[drftr]

Search for a program like ISO2DSD or SACD_Extract to split the iso. into individual DSF tracks, then use FooBar to convert these tracks to lossy format of your choice.

Tnx - will try!

drftr

 

[Rockwell75]

I don't think hurt feelings are at stake here. To me, blathering on about how bad something is is just utterly unhelpful. The same goes for blathering on about something being great. I seek data not opinions - and of course opinions can become data if they contain an actual comparative analysis of the devices in question.

Your comment and some discussion over the last couple days got me thinking about what the intended "purpose" of this community really is. Insomuch as my own wishes and intentions go the Watercooler exists as a community first and foremost and secondly as a source of information. While I don't think I've ever stated it this explicitly before I think this has been true the whole time-- and what characterizes the enduring nature of this place. People come for the info but stay for the connection, which in turn only enriches the quality of information over time. Consequently while it is important to maintain a high standard of quality/purity of information even more important is that people abide by the norms of a healthy community-- mutual respect, thoughtfulness, tact, and so on.

In other news this evening I was inspired to pull out my Dorado 2020 for the first time with the LP6 and what a perfect match. The analogue clarity and resolving nature of LP6 marries beautifully with the analogue muscularity and deceptive technicality of the Dorado 2020. Still one of tne of the most unremittingly fun and engaging IEMs I've heard. Incidently it was two years ago this week in fact that I purchased the Dorado 2020 which makes it both the longest standing IEM in my collection and the longest I've owned an IEM since getting into this hobby in earnest in 2019.

 

[gLer]

I've downloaded a few DSD .iso files. Do you know how to convert them to lossy quality? Do I need to mount the file since there's no physical disc or so?

Search for a program like ISO2DSD or SACD_Extract to split the iso. into individual DSF tracks, then use FooBar to convert these tracks to lossy format of your choice.

Was going to suggest ISO2DSD (that's what I use, but keep it in DSD format beyond that). You can also get DSD2FLAC, but if you want a one-stop shop and have access to a Mac, download XLD (https://sourceforge.net/projects/xld/) which, if I'm not mistaken, will allow you to go from ISO directly to the MP3 format of your choice.

Consequently while it is important to maintain a high standard of quality/purity of information even more important is that people abide by the norms of a healthy community-- mutual respect, thoughtfulness, tact, and so on.

This, and why the college-jock 'humour' lately has been met with a contrarian response by many. Might seem boring and restrictive to some, but I also think it's what made this thread the success that it is and attracted so many newcomers. Without a few common courtesy checks and balances, however trivial they might seem, this place will quickly go the way of other threads, with mods stepping in to clean up the mess.

 

[Animagus]

I find this Western vs Eastern tuning ideology theory quite weird and funny. Whenever I read something like this, this is the string of thought that runs in my head, which I thought I'll post here for everyone to ponder on.

A lot of the 'Asian', especially Chi-fi IEM companies, try to tune around the Harman Target -> which was a fact, measurement and preference research led and done majorly by White scientists -> with the head of the research (Dr. Olive) being a white man from Canada -> all working for an American company (Harman) -> which was later acquired by a Korean company (Samsung) -> who then implemented the research in their own TWS IEMs (Buds line) -> which is tuned by one of their European/Austrian companies (AKG) -> and now slowly being implemented in all their American companies and products (JBL, Mark Levinson, etc).

Can't get more global than this!

Harman, Diffuse Field or Free Field - which primarily focus on forward upper-midrange (ear/pinna gain), because that is how our ears measure and respond to sound, are not 'Asian'. You might like or dislike it depending on your liking for neutral (forward) or recessed upper-midrange but all the audio research leading to measurements like Diffuse Field, Free Field and Harman In-Room were all done 'objectively', majorly in the 'west' and mostly led by 'western' scientists, even if there were scientists of other ethnicities in the team.

So, let's not call Harman or Diffuse Field tuning followed by any of the Asian or Western companies as 'Asian tuning'.

