[rabbitsfoot]

I'm also having a hard time understanding the rising note and falling note description Lindrone. Are you talking about the attack and decay of the note? Attack meaning a sharper/softer/ definition of a note, and the decay a natural decay of the notes attack/sustain/decay envelope.

 

[lindrone]

Yes.. (concise enough?)

 

[Spankypoo]

Lindrone - This isn't a response to your post (math exams on Wednesday and I ain't got time to think that hard!), but I wanted to throw this thought out there: The decay section of a note is (almost always - barring Paul Revere-esque trickery) of a much longer duration than the attack phase - making it much easier to discern. Screw up something which lasts for .75 seconds and it'll be much easier to tell than the .18 attack phase.

At which point I think it's safe to say that while it may be indeed possible to modify one portion of the note and not the rest of it, it's probably much more likely that we're not as attuned to that phase and see the effect as being only to the decay.

I suspect there's a more scientific answer at the root of your theory. The very high frequency data (>12k) probably plays a big role in it. I have a hard time believing that if you recorded a reproduced sound of each high-end 'phone, the actual duration of the sound would be too terribly different. [Oops - didn't mean to introduce empiricism here, and ruin the whole thread.] Models like the Etys do give an impression of being more incisive in their presentation of short bursts of sound, but I still doubt they could sit down and say, "let's shorten the decay phase of the note" and make it happen.

Occam would probably shave my legs with this one, but I think it's too simple a theory to be the complete answer. There may certainly be an element of it, but I still maintain that as long as an electrical signal (i.e., audio data) is still being pumped into the driver, it should move. As soon as the signal stops, the driver should stop, and should do so with a linearity to match the signal. If a driver is doing it more slowly, that could be easily explained through inertial phenomena - if the driver stops before the signal (and/or at a faster rate than the signal), that would imply a stiffness to the driver which would surely seem to manifest itself elsewhere. E.g., putting your hand on a speaker cone kills decay - it also kills all the nuanced movement, therefore higher frequencies are muted.

Ehh...I guess that was a response.

A speaker doesn't know what's attack and what's decay - especially considering complex waves, which is what it's constantly reproducing, unless you're listening to a test tone CD.

I'll e-mail my super-duper-scientific contact and see what his impressions on the issue are. It just seems counterintuitive to think that you could construct a driver to artifically shorten the decay more than the source material (without electronics) without making huge compromises elsewhere.

 

[lindrone]

Well, your supposition is built on the fact that there's nothing between the electrons and the drivers, but indeed there's many, many other circuits that exists between them.

Case in point, Ety ER-4S sounds more detailed than ER-4P; the only difference between them is the resistors that's placed in the y-joint of the wire. The higher resistance of the ER-4S probably reduces some of the minor electron fluctuations that's associated with producing decay (of course, this is just my guess, all this stuff is supposed to be trade secret, eh?). ER-4P is more active in terms of producing a bass, but it also sounds less detailed and messier.

Think about it, manipulation of these different characteristics is exactly how a sound signature is created anyway. If everything is just pure... all high-end headphone should sound relatively close to being the same, no? (edit: oh wait, you said that.. hahaha...) Circuits, amplifier, drivers, all play a part of it.

 

[Big D]

Quote:

Originally Posted by toaster22 so in your opinion, the greater detail and "wow" moments are enhanced by reducing (actually, you mean increasing) note decay? according to that, it could be interpreted that the ue's are not more detailed, but due to their unrealistic note decay, according to both you and lindrone, more detail is readily apparent. do you feel that the ue's actually produce more detail, or simply make it easier to hear the detail due to their quick note decay?

A reduced note decay will be over quicker not longer therefore the note will be reduced in duration. This is the way detailed phones will get their extra detail. You can't have more detail AND more note decay as the decay will affect the level of detail.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Random Person There really is a piano coming in at 1:43 on Body Rock? Now, yeah it's very prominent at around 1:47 -- but that early??? But I wouldn't give up my bassline for anything!

Yes, it's an error. It should be 1:47!! The UE-10 Pro aren't that good!

Quote:

Originally Posted by vranswer OK. Now I'm confused/concerned. I love my Etys, but they are occasionally just too thin. This is especially noticeable when switching from my Westone UM2s, which straight up can put the hammer down on bass. But OTOH, I'm somewhat of a "detail freak" as Lindrone so aptly puts it, and I find the Ety signature intoxicating. If someday I were to jump off the cliff and do the unthinkable, I'm now at a total loss of what I would do. I want the musicality and fun (UM2) and I want the detail/treble (ER4). Which one of these two will give me what I want (...and I'll go away)?? UE10 Pro or Sensaphonics??

Both the UE-10 Pro and 2X-S have much more bass than the ER4, but nowhere near that of the E5. The UE-10 Pro is nearer the sound signature of the ER4 but this statement does it a disservice as it excels in every way over the Ety.

I think that anyone who just owns one of these is going to be happy either way, but to an audiophile crowd I think the extra $150 may be worth it if detail is what you are really after. If the slightly lower detail is acceptable then the decision is probably between the UE-5c and the 2X-S, rather than UE-10 Pro and 2X-S.

