[Inks]

Also, I challenge any user to send their C4s for analysis by this blogger (Rin Choi), who I collaborate with. He is extremely reliable and has many head-fi references that can back him up in regards to taking care of loaned stuff. He is currently borrowing a UERM, so a comparison will be nice for those on the fence
 
Any takers can PM me, LFF?

 

[gnarlsagan]

 What's missing in the ER6 in terms of details is extension in the subbass and highest treble (past 10k), this can be covered by multi-driver IEMs, a modded UE900 seems to do just that, but it isn't as forward as the ER6 in the midhighs and treble up to 10k, dipping a bit more. I agree, people factor in cost WAY too much into thinking that means the sound quality is going to be that much better. In my experience, price hardly tells you about performance, many sub 100$ IEMs are on par or better than the much more expensive ones. 

I agree but are there any iems that actually remedy the sub-bass and treble extension without adding a boost or having dips in the mids or lower treble? Maybe the C4...

 

[Inks]

I agree but are there any iems that actually remedy the sub-bass and treble extension without adding a boost or having dips in the mids or lower treble? Maybe the C4...

  Dips are inevitable, ER6 dips 5-8k, at times they can be beneficial. IMO I do think the ER6 is a bit bright at times, (though generally smooth), I accept dips or bumps from the DF reference as long as they aren't constant or exaggerated. Many modern recordings do get boosted in these regions, at times 1-3k can sound "honky" on Etys. Point being, there are so many compromises that happen that IME the goal shouldn't be to cover all bases, but to get as close as you can without any major flaws. 

 

[gnarlsagan]

.  Dips are inevitable, ER6 dips 5-8k, at times they can be beneficial. IMO I do think the ER6 is a bit bright at times, (though generally smooth), I accept dips or bumps from the DF reference as long as they aren't constant or exaggerated. Many modern recordings do get boosted in these regions, at times 1-3k can sound "honky" on Etys. Point being, there are so many compromises that happen that IME the goal shouldn't be to cover all bases, but to get as close as you can without any major flaws. 

Absolutely agreed but the question remains what exists without exaggerated or extended deviations from DF reference? Also I thought the ER-6 dip from 5-8kHz was designed based on listener feedback.

 

[Inks]

Absolutely agreed but the question remains what exists without exaggerated or extended deviations from DF reference? Also I thought the ER-6 dip from 5-8kHz was designed based on listener feedback.

Modded UE900, a bit safe in the midhighs but pretty flat. R50 with certain tips, though bass extension is no better than ER6. MH1 has better extension at both ends with a very similar treble response, too bad it's bass response is exaggerated and slow. The dip at 5-8k does make it smoother, you generally want to avoid bumps here as that will make things potentially sibilant, but 1-3k dips can be nice as long as it isn't too much. 

 

[gnarlsagan]

Modded UE900, a bit safe in the midhighs but pretty flat. R50 with certain tips, though bass extension is no better than ER6. MH1 has better extension at both ends with a very similar treble response, too bad it's bass response is exaggerated and slow. The dip at 5-8k does make it smoother, you generally want to avoid bumps here as that will make things potentially sibilant, but 1-3k dips can be nice as long as it isn't too much. 

I see what you mean about compromises. Still would really like to see a C4 graph though.

 

[Inks]

I see what you mean about compromises. Still would really like to see a C4 graph though.

  Indeed, specially since they're said to be so neutral, hope someone can volunteer a pair to test. 

 

[LFF]

Quote:

Also, I challenge any user to send their C4s for analysis by this blogger (Rin Choi), who I collaborate with. He is extremely reliable and has many head-fi references that can back him up in regards to taking care of loaned stuff. He is currently borrowing a UERM, so a comparison will be nice for those on the fence
 
Any takers can PM me, LFF?

I already had Purrin take measurements.

 

[anetode]

Given that there are plenty of Paradox measurements out there it's simple enough to know that LFF has an ear for neutrality. If the C4s are more even than the UERMs then there's already some rough idea of the FR tolerances.

 

[fuzzy1969]

I dont bother with graphs, the ety4 is regarded as one of the most neutral iems on this site but when you compare the graph with the perceived human hearing graph the treble response is anything but neutral.

 

[gnarlsagan]

I dont bother with graphs, the ety4 is regarded as one of the most neutral iems on this site but when you compare the graph with the perceived human hearing graph the treble response is anything but neutral.

But pretty much any graph you see adjusts for perceived human hearing. Considering raw graphs most iems would look even less neutral than they already are.

 

[fuzzy1969]

I don't think they do adjust I just pulled this from ety's website...
 
 

 
you can see the big bump, etys designed them this way but I wouldn't call it neutral in a graph sense although a lot of people on here say they are neutral, so I dont really go for graphs.
 
Im double posting but this is more of a official perceived hearing graph...
 
 

 

[Inks]

Quote:

I don't think they do adjust I just pulled this from ety's website...
 
 

 
you can see the big bump, etys designed them this way but I wouldn'tt call it neutral in a graph sense although a lot of people on here say they are neutral, so I dont really go for graphs.

  Those are raw graphs, before you factor in resonance from the canal, concha and pinna, the bump is a must for neutrality and many manufacturers use it. When these headphone-related-transfers are factored in this is the actual response of the ER4 line is line this

 
 

I already had Purrin take measurements.

  Nice, maybe the raw results can be shown to Rin and he can do a preliminary graph like this one,using his DF compensation. I do feel Rin can analyze certain things in detail which may help users, he's shown that repeatedly in his other analyzed IEMs. Maybe once he releases the full UERM analysis (which will be kind of soon) may a user be convinced. 

 

[purrin]

Will post measurements soon. I don't remember, but I think the measurements (EDIT: Not really it turns out) looked similar to ER-4S in the upper mids, but had more bass. Sounded like that too. Very clear sounding like the ER-4S and more clear than UERM. Although I feel the UERM is still my own "neutral" standard (at least when comparing with my custom-made nearfield desktop monitors actively crossed over and EQ'd to neutral.) YMMV.

 

[fuzzy1969]

That's the graph that show the treble bump around 16k on the er-4s and 4b something I wouldn't call neutral, in a graph sense.