Why do studio IEMs have little to no “ear gain”?

[JamoBroGuy]

This question is targeted at @Vamp898 and my wording in this first message will be directed at them too. Instead of asking him directly in DMs or whatever, I decided to make a thread here so others can chime in if they want.

Studio IEMs used by mixing and mastering engineers are objectively neutral and correct. If you mix a track with one of those IEMs and transfer it to flat measuring speakers like the Neumann KH 120 II, it’ll sound correct. Some examples of these IEMs are:

The Shure SE535:

The Sony IER-M7:

The Vision Ears VE7:

And countless others.

Notice how all these (and all other professional IEMs) have one thing in common: they have way less “ear gain” than almost every modern audiophile IEM.

According to the research from B&K, Etymotic, Harman, etc., IEMs need a sizeable push in the upper mids to sound neutral due to the pinna being bypassed.

This is just in theory, however. If IEMs actually needed to be tuned like that to sound neutral, that would mean all studio IEMs used by mixing and mastering engineers all around the world to make countless tracks, some of which you probably listen to, are incorrect. That is very obviously untrue.

Here’s an example of 2 IEMs that are tuned to be what I like to call “mathematically neutral”:

This doesn’t translate to neutral sound, though. IEMs tuned with such a huge push in the upper mids do not sound like flat measuring speakers (confirmed by @Vamp898’s KE4 review) and thus are not usable for mixing and mastering.

My question is: why is this the case?

We hear flat measuring speakers with a large push in the upper mids due to our HRTF. It makes sense to tune IEMs like that so they sound neutral, no? Well, it obviously doesn’t work, but why?

Theoretically, wouldn’t we perceive professional IEMs to be dark and muffled due to the lack of “ear gain”?

 

[gregorio]

Studio IEMs used by mixing and mastering engineers are objectively neutral and correct.

If IEMs actually needed to be tuned like that to sound neutral, that would mean all studio IEMs used by mixing and mastering engineers all around the world to make countless tracks, some of which you probably listen to, are incorrect. That is very obviously untrue.

I’m not really sure where you got this from, maybe some reviewers who didn’t know any better or implications or false statements in marketing but there’s really no such thing as as “Studio IEMs”. I’m not aware of any tracks mixed and mastered with IEMs, let alone countless tracks, and they’re not used by “mixing and mastering engineers all around the world”, even full sized headphone use is rare, let alone IEMs.

There are some exceptions of mix or even mastering engineers using HPs, mostly that would be out of necessity however, for example if they have to work while traveling and can’t take their speakers and I’m sure there’s numerous amateurs in bedrooms/basements who can’t afford proper monitoring setups although neither of these situations is actually “studio” of course and IEM use would be even rarer than HP use!

While almost no mix or mastering engineers use IEMs to actually mix and master, it’s not uncommon for us to check a mix on IEMs if we believe the audience will largely be using IEMs but we don’t have any specific “Studio IEMs” for this task, we just use what we own or what we think is representative of what the audience owns (Apple ear pods for example).

None of the IEMs you listed are “Studio IEMs” or have any connection with mix or mastering use, they just appear to be regular consumer IEMs.

G

 

[JamoBroGuy]

I’m not really sure where you got this from,

I got it from @Vamp898. If it’s incorrect, maybe ask him about it instead of me.

maybe some reviewers who didn’t know any better or implications or false statements in marketing but there’s really no such thing as as “Studio IEMs”.

Are you sure? Mixing and mastering with headphones and IEMs is actually becoming increasingly more common (and, in turn, music mixed and mastered for headphones and IEMs instead of speakers), especially in places like Japan.

For the most part, what I meant by “studio IEMs” is “professional IEMs”. I was just narrowing it down to ones used for producing music rather than on stage or whatever. I hope I didn’t cause any confusion.

I’m not aware of any tracks mixed and mastered with IEMs,

Fair. Most are mixed and mastered with speakers.

let alone countless tracks, and they’re not used by “mixing and mastering engineers all around the world”, even full sized headphone use is rare, let alone IEMs.

