[drftr]

Frequency response only gives part of the story-- it says nothing of timbre or technical capacity. To me it is akin to the reflection of a building on the ground which gives only the dimensions but says nothing about the substance of which the building is made.

Now be fair, step in front of the mirror, and ask if this isn't exactly the same for the Harman curve that you commented on a few days ago.

Measurements promise nothing. But they do provide hints. Once you've learned what part of the FR often triggers an allergy then you can use the chart to avoid stepping in the same trap over and over again. In my own case I have learned that once the FR of an IEM jumps above the Harman line I find it too aggressive (think lower treble on the Sultan, or too fast a rise for the pinna gain or an early descent from mid bass to lower mids for many/most others). So while I can't use measurements to select the best IEMs I can definitely see back why some worked while many others didn't. Concluding I think the practical use for measurements is to confirm any doubts of things you think you hear. For me, after a confirmation I can give it a place and leave it alone. Or, better, think about how to change the balance in my favour modifying the chain.

drftr

 

[Lépine]

Something unrelated....


Thought I wanted a Lange 1 with a black dial judging by the pictures/videos online...but the 1815 blew my mind away once I actually saw the real thing.

I guess watches are just like IEMs...don't judge it until you tried it yourself.

Yeah I might need to sell a few things to get some plain bread for my everyday meals for the next 10 years. But that's after I get my black Phonix, of course...should be coming soon.

What a beauty!

 

[KuroKitsu]

Speaking of FR Graphs

 

[Rockwell75]

Now be fair, step in front of the mirror, and ask if this isn't exactly the same for the Harman curve that you commented on a few days ago.

I'm not sure I follow...I think they are different issues. With respect to Harman my main thing is that I don't like the idea of a generic or universalized target curve. In this case today my point is that there are many aspects of sound that are not reflected in FR curves.

Measurements promise nothing. But they do provide hints. Once you've learned what part of the FR often triggers an allergy then you can use the chart to avoid stepping in the same trap over and over again. In my own case I have learned that once the FR of an IEM jumps above the Harman line I find it too aggressive (think lower treble on the Sultan, or too fast a rise for the pinna gain or an early descent from mid bass to lower mids for many/most others). So while I can't use measurements to select the best IEMs I can definitely see back why some worked while many others didn't. Concluding I think the practical use for measurements is to confirm any doubts of things you think you hear. For me, after a confirmation I can give it a place and leave it alone. Or, better, think about how to change the balance in my favour modifying the chain.

I've never denied the utility of measurements and I never meant to imply that they aren't important or that they don't contain useful information. With respect to reading FR graphs I have found personally that I cannot divorce things like driver type from how an IEM graphs. My experience in this regard has been a little different than yours-- my attempts to form an absolute idea of my preferences based on graphs have all failed. Numerous times there have been IEMs that on paper I should not have liked but I ended up liking a lot-- firming my conviction that in the ultimate sense the overall gestalt of an IEM's performance (including even intangible things like the artfulness and soul imbued by the conscousness of the tuner) is ultmately what really matters and is much more important than any single variable or factor. Hence my beleive that there is simply no substitute for hearing something yourself in order to judge it.

 

[drftr]

I'm not sure I follow...I think they are different issues. With respect to Harman my main thing is that I don't like the idea of a generic or universalized target curve. In this case today my point is that there are many aspects of sound that are not reflected in FR curves.



I've never denied the utility of measurements and I never meant to imply that they aren't important or that they don't contain useful information. With respect to reading FR graphs I have found personally that I cannot divorce things like driver type from how an IEM graphs. My experience in this regard has been a little different than yours-- my attempts to form an absolute idea of my preferences based on graphs have all failed. Numerous times there have been IEMs that on paper I should not have liked but I ended up liking a lot-- firming my conviction that in the ultimate sense the overall gestalt of an IEM's performance (including even intangible things like the artfulness and soul imbued by the conscousness of the tuner) is ultmately what really matters and is much more important than any single variable or factor. Hence my beleive that there is simply no substitute for hearing something yourself in order to judge it.

I totally agree with that last sentence, but the rest of the paragraph may simply be because you were not "the average person" that was used to produce the curve. There's nothing Harman or the curve (or you) can do about that. Knowing this I totally see your point: The curve is useless for you but it can still be helpful for people that are more average in their hearing preferences (quantity-wise; not quality-wise).

drftr

 

[firesign]

I've tried IEMs that follow the Harman curve and find them too shouty in the upper midrange.