Some more stuff to think about -

• Custom Art, a Polish (European) brand's two most successful IEMs - F7 and F7U have really good pinna gain (forward upper-midrange). F7 in fact had much more as it was tuned as a bass boosted Diffuse Field style IEM whereas F7U is tuned around the Harman target.
• Empire Ears, an American company owned by Asian folks have Odin, a forward upper-midrange IEM and probably their most critically acclaimed IEM too - which again is tuned around the Harman target.
• Audeze, an American company started by an Indian (Asian), have MM-500 and LCD-5, which are forward upper-midrange headphones tuned to a downward sloping Diffuse Field/Harman In-Room style target, with the MM-500 being made in collaboration with famous American-Guatemalan mixing engineer Manny Marroquin.
• 64 Audio, an American company started by European, Belonozhko brothers, have U12t (their most popular model), again a forward(-ish) upper-midrange IEM tuned close to the Harman target.
• Sennheiser, a German company with one of the most neutrally tuned HD6X0 range are all forward upper-midrange headphones with around 11-12db of ear gain. Let's not forget about the upper-midrange + heavily treble dominant HD800 series of headphones. All made by a German company and tuned by the famous European engineer Axel Grell (ex-Chief Engineer of Sennheiser).
• Lime Ears, a Polish company have 2 nice forward upper-midrange based IEMs with sparkly lower-treble - Aether R and Pneuma.
• FiR Audio, an American company of some of the 64 Audio, European, Belonozhko bothers, had an IEM called M2 with 20dB of pinna gain and extremely bright treble - most I've seen in an IEM!
• Etymotic, an American company and leader in acoustic research, tune most, in fact all of their IEMs in the ballpark of their own version of Diffuse Field target. All have good pinna gain/forward upper-midrange.

Just because some companies don't tune their stuff to existing audio research and instead like tuning by ear (for lack of a better word), be it in the West or East, does not make them have Western or Eastern ideologies. Same goes for Asian companies like Elysian, HifiMan, Moondrop, Softears, Tanchjim, TruthEar, Thieaudio, etc - Just because they're tuning to Audio Research based target curves led by Western/White scientists does not make them have an Eastern tuning ideology. These companies are mostly trying to tune based on different audio research and targets. Some mix in more treble, others a bit more bass and so on.

Coming to the love of bass - I've heard and read stuff like 'Americans love their bass' (#BeatsByDrDre) but so do 99% of the Indians. I'm an Indian, currently in India, and every amateur, some even enthusiasts, who talk to me about audio or in general discuss audio in groups or online, talk about bass first and foremost, while some only talk about bass. I've very rarely seen amateurs start a conversation on audio with upper-midrange or treble. You should see the EQ most of my family, friends and acquaintances have in their cars! It's extremely V-shaped. There's no midrange there, lower or upper! Lol! Most of the budget IEMs sold on Amazon India either have 'bass', 'dynamic bass' or 'basshead' in their name, heading or tagline. Even more by an Indian brand called BoAt (one of the founders is now a shark on Shark Tank India too). They all sell like hot cakes (more than 10,000 products a day as per BoAt's claim) and the marketing using 'only bass' is so excessive that it's cringeworthy for an audiophile who values the totality of well tuned FR.

Also, there are other premium Asian companies like FatFreq and Symphonium making bass head / bass lover models like Maestro, Maestro Mini, Helios and Meteor. Elysian Diva in Max setting is surely a bass lover IEM too!

Sure, the genres heard across the world are very different; fairly differently mixed and produced. But so are different genres in the same country! R&B and Hip-Hop are mixed completely differently from Alternative Rock and Metal in just America! It's not like Eminem, a white rapper, mixes his hip-hop very differently from any of the black or brown rappers in the US or any other country! You see, ethnicity or race has nothing to do with the way a genre is mixed across the globe. It depends on the artist, producer and audio engineer working on the record and the preferences they have for that genre or type of production.