Again, fair.

While almost no mix or mastering engineers use IEMs to actually mix and master, it’s not uncommon for us to check a mix on IEMs if we believe the audience will largely be using IEMs but we don’t have any specific “Studio IEMs” for this task, we just use what we own or what we think is representative of what the audience owns (Apple ear pods for example).

Your knowledge level is definitely far higher than mine, so take this as a cincere question and no more than that, but are you sure there’s little to no mixing and mastering engineers using IEMs? According to @Vamp898, a self-proclaimed mixing and mastering engineer who you have spoken to in the past here in Sound Science, there are tons of professionals, him included, that use IEMs for this purpose. It’s entirely possible that it’s just rather uncommon where you live. It’s true that the majority of music is mixed and mastered with speakers, but as I said before, it’s becoming increasingly more common with headphones and IEMs.

None of the IEMs you listed are “Studio IEMs” or have any connection with mix or mastering use, they just appear to be regular consumer IEMs.

If you’re talking about the last 2 (KE4 and Dusk), then yes. If you’re talking about the first 3 (SE535, IER-M7 and VE7), then no. Those IEMs are all marketed to and used by professionals. They are not consumer IEMs, they are professional tools. Some other examples are the Westone Mach 80, Shure SE846 and FitEar MH334SR, the latter literally being tuned by a mixing and mastering engineer, and 1/5 of the people who have bought that IEM are sound engineers. Again, music being produced with IEMs might just be uncommon where you live, hence you’re unaware of these.

 

[VNandor]

Without even looking up those IEMs, I'm willing to bet they are marketed for monitoring and stage use, not for mixing and mastering. Sure, they are marketed as professional tools but not as tools for mixing or mastering. An IEM without extensive compensation for personal HRTF and fit can be about as correct as a speaker without a room treatment and EQ, which is to say, they can't be correct.

 

[gregorio]

Are you sure?

Yep.

Mixing and mastering with headphones and IEMs is actually becoming increasingly more common (and, in turn, music mixed and mastered for headphones and IEMs instead of speakers), especially in places like Japan.

Mixing and mastering with HPs is becoming more common; as I mentioned, it’s not uncommon with amateurs in their bedrooms, etc., and it’s more common than it used to be for some engineers to have to create mixes in hotel rooms when they’re traveling or touring, it would be very unusual for engineers to choose to use HPs and even more uncommon to choose to use IEMs. For certain editing and tracking tasks HP use is quite common and as I mentioned for checking mixes but IEM use would be far rarer. Maybe Japan is an exception, I haven’t worked there as an engineer for over 20 years so I can’t say for sure but certainly at that time their practices were much the same as everyone else’s.

For the most part, what I meant by “studio IEMs” is “professional IEMs”. I was just narrowing it down to ones used for producing music rather than on stage or whatever. I hope I didn’t cause any confusion.

There is such a thing as “professional IEMs”, they are used by musicians on stage to monitor cue mixes, not by mix and mastering engineers though.

According to @Vamp898, a self-proclaimed mixing and mastering engineer who you have spoken to in the past here in Sound Science, there are tons of professionals, him included, that use IEMs for this purpose.

Assuming we’re talking about professional mix and mastering engineers in commercial studios, rather than amateurs/semi-pros, I would be extremely surprised if the percentage of engineers was greater than 0.1% (1 in a 1,000).

If you’re talking about the first 3 (SE535, IER-M7 and VE7), then no. Those IEMs are all marketed to and used by professionals. They are not consumer IEMs, they are professional tools. Some other examples are the Westone Mach 80, Shure SE846 and FitEar MH334SR, the latter literally being tuned by a mixing and mastering engineer, and 1/5 of the people who have bought that IEM are sound engineers.