However, in headphones it is my preferred profile. I've tried many headphones, and I like all of them much better if I equalize them to follow the Harman curve

 

[drftr]

I've tried IEMs that follow the Harman curve and find them too shouty in the upper midrange

I find it an extremely fine line and mostly depending on how it's compensated elsewhere in the curve. For my preferences it should be juuust a little below the Harman curve, but if it gets too far below I lose the in-your-face quality of for instance guitars too much. The same goes for any big dips in the curve between upper mids and lower treble as that makes the sound too relaxed for me. I can definitely see why many do dip in that area but for me it becomes too laid back and for some music boring.

drftr

 

[metaljem77]

My bliss or 极乐 coming in whichever value proposition / formula (DAP-cable-IEM) I am game enough to try

 

[firesign]

I find it an extremely fine line and mostly depending on how it's compensated elsewhere in the curve. For my preferences it should be juuust a little below the Harman curve, but if it gets too far below I lose the in-your-face quality of for instance guitars too much. The same goes for any big dips in the curve between upper mids and lower treble as that makes the sound too relaxed for me. I can definitely see why many do dip in that area but for me it becomes too laid back and for some music boring.

drftr

Just like me

 

[Animagus]

I find it an extremely fine line and mostly depending on how it's compensated elsewhere in the curve. For my preferences it should be juuust a little below the Harman curve, but if it gets too far below I lose the in-your-face quality of for instance guitars too much. The same goes for any big dips in the curve between upper mids and lower treble as that makes the sound too relaxed for me. I can definitely see why many do dip in that area but for me it becomes too laid back and for some music boring.

drftr

Hey Joop! From what you've written, looks like your preferences are closer to mine, closer to my preference target curve below (dotted line). You're absolutely on point pointing out and valuing pinna gain for accurate definition of guitars (most instruments in general). It's very important for me as a listener too and even more as a musician. But then I reckon it's a preference for people who like listening to songs with the ability to focus on each instrument precisely, like one could on flat speakers/monitors in a studio room. They're mostly the ones who value instrument definition as much and good amount of pinna gain as a result.

People who want to listen to songs more like a soundscape, or actually a slightly dulled down soundscape for a relatively relaxed and laid back listen, might like the pinna gain much lower. Other reasons why people might prefer lower pinna gain is them being particularly sensitive to upper-midrange peaks due to their ear canal shape and resonances (not really quantifiable sitting at home) or sometimes just because they're used to listening to IEMs that had recessed upper-midrange, for most of their life, and moving to a more neutral pinna gain sounds peaky as a result, even if it is quite a bit lower than the Harman curve. The latter is where the concept of ear adapting and normalising a particular sound over a long period of time plays a role. The reason where people prefer highly coloured signatures are for 'an experience', where the unique signature can give a feeling of listening to the songs in a hall, arena, standing right next to the bass woofer in a music festival, open fields with no human population, etc. Jokes apart, I kinda like some IEMs for that experience, mostly the first two kind though. Haha!

What I keep fiddling with in my preference curve is the amount of bass shelf and upper-treble. A lot of my favourite IEMs generally have upper-treble boosted above the dotted but I personally like it best around the dotted line or lower.

 

[main character]

Homebrew Canjam started!

Recently, I upgraded my Fir Ne4 to Kr5. After US Fir Kit Tour, I felt Kr5 was my favorite, with better detail than Ne4.
Ne4 is all packed up for classified now, but I feel Ne4's high extension was even better than Kr5, and it may provide some uniqueness to me even though I have Kr5.

I like Bogdan's welcome letter. Almost a decade of experimentation.. Cutting edge.. It's the culmination of everything!
This letter is part of the reason why I stuck with the stock foam tip (Comply 500) for Ne4, as it was shipped with a foam tip installed to units. Kr5, on the contrary, did not come with any tip inserted with units. To realize high extension potentials, I experimented with silicon tips. Foam tips augment kinetic bass, or just bass, but the high extension is less.

On top of existing Azla Xelastec, Azla crystal, and JVC Spiral dot ++(spiral dot pro is the newest one), Amazon sent me Spinfit W1 and Azla Max. Azla Xelastec and crystal are excellent tip and match well with UM Mest2/Mext, but I felt their high extension is somewhat limited.
Acoustune AEX70, Symbio W, and Eartunes U tips are also incoming.