I believe a good versatile tuning will play most genres very well, if not equally well (subjectively), regardless of who tuned the IEM, where he lives or what he listens to. I'm not talking about specialist/flavoured IEMs targeted at niche or specific audiences and preferences but versatile IEMs in general. Again, one's perception of an IEM being versatile or not depends on one's own preferences. Some might consider Trailli, U12t, RSV, KXXS, Hana and IER-Z1R as more versatile, while others could prefer Andromeda, VE8 and Erlkonig the same way. They are all tuned very differently!

So, with all this said, is there really a phenomenon where several companies in the West or East are coming together or even tuning individually based on their region, race, skin tone and genre preferences to make up a West vs East tuning ideology? Or are there just companies that like to tune neutrally, some to reference targets, some who like to balance the FR regions as per their own taste while others who like to make highly coloured tunings for specific niches, preferences and likings?

 

[daijobudes]

I find this Western vs Eastern tuning ideology a little weird and funny. Whenever I read something like this, this is the string of thought that runs in my head, which I thought I'll post here for everyone to ponder on.

A lot of the 'Asian', especially Chi-fi IEM companies, try to tune around the Harman Target -> which was a fact, measurement and preference research led and done majorly by White scientists -> with the head of the research (Dr. Olive) being a white man from Canada -> all working for an American company (Harman) -> which was later acquired by a Korean company (Samsung) -> who then implemented the research in their own TWS IEMs (Buds line) -> which is tuned by one of their European/Austrian companies (AKG) -> and now slowly being implement in all their America companies and products (JBL, Mark Levinson, etc).

Can't get more global than this!

Harman, Diffuse Field or Free Field - which primarily focus on forward upper-midrange (ear/pinna gain), because that is how our ears measure and respond to sound, are not 'Asian'. You might like or dislike it depending on your liking for neutral (forward) or recessed upper-midrange but all the audio research leading to measurements like Diffuse Field, Free Field and Harman In-Room were all done 'objectively', majorly in the 'west' and mostly led by 'western' scientists, even if there were scientists of other ethnicities in the team.

So, let's not call Harman or Diffuse Field tuning followed by any of the Asian or Western companies as 'Asian tuning'.

Some more stuff to think about -

• Custom Art, a Polish (European) brand's two most successful IEMs - F7 and F7U have really good pinna gain (forward upper-midrange). F7 in fact had much more as it was tuned as a bass boosted Diffuse Field style IEM whereas F7U is tuned around the Harman target.
• Empire Ears, an American company owned by Asian folks have Odin, a forward upper-midrange IEM and probably their most critically acclaimed IEM too - which again is tuned around the Harman target.
• Audeze, an American company started by an Indian (Asian), have MM-500 and LCD-5, which are forward upper-midrange headphones tuned to a downward sloping Diffuse Field/Harman In-Room style target.
• 64 Audio, an American company started by European brothers, have U12t (their most popular model), again a forward(-ish) upper-midrange IEM tuned close to the Harman target.
• Sennheiser, a German company with one of the most neutrally tuned HD6X0 range are all a forward upper-midrange headphones with around 11-12db of ear gain. Let's not forget about the upper-midrange + heavily treble dominant HD800 series of headphones. All made by a German company and tuned by European engineer Axel Grell.
• Lime Ears, a Polish company have 2 very upper-midrange dominated IEMs with sparkly lower-treble - Aether R and Pneuma.
• FiR Audio, an American company of some of the 64 Audio, European Belonozhko bothers, had an IEM called M2 with 20dB of pinna gain and extremely bright treble - most I've seen in an IEM!

Just because some companies don't tune their stuff to existing audio research and instead like tuning by ear (for lack of a better word), be it in the West or East, does not make them have Western or Eastern ideologies. Same goes for Asian companies like Elysian, HifiMan, Moondrop, Softears, Tanchjim, TruthEar, Thieaudio, etc - Just because they're tuning to Audio Research based target curves led by Western/White scientists does not make them have an Eastern tuning ideology. These companies are mostly trying to tune based on different audio research and targets. Some mix in more treble while others a bit more bass.