The Shure’s are marketed by Shure themselves for musicians and audiophiles, not engineers. I’ve never heard of the FitEar IEMs and can’t even find a single mention of them in any of the professional engineering forums I visit. I’ve heard of Westone and have seen quite a few musicians using them and while Westone market them for “musicians, audiophiles and studio engineers”, I’ve never seen or heard of them being used for mixing or mastering by any studio engineer and again, cannot find a single mention of them being used for that purpose in the engineering forums.

There may well be a few exceptions and I vaguely remember a traveling engineer who did use IEMs sometimes but it really is very rare and only in some conditions. As a general rule, it is not recommended for engineers to use HPs and even less so for IEMs, because the variability of individuals’ HRTF would very likely result in a mix that “translated” poorly. IE. It would be unrepresentative of how the mix would sound/translate on other transducers, speakers or other HPs/IEMs.

G

 

[bigshot]

I can't imagine approving a mix without auditioning it on a proper mixing stage first. There are so many pitfalls that can be avoided with mixing on speakers. In my experience, headphones are used in studio environments for isolation in tracking and for editing, not mixing and mastering.

 

[Vamp898]

First the simple Answer to your Question: Because it makes IEM sound wrong.

Does it really? Listen to an Studio Reference Monitor Speaker, listen to an IEM with Ear Gain and you'll instantly notice, that the mix sounds different.

Mix/Master an Song with an IEM that has Ear-Gain, listen bask to it on calibrated Studio Reference Monitor Speakers and you'll notice, it sounds completely dull and strange and just off.

Mix/Master the same song with an VE7 and the result on the Speaker sounds how it should sound and (in the limitations of how close IEM/Speakers can sound) as it sounded on the IEM.

That is why they have no Ear Gain. So you can do this and this is why the exist and what they are made for. Ear Gain simply makes IEM sound wrong and off, that is why Studio Reference Monitors don't have it.

I see people already starting to comment at this point with red heads and steam out of the ears because "But what about Harman and other experiments of such? They all say you need Eargain"

That IEM need eargain is due to an failed experiment from Harman that tried to proof how IEM have to be tuned to sound like flat speakers in an anechoic chambers. To this day there is no simple answer explaining why Harman does not work and where exactly it fails, but it does. There are several explanations on why that is, but that is too complex to explain it all here.

There is lot of heated discussion about how and why Harman is wrong, but one thing is for sure. Give an perfectly Harman tuned In-Ear to an Mixing/Mastering Engineer and he can not do his job with it. If you transfer the master to the speaker, everything sounds off and wrong to the point where you have to start again at mixing when you finished mastering. So its not usable in the real world and hence it is not used.

As an Mixing/Mastering Engineer working with a lot of Studios (and also, of course, make music on my own), i maybe able to clear a few things up.
First of all, so called Studio Reference Monitors for Mixing/Mastering obviously do exist. And no, they are not average Consumer IEM, the MH334 Pro for example can't even be bought by consumers. The above mentioned VE7 was explicitly made for Mixing/Mastering. These are just a few example of many. There are several IEM that are made for Mixing/Mastering and the maker clearly say that they are made for this job.

In Japan the MH334 (Studio Reference) is probably the most used IEM. FitEar says 1/5 of their customers using the MH334 are Sound Engineer using the MH334 for Mixing/Mastering (around 1200 customers two years ago). So yes, they exist and yes, they are used for exactly that job. Vision Ears also hase several references listed from Sound Engineers using the Vision Ears IEM for Mixing/Mastering.

Obviously there are purists who think, because this wasn't done in the past, its not done today and doing so would be wrong because they learned it otherwise, but evolution doesn't stop due to purists, thankfully.

And i am not kidding. Check the Sound Engineer using IEM as their Main Tool and Sound Engineer using Speakers as their Main Tool and you'll see an age gap. There are even some Bands who still use floor monitor speakers for live monitoring. Some people just really like to get deaf and to punish the audience with feedback loops.

I can name you several Platin Albums that are mixed/mastered on Headphones or IEM. The Singer from サカナクション for example checks every single Master with his Studio Reference Monitor Headphones and unless he approvs that they sound exactly how they should on these, they are not getting released.

