Who makes the best single balanced armature earphone?
Feb 4, 2009 at 10:44 PM Post #32 of 90
Quote:

Originally Posted by Beyerfan70 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Etymotic make the best end of story.
I have er6i,er4p and also Shure Se310 and to me all these sound better than ANY double or triple driver.


That is your weird personal preference....
 
Feb 4, 2009 at 11:12 PM Post #35 of 90
Quote:

Originally Posted by mvw2 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
But it's still a wide band. I haven't listened to the IE8, so I can't comment on them directly. No one has done frequency response and distortion tests on it, so again, there's no info stating what it does well. We are left with user comments/reviews.

I can say the same about the RE0. 20Hz and 15kHz was there too. It's a really good wide band driver. However, sound being there and sound correctly being there are two different things. An example in home audio would be the common use of a small 3" or 4" wide band driver in a compact satellite design. Ported, they can offer quite a wide bandwidth. For example a Jordon JX92S in a ported enclosure will output from 40Hz to 20kHz within +/-5dB, better with a little EQing. However, just because the frequency range is covered doesn't mean it's covered well, or I should say as well as a multi-driver system.

The RE0 and IE8 do make good use of a single driver. However, you have to ask yourself is the quality of the information presented as good at 20Hz or 40Hz and 12kHz or 15kHz as good as at 500Hz or 2kHz? Is it as accurate and without noticeable distortion everywhere? I can't comment about the IE8, but the RE0, I can say no. The top end, albeit present, did lack accuracy and definition of the information presented. Because I have not heard the IE8, I can only speculate. However, physics and history lean me towards the idea that there will always be a compromise in a system that is limited to one driver. Still, great implementation will yield great sound. Yet, to say it's as good as a multi-driver system is stretching it.

The HD800, a different scale, a different price. Still, you're bound by what you can make work. Frequency response is there, 14Hz - 44kHz within 3dB. What about distortion? If it is amazing, I'd love to see a BL, CMS, and Le curve of it showing amazing linearity. I'd love to see a frequency response plot and distortion plots through the frequency spectrum. Show me now amazing it is over the entire range.

Am I saying it can't be done? No. I'm just saying generally multi-driver wins. It's an easier approach, many drivers that excel over a narrow bandwidth paired together to excel over the entire frequency spectrum.

The closest thing I've ever seen to actual IEM testing:
Product Review

I'd love to see more.


What I heard from my IE8 is that it is very detailed across the spectrum, as detailed as the PFE with the grey filters. The instruments in the midrange did sound slightly different than in the PFE (through repeated a/b testing of the same part of a track). There was a big difference in presentation with the bass, but I could make out the same details in both, just much more quantity in the IE8. Also with drums and guitar, the IE8 seemed to have a more natural decay of the tone. However, the decay sounded the same with piano, just more mid-bass warmth with the IE8.

And for drivers, a huge part of how they sound from what I know is their environment. Internal and external enclosure space is very important to how speakers perform. Take a subwoofer that sounds deep and impactful in your living room, move it outside in the middle of your lawn, and it will sound bad comparatively. Put it in the trunk of your car, and it will blow out your eardrums!

The ear canal is a very small environment, which logically would allow a driver to move less than an open air driver, less movement for the sound means less distortion from other frequencies, hence accuracy and low distortion across the spectrum.

Just my .02
 
Feb 5, 2009 at 12:03 AM Post #37 of 90
Quote:

Originally Posted by imademymark /img/forum/go_quote.gif
the er4s are untouchable in the single BA department imo, the clarity is just fantastic.


Just curious if you have heard all the single BA IEMs? And if you have, did you get a chance to test them all for a while to make sure you got a good fit and use them with the same source and song selection?
 
Feb 5, 2009 at 12:42 AM Post #38 of 90
I'd hazard a guess at the SA6's. The fact that you can also change the bass and treble ports lets you customize them a bit more to your taste, though I hear that their bass isn't incredible, even with the Bass++ ports in.
 
Feb 5, 2009 at 2:47 AM Post #39 of 90
Quote:

Originally Posted by imademymark /img/forum/go_quote.gif
the er4s are untouchable in the single BA department imo, the clarity is just fantastic.



Right! At the sacrifice of the weakest bass of any IEM ever made. No different than a single BA with great tight articulate bass with weak highs.

