Toranku's Thoughts and Reviews (and target EQ filters!)

[Edric Li]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereo_imaging

The term "imaging" is a shortened from "stereo imaging" and is defined by positional cues, also used in the 2-channel world to determine proper speaker placement.

Nope, there's more to it. According to J. Gordon Holt's audio glossary:

- Imaging: the measure of a system's ability to float stable and specific phantom images, reproducing the original sizes and locations of the instruments across the soundstage.
- Stereo imaging: the production of stable, specific phantom images of correct localization and width.
- Soundstage: the accuracy with which a reproducing system conveys audible information about the size, shape, and acoustical characteristics of the original recording space and the placement of the performers within it.

Imaging is more than just location/position. It's also about the "size" and the "stableness" of the instrument. For example, K3003/N5005 give great positional cue and boast exceptional soundstage, but neither is good at imaging. Their imaging are not "stable"; I cannot see the "size" of the instrument because I cannot visualize its "body."

These effects are due to tonality and timbre.

Partly, but not totally. The best example is to compare a pre-freqphase JH13/16 with a post-freqphase JH13/16 demo unit. JH claims to have resolved the phase issue in the original, resulting in a better imaging. The tonality were near identical, but the difference in imaging was night and day.

 

[crinacle]

Nope, there's more to it. According to J. Gordon Holt's audio glossary:

- Imaging: the measure of a system's ability to float stable and specific phantom images, reproducing the original sizes and locations of the instruments across the soundstage.
- Stereo imaging: the production of stable, specific phantom images of correct localization and width.
- Soundstage: the accuracy with which a reproducing system conveys audible information about the size, shape, and acoustical characteristics of the original recording space and the placement of the performers within it.

Imaging is more than just location/position. It also about the "size" and the "stableness" of the instrument. For example, K3003/N5005 give great positional cue and boast exceptional soundstage, but neither is good at imaging. Their imaging are not "stable"; I cannot see the "size" of the instrument because I cannot visualize its "body."

Interesting because I've never had a concept of "instrument size" before, nor have I experienced "instability". I define imaging as the umbrella term for soundstaging (width, depth etc.) and spatial cues and that's about it. Oh well, different perspectives I guess.

Partly, but not totally. The best example is to compare a pre-freqphase JH13/16 with a post-freqphase JH13/16 demo unit. JH claims to have resolved the phase issue in the original, resulting in a better imaging. The tonality were near identical, but the difference in imaging was night and day.

I have, and post-Freqphase JH13 was actually considerably narrower in staging in my experience, also causing very congested positional cues. It was also one of the main reasons why I've been recently theorising that intentional phase mismatch may have a positive effect on imaging in IEMs.

 

[Edric Li]

I have, and post-Freqphase JH13 was actually considerably narrower in staging in my experience, also causing very congested positional cues. It was also one of the main reasons why I've been recently theorising that intentional phase mismatch may have a positive effect on imaging in IEMs.

I have the same first impression for the post-freqphase JH13 too. But upon listening to more units from different retailers for extended time, I came to this conclusion (about 5 yrs ago lol): JH was able to achieve a better imaging by correcting phase, and hence needs less positional cues from the timber. In other words, he had to turn down the high freq drivers a bit to accommodate the better (true) imaging, otherwise things will sound precise yet bright. Having less high freq, as you may well know, results in smaller perceived soundstage. To my ears post-fp JH13 is indeed better at imaging: I can "see" the instruments better. The images, though may be closer together, are more precise and more vivid. Being the darker compared to pre-fp JH13 does not change that fact.

My theory against your intended theory is that phase-incorrect IEM, say pre-fp JH13/K3003, needs excessive high freq to give timber and soundstage that results in perceived positional cue, hence better imaging according to your definition. On the other hand, phase-correct IEM, say JH Roxanne, can be dark while achieving a better imaging according to Holt's definition. The muted treble results in narrower perceived soundstage and positional cue, hence your impression.

TL;DR: Poor imaging (according to Holt's definition) / phase-incorrect IEMs need more treble to give positional cues and soundstage, hence better imaging (according to your definition.)

 

[issuzark]

I do have the Oriolus mkii but i feel its still different...still good though.

How's your mkii coming along? Any signs of cracked housing?

Just so you know Togo 334 is a product from 2012. For reference, K3003 was from 2011 and se846 was from 2013. It is very unlikely that no IEM today are all around better than 334. I personally can think of so many that I don't where should I begin with to recommend. It's like if you ask me what IEM has better resolution than SEM6 - I can't list you *everything*.

