshness is EQ. Whether you're EQ-ing those instruments individually in the mixing stage, or EQ-ing the track as a whole in the mastering stage, it's where peaks and dips throughout the frequency response are at their most transformative. You can colour a pristine acoustic recording to the point of harshness or mellowness, you can alter a synthetic recording to have a vintage 70's sound, etc. Heck, most unmixed hi-hat tracks I've heard sound terrible, so I can guarantee even the most life-like hi-hats you've ever heard have been coloured. Then, on the consumption side, if the IEM or DAP's EQ (or tuning) happen to coincide with that of the recording's, that's where harshness sets in. For example, you have tracks like Charlie Puth's Done For Me, which sound perfectly palatable on a Lime Ears Aether or Jomo Audio Haka, but is wincingly sharp on Empire Ears' Phantom or JH Audio's Layla, because of where they've chosen to place their peaks. Conversely, the Phantom and Layla render tracks like Stevie Wonder's Overjoyed with greater clarity and a more accurate top-end timbre than the Aether or Haka because of those very same peaks. So, it's always a mixing-and-matching game with every component of the chain; from track to tip (oh, yes, tips play a big role as well). You could go for an IEM that does everything rather smoothly and lovably, an IEM that risks sounding shrill on some material to sound absolutely pristine on others, some mix of both, etc. At the end of the day, it's up to your personal preferences and needs.

Oh, and if everything sounds harsh no matter what, maybe you're listening to your music a tad too loud.

I have a warm source with chord mojo but maybe a copper cable will take some of that edge off.



Yes thats what Im hearing with my k10ua aswell, you described it very well. Its also my first BA iem .Could also be that BA simply doesnt do upper registrers that well, isnt that why everyone has switch to electrostatic drivers that delivers highs smoother without that metallic shrill.

Hey, hey, let's not generalise now. Balanced armatures can do highs perfectly well. Noble's Savant II and Katana have pretty stunning top-ends to me. Sometimes, it's just a matter of the tuning not meshing with your preferences and/or tracks. And, don't forget, sometimes the sins we pin onto the treble are in fact something to do with the midrange or bass. One cannot change without affecting the other.

I would give the Final Audio the e tips a try, with the Maestro cable. They worked for me.

Final Audio's e-type tips are great for improving linearity overall, in my opinion. It eases the transition between the upper-mids and low-treble, and I've found them incredibly versatile. The tone down the top-end, I've heard that JVC's Spiral Dot tips work great as well.

 

[Malevolent]

Hey, hey, let's not generalise now. Balanced armatures can do highs perfectly well. Noble's Savant II and Katana have pretty stunning top-ends to me. Sometimes, it's just a matter of the tuning not meshing with your preferences and/or tracks. And, don't forget, sometimes the sins we pin onto the treble are in fact something to do with the midrange or bass. One cannot change without affecting the other.

As one who has the Encore and the Savant II, I couldn't agree more with this statement. Well-tuned BAs can deliver precise, clean, and controlled highs. Without straying out of the Noble fold, the Encore is good-enough proof of this assertion.

Every music in my libery is cd quality or higher. I listen to almost every genre pop,rock,hiphop, electronic, classic, soundtracks...except jazz..uhh. Main reason I bought k10 was people said it was so good at any genre and really smooth but it wasnt.
Its an analytical sound that exaggerates the detail and drill them into your skull. It doesnt sound natural or pleasent so im gonna see if I can fix them with a copper cable and better tips.

At present, the K10 is still one of the most well-rounded IEMs on the market, at least to my ears. I've listened to it for hundreds of hours, across multiple genres of music, and they've always been able to handle the track/song with relative ease. Without delving too much into the audiophile's lexicon, the words "lush" and "organic" are what I'd use to describe the K10.

 

[Bluess]

Can anyone recommend a reasonable priced cable for m3? I know the included one is nice already but still interested in an upgrade.
The spinfit cp145 really makes the m3 shines in case anyone want to change the eartips

 

[soundperfection]

As one who has the Encore and the Savant II, I couldn't agree more with this statement. Well-tuned BAs can deliver precise, clean, and controlled highs. Without straying out of the Noble fold, the Encore is good-enough proof of this assertion.


At present, the K10 is still one of the most well-rounded IEMs on the market, at least to my ears. I've listened to it for hundreds of hours, across multiple genres of music, and they've always been able to handle the track/song with relative ease. Without delving too much into the audiophile's lexicon, the words "lush" and "organic" are what I'd use to describe the K10.

Do u have the customs, cuz my k10UA sounds the opposite of what you are describing, analytical and shrill is what describes them the best and I can only listen for them for about half an hour before I need a break.