Modern Music these days is more and more Mixed/Mastered with IEM, more and more Studios switch from Speakers to Headphones and especially IEM (Which does not mean Speakers are no long er used, they are! But most of the job is no longer done on these).

But why would you want to use an IEM at all? And why would you favour it over an speaker? There are several reasons for that.

You have an reproducible sound, no matter your location and your surroundings. Its a pain in the a** to make speakers sound correct in some rooms. Especially when you have to work with different locations, its just insanely cumbersome to the point where, not kidding, a lot of studios just do not calibrate their speakers at all and take them as they are.

Calibrate the speaker at 75db to be perfectly flat, listen to it at 65db and it will be no longer flat. Even worse, you can not predict how the frequency response will change when you go to 65db because this depends on the room, how many people are in the room and so on. In theory, you would have to calibrate the speaker every time someone enters the room and nobody is allowed to move an inch after calibration. As you might think by yourself already, nobody does that. Most studios just accept that they are no longer correct and ignore it. You have a timeline and a job to do. Time is money. If you need a month per song, you are not getting the job, its as simple as that.

Due to the Isolation of IEM, you will generally listen at lower volumes which protects your hearing which is a factor for quite some engineer. Due to this, some IEM are intentionally tuned that they sound like "Loud Speakers" at low to medium volumes. Also Sound Studios also have Air Conditioning, nobody wants to die during his job. This conducts noise and can mask things in recordings which either forces you to push up the volume in the speakers (which will limit how long you can do the job as your hearing will damage).

Also Cross-Talk of Speakers can mask issues that are audible with Headphone/Earphone (There are famous examples of Platinum Albums including one from Rammstein, that contain Recording Errors like Noise from the Microphone that you don't hear on speakers as it is masked by the Crosstalk, but you hear with IEM/Headphone.

Also very annoying, especially on Recordings almost exclusively done on speakers, is that the Bass is often pinned towards the right/left. That is done because humans can't properly locate the location of bass frequencies. When you listen at these songs, you hear the bass coming from center or "everywhere" but when listening with Headphones/IEM, the Bass clearly comes from one direction (as you only hear it in one ear and/or much stronger in one ear).

And this is important as in most countries, Music these days is almost exclusively listened to with Headphones/Earphones, the market for Speakers steeply declines as more and more apartments just straight out forbid them or only allow them at volumes where you can't enjoy them (and more and more people are living in cities and densely populated areas). Also more and more rooms have aircon, PCs have fans (especially Notebooks can be very noisy), you might have noisy neighours, construction work outside and so on. In Japan, lots of electronics stores even stopped selling Speakers alltogether.

Every Studio i know still listens to the Master several Times on Speakers (including me), because it has to sound correct on IEM, Headphones and Speakers. You can not ignore them, but for a lot of people (like me) Spakers are only used to listen back to the Master and Check if everything sounds as it should. Done.

With IEM you can do your Job more reliable/reproducable which means higher quality and, at the same time, higher speed/efficiency. You can do your job at home or everywhere you want. Last but not least, its cheaper as you need less well treated rooms. You need only one or two for the Check on the Speakers and all other rooms can be average rooms.

Summary: There are very good reasons why you would want to Mix/Master with IEM. It makes your job easier in almost all aspects and customers use them to listen back at your master. If IEM have a lot of eargain (like Harman), you can not use them for Mixing/Mastering, hence Studio Reference Monitor IEM exist that do not have eargain.

And yes, there will absolutely people commenting in rage, disagreeing with me about literally everything i said and, at the same time, have absolutely no explanation why Studio Reference IEM are tuned different than Constumer IEM and just tell you to ignore it and these are bad and FitEar, Vision Ears, Canal Works, Ultimate Ears, Shure, Westone and so on are just lying to you and musicians are too stupid to know it and just by pure accident, they all have no ear gain to the same level. Westone invented the IEM but they are not good enough to make one that sounds correct and are still used by thousands of musicians while some random Chinese Companies with 0 experience and not one single musician using them can do that. Think for yourself how high that probability is.