I felt Azla Max has a very slight veiled sensation, probably due to its integrated waxguard.

Spinfit W1 just clicked the moment I used it! I believe this is EE Gaea's stock tip and most recommended tip, as it preserves high FR energy. Indeed, the high FR performance was good. Though, SQ is also soft and never crosses that line for harshness. Moreover, it adds this special hue - I feel Spinfit W1 adds a little bit of tube hue that may be felt with very good amps. Timbre is soft and the staging is great. The Bass department is also very good. Now, all the rave reviews touting Kr5 as TOTL make sense to me. This is ONE silicon tip that succeeds both in the low-end and the high-end department. Also, Vocals are beautiful.



I also jumped on U12t from Classified, as @Precogvision recommended it (No doubt). I haven't compared it with my U6t. While very good iem, I felt that U6t could not be on TOTL level SQ with various matches. Maybe due to a slight lack of detail?
(Anyway, Precogvision keeps U6t with him as well)

I LOVE 64 Audio's welcome letter from Vitaliy. It's just the best I've ever seen. I feel like U6t, (or other 64 IEM) should alway acompany with me in life through and through. HEAR. FEEL. CREATE.

Talking about welcome letters, I also like FAudio K.'s welcome letter that came with Dark Sky. No recipe; it is hard, but he did it! He made the perfect sound with this kit! This is why I re-visited FAudio stock vocal tip(M was too small for me. L size was good) and was finally satisfied with Dark Sky's stock 2.5mm cable and Sp2000ss match. I was considering FAudio Daylight or other cables due to this metallic hue that comes with Dark Sky stock cable. FAudio vocal tips, like W1 tip, add slight softness and organic feel.


Speaking about unboxing experiences, I felt the best and most luxurious experience was with Vision Ear's VE7.

I am trying to understand why. It could be due to the purple color that effused nobility. Maybe it was due to 'Eau de COLOGNE'.


Oh, also, Spinfit has something to say to you guys! (All this writing was really about Spinfit W1)

Fir Kr5 / Sp2000ss+pw 1960s 4.4 adapter, Erua Miro 4.4mm cable)(Spinfit W1 tip)
FAudio Dark Sky, stock 2.5mm cable, stock FAudio vocal tip

 

[Natesdailies]

Interesting perspectives with frequency charts. My view is somewhere in between. Charts can provide me with an indication of the IEMs potential upsides and its negatives but cant illustrate the full picture.

If I show someone this image of Robson Street, Vancouver (or even a 360 angle on Google maps), that person can get an idea about its architecture and landscapes. However, it is impossible to grasp the full gesalt of the atmosphere in that moment: The fusion of scents from shops nearby that give it that nostalgic downtown characteristic, nor the ambiance of the local musicans and passerbys.

Graphs to me is a blueprint of an IEMs DNA. The full execution of that code is hard to gauage without experiencing it.

Jim (TGX) posted an image of Penons graph that resembled the Traillii. This got me morbidly curious because like many I am a huge fan of its tuning. It has great acoustic timbre and the relaxed highs made it an all rounder. I can listen to energetic music without feeling like someone is crashing a cymbal right next to my ears. This is another reason why I liked the XE6 - the treble tuning was perfect but I digress. After running some test tracks on the Impact Demo, it matched most of my expectations. However there some intangible differences that the graphs couldn't measure. Even though the shells look and feel simililar, the Impact didn't build pressure while the Traillii had a suction effect. The soundstage on the Impact was also more narrow and intimate while the Traillii boasted width. The Bass also slammed harder on the Impact while Traillii had an edge with the way it separated instruments.

These differences may have something to do with its driver configuration (4EST + 10BA vs 4EST vs 8BA) and different cable configurations. During my cable tests while I had the Traillii, the 1960s had a holographic stage, organic smooth "vintage" tonality. Impact in comparison is running a thinner OCC + 24K cable.

In the end, I like the fact that some of these technicalities can't be displayed on a graph. It keeps the hobby enigmatic for me and makes discussions like this interesting.

 

[drftr]

Hey Joop! From what you've written, looks like your preferences are closer to mine, closer to my preference target curve below (dotted line). You're absolutely on point pointing out and valuing pinna gain for accurate definition of guitars (most instruments in general). It's very important for me as a listener too and even more as a musician. But then I reckon it's a preference for people who like listening to songs with the ability to focus on each instrument precisely, like one could on flat speakers/monitors in a studio room. They're mostly the ones who value instrument definition as much and good amount of pinna gain as a result.