Coming to the love of bass - I've heard and read stuff like 'Americans love their bass' (#BeatsByDrDre) but so do 99% of the Indians. I'm an Indian, currently in India, and every amateur, some even enthusiasts, who talk to me about audio or in general discuss audio in groups or online, talk about bass first and foremost, while some only talk about bass. I've very rarely seen amateurs start a conversation on audio with upper-midrange or treble. You should see the EQ most of my family, friends and acquaintances have in their cars! It's extremely V-shaped. There's no midrange there, lower or upper! Lol! Most of the budget IEMs sold on Amazon India either have 'bass', 'dynamic bass' or 'basshead' in their name, heading or tagline. Even more by an Indian brand called BoAt (one of the founders is now a shark on Shark Tank India too). They all sell like hot cakes (more than 10,000 products a day as per BoAt's claim) and the marketing using 'only bass' is so excessive that it's cringeworthy for an audiophile who values the totality of well tuned FR.

Also, there are other premium Asian companies like FatFreq and Symphonium making bass head / bass lover models like Maestro, Maestro Mini, Helios and Meteor. Elysian Diva in Max setting is surely a bass lover IEM too!

Sure, the genres heard across the world are very different; fairly differently mixed and produced. But so are different genres in the same country! R&B and Hip-Hop are mixed completely differently from Alternative Rock and Metal in just America! It's not like Eminem, a white rapper, mixes his hip-hop very differently from any of the black or brown rappers in the US or any other country! You see, ethnicity or race has nothing to do with the way a genre is mixed across the globe. It depends on the artist, producer and audio engineer working on the record and the preferences they have for that genre or type of production.

I believe a good versatile tuning will play most genres very well, if not equally well, regardless of who tuned the IEM, where he lives or what he listens. I'm not talking about specialist/flavoured IEMs targeted at niche or specific audiences and preferences but versatile IEMs in general. Again, one's perception of an IEM being versatile or not depends on one's own preferences. Some might consider Trailli, U12t, RSV, KXXS, Hana and IER-Z1R as more versatile, while others could prefer Andromeda, VE8 and Erlkonig the same way. They are all tuned very differently!

So, with all this said, is there really a phenomenon where several companies in the West or East are coming together or even tuning individually based on their region, race, skin tone and genre preferences to make up a West vs East tuning ideology? Or are they just companies that like to tune neutrally, some to targets, some who like to balance the FR regions as per their own taste while others like to make highly coloured tunings for specific niches, preferences and liking?

What a read! Kudos

 

[o0genesis0o]

Just because some companies don't tune their stuff to existing audio research and instead like tuning by ear (for lack of a better word),

This one made me laugh out loud (ok, exhaling more air out of my nose than usual. But you get the point)

But totally agree. It is unwise to not at least consider the research results of how human hear.

At the same time, saying that a product is good because it’s within a few dB from target like a certain company is also kind of ridiculous.

I believe a good versatile tuning will play most genres very well, if not equally well, regardless of who tuned the IEM, where he lives or what he listens to

Totally agree. Balanced, “correct” tuning with just enough deviation for “character” is what I personally look for. Other than that, it’s about controlling the peaks and dips to avoid any harshness.

 

[Animagus]

This one made me laugh out loud (ok, exhaling more air out of my nose than usual. But you get the point)

But totally agree. It is unwise to not at least consider the research results of how human hear.

At the same time, saying that a product is good because it’s within a few dB from target like a certain company is also kind of ridiculous.

Oh they're just different schools of tuning and most brands follow both! Even the audio research dominant brands actually tune by ear once they've gotten the product sounding close to the intended target, whatever that target may be - an internal in-house sound target or one of the popular ones available. I personally at least don't know of any brand that tunes just with measurements to a target curve without ever inserting the IEM in their ears even once. I'd love to hear if such an IEM exists. Lol!

When I help some brands by providing tuning ideas or feedback on their prototypes, I follow both, actually preferring the latter for testing, i.e. my ears, and then following it with written notes for tweaks they should make for final version and then correlating it all with tweaks on the current measurements as easy and convenient visual feedback. Starting within parameters of the kind of signature one is trying to target - Reference, Basshead, U-shaped, V-shaped, W-shaped, etc, helps greatly but the final tuning is always done in this continuous cycle - tune the circuit -> measure for reference -> extensive listening tests -> tweaks -> measurements for reference -> extensive listening tests and it goes on and on!