I tried the 846 too, sadly it isn't for me. I wasn't saying that 334 is the best all around. I only said that 334 is still one of the best in terms of mids alone.

 

[Love Music]

How's your mkii coming along? Any signs of cracked housing?


Nope. I haven't bought them for a long time and just listen to them at home. Haven't taken them outside yet.

 

[Love Music]

Toranku, just wondering if the M9 is an upgrade to the oriolus mkii? As I might sell them to get either the m9 or 334....

 

[toranku]

Toranku, just wondering if the M9 is an upgrade to the oriolus mkii? As I might sell them to get either the m9 or 334....

Subjective. Think most will prefer Orio's overall tone + dynamics but in terms of technicalities alone I feel m9 is ahead. 334 is frankly quite dated in terms of technicalities and resolution. 334 is dark and low-res sounding. Consider 4ss/4cs or m7/9 as alternatives to 334.

 

[echineko]

Toranku, just wondering if the M9 is an upgrade to the oriolus mkii? As I might sell them to get either the m9 or 334....

If you like the warmth and overall tone of the Mk ii, then no. M9 is a lot more resolving, has better sense of positioning but at the same time more neutral compared to Oriolus.

I owned one for some time, the warmth was something I enjoyed, even if it's not the most technically capable. If you're looking for more of the same, M9 isn't it. Otherwise M9 is definitely more capable overall.

 

[Nabillion_786]

@toranku what are your favourite iems soo far?

 

[Love Music]

Subjective. Think most will prefer Orio's overall tone + dynamics but in terms of technicalities alone I feel m9 is ahead. 334 is frankly quite dated in terms of technicalities and resolution. 334 is dark and low-res sounding. Consider 4ss/4cs or m7/9 as alternatives to 334.

I see. What about the monndrop blessing? I heard they were good too.

 

[Love Music]

If you like the warmth and overall tone of the Mk ii, then no. M9 is a lot more resolving, has better sense of positioning but at the same time more neutral compared to Oriolus.

I owned one for some time, the warmth was something I enjoyed, even if it's not the most technically capable. If you're looking for more of the same, M9 isn't it. Otherwise M9 is definitely more capable overall.

I see. Seems like an upgrade. What about in terms of mids/vocals? How do they compare?

 

[echineko]

I see. Seems like an upgrade. What about in terms of mids/vocals? How do they compare?

Going off memory, when I compared the mk2 seemed more forward for vocals, the M9 a little laid-back. It seemed the mk2 emphasised it a little more, the M9 was more "correct", in that if it's in the track you hear it, if not it doesn't push it.

It's mostly a case of preference, imo.

 

[toranku]

@toranku what are your favourite iems soo far?

Answered this one a while back

I see. What about the monndrop blessing? I heard they were good too.

Didn't have enough time to form a more elaborate opinion. But in general nicely implemented subbass (still not enough, but it's clean) but can sound a bit thin overall. Ok I guess, nothing special

 

[toranku]

First Impressions: Campfire Io

Slight v-shaped signature. Hollow and odd tone. Does have warmth to the sound but it's as if the stage has a huge hole in the middle, like how speakers are when they are not toed in. As such the more forward vocals feel unnatural, hollow and nasal. Tone is...musky sounding? Like it's a bit suffocated.

Highs have slight peaks at the lower treble. Extends somewhat smoothly with that sparkle. Sounds a little tizzy with the treble. Bass is fast and subbass is a little rolled off. Elevated midbass to upperbass/lowermids. One note bass. Even the bass has a feeling of hollowness.

Overall odd tone with forward and very noticeably hollow vocals. Average at best.

 

[papa_mia]

First Impressions: Campfire Io

Slight v-shaped signature. Hollow and odd tone. Does have warmth to the sound but it's as if the stage has a huge hole in the middle, like how speakers are when they are not toed in. As such the more forward vocals feel unnatural, hollow and nasal. Tone is...musky sounding? Like it's a bit suffocated.

Highs have slight peaks at the lower treble. Extends somewhat smoothly with that sparkle. Sounds a little tizzy with the treble. Bass is fast and subbass is a little rolled off. Elevated midbass to upperbass/lowermids. One note bass. Even the bass has a feeling of hollowness.

Overall odd tone with forward and very noticeably hollow vocals. Average at best.

....Wat? But people been saying these are the mini Andro. No?