It's personal preference.
 
Feb 5, 2009 at 7:20 AM Post #40 of 90
Agreed on the environment average_joe, the designs to operate in completely different environments and scales. The materials, designs, physics, etc. involved are different. I just push the concept of multi-driver because despite head-fi being predominantly single driver and having many exceptional designs I'm sure, many times I still see shortcomings from designs that continue to lean me towards multi-driver systems as the ideal to truly cover the entire spectrum. A necessity? No. There are many very good designs that do well enough to get the job done. There's just that "it could be better" idea floating in my head.
tongue.gif


And to OP, sorry for getting way off track.

Phonak PFE is affordable and sounds really good.

The ER4 has been the benchmark for many, many years

The SA6 is well regarded and the tuneability is unique in the sense that you are not bound to the original frequency response of the earphone and you don't need software EQing to get the sound you want. It's a neat idea that would be cool to see in more and more earphones.
 
Feb 5, 2009 at 8:06 AM Post #41 of 90
Quote:

Originally Posted by mvw2 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Agreed on the environment average_joe, the designs to operate in completely different environments and scales. The materials, designs, physics, etc. involved are different. I just push the concept of multi-driver because despite head-fi being predominantly single driver and having many exceptional designs I'm sure, many times I still see shortcomings from designs that continue to lean me towards multi-driver systems as the ideal to truly cover the entire spectrum. A necessity? No. There are many very good designs that do well enough to get the job done. There's just that "it could be better" idea floating in my head.
tongue.gif



As you probably know, there are always compromises in engineering a product. Cost, size, what do you give up for what you get? I am no microphone expert, but to my knowledge there are no multi-transducer microphones. An it could be better idea would be to reverse a really good, full spectrum mic. Maybe some company should come up with a condenser (electrostat) IEM!

When you have a multi-driver you have engineering trade-offs, what is the phase shift of the crossover, how so the overlaping signals interact with each other, etc. Not that it can't be done well, it has, but there is also something to be said for single driver simplicity.

But I guess my point is if a single transducer mics work for the recoding industry (please correct me if I am wrong), a single driver IEM would actually be the best.
 
Feb 5, 2009 at 9:04 AM Post #42 of 90
I don't really care about the technology, as long as they sound good. I remember almost a decade ago back when Intel and AMD took different approach to scaling the performance of their respective processors. One went for improved efficiency, another went for raw Ghz.

I hope IEM users don't fall into the typical marketing trap, more = better. I have a four-blade Quattro which barely improves over a three blade Mach3. Even then, both can compete with a good single-blade razor. The same can be said about IEMs, cars and planes.

I have zero doubts that the Westone 3 is a great IEM, but many here has already attest that even single BA or dynamic transducers can hold their own.
 
Feb 5, 2009 at 4:20 PM Post #43 of 90
Quote:

Originally Posted by moseboy /img/forum/go_quote.gif
It's not, and that's why not all of them sound as pleasing/natural as other single BA earphones.



What's with all the Audiophile talk about "pleasing" being natural? Warm and pleasing is not natural.

Many instruments sound harsh in real life. Have you heard a Cymbal crash hard in real life? Does it sound pleasing?

Any audio gear should reproduce the recording exactly as it is. If it is harsh it should be harsh. Anything that makes it Pleasing, Warm or some pseudo Natural which is made up of some other psuedo audiophile terms is broken.
 
Feb 5, 2009 at 4:26 PM Post #44 of 90
To me in my rig my balanced ER4-P is one of the worlds best phones of any type and it sure does the whole frequency range fantastically, nothing recessed nor eneamic about it at all.
 
Feb 5, 2009 at 4:40 PM Post #45 of 90
Quote:

Originally Posted by oarnura /img/forum/go_quote.gif
What's with all the Audiophile talk about "pleasing" being natural? Warm and pleasing is not natural.

Many instruments sound harsh in real life. Have you heard a Cymbal crash hard in real life? Does it sound pleasing?

Any audio gear should reproduce the recording exactly as it is. If it is harsh it should be harsh. Anything that makes it Pleasing, Warm or some pseudo Natural which is made up of some other psuedo audiophile terms is broken.



^^^^^^^^^THE TRUTH^^^^^^^
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top