[StudioTan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mvw2 /img/forum/go_quote.gif

I realize this is a relative comparison, but the perceived frequency response of the ER4S is not what I'm hearing at all. The midrange bump @ about 2K doesn't sound that prominent. However there is a gradual rise from that point upwards, but sounds more than 5 dB; maybe closer to 8 or more at its peak. But that's probably due to the shape of my ear canals, insertion depth, ear tip material, etc. I doubt that anyone is going to hear close to what this chart displays.

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bilavideo /img/forum/go_quote.gif With all due respect to the science of in-ear frequency response sensitivities and the engineering necessary to adapt, earphone manufacturers don't make the drivers. They buy them from companies like Knowles Acoustics. The "science" of in-ear acoustics has been carried out by firms in the hearing-aid industry whose equipment has been adapted to the hi-fi market.

You are mostly right when it comes to armature drivers, but there are a number of armature driver based headphone manufacturers that have the drivers made to their specification, rather than buying from a catalog.

Further, many dynamic driver based IEM companies custom design and custom build their own dynamic drivers they use in their IEM's. This way, they can employ proprietary technology to give them an edge over their competition.

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by StudioTan /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you like the sound the foam eartips provide (good, tight seal with wider range of insertion depth) compared to the vinyl ones (not actually sure of the material), in my long-time experience with them, they've been highly susceptible to breakage if you replace the eartips often. The last time I got them fixed it cost me $80. Just a warning. They claim the recent material they're made out of is stronger now, but personally it's not worth the chance for me. By the way, I'm very careful when removing/replacing the eartips. Just my experience, but I can safely say there are others out there that are of better build quality in the same price range.

Sounds like you might be referring to the old Ety ER4 problem.
Most dynamic IEM's use a substantially more robust ear tube than what Etymotic used on their 1st gen armature driver based IEM.

The fact is generally, that the larger the ID of the tube, the better the HF frequency response, hence the very small inside diameter of the tube on an ER4 and the much larger ID on most dynamic driver based IEM's. Armature drivers tend to be bass shy, whereas dynamics tend to be bass heavy.

To compensate, armature based IEM's use small tubes to attenuate the HF to bring it into balance with the bass. Dynamic based IEM's use large ID tubes to allow more HF out to bring it into balance with the naturally bass heavy dynamic drivers.

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by StudioTan /img/forum/go_quote.gif I realize this is a relative comparison, but the perceived frequency response of the ER4S is not what I'm hearing at all. The midrange bump @ about 2K doesn't sound that prominent. However there is a gradual rise from that point upwards, but sounds more than 5 dB; maybe closer to 8 or more at its peak. But that's probably due to the shape of my ear canals, insertion depth, ear tip material, etc. I doubt that anyone is going to hear close to what this chart displays.

The chart reflects your ear's sensitivity to diffuse field sound. The bottom trace reflects what your perception should be of the final result.

 

[StudioTan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwkarth /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sounds like you might be referring to the old Ety ER4 problem. Most dynamic IEM's use a substantially more robust ear tube than what Etymotic used on their 1st gen armature driver based IEM. The fact is generally, that the larger the ID of the tube, the better the HF frequency response, hence the very small inside diameter of the tube on an ER4 and the much larger ID on most dynamic driver based IEM's. Armature drivers tend to be bass shy, whereas dynamics tend to be bass heavy. To compensate, armature based IEM's use small tubes to attenuate the HF to bring it into balance with the bass. Dynamic based IEM's use large ID tubes to allow more HF out to bring it into balance with the naturally bass heavy dynamic drivers.

I guess that's probably why the newer tube hasn't broke (the two breaks were on much lower serial numbers; I waited quite a while before fixing the last break).

From what you're describing, it sounds like they went to the smallest size they possibly could, but perhaps didn't do enough stress tests, if any, in the the beginning. Based on the frequency response of mine, it sounds like they would have gone smaller if they could.

I actually fitted mine with the orange filters for a steeper rolloff (if I'm remembering correctly). It helped a little, but at the expense of being just a tad veiled.

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by StudioTan /img/forum/go_quote.gif I guess that's probably why the newer tube hasn't broke (the two breaks were on much lower serial numbers; I waited quite a while before fixing the last break). From what you're describing, it sounds like they went to the smallest size they possibly could, but perhaps didn't do enough stress tests, if any, in the the beginning. Based on the frequency response of mine, it sounds like they would have gone smaller if they could. I actually fitted mine with the orange filters for a steeper rolloff (if I'm remembering correctly). It helped a little, but at the expense of being just a tad veiled.

I doubt they went to the smallest size they could as there would be no reason to do that, however, they probably went with the size they needed to in order to get the proper balance of sound so it sounded good. Maybe they did go as small as they dared, and then still had to pack filter paper in the tube to further tune it.

That DID pay off for them. Just think, they were THE standard of the industry for almost 20 years. That's quite a run!

When I worked for Tektronix, back in the '80's, we had a down-converting tuner that was in our catalog for over 19 years and during that time it led the industry. Nobody else even came close to the performance of our product. A 20 year product run in the electronics industry? Unheard of! So Etymotic has a lot to be proud of there!!

 

[lnvisible]

I just received my pair of UE Super.fi 5 EBs in the mail today. I don't wanna write too much about them in this post, but let's just say I love them for right now.

I definitely want to write a bit of a mini-review on them, but what does everything think I should do with that? Make a new thread or just include it in a new post in this thread?

 

[nkk]

I am going to admit that I have not read the whole thread, so if this has been settled, I apologize. However, I would urge you to get the er4s or even hf5 from etymotic. It is not the bassy signature that you are looking for, but what bass it has is of the highest pedigree. Instead having a collection of dogs that win places 2 through 5, you will have one that always gets first (odd analogy, I know, but as soon as I typed pedigree that is what I thought of, and it works, even if a bit random).

The sound signature will also be a must have for any collection of IEMs. Personally, I love it, and only really choose dead neutrality over it, and even that is mood dependent (I am really not a bass head).

-Nkk

EDIT: Apparently I totally missed your last post, so take this advice for your next IEM, as I still think that it applies.