Hi, I'm interested in your measurements, are these made with your own in-ear mics?
Yes and No. Combining in-ear micro-measured responses with 7hz ZERO:2 measured with GRAS, I compensated with an additional EQ while listening to the rest with my ears. Because I know how to make the reference sound that I made/
Is this not usually independent of the IEM though? It's not a resonance of the IEM itself, it's the ear canal. It's created by the creation of a resonant tube closed at both ends (ear canal with ear drum and IEM either end). Etymotics are the only exception as they are inserted so deeply the resonance appears much higher up in the frequency range than with other earphones.
I think you misunderstood my content. (Or maybe I wrote it wrong using a translator.)
That response is not an independent response of the IEM alone.
A "filter" response to copy the sound in my ears listening to the speaker. That response itself is a filter.
What I was saying is that the response of that filter usually has a little bit of a boost in the resonant part. It should. And the less that EQ goes in, the more I'm judging it as a good IEM or good headphones.
I've also tried inserting it deep into the er2xr of Etimotic. It wasn't bad, but the performance of the Atimotic itself wasn't that good. (All IEMs and headphones have almost the same tone balance, so you can make an objective comparison.)
Following on from my previous question, doesn't the variability mean it can't be "closer to HRTF" in any general sense?
also this. Yes and No.
The HRTF curve is not one curve that fits an individual.
It's just a form in which we accept sound in certain conditions, in certain situations.
For example, the response is different from when the sound comes in front of a 30-degree angle at a distance of 1 meter, when the sound comes in 10cm above a 50-degree angle, and when the sound comes in behind a 110-degree angle. It has to be different. That's how we perceive it.
So what I was saying is that it might be closer to the "normal" and "average" HRTF curve, but even if it matches the HRTF curve as I wrote down, the limitations of the way IEM and headphones are heard (we only hear one sound each with one ear) make it impossible for us to hear that response intact.
Imagine, for example. Some people wear IEMs and say that the high notes sound too painful. That's possible. There's also a problem with wearing them.
But on the other hand, you rarely experience that in speakers. Why is that?
The level of IEM has already risen tremendously. I think it's not a matter of the performance of the device itself, but a matter of the way you listen.
Applying the four-channel true stereo method, which listens to sound almost simultaneously with both ears, to IEM also eliminates the details of the sound that hurt our ears and allows for a comfortable appreciation.
So I recorded my own heavenly sound using HRTF, made it and listened to it, but even if I didn't use it, I got a hypothetical Crosstalk response car based on HRTF and applied it with delay (approximately 0.25ms), and I experienced that the distracting sound of any earphone or any headphone immediately disappears. I think it's obvious, because that's how I listen.