In the end, you have to decide for yourself. My personal recommendation? Get yourself a pair of flat Nier Field Studio Reference Monitor Speakers, place them properly, listen to music on it and decide for yourself which IEM tuning sounds closer to it. Spoiler: It will be the ""Non Existing"" Studio Reference Monitors IEM

//EDIT: There are some songs that have changing bass (sub bass) from left to right (jumping from left to right and back). You can not hear that with speakers, it will always sound like coming from the center/everywhere (especially when you have an Sub woofer). So there exist songs that simply do not work on speakers and they obviously are not mixed/mastered on speakers. You need IEM/Headphones for Mixing/Mastering and the Playback

 

[gregorio]

And yes, there will absolutely people commenting in rage, disagreeing with me about literally everything i said …

Ahh, you seem to realise people will be calling BS, why would you think that if it isn’t BS? A large proportion of what you said is indeed incorrect or just pure BS! For example:

The difference between speakers and HPs (and even more so IEMs) is not just the “ear gain”, it’s the speaker crosstalk and room acoustics. If you think, as you’ve claimed, that just lowering the “ear gain” makes IEMs sound the same as speakers, you need your hearing tested!
The testing for the Harman target curve for speakers was NOT done in an anechoic chamber, it was done in acoustically treated rooms and that’s what the target curve for headphones was based on.
There is no country that I’m aware of where the consumers exclusively use HPs/IEMs. In every country I know of, consumers also use car sound systems, the speakers built into their mobile devices, Bluetooth speakers, desktop speakers with their computers, traditional home stereo systems and AV sound systems.
I don’t know any apartments that ban speakers, how do people listen to their TVs, do they all sit around their TV wearing IEMs using a distribution amp?
Studio air conditioning is virtually silent.
Near field monitors are not the reference speakers in commercial studios, the “Mains” (mid-field) monitors are, have you never even been to a commercial studio?
Studios are NOT ripping out their studio monitors and just relying on IEMs, that’s complete BS! In fact, commercial studios are in general doing the exact opposite and adding more studio monitors, to cater to the growing demand for Atmos mixes.
Yes, you are kidding, absolutely NO commercial studios “just do not calibrate their speakers at all and take them as they are”, I’m sure that’s probably true with bedroom studios and kids/amateurs/semi-pros calling themselves “engineers” on the internet though!
I could go on, where are you getting all this nonsense from, because it sure as h€ll isn’t real/commercial studios!

That last point seems to account for nearly all your false assertions, they’re not false if you’re talking about kids/hobbyists in their bedroom “studios” claiming to be engineers, it’s only false if you’re talking about real/trained engineers and professional/commercial studios!

G

 

[JamoBroGuy]

Ahh, you seem to realise people will be calling BS, why would you think that if it isn’t BS? A large proportion of what you said is indeed incorrect or just pure BS! For example:

The difference between speakers and HPs (and even more so IEMs) is not just the “ear gain”, it’s the speaker crosstalk and room acoustics. If you think, as you’ve claimed, that just lowering the “ear gain” makes IEMs sound the same as speakers, you need your hearing tested!
The testing for the Harman target curve for speakers was NOT done in an anechoic chamber, it was done in acoustically treated rooms and that’s what the target curve for headphones was based on.
There is no country that I’m aware of where the consumers exclusively use HPs/IEMs. In every country I know of, consumers also use car sound systems, the speakers built into their mobile devices, Bluetooth speakers, desktop speakers with their computers, traditional home stereo systems and AV sound systems.
I don’t know any apartments that ban speakers, how do people listen to their TVs, do they all sit around their TV wearing IEMs using a distribution amp?
Studio air conditioning is virtually silent.
Near field monitors are not the reference speakers in commercial studios, the “Mains” (mid-field) monitors are, have you never even been to a commercial studio?
Studios are NOT ripping out their studio monitors and just relying on IEMs, that’s complete BS! In fact, commercial studios are in general doing the exact opposite and adding more studio monitors, to cater to the growing demand for Atmos mixes.
Yes, you are kidding, absolutely NO commercial studios “just do not calibrate their speakers at all and take them as they are”, I’m sure that’s probably true with bedroom studios and kids/amateurs/semi-pros calling themselves “engineers” on the internet though!
I could go on, where are you getting all this nonsense from, because it sure as h€ll isn’t real/commercial studios!