 

[gLer]

Oh they're just different schools of tuning and most brands follow both! Even the audio research dominant brands actually tune by ear once they've gotten the product sounding close to the intended target, whatever that target may be - an internal in-house sound target or one of the popular ones available. I personally at least don't know of any brand that tunes just with measurements to a target curve without ever inserting the IEM in their ears even once. I'd love to hear if such an IEM exists. Lol!

When I help some brands by providing tuning ideas or feedback on their prototypes, I follow both, actually preferring the latter for testing, i.e. my ears, and then following it with written notes for tweaks they should make for final version and then correlating it all with tweaks on the current measurements as easy and convenient visual feedback. Starting within parameters of the kind of signature one is trying to target - Reference, Basshead, U-shaped, V-shaped, W-shaped, etc, helps greatly but the final tuning is always done in this continuous cycle - tune the circuit -> measure for reference -> extensive listening tests -> tweaks -> measurements for reference -> extensive listening tests and it goes on and on!

You know what would be really cool: a how-to write-up on how modern IEMs are tuned (physically tuned). For example, how do you push each FR band where you want it to go, physically, inside the IEM - what parts are tweaked, etc. Not sure if you have time for it, but it's like a dark art mystery for most people. I think many of us would have a better appreciation for the final sound of an IEM if we knew how (and how easy/difficult) it was to tune it, and the actual process involved. No pressure!

 

[zeroshiki]

Search for a program like ISO2DSD or SACD_Extract to split the iso. into individual DSF tracks, then use FooBar to convert these tracks to lossy format of your choice.

Actually when you load up the .iso to foobar, you can select/highlight all the tracks there and just convert straight to flac. No need to split the dsd files first. Although that could be useful too, one can load up the individual dsd files to sdcard instead of a whole .iso

 

[drftr]

Actually when you load up the .iso to foobar, you can select/highlight all the tracks there and just convert straight to flac. No need to split the dsd files first. Although that could be useful too, one can load up the individual dsd files to sdcard instead of a whole .iso

I ran into Jriver software which happens to have that option too. Seems to be quite the process as my tablet has never run this hot.

drftr

 

[Deezel177]

You know what would be really cool: a how-to write-up on how modern IEMs are tuned (physically tuned). For example, how do you push each FR band where you want it to go, physically, inside the IEM - what parts are tweaked, etc. Not sure if you have time for it, but it's like a dark art mystery for most people. I think many of us would have a better appreciation for the final sound of an IEM if we knew how (and how easy/difficult) it was to tune it, and the actual process involved. No pressure!

From the conversations I’ve had, most tuners will start visualizing the sound they want, which, in most cases, means picturing the final target curve. So, they’ll start with a graph they want to achieve.

Afterwards, they’ll select the drivers to achieve that. Just like the final IEM, each driver has their own FR curve. I believe, if you go to sites like Mouser, which sell Knowles and Sonion drivers, you can view the specs sheet of each driver, and you can see the FR graph of each driver there. You can also see their individual sensitivities and impedances, which is crucial when you’re driver-matching for a multi-driver config, but we’ll get to that later.

Now, the “tweaking” bit is when crossover components are introduced. These can be electrical components like resistors, inductors and capacitors, or they can be acoustic like dampers or foam. In a single-driver config, maybe you wanna dampen a specific peak at 6kHz. Well, that’s when you add a damper in the sound tube to do so. If you have clear-shelled IEMs, it looks like a little ring in the middle of the sound tube. Recently, these contraptions have become super advanced like Custom Art’s Heimholtz-like resonators or CFA’s acoustic chambers, etc. And, speaking of sound tubes, the length of the tube also determines where those peaks fall, just like how an IEM’s treble (mostly) will sound different depending on insertion depth. So, that’s another tweak-able parameter.

