Best 'Bang for your buck' IEM - Poll

[IAtaman]

that is funny. cannot imagine these sounding harsh. but you don't find them bloated, but the delci sounds bloated?

This Zero:2 story has been discussed many times over the course of various threads, and raised by many people, so I am afraid you'll need to start imagining it might indeed be the case.

 

[Doltonius]

This Zero:2 story has been discussed many times over the course of various threads, and raised by many people, so I am afraid you'll need to start imagining it might indeed be the case.

did a quick search. searched for "harsh" in the zero 2 review discussions. not many results. just a few posts from the 50+ pages of discussion. can you direct me to threads where this is discussed.

 

[IAtaman]

did a quick search. searched for "harsh" in the zero 2 review discussions. not many results. just a few posts from the 50+ pages of discussion. can you direct me to threads where this is discussed.

Best 'Bang for your buck' IEM - Poll

If you are sensitive to treble no matter the IEM, try Moondrop Spring Tips. They reduce the highs a little compared to foam and silicone. They works well on the Trios and are more comfortable for me than the regular foam tips. They seem like a good match with these IEMs in particular as I am...

audiosciencereview.com

 

[Doltonius]

Best 'Bang for your buck' IEM - Poll

If you are sensitive to treble no matter the IEM, try Moondrop Spring Tips. They reduce the highs a little compared to foam and silicone. They works well on the Trios and are more comfortable for me than the regular foam tips. They seem like a good match with these IEMs in particular as I am...

audiosciencereview.com

the guy you cite has fit issues; resolve's dissatisfaction also comes from fit issues. but you say you find them harsh even with a good seal. that is what is intriguing.

what is even more intriguing is that you like the ie200. you don't find that treble harsh (see graph below)? or is the harshness coming from 3k-5k? if that is the case, you are definitely a minority. most people won't find this kind of upper mids harsh, especially when balanced by this much bass.

my hunch is that you actually also don't have a good seal with zero 2. i make this guess because you don't talk about the zero 2 as being bloated, while you do for delci, which should have very similar levels of mid bass and bass in general, responsible for bloat.

 

[InfiniteJester]

that is funny. cannot imagine these sounding harsh. but you don't find them bloated, but the delci sounds bloated?

The Zero:2 also sound extremely harsh and fatiguing to me. I can't also stand them for more than a few minutes.

 

[Doltonius]

The Zero:2 also sound extremely harsh and fatiguing to me. I can't also stand them for more than a few minutes.

I know. He linked your post. But for you it is a fit problem, this is understandable, because without a good seal it will be harsh. However, he claims that he doesn’t have a fit problem. My guess now is that he actually has a fit problem.

 

[MacClintock]

KZ is the kind of IEM that makes people think kilobuck IEMs are necessary. The best thing about them is their marketing skills, all six sets I bought from them are collecting dust.

You have six sets? So the marketing was successful on you.

 

[MayaTlab]

my hunch is that you actually also don't have a good seal with zero 2.

It's possible, but there are other plausible mechanisms that don't involve leakage that can make two passive IEMs equalised to the same target on an ear simulator measure differently in your ears, such as ear canal volume or length issues (whether it's the length of your ear canals per se - above 3kHz or so passive IEMs do not vary with ear canal length in exactly the same way - or insertion depth - different effective length mode resonances for different IEMs because of their design / choice of tip / nozzle). And we should also talk about eardrum / middle ear impedance, but while it could be an important factor in terms of inter-individual variability, I am not certain that in the case of these two IEMs it would be for a given individual.

And of course the usual sample variation, but I don't think that we have any idea what it is for the Delci.

 

[MacClintock]

How is the soundstage? It is the aspect that interests me the most.

Then you should listen to speakers or live music.

 

[Doltonius]

It's possible, but there are other plausible mechanisms that don't involve leakage that can make two passive IEMs equalised to the same target