That last point seems to account for nearly all your false assertions, they’re not false if you’re talking about kids/hobbyists in their bedroom “studios” claiming to be engineers, it’s only false if you’re talking about real/trained engineers and professional/commercial studios!

G

Now, I certainly don’t want to come across as aggressive or stubborn, and I completely acknowledge my somewhat limited knowledge of this scene. That said…

If what he’s saying is BS, that would mean almost every single mixing and mastering engineer in Japan, Vamp898 included, is doing their job wrong. That could very well be the case, but I’m not buying it until you provide evidence.

It’s absolutely true that most countries use speakers for mixing and mastering. Emphasis on most. There are certainly countries that do it differently. There absolutely exists music that is professionally mixed and mastered with and for headphones and IEMs (like a lot of electronic music), they’re just rarer than speaker-produced music.

It seems you have limited experience in modern day Japan and, by extension, with IEMs. That’s completely fine, this is in no way shape or form a personal attack, but I think due to this you shouldn’t just immediately call BS. Places like the UK have different practices than places like Japan, which you don’t entirely seem to realise (again, completely fine!).

Please correct me if anything I just said was wrong. The last thing I want is to spread misinformation, especially in a place like Sound Science.

 

[Vamp898]

Maybe he is right, maybe i am telling bull. The best thing you can do and i highly recommend, as said, check for yourself. Don't trust me or anyone else.

You don't even have to break the bank, a set of Yamaha HS-8 measure good enough (Around 580€ a pair according to Thomann Germany)

Not perfect (Taking into account they don't use an DSP, its pretty good), but imho good enough. At last if you take the effort to calibrate them, these small imperfections no longer matter. Place them properly (60° angle, 1~2 Meters from you away, >=1.5 Meters from the next wall), listen to a song that you know inside out and see for yourself which IEM sounds closest. Some stores even rent them out and there is B-Stock and stuff that can be returned without any feel of guilt if you don't want to keep them (Or you just keep them, they are a nice set of speakers).

This is by way the method that was used to tune the MH334 (and many others). The original MH334 from 2011 and the updated MH334 Studio Reference from 2017 were both tuned exactly that way by famous Mixing/Mastering Engineer (The original by Mitsuharu Harada and the upgraded Version with additional Feedback from Sugiyama Yuuji who is for example known for his work for L'Arc~en~Ciel if you happen to know them (They have a fan base in germany) and many other pro users who gave their feedback). They listened to their Studio Speaker Setup, they listened to the IEM and changed the tuning until they sounded as close as it is possible for IEM/Speakers to sound close.

So when in doubt, trust nobody, test for yourself.

 

[gregorio]

If what he’s saying is BS, that would mean almost every single mixing and mastering engineer in Japan, Vamp898 included, is doing their job wrong. That could very well be the case, but I’m not buying it until you provide evidence.

No, that is a completely false dichotomy! If what he’s saying is BS that would mean the vast majority of mixing and mastering engineers in Japan are doing their job correctly and pretty much the same as everyone else!

Evidence is easy, have you not even tried to type into google say “Tokyo recording studios”? What about this list of “15 Best Recording Studios in Tokyo” posted this year, every single one of them is a standard recording studio, acoustically treated rooms with both near-field and “Mains” (mid-fields) exactly as I described. Not a single one of them have ripped out or don’t have their monitoring systems or have uncalibrated studio monitors and not a single one of them is relying on IEMs!

Places like the UK have different practices than places like Japan, which you don’t entirely seem to realise (again, completely fine!).