Whereas, electrical crossover components in a single-driver IEM are for, say, reducing the IEM’s sensitivity, so it doesn’t pick up as much noise. I believe a resistor is the solution to that. They’re far more vital in a multi-driver config, where, as you said, you have to determine what frequency an IEM’s output starts, and where it rolls-off. That’s done with the RLC components I mentioned earlier. It’s been years since I took my diploma course in electrical engineering, but you can manipulate a driver’s capacitance, inductance and resistance, such that only a range of frequencies reach it. So, for example, and this may be very simplistic (or outright wrong), for a low-mid driver, you can wire an RLC circuit to it of a certain O, H and F, such that it rolls off at 200Hz and 1kHz, meaning it outputs 200Hz-1kHz.

Then, the number of separations or segregations you make determines the number of ways that crossover is. So, if you have a 3-way crossover, that means the signal is being divided into 3 and headed towards 3 drivers or driver clusters. Usually, those 3 ways are bass, mids and treble. What does it mean, then, if an IEM has more drivers than crossover paths? Say, a 6-driver IEM with a 3-way crossover. That means, each crossover path is being handled by more than 1 driver. In this hypothetical IEM, maybe there’s 1 woofer, 4 mid drivers and 1 tweeter. So, that’s 6-drivers divided into 3 frequency ranges. The 64A A18t, for example, has a 4-way crossover. On the specs sheet, it says “1 tia high, 1 high, 8 mid, 8 low” and those are the 4 ways those 18 drivers are being separated. And, what does it mean when an IEM has more crossover paths than drivers, like EE’s IEMs? I… have no clue. I have my theories, but I don’t even wanna guess in fear of misinformation. So, I’ll leave that to the Vang’s to explain.

Obviously, though, it isn’t as easy as slapping on an RLC circuit to carve your FR and calling it a day. Aside from affecting the roll-off points, RLC circuits also affect things like sensitivity, distortion, phase, etc. So, maybe your circuit got the mid and bass drivers tonally-matched, but the former is suddenly quieter than the latter, and turning it up adds some distortion. What do you do, then? A solution would be adding one more of the same mid driver and wiring the 2 in parallel, so now you’ve got 2 drivers carrying that output. That’s how a 2-driver IEM becomes a 3-driver out of necessity. Or, you could use a different mid driver with a closer sensitivity, which is where driver-matching and selection comes in. Then, maybe your RLC circuit got the harsh treble peak out of the tweeter, but it’s now out of time with the woofer, and you’re getting phasing, ruining imaging and coherence. A solution would be to remove the RLC circuit and dealing with the peak with a damper instead. Or, you could add length to the sound tube and move the peak to a less offensive frequency. Or, you could leave it in as the lesser of two evils, and have it get bashed on Head-Fi.

After all that’s done, moving back to each driver having their own impedances, sensitivities, etc., you now have to get all those drivers to work the same when they meet the source. It’s the key to technology like FIBAE tech or LID tech, which is getting the drivers to be on the same page when they see a load, essentially. Admittedly, this is the bit I’ve personally read the least about, but I know it’s why CFA’s OG Andro, as an example, had a wildly-varying bass response depending on the source’s output impedance. So, even after you’ve got the tuning down on your workstation or source, you now need to make sure it’ll sound the same (or similar enough) with other sources too.

Then, after ALL of that, you still gotta listen to it yourself and do all the final tweaks. Maybe, the IEM graphed great, but the soundstage sucks or the dynamics are dead. Back to the drawing board, you go…

That’s pretty much all I know about tuning off the top of my head. I’m sure I’m forgetting stuff, I’m sure I’ve gotten some stuff wrong, and I’m sure what I know is only scratching the surface as to what goes into building an IEM. But, ‘hope that answers some questions for you, and I hope to see others in the know chime in too.

 

[gLer]

From the conversations I’ve had, most tuners will start visualizing the sound they want, which, in most cases, means picturing the final target curve. So, they’ll start with a graph they want to achieve.

