[neoufo51]

Now I think this poll might be neck and neck once it hits 100.

 

[ZephyrSapphire]

Rawr everyone's arguing.

Flat means neutral but does not mean it's natural. That's IMHO. And that's what the ER4S are, IMHO. Westone 3's lack detail, otherwise I would've kept them. They are unable to portray the amount of detail which would make Japanese words make sense and sound clear.

Now back to the main picture, flat is neutral as flat does not have emphasis in certain frequencies. Most concerts have overpowering bass which engulfs every other instrument if you're at the front row, which is of course why I'd be somewhere at the back to balance out how much bass I want to hear, IMHO. The amount of bass one wishes to hear is a matter of preference IMHO. So is the amount of mids and treble. Some people misunderstand that bright headphones have more detail than bassy headphones, but that is of course, wrong IMHO.

Now, the most accurate headphones would not have a flat, neutral sound IMHO but of course it has to be detailed.

Now, onwards with the hunt for the most accurate headphones/IEMs, which IMHO would be the ER4S with slightly more bass amount.

 

[oarnura]

I am glad this poll came up because I was wondering the same thing after reading so many reviews and buying some of the phones raved about.

IMHO Audiophile grade audio should strive to reproduce the recording as the sound-engineer and artists wanted. Anything that changes that is not good audio.

I voted for balanced and neutral because it closely matched my opinion.

 

[oarnura]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jinx20001 /img/forum/go_quote.gif analytical is boring, warm is fun... question is why do you listen to music, do you listen to judge? if so you may prefer a balanced or analytical sound. do you listen to be entertained? if so you will enjoy a warm sound that emphasises beat and flow. i listen to be entertained, therfor i find earphones like ety's ar4p for example to be stale and certainly belongs in the studio for music making and judgement.

Audiophile audio is the quest to find perfect sound reproduction. I find accurate audio more entertaining because it engulfs me in what I was meant to hear from the artist and sound engineer. Also to reproduce a live performance for music like jazz and such. That's why we get a sound stage with stereo and can place instruments and players.

Anything that colors it an makes it warm detracts from that and makes for good background music. Like at dance clubs where the music is just there to facilitate dancing and drinking not listening, hence the overemphasized bass.

I have never heard live music that was warm. Have you heard a real life drum kit? Does it produce warm bass?

 

[oarnura]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luckyleo /img/forum/go_quote.gif AJ, I appreciate your points and don't have too much to disagree with. However I do take exception to your description of most live music as having very little base. I've gone to close to a 1,000 concerts during my lifetime and let me tell you from personal experience that most of my live shows have very pronounced base either from the base instrument itself or the drums. I've seen classical, rock, jazz, jamband, reggae, and many other types of concerts. I'll admit that there is variance between the base levels at different shows, but still very pronounced. In order to accurately reproduce a live musical experience via headphones or IEM's you definitely require noticeable base. In my opinion this base reproduction shouldn't sound bloated or uncontrolled, but rather tight, quick, and very controlled. Any that's how I feel.

No body said live music lacks bass. I find a warm sound signature to come from artificially bloated bass that bleeds in to the mids and muddies higher frequencies.

Good bass is tight controlled and fast. Some find that sound signature lean. I find that unless it booms a little bit people find the bass inadequate. An audio device( speaker, earphone) shouldn't try to reproduce frequencies its drivers can't accurately reproduce. I'd rather have an IEM reproduce everything correctly and not even try to do deep bass if its design won't allow it. Nothing bugs me more than to hear sloppy bass that kills the other frequencies.

 

[INGRAMLI]

Vote for analog, balanced, while being musical and natural sounding(such as NOS).

 

[mvw2]

I prefer the same sound I desire from my home or car audio.

 

[skeptic]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luckyleo /img/forum/go_quote.gif AJ, I appreciate your points and don't have too much to disagree with. However I do take exception to your description of most live music as having very little base. I've gone to close to a 1,000 concerts during my lifetime and let me tell you from personal experience that most of my live shows have very pronounced base either from the base instrument itself or the drums. I've seen classical, rock, jazz, jamband, reggae, and many other types of concerts. I'll admit that there is variance between the base levels at different shows, but still very pronounced.

Well said. Whether you're attending hip-hop shows or listening to the tympani of the LA symphony at Disney hall, there is plenty of bass in live music. I've been in choirs where the director actually doubled or tripled the size of the bass section relative to the others to ensure a balanced sound. Bass voices simply don't travel like soprano voice, and yet being able to hear the foundational notes in each chord is critical to producing overtones, etc.

Granted, it depends on the artist. There isn't a lot of bass in folk rock, but most other genres have deep bass in one form or another that should be reproduced in a realistic and audible way, akin to how you would hear it live.
Quote:

Originally Posted by oarnura /img/forum/go_quote.gif No body said live music lacks bass. I find a warm sound signature to come from artificially bloated bass that bleeds in to the mids and muddies higher frequencies.

Just fyi - see post 20 where the commentator stated: "Imho, most live music has very little bass to begin with..."

 

[Spad]

When I saw this I thought "Well, here's another useless poll." But I'm amazed that, so far at least, the overwhelming majority prefer something other than a balanced response. Consequently, this may be among the most important threads ever, IMO, in that it illustrates how much weight some of us should--or should not--give to the opinions of our fellow Head-fiers.

 

[VooX]

.

 

[VooX]

Balanced and neutral for me. I find that anything emphasized increases listening fatigue and unbalances my mix which will not "travel" well. Sometimes sizzle is good for the client, but not for the engineer.

This applies to my speakers, my headphones, and my IEMs.

 

[applevalleyjoe]

I need something that enables the mids and highs...my ETY's do that.

 

[bleedingears]

I like alot of bass and mids, if the headphones are good enough to notice the highs mixed with it then cool, but I love bass. I listen to (in this order) rap,reggae, (whatever M.I.A. is classified as) R&B then some sparse rock. I like it to sound like I'm in my old car when I had a nice stereo

 

[berniebennybernard]

I voted for "I prefer an analytical, detailed sound that brings out the mids and highs." I realized I had a love for the such when I owned the SA6s. I'm waiting for my SE530 to come back, and although they seem to be more neutral, the added bass should be fun as well.

 

[obobskivich]

voted "more specific than options given"

I like an analytical detailed sound that brings out mids and the midbass more importantly than the highs

to give you examples of hp's that do this imho (just to help you understand my preference, not to argue over what an hp does or doesn't do):

AKG K701
Koss ESP/10

and to a lesser extent, all Grado 'phones