There is no dispute that the natural ear canal resonances for an open ear shift when the ear is occluded with an IEM depending on the insertion depth, etc. The past year we've spent some time modeling earphones in different ear canals (based on MRI scans) in COMSOL and compared the results with the headphones measured in 3D printed canals and the models are quite accurate.
The main challenges or research questions are:
1. Should the IE headphone response at DRP replicate the open ear canal response at DRP ? Can you quantify benefits in terms of sound quality?
Indeed. My question arose more out of a logical train of thoughts (why would an individual with a significantly longer or shorter ear canal than standards would want an ear canal resonance peak at a different location when wearing an IEM vs. an over-ear or speakers ?) rather than anything grounded in actual psychoacoustic tests (is it worth it ?).
Which is kind of where I would love to have the input of someone particularly knowledgeable in that area who's free to publish his research .
2. How do you model an individual's ear canal and predict the open ear canal resonance at DRP without using a probe mic or having access to an MRI? How much does the impedance of the ear drum vary between individuals to make it important to include?
The current version of the HARMAN IE target curve is already based on an open ear canal resonance at DRP based measurements of sound sources in the room using an B&K 5128 which is supposed to be an "average" human ear. So the question is how much better is the experience when personalized to your own canal?
Samsung presented a paper on question 2. at the recent AES conference in Madrid
I would be interested in your take on this paper as I have my own thoughts.
I've seen that paper indeed but it will take me quite a while to digest it. I don't have a lot of thoughts on it, but rather quite a few questions, and your input would be appreciated. I'll respond by the end of the week in more detail if you don't mind.