Afterwards, they’ll select the drivers to achieve that. Just like the final IEM, each driver has their own FR curve. I believe, if you go to sites like Mouser, which sell Knowles and Sonion drivers, you can view the specs sheet of each driver, and you can see the FR graph of each driver there. You can also see their individual sensitivities and impedances, which is crucial when you’re driver-matching for a multi-driver config, but we’ll get to that later.

Now, the “tweaking” bit is when crossover components are introduced. These can be electrical components like resistors, inductors and capacitors, or they can be acoustic like dampers or foam. In a single-driver config, maybe you wanna dampen a specific peak at 6kHz. Well, that’s when you add a damper in the sound tube to do so. If you have clear-shelled IEMs, it looks like a little ring in the middle of the sound tube. Recently, these contraptions have become super advanced like Custom Art’s Heimholtz-like resonators or CFA’s acoustic chambers, etc. And, speaking of sound tubes, the length of the tube also determines where those peaks fall, just like how an IEM’s treble (mostly) will sound different depending on insertion depth. So, that’s another tweak-able parameter.

Whereas, electrical crossover components in a single-driver IEM are for, say, reducing the IEM’s sensitivity, so it doesn’t pick up as much noise. I believe a resistor is the solution to that. They’re far more vital in a multi-driver config, where, as you said, you have to determine what frequency an IEM’s output starts, and where it rolls-off. That’s done with the RLC components I mentioned earlier. It’s been years since I took my diploma course in electrical engineering, but you can manipulate a driver’s capacitance, inductance and resistance, such that only a range of frequencies reach it. So, for example, and this may be very simplistic (or outright wrong), for a low-mid driver, you can wire an RLC circuit to it of a certain O, H and F, such that it rolls off at 200Hz and 1kHz, meaning it outputs 200Hz-1kHz.

Then, the number of separations or segregations you make determines the number of ways that crossover is. So, if you have a 3-way crossover, that means the signal is being divided into 3 and headed towards 3 drivers or driver clusters. Usually, those 3 ways are bass, mids and treble. What does it mean, then, if an IEM has more drivers than crossover paths? Say, a 6-driver IEM with a 3-way crossover. That means, each crossover path is being handled by more than one driver. In this hypothetical IEM, maybe there’s 1 woofer, 4 mid drivers and 1 tweeter. So, that’s 6-drivers divided into 3 frequency ranges. The 64A A18t, for example, has a 4-way crossover. On the specs sheet, it says “1 tia high, 1 high, 8 mid, 8 low” and those are the 4 ways those 18 drivers are being separated. And, what does it mean when an IEM has more crossover paths than drivers, like EE’s IEMs. I… have no clue. I have my theories, but I don’t even wanna guess in fear of misinformation. So, I’ll leave those to the Vangs to explain.

Obviously, though, it isn’t as easy as slapping on an RLC circuit to carve your FR and calling it a day. Aside from affecting the roll-off points, RLC circuits also affect things like sensitivity, distortion, phase, etc. So, maybe your circuit got the mid and bass drivers tonally-matched, but the former is suddenly quieter than the latter, and turning it up adds some distortion. What do you then? A solution would be adding one more of the same mid driver and wiring it in series, so now you’ve got two drivers carrying that output. That’s how a 2-driver IEM becomes a 3-driver out of necessity. Or, you could use a different mid driver with a closer sensitivity, which is where driver-matching and selection comes in. Then, maybe your RLC circuit got the harsh treble peak out of the tweeter, but it’s now out of time with the woofer, and you’re getting phasing ruining imaging and coherence. A solution would be to remove the RLC circuit and dealing with the peak with a damper instead. Or, you could add length to the sound tube and move the peak to a less offensive frequency. Or, you could leave it in as the lesser of two evils, and have it get bashed on Head-Fi.