 

[N0BOX]

Speaking as a sound engineer, I can safely say that the three theories you've mentioned are not what's happening. Both acoustically-recorded and synthetically-produced instruments have equal potential to sound harsh. The latter isn't inclined to sound more metallic than the former simply because it wasn't recorded with a microphone. And, keep in mind, most of the samples used in EDM or electronica (i.e. hi-hat shimmers, cymbal crashes, kick drums, etc.) are, in fact, samples taken from recordings of real-life instruments. The same goes for lossy formats and compression. While I've observed a free-er sound and greater impact with higher-resolution files (and, even then, the effect is only appreciable with tracks mixed and mastered with good dynamic range to begin with), I've never observed occurrences of harshness simply because of a lossier format. Funnily enough, compression is actually a tool we use in mixing to reduce harshness with hi-hats and cymbals. Compressing allows us to control how much they jump at the listener, so they don't stick out like a sore thumb compared to the rest of the ensemble. Noise coming from the gear also has very little truth to it. If your equipment has poor dynamic range or THD, it'll most likely manifest itself in hazy instruments, a dirty background and a lack of definition/separation. But, in the same way that certain amps and sources can colour sound going out, pre-amps and ADCs can also colour the sounds that are coming into a recording, so that can have something to do with it, even though it's in an entirely different context.

In my experience, the #1 reason for harshness is EQ. Whether you're EQ-ing those instruments individually in the mixing stage, or EQ-ing the track as a whole in the mastering stage, it's where peaks and dips throughout the frequency response are at their most transformative. You can colour a pristine acoustic recording to the point of harshness or mellowness, you can alter a synthetic recording to have a vintage 70's sound, etc. Heck, most unmixed hi-hat tracks I've heard sound terrible, so I can guarantee even the most life-like hi-hats you've ever heard have been coloured. Then, on the consumption side, if the IEM or DAP's EQ (or tuning) happen to coincide with that of the recording's, that's where harshness sets in. For example, you have tracks like Charlie Puth's Done For Me, which sound perfectly palatable on a Lime Ears Aether or Jomo Audio Haka, but is wincingly sharp on Empire Ears' Phantom or JH Audio's Layla, because of where they've chosen to place their peaks. Conversely, the Phantom and Layla render tracks like Stevie Wonder's Overjoyed with greater clarity and a more accurate top-end timbre than the Aether or Haka because of those very same peaks. So, it's always a mixing-and-matching game with every component of the chain; from track to tip (oh, yes, tips play a big role as well). You could go for an IEM that does everything rather smoothly and lovably, an IEM that risks sounding shrill on some material to sound absolutely pristine on others, some mix of both, etc. At the end of the day, it's up to your personal preferences and needs.

Ok, well like I said I was just pulling at straws trying to guess why some of my music sounded harsh, while other music sounded beautiful. The thing about drum&bass music is that it is often nothing but a very expressive bassline some hint of a mid-range melody in places (whatever part of the melody that isn't expressed in the bassline, that is) with a decent amount of snare and sometimes an almost constant 160bpm cymbal or high hat hit (for some of the musical phrases, anyway). It doesn't happen with every single song, and is generally less likely to be a problem with rock/metal songs that have the same sort of constant cymbal ride.

Also, isn't the compression you are talking about using something different from audio codec compression? I thought it was a process that reduces the dynamic range of the recording, not something that is used to reduce the size of the data file? All of the compression references in my first post referred to the process of encoding the audio data into a format like MP3 or AAC.

 

[Deezel177]

Ok, well like I said I was just pulling at straws trying to guess why some of my music sounded harsh, while other music sounded beautiful. The thing about drum&bass music is that it is often nothing but a very expressive bassline some hint of a mid-range melody in places (whatever part of the melody that isn't expressed in the bassline, that is) with a decent amount of snare and sometimes an almost constant 160bpm cymbal or high hat hit (for some of the musical phrases, anyway). It doesn't happen with every single song, and is generally less likely to be a problem with rock/metal songs that have the same sort of constant cymbal ride.

Also, isn't the compression you are talking about using something different from audio codec compression? I thought it was a process that reduces the dynamic range of the recording, not something that is used to reduce the size of the data file? All of the compression references in my first post referred to the process of encoding the audio data into a format like MP3 or AAC.

If you could provide some examples of the tracks you're talking about (both the harsh and beautiful ones), I could more precisely pin-point where the trouble spots are. Also, have you tried listening to the AAC and FLAC versions of the same song and compared the differences? In my experience, people tend to overestimate the difference high-res files really make, and can usually barely tell the difference in an ABX test. I'm not saying that's your case, but it'd be a cool experiment to test out some of your theories. With regards to compression, it's possible you are indeed correct. The word just triggered a train of thought, and I hadn't considered the context.

 

[soundperfection]

If you could provide some examples of the tracks you're talking about (both the harsh and beautiful ones), I could more precisely pin-point where the trouble spots are. Also, have you tried listening to the AAC and FLAC versions of the same song and compared the differences? In my experience, people tend to overestimate the difference high-res files really make, and can usually barely tell the difference in an ABX test. I'm not saying that's your case, but it'd be a cool experiment to test out some of your theories. With regards to compression, it's possible you are indeed correct. The word just triggered a train of thought, and I hadn't considered the context.

I always think flac and wav sounds brighter than mp3 for some reason. Could just be my faulty k10ua tho biting extra hard at the added dynamic range XD

 

[Colors]

K10U is probably one of the most "genre-master" + forgiving/yet detailed IEM.

 

[FullCircle]

The Falcon has landed in Korea

My brother is having fun with the new CNC machine