 

[Max Minimum]

I think that so far I'm more inclined to agree with Spankypoo. I know of nothing in a headphone made today that can differentiate between the beginning of a note and the end. In fact, there may be a misunderstanding here of the way sound is produced by drivers. A driver sytem at all times is producing only one sound, barring regional resonances that only serve to degrade the sound overall. The signal coming in is a single waveform. It only sounds like there are many things going on at once because our biological hearing systems (ears and brains) aren't perceptive enough to tell the difference. And an earphone, as Spankypoo has said, doesn't know if the very quiet high-pitched noise it's making is the end of a cymbal sizzle or the beginning of a soft synth note. Now, one thing you could do is to filter out all soft sounds below a certain threshold to try and cause artificial differentiation, but again that's ALL sound below the threshold. You could do this electronically or by, say, making the power/weight ratio at the driver such that faintly recorded sounds just don't trigger enough electrical signal to cause the driver to move, though they would still be represented if they were 'riding piggyback' on a driver excursion caused by a lower note that was strong enough to cause the driver to move. Other than some quite advanced 'intelligent' signal processing, I don't see a way to specifically target (even accidentally) the decay. And don't think I'm just sticking up for my Etys. I've had them a month and love them, but I'm already getting upgraditis and right now, despite what I've just said, the Sensas are (barely) the frontrunning candidates for my next purchase. So, I'm not convinced on the truncating of decays that seems to be proposed, but I'm definitely interested in reading more thoughts from both side concerning the issue.

EDIT: Oh, forgot to mention that I think the loss of some of the detail from 'S' to 'P' is due to the increased bass which is notorious in driver systems for causing chaotic harmonic resonances.

 

[Welly Wu]

BigD:

I thank you for the enormous financial investments you have made personally and for your willingness to share your frank opinions with us. It is very good to have a second opinion of exactly how these two top of the line custom IEMs really sound and perform. Other ancilliary notes such as fit, material workmanship, customer service are appreciated as well.

 

[rabbitsfoot]

Thanks Lindrone for clearing that rising note/falling note info. I am inclined to go with spankypoo on his conjecture regarding attack and decay, though I suppose different driver materials and circuit differences might affect the reproduction of sound in such a way as to either soften or accentuate attack, maybe even the dampening of a driver, if employed for some reason, might affect the reproduction of the decay portion of music. Since both Lindrone and Big D describe the differences of the attack and decay the same, there is obviously something in the way each phone sounds that can't, or isn't able to be defined by frequency response alone-usually my first inclination for differences.

 

[random person]

Question for Big D and lindrone --

With this whole decay question I am curious as to its effect on classical music. I'm thinking of those long, lingering piano notes notable in solo classical performances and some jazz pieces. With high end speakers (and even with my UE5c) you can hear everything from that "poof" (or perhaps "plunk") as the key strikes, down through the long finish (except, of course, when the note is expected to be quick and brief.) . Do you find there is a difference between the UE10Pro and Sensaphonics with respect to your perceived enjoyment of classical music? Do either of them particularly excel in this area?

From both your descriptions I'm inclined to think of the UE10Pro vs Sensaphonics discussion the way one might think of fine chardonnay. There is the lean, tight, "minerally" quality of really fine French wine which many would argue is the best chardonnay in the world, the cleanest-tasting of them all. Think of French chard as the UE10Pro. Then there is the American school of big, oaky, buttery chardonnays -- warmer, more complex, arguably more drinkable, thoroughly engaging. Think of the American chard as the Sensaphonics. Both are gorgeous. Some of us may have a clear preference for one over the other at all times; others of us enjoy both depending on the mood and the food. But they can be equally great.

BTW I had a wierd dream last night. My beautiful translucent blue UE5cs were turning clear right before my eyes! WHAT can it mean!!??

 

[gorman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by random person BTW I had a wierd dream last night. My beautiful translucent blue UE5cs were turning clear right before my eyes! WHAT can it mean!!??

It's okay random person, really. Come and we'll show you this nice new model of shirt. It ties on the back for a very comfortable fit. And yes, step inside this padded cell. It's for optimal sound isolation.

 

[Big D]

How the UEs affects the decay I don't know. It does have a small circuit board inside each earpiece. The fact is that it does. Maybe some of the decay is reverb from the driver itself and the UEs have drivers that limit reverb.

Any waveform no matter how complex can be broken down into each individual component sine wave. This is called Fourier(sp?) analysis. Maybe it has something to do with this?

 

[NotoriousBIG_PJ]

Just curious, how does all this talk of decay fit in with notions of speed and prat?

Biggie.

 

[gorman]

It might simply be that UEs drivers are better dampened. I spent a good part of the day reading on the web and it appears that for monitoring purposes (in speakers) a long decay pretty much always derives from cabinet resonance and vibration once the original sound has stopped being played. Which can be pleasurable, but it's not faithful to the recorded sound that it's being reproduced.

Then again, maybe UEs are too dampened? It's certainly not what I hear with my ears but... one has to be open to everything.

 

[hackeron]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big D While the Shure E5 are "okay" I would personally take the E2 if I had the choice. The bass of the E5 is overdone and it is little surprise that someone who likes the E5 will prefer a canalphone with an accentuated bass over a more neutral bass.

Bah! -- whatever minimal credibility is now lost. No need to read on.

 

[Big D]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gorman It might simply be that UEs drivers are better dampened. I spent a good part of the day reading on the web and it appears that for monitoring purposes (in speakers) a long decay pretty much always derives from cabinet resonance and vibration once the original sound has stopped being played. Which can be pleasurable, but it's not faithful to the recorded sound that it's being reproduced. Then again, maybe UEs are too dampened? It's certainly not what I hear with my ears but... one has to be open to everything.

Maybe it is something to do with "critical damping". In any system there is a critical damping level (related to the range of frequencies that the system produces and then amplifying these, while trying not to amplify interference) which will reduce resonance but prevent overdamping. Maybe the triple driver design allows this better than the dual driver design of the Sensas?