After all that’s done, moving back to each driver having their own impedances, sensitivities, etc., you now have to get all those drivers to work the same when they meet the source. It’s the key to technology like FIBAE tech or LID tech, which is getting the drivers to be on the same page when they see a load, essentially. Admittedly, this is the bit I’ve personally read the least about, but I know it’s why CFA’s OG Andro, as an example, had a wildly-varying bass response depending on the source’s output impedance. So, even after you’ve got the tuning down on your workstation or source, you now need to make sure it’ll sound the same (or similar enough) with other sources too.

Then, after ALL of that, you still gotta listen to it yourself and do all the final tweaks. Maybe, the IEM graphed great, but the soundstage sucks or the dynamics are dead. Back to the drawing board, you go…

That’s pretty much all I know about tuning off the top of my head. I’m sure I’m forgetting stuff, I’m sure I’ve gotten some stuff wrong, and I’m sure what I know is only scratching the surface as to what goes into building an IEM. But, ‘hope that answers some questions for you, and I hope to see others in the know chime in too.

That, Sir, is what I can an exceptional post Now throw in some macro shots of the step by step process, will you?

Just kidding, some seriously good insights there Dan, and an indication of how complex the art and science of tuning a precision instrument like an IEM can be (and how expensive too).

PS....and I'm adding this in small text so as not to derail from Dan's brilliant post, when some crony walks into a room of passionate professionals and gives a one-word 'trash' summary to describe their hard work and livelihood, is it really surprising that some get annoyed?

 

[CodenameBK201]

I believe a good versatile tuning will play most genres very well, if not equally well (subjectively), regardless of who tuned the IEM, where he lives or what he listens to. I'm not talking about specialist/flavoured IEMs targeted at niche or specific audiences and preferences but versatile IEMs in general. Again, one's perception of an IEM being versatile or not depends on one's own preferences.

This is a great read overall, but this bit especially. I very quickly realized it when demoing the xe6, but it sort of always made me chuckle when people threw around words like "bombastic" or "basshead" for that model's tuning when, to me, based on my tuning preferences, on the bassiest setting nothing sounded peculiar or off. I was tossing orchestral compositions at these things and having what to others might sound as elevated bass sounded, to me, perfectly natural on something like a cello in a standup orchestra. In fairness, my daily drivers were a pair of v-moda m100s, for years--v shaped tuning is literally in the description. Elevated bass and treble and slightly recessed mids are more or less my speed. I've never claimed to have audiophile tuning preferences, and I never will, but I think to a fair degree what makes tuning sound right comes from what you mentally benchmark as the way something should sound to you, and that's not always going to align with "reference sound", as in "the way this piece was intended to be heard", either by the artist or the studio.

 

[drftr]

I think to a fair degree what makes tuning sound right comes from what you mentally benchmark as the way something should sound to you

Rule #1.

drftr

 

[gLer]

This is a great read overall, but this bit especially. I very quickly realized it when demoing the xe6, but it sort of always made me chuckle when people threw around words like "bombastic" or "basshead" for that model's tuning when, to me, based on my tuning preferences, on the bassiest setting nothing sounded peculiar or off. I was tossing orchestral compositions at these things and having what to others might sound as elevated bass sounded, to me, perfectly natural on something like a cello in a standup orchestra. In fairness, my daily drivers were a pair of v-moda m100s, for years--v shaped tuning is literally in the description. Elevated bass and treble and slightly recessed mids are more or less my speed. I've never claimed to have audiophile tuning preferences, and I never will, but I think to a fair degree what makes tuning sound right comes from what you mentally benchmark as the way something should sound to you, and that's not always going to align with "reference sound", as in "the way this piece was intended to be heard", either by the artist or the studio.

Ah, a kindred spirit! m100 was my entry back into headphones that started me off on this journey more than five years ago now... You'll quickly learn, like I did, that bassheads are the second-class citizens of the audiophile world, and that for many, bass should just stay in its lane (otherwise it messes up all the good stuff, apparently). Sadly when I listen to the m100 now I sort of get that (even though it's still a crazy fun headphone), but bass as the foundation of all music has been my creed since day one, and nothing is ever going to change that.

Rule #1.

drftr

Spot on. And then as soon as you say that out loud, you get 50 replies telling you how you're hearing it wrong.