Sure, of course I “don’t entirely seem to realise” that assertion, because it is BS! Studios in Tokyo are NOT built on different practices to the UK, they’re exactly the same practices.

Just picking a random Tokyo studio that lists its equipment, the Red Bull Studio Tokyo for example, designed by a Japanese architect. What do we see? A British mixing desk, American DAW, a mix of European, American and Japanese outboard, pretty much identical to what you’d find in any commercial studio in the UK (and elsewhere), and monitoring listed as “ATC 200ASM Pro + ATC P4, Bryston 4B Dynaudio BM15A, Yamaha NS10”, not even a mention of HPs or IEMs.

Enough of this BS!

G

 

[JamoBroGuy]

Enough of this BS!

I’m sorry. As I said, I have limited knowledge of this scene. You are very obviously far more knowledgeable and intelligent than me and I’ve learned something today. Thank you.

(None of that is sarcasm. I’m being 100% sincere.)

I’ll see myself out. I apologise for spreading misinformation. Take care.

 

[gregorio]

I’m sorry.

I don’t blame you, I blame vamp for posting the BS in the first place! Ask yourself this though about his most recent post: Yamaha is a Japanese company right, why are they manufacturing the HA-8 near-field monitors if all the engineers are using IEMs? You think they’re manufacturing them for export only, even though some of the Tokyo studios listed previously clearly have Yamaha near-fields? You think maybe the Tokyo studios are buying them from say Thomann in Germany and shipping them back to Japan again? Of course not, I’m sure you’ll find them listed by pretty much every studio equipment retailer in Japan.

Vamp clearly has some agenda, maybe he’s a wannabe engineer who either can’t afford a proper studio or is unable to work at one but whatever the reason, he’s pushing an IEM agenda that simply is not true.

You are very obviously far more knowledgeable and intelligent than me and I’ve learned something today. Thank you.

I’m not necessarily more intelligent than you but certainly more knowledgeable, that’s hardly surprising seeing as I’ve been a professional sound/music engineer for 30 years, have worked in about 30 different countries, including several in Asia, with various international artists and at various world class studios, have guest lectured on the subject, including in the USA and Japan, was a senior lecturer in the subject for several years at a UK university and am still a practicing professional engineer today. However, this is the Sound Science discussion forum and “appealing to authority” is a fallacy and therefore unacceptable as a basis for argument but I’ve provided plenty of evidence of studios in Japan which you can verify for yourself.

Unfortunately this isn’t the case in the rest of the audiophile world. Someone who professes to have some authority makes some claim, others believe them and spread that claim and before you know it we have another audiophile myth that’s utter BS.

G
Edited to include the last quote.

 

[Vamp898]

@gregorio Can you please stop referencing things i never said? Or at that point, nobody ever said. That is very annoying and makes the conversion very cluttered. You do that with everyone you talk to in every thread and a lot of people are annoyed by that behavior. I explicitly stated that every Studio is still using Speakers (including me and myself). Even the famous Studios and Mixing/Mastering Engineers that work/worked on the MH334 use Speakers. Nobody here ever said that nobody in Japan uses speakers except for yourself.

I even state in my signature that i own a pair of Neumann KH 120 II, its not even a secret or anything (Excellent speakers by the way).

Of course you find the HS-8 at every studio retailer in Japan, the HS-8 and every other HS-Series. You even find the Presonus Eris 3.5 (Which are the worst speakers you can think of. Nobody ever should buy them to use them to make music, they are horrendous). You can also buy the IER-Z1R at these dealers. Just because these dealers sell this stuff, doesn't mean it is getting used in Sound Studies (The HS-8 are, i've seen several of them).

Please, i beg you, stop making up things, have the conversion in your head with yourself and then confront us with the conversion you had with yourself. I am not pushing any agenda, this agenda is in your head.

The question was why Pro IEM have no ear gain, you did fail to answer the question. Look at your first comment, you gave no explanation than "Studio Reference IEM don't exist (which is a lie, they do exist), that these are average consumer IEM (which kinda makes no sense as IEM are Monitors, why would Consumer want Monitors and the MH334 Pro can't even be bought by consumers, neither can the Monitor-1 from FitEar. You have to provide a proof that you're commercial customer realted to music production).

He asked, politely, a question and you did nothing but rant from the first second and share wrong information.

By the way, just for reference, the Consumer In-Ear from Shure have the eargain (The so called AONIC Series), only the Pro Series doesn't have it. The same is true for Vision Ears. The Consumer In-Ear (called Premium Line, the EXT is probably the most famous) all have the push in the upper-mids/lower-treble. And obviously the consumer In-Ear from Sony have it too (no surprise there).

So those companies are totally aware of Harman and that consumer like that push. And they are totally aware that pros do not. This is an intentional tuning choice and these companies make clear and explain, that this tuning choice was done after considering the feedback from Sound Engineers that use these IEM for that purpose.

Canal Works and Sennheiser even explains why you might want ear-gain as an pro user too, especially when you are an vocalist and have offerings optimized for vocalists with eargain. FitEar has them too, they are called the "Private" Series. So there are reasons why pros would want eargain but both companies state, explictly, that these are not for mixing/mastering. They are for on-stage use because the eargain has advantages (especially hearing the click, counting voice or instructions).

So its not that these companies are incompetent or just don't know how to do their job, its the exact opposite.

I am not pushing any agenda, everyone is free to use whatever he wants to use and things he can do the job best with. Want to use Headphones? Use these, there are excellent Headphones too. And there are tons of excellent speakers, not just from Neumann and Yamaha. Thanks to builtin DSP, a lot of very cheap speakers come flat out-of-the-box these days.

But if someone asks about IEM, he should get an reply explaining the use of Studio Reference IEM and not "Do not care, they are garbage consumer toys".

And i stated, two times, he should not trust any of us (which includes me) but test for himself and recommended cheap speakers that enable him to do that without breaking the bank.

Nobody here is pushing any agenda. He asked a question and he deserves a correct answer to that question. If anyone is pushing an agenda, its you about "IEM do not belong into studios".

If he thinks i am wrong, but likes the HS-8 or the KH 120 II or any other speaker and can do his best mixes/masters with that, he should absolutely go for these and be happy with them. If people ask me what is the best speaker, i tell them what the best speaker is and do not try to convince them using IEM.

Do you know what the reason is why i own the KH 120 II privately (I bought them with my own, private, money)? So i do not have to trust companies about marketing claims. That i have an stable reference i can consult to check for myself if something really can do what it advertises to do.

 

[gregorio]

Can you please stop referencing things i never said?

Firstly, most of the things I referenced were things that JamoBroGuy took from what you stated, indicated by the fact I quoted him rather than you and which incidentally was very similar to what I also took from your posts.

Secondly, so you never said “Modern Music these days is more and more Mixed/Mastered with IEM, more and more Studios switch from Speakers to Headphones and especially IEM (Which does not mean Speakers are no long er used, they are! But most of the job is no longer done on these).” or “a lot of studios just do not calibrate their speakers at all and take them as they are.” and various other assertions which were either just BS or at least misleading. As I detailed in my post that was responding to you!

Nobody here is pushing any agenda.

In which case you’ve done a perfect impression of someone who is! For example, you mentioned all the disadvantages of mixing with speakers and all the advantages of mixing with IEMs, the falsehood is in your “lie of omission” you omitted all the disadvantages of mixing and mastering with IEMs, and therefore why it is not recommended and why exceedingly few professional/trained engineers use them for that purpose. How is that not completely indicative of pushing an agenda?

If anyone is pushing an agenda, its you about "IEM do not belong into studios".

To an extent I am, because they are typically not used and their use is not recommended, mainly for the reasons you deliberately omitted. The only potentially valid reason to use them in studios is for a musician to monitor a cue mix but even then HPs would generally be a better choice unless the musician is particularly used to IEMs and/or doesn’t want to use HPs for some reason.

G