People who want to listen to songs more like a soundscape, or actually a slightly dulled down soundscape for a relatively relaxed and laid back listen, might like the pinna gain much lower. Other reasons why people might prefer lower pinna gain is them being particularly sensitive to upper-midrange peaks due to their ear canal shape and resonances (not really quantifiable sitting at home) or sometimes just because they're used to listening to IEMs that had recessed upper-midrange, for most of their life, and moving to a more neutral pinna gain sounds peaky as a result, even if it is quite a bit lower than the Harman curve. The latter is where the concept of ear adapting and normalising a particular sound over a long period of time plays a role. The reason where people prefer highly coloured signatures are for 'an experience', where the unique signature can give a feeling of listening to the songs in a hall, arena, standing right next to the bass woofer in a music festival, open fields with no human population, etc. Jokes apart, I kinda like some IEMs for that experience, mostly the first two though. Haha!

What I keep fiddling with in my preference curve is the amount of bass shelf and upper-treble. A lot of my favourite IEMs generally have upper-treble boosted above the dotted but I personally like it best around the dotted line or lower.

Yeah I could definitely see this work. I might want to dip into the lower mids a tiny bit later to give piano, double bass, cello, and male vocals a tad more sound box or chest volume, but perhaps a slower but not too slow DD for sub bass would take care of that.

RE your music related comment, I think this is close to my question for @JSBachFan yesterday (about whether preferring to call it a day before the shore is reached and focus on the music instead) had something to do with the classical music we mostly listened to. I think it might be safe-ish to say that we don't need to be wow-ed by anything and are very happy with a perfect 8, where if you'd be into for instance very bass rich genres then you'd probably strife to get the very last bit out of it. For me the risk with striving to be wow-ed would be that with the next IEM I'd want to be wow-ed more. That feeling probably doesn't exist for classical music lovers. Although a great soundstage and resolution are certainly a big bonus for me that's easier to compromise on than an unnatural presentation of acoustic instruments. Once I have that (and I do) I find it pretty hard to do a next step, mostly because of the risk of losing balance.

drftr

 

[MatW]

yeah! KK rocks! I’d really love to demo Ragnar now! Since many seem to say it’s even better!!

Based on what I have read about it, I don’t think I would like the Ragnar, esp. the treble, which is apparently quite elevated. Looking forward to your impressions though, should you get the opportunity to demo it.

 

[Skullar]

I'm not sure I follow...I think they are different issues. With respect to Harman my main thing is that I don't like the idea of a generic or universalized target curve. In this case today my point is that there are many aspects of sound that are not reflected in FR curves.



I've never denied the utility of measurements and I never meant to imply that they aren't important or that they don't contain useful information. With respect to reading FR graphs I have found personally that I cannot divorce things like driver type from how an IEM graphs. My experience in this regard has been a little different than yours-- my attempts to form an absolute idea of my preferences based on graphs have all failed. Numerous times there have been IEMs that on paper I should not have liked but I ended up liking a lot-- firming my conviction that in the ultimate sense the overall gestalt of an IEM's performance (including even intangible things like the artfulness and soul imbued by the conscousness of the tuner) is ultmately what really matters and is much more important than any single variable or factor. Hence my beleive that there is simply no substitute for hearing something yourself in order to judge it.

Yeh, i think i mentioned before in here too, but graph will only give you basic info. Not about technicalities, driver config as you said youreself.

Now whether that basic info you get from graph is enough to justify a blind bite will probably be affected on how broad or specific you tuning preferences are.
For me personally, can easily tell from graph if its going to work for me based on mids and bass tuning. If mids and bass section of graph are showing something i dont like. Its easy.. Every single iem that had "Issues" there, were a quick sell or if not an owned unit was not even considered.
For instance midbass tuned above subbass. Or lower mids too boosted. Will always mean its not my iem. All the auditions/purchases proved it.

Treble however had some exceptions. Because i simply dont have that strictly defined preferece for it. For instance i quite like my lower mids boosted. But i liked Supermoon with has that region dipped. It wasnt spot on, but i did not minda nd loved other aspects it that iem.

But in general, graph will tell me where iem would be a keeper or not. Not a single iem that graphed weird, i kept for longer.
Just my 2c here.

Edit: as an argument, i suspect that people who are looking to have a variety of flavours in tuning. Graphs will be almost useless....