[s_nyc]

Hi there,

From reading this board on and on (yes, that is addictive!), I just realized the folowing:

It seems that most head-fiers are in agreement that each IEM has its own signature and that, if you compare IEMs which are in the same league, preferring one over another is more a matter of personal taste than anything else. Still, I keep reading loads of messages stating that IEMs X, Y or Z have "way too much bass", "forward mids" or "harsch treble" and that there is no way they can be considered as good, etc. How unfair of course.

Hence my request to you all, Head-fi experts: would one of you give a try a putting a list of the main IEMs (there, I can help) with a brief description of their sound signature? This would need be very different than a standard review. I am much more interested in knowing e.g. which IEM has a bass or treble bias and how this bias compare with other IEMs having a close sound signature.

Just a suggestion but an idea would be to set up a simple scale for treble, mids and bass where e.g. 0 on each T, M & B would characterize an IEM which has a flat response, -5 on bass would be a mid-highs oriented response, etc.

Let me know if any of you has an interest in setting that up. I can of course help but am so far from being an audiophile (now!)

S.

NB: My interest in this matter comes from the fact that I find that my Sleeks SA6 with ++treble port and EQ off do not give enough clarity (a bit like if the singer had a cloth before his mouth). I guess I'll need to play with EQ settings, but I bought this pair of IEMs precisely to avoid doing this and risking that the sound suffers from distortion...

 

[Taikero]

There are a number of problems with simply differentiating between sound signatures.

A sound signature only tells part of the story. Talking only about the sound signature of an IEM is like saying some animal is black. This doesn't tell you if the animal has fur, feathers, feet, gills, a tail, or even eyes.

How this relates to IEMs is that a sound signature only gives you a basic idea of what you're going to hear. If someone says an IEM has lots of bass, that doesn't tell you anything about the quality of the bass being produced. The Future Sonics Atrio M5 and the UE Super.fi 5 EB have close to the same amount of bass (few decibels of difference), but one of them is leagues above the other in terms of quality reproduction of that bass (hint: It's not the UE). If someone says that a given IEM has forward mids, that doesn't tell you if the IEM is "warm and lush" because of that, or "grating and nasal". As well, when someone says harsh treble, that says nothing of sibilance (although sibilance may be there of course), as it's only saying that treble has been presented in a most forward fashion. This speaks nothing to the airiness of the treble, how much and where it rolls off, or even to its ability to not sound "cluttered", "tinny", or distorted.

A sound signature also tells you nothing of sound stage, instrument separation, build quality, comfort, accessories, what genres sound good with the IEM, etc.



I'm all for discussion and lists and comparisons, but I think that building such a list is more harmful than helpful without providing more information than simply a sound signature. Skullcandy or V-Moda products and the UE Super.fi 5 EB might have a lot in common as far as (very general) sound signature, but that's far from the final word (or even, really, half the word) on which one of those, if any, is worth looking at.

I don't want to completely discourage you here, but all I'm asking you to do is consider that (+3, +2, -1) might not be enough for someone to really get a true grasp of what that product might offer them. Sure, you can see that the product will probably have a fair amount of bass and some very present mids with somewhat rolled off or "darker" highs, but you really don't know anything beyond that.

Perhaps your list would be better if every name of every IEM rated based on your system linked to a search for posts with that IEM's name, possibly even [IEM Name] + "Review". That way people could see brief information about the IEM they have a curiousity for, then they could actually use the forums as the vast repository of research they are and find actual useful information based on the general sound they're looking for.

In any case, I wish you luck in both building this list and finding that sound that's right for you.

 

[sidtai]

Although I do not agree that setting up a simple numerical scale would be any more beneficial, I do agree that all the comments about headphones are personal tastes. There are a lot of canalphones or IEMs that get a lot of praise here, like the denon C551 or C751 or AT CK7, but after I tried them, I can't stand listening to them any more because of their sound signature. I much prefer my lowly e2c, though perhaps having less details, to all those IEM/canalphones. That, of course, is my personal taste.

 

[Currawong]

Try an Advanced Search for "review iem" in thread titles. You'll find what you're looking for, to a degree.

 

[mape00]

HeadRoom has some measurements which can be useful for determining sound signatures.

I agree that reviews can be good for talking about comfort issues and accessories, but I kind of despise the reviews which are multiple pages with subjective and vague audiophile buzzwords, most of which directly relate to the frequency response, which does not bring up any technical data.

 

[Calexico]

I think a compilation would be really helpful. That way, someone can decide on what sound signature they want first, THEN look through the reviews of the headphones that match that sound signature. So if I want something that sounds like an Ety, I'm not going to bother looking the Super.fi 5 EBs or the Atrios, because I know I'm not going to be interested. Obviously a bit of extra searching or browsing could do the same, but this would be a lot faster.

 

[s_nyc]

Mmh... it seems that I have been a bit too optimistic here. I totally agree that such a chart would not necessarily provide all information needed for making a good and well-advised purchase.

Knowing that, why not just setting up a general post containing the frequency reponse curves of most IEMs. It could still be useful.

Is that data available anywhere? I understand that multiple curves would need to be obtained for some IEMs (SA6, Sennheiser IE8).

Cheers

S.

 

[s_nyc]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calexico /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think a compilation would be really helpful. That way, someone can decide on what sound signature they want first, THEN look through the reviews of the headphones that match that sound signature. So if I want something that sounds like an Ety, I'm not going to bother looking the Super.fi 5 EBs or the Atrios, because I know I'm not going to be interested. Obviously a bit of extra searching or browsing could do the same, but this would be a lot faster.

Precisely, that is exactly the point : making the list of candidates as short as possible in the least possible time.

 

[Jensen]

Here, I'll start with the generalities:

SE530: MIDS

Triple.Fi: HIGHs

W3: BASS

IE8: DON'T KNOW

 

[ZoNtO]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jensen /img/forum/go_quote.gif Here, I'll start with the generalities: SE530: MIDS Triple.Fi: HIGHs W3: BASS IE8: DON'T KNOW

.......

 

[wuwhere]

This is really not a simple thing to do. An IEM is just a component of the whole system.

 

[mape00]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wuwhere /img/forum/go_quote.gif This is really not a simple thing to do. An IEM is just a component of the whole system.

Of course, sources and amps should be ideal. I.e. not affect the sound. Of course, not any source is neutral and not any amp adequate, but the impact they ultimately have, provided they're adequate, is negligible in comparison to that of headphones/speakers.

 

[wuwhere]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mape00 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Of course, sources and amps should be ideal. I.e. not affect the sound. Of course, not any source is neutral and not any amp adequate, but the impact they ultimately have, provided they're adequate, is negligible in comparison to that of headphones/speakers.

Negligible? Really? So in your opinion, why buy an RSA if a FIIO is good enough? I think your yardstick is not even close to mine.
Have a nice day.

 

[s_nyc]

Ok, ok, let's keep our ambitions to the mininimum.

I understand that the DAP has not necessarily a perfectly flat response and that the sound signature of an IEM would depend on more than its frequency response curve.

Still, many head-fiers should be interested in having an idea of what the frequency response curves of their IEMs are...

Any clue where we could get that? I am happy to compile any information found in the opening post.

Cheers

 

[Calexico]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wuwhere /img/forum/go_quote.gif Negligible? Really? So in your opinion, why buy an RSA if a FIIO is good enough? I think your yardstick is not even close to mine. Have a nice day.

Would you rather have a $500 amp and iBuds or no amp and $500 headphones. Relativity.