[vesther]

I've seen a good deal of threads that talk about "missing bass", "muddy sound", whatever I can name it. I would like to try to help some newbies get over with posting pointless threads, and to set the record straight in some corners.

Why is the sound muddy?
There could be many factors why the sound is muddy. Among them is that the magnet does not have enough room to "kick air in", the magnet works too hard to deliver bass, there's a bit too much "bass bias", other adverse factors that cause the 'cans to sound muddy. I've tried out the Shure E2C and the Shure SE110 and I found out that compared to the Shure E500/SE530 (I have yet to test out other IEMs), earphones that literally use balanced armatures have greater sound clarity than earphones that use dynamic magnets. The material used in the magnet also determines the clarity, as the majority of the high-end earphones *should* utilize Neodymium magnets.

Not enough bass on my earphones!
Because earphones are compact and because the drivers don't have enough space, there's not enough room for bass performance.

A dynamic 7-9mm diapharagm that utilize neodymium will generally have better frequency response as opposed to a ferrite magnet, although some known earphones have been known to have excessive "bass bias". Because a lot of IEMs have no "vents" and/or the balanced armatures have virtually no room to "move air", bass response tends to be poorer than traditional headphones.

What do you mean by "kicking air"?
I've been saying this because lower frequencies (bass) requires a lot of air to move. Like I said, because earphones literally have armatures inside confined housings, there isn't much room for the drivers to move air around. The more air the magnet can move, the better the frequency response would be. Shure and Ultimate Ears literally try their best to curb this bass problem through use of internal vents (Shure) to allow the armature to move a reasonable amount of air albeit no visible holes on the can, whilst others may choose to utilize a crossover to split frequencies up. An internal vent (claimed by Shure) was designed to allow the armature to move air so that the frequency response isn't too compromised.

Audio is subjective, so I suggest running tests on multiple earphones to determine which one suits your needs the most.

I have a lot of explaining to do, but please share your knowledge on how you perceive sound on this thread.

 

[b0dhi]

If you take a driver that can move a *lot* of air and get rid of the enclosure, you will end up with something with very little bass, and practically no deep bass. An example of this is the K1000. Although the driver is very large (for a headphone), the bass response, especially the deep bass (sub 30hz) is still limited.

A similar scenario is where you place damping material in the enclosure. This may reduce low frequency resonances (as seen here) and result in much less bass.

If you've ever heard a subwoofer outside of its box, you know what I mean - the bass is reduced significantly.

To my ears, a non-resonant or low resonance enclosure provides *much* better bass definition than an enclosure that reflects low frequencies. The problem with these types of systems is that distortion tends to shoot through the roof because of the huge excursions the driver must perform in order to create strong bass.

 

[LFF]

Some people just prefer the modern approach to mastering. Boosted bass and highs. I have some car enthusiasts say that if the song doesn't thump and sparkle - it doesn't sound good.

I have found that when you EQ a song to sound natural some people will find that it sounds amazing and yet others will say it's lacking in the highs (or lows).

To each his/her own I guess.

Anyway...if you want to get good bass response on IEMs it is essential that you get a good seal.

 

[Chu]

I don't think there really is such a thing as "natural" sound in most modern music. Almost all popular music is electronic (be it guitars or synths) and most of it doesn't try to really reproduce any physical instrument. Voices are just as processed these days.

When someone states their preference for "base and sparkle" it's not necessarily any more unrealistic then a much more neutral presentation. It's all manufacturer sound.

A small sidetrack, but it's also interesting just getting people listening to electrostatic headphones just because most people have never heard reproduced music on anything but a dynamic driver in their life.

 

[d.phens]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LFF /img/forum/go_quote.gif Some people just prefer the modern approach to mastering. Boosted bass and highs. I have some car enthusiasts say that if the song doesn't thump and sparkle - it doesn't sound good. I have found that when you EQ a song to sound natural some people will find that it sounds amazing and yet others will say it's lacking in the highs (or lows). To each his/her own I guess. Anyway...if you want to get good bass response on IEMs it is essential that you get a good seal.

Thump and sparkle is a good thing even if it's not natural IMO but it must sound pleasant and offer something to listen to. If more bass means thumpy resonances muddyfieing sound I say no. If more treble means hissy vocals, hi-hat and snare I say no again. It depends on instruments / vocalists that are recorded, some sound good with boosted low / high end and some not.

Music has been non-acoustic for _so long_ that there's nothing like natural.
Even those who listen to classical rarely visit concerts.

 

[ph0rk]

 

[d.phens]

Getting less bass as a result of dampening or removing enclosure isn't what I'd call 'removing resonances'. In fact, the sound reflects off your head and / or ear so there's a backwave that often cancels out bass.
Enclosures are an acoustic way of sound amplification like in guitars or cellos.
In speaker or headphone design you may want to get rid of them as they infect sound (often in a musical way though

)
Bodhi? Your mod is very likely to be uneffective on open cans but has something to do with the ribbon driver construction. Can you explain where exactly you put the dampening felt?

BTW if I get enough money I might try to make DIY Electrostats with Stax drivers in a foam enclosure. The idea is still to be discussed. First I need money and I need the Stax drivers.

 

[ericj]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LFF /img/forum/go_quote.gif Some people just prefer the modern approach to mastering. Boosted bass and highs. I have some car enthusiasts say that if the song doesn't thump and sparkle - it doesn't sound good.

That's because they're going deaf.

Quote:

Originally Posted by b0dhi /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you take a driver that can move a *lot* of air and get rid of the enclosure, you will end up with something with very little bass, and practically no deep bass. An example of this is the K1000. Although the driver is very large (for a headphone), the bass response, especially the deep bass (sub 30hz) is still limited. A similar scenario is where you place damping material in the enclosure. This may reduce low frequency resonances (as seen here) and result in much less bass. If you've ever heard a subwoofer outside of its box, you know what I mean - the bass is reduced significantly. To my ears, a non-resonant or low resonance enclosure provides *much* better bass definition than an enclosure that reflects low frequencies. The problem with these types of systems is that distortion tends to shoot through the roof because of the huge excursions the driver must perform in order to create strong bass.

What you're talking about here is backwave control.

Bass is different from other frequencies. Bass waves go in every direction simultaneously.

This becomes a problem because the wave coming out of the back of the driver is 180 degrees out of phase with the wave coming out of the front of the driver. These waves literally collide and cancel each-other out.

In a moving-coil design, there is typically less backwave than frontwave. And typically, the backwave is damped one way or another. Limited venting on the driver frame, for example. This means that you can make a driver that produces tons and tons and tons of bass, employ limited backwave control, and still hear some bass. But this bass may tend to sound uncontrolled, warbly, etc - because it is.

In a design like the K1000, very little has been or can be done to control the backwave. People who say they hear the 1st octave of audible bass from a K1000 are deluded, lying, mistaken, or succuming to psychoacoustics. No amp can make it possible.

Sometimes, you can turn the backwave into useful bass. You do this by delaying it's entry into the forward cavity of the headphone by enough time to shift it closer to the phase of the front wave. This is how the K240 Sextett and K340 work. They used a relatively small, relatively stiff driver that produces very little bass indeed, and they milked the bass for all they possibly could. It's admirable, really. These days they just give you a giant bassy driver.

As for adding damping material to reduce the bass, that all depends on the amount of bass the driver actually produces and the backwave control methods that are employed in the frame.

In some headphones, it increases the bass.

Edit: Oh, and thanks for the fletcher-munson graph, ph0rk

 

[jinx20001]

i think bass is difficult for IEM's specifically to master because they cant use big speaker cones or speaker cone surround limiting excursion therfor if pushed too far will distort and likely damage.

the housing is very important for bass to perform well,the size and depth of the housing determines how bass will end up greatly.

IEM's such as shure e500 use small enclosed housings with the help of internal vents in the bass drivers (claimed to improve air flow and response by shure). on the other hand theres its biggest rival the triple fi 10, not claiming to use such ideas and using a bigger housing. IMO the result is the triple fi 10 bass seems less powerful and a bit loose.

both of these earphones IMO would benifit greatly from ports on the housing itself but these phones strive for excellent isolation and that would be lost in the process.

as a result i think the triple fi loses out to shures internal vent system and smaller housing and this could possibly explain why they are a bit cheaper and comprimise on bass and mids a little

 

[vesther]

Where's the vent holes on the E500/SE530/SE310/SCL2/E4's?
It's hidden.

The "Internal Vent" technology is what Shure created to ensure that the balanced armature or such have a dedicated space to move air so that low frequencies can operate in a proper manner. Since there are no holes visible in the housing, there's no loss in isolation, hence the internal vent could also work secretly to ensure that air gets circulated properly so the sound doesn't sound too muddy.

I found out that the Shure E2/SCL2/SE110 puts excessive emphasis on the Mid Range and there's virtually no "touching" on the Bass or Treble, so a bass boost would be required for the Shure E2/SCL2/SE110.

Literally IEMs with dynamic diapharagms and without any vent holes literally give no air for the diapharagm to move, resulting in a muddy sound signature, so in some cases, external vents and/or internal vents may be required for IEMs with dynamic diapharagms.

There's really one downturn in closed-air IEMs/headphones: because the air virtually cannot "touch" the drivers, there's going to be some sound distortion at times.

 

[b0dhi]

A driver enclosure with no vents can still move plenty of air, it simply means more work for the driver in compressing/expanding the air in the enclosure (IE stronger magnet). All else being equal, it'll result in less bass but with faster settle time.

 

[jinx20001]

Quote:

Originally Posted by b0dhi /img/forum/go_quote.gif A driver enclosure with no vents can still move plenty of air, it simply means more work for the driver in compressing/expanding the air in the enclosure (IE stronger magnet). All else being equal, it'll result in less bass but with faster settle time.

ofcourse, its just like any conventional subwoofer, sealed enclosures create a tighter bass but they do require more power and are not as efficient as ported enclosures. it certainly explains why bass is so different between the se530 and triple fi and explains why bass is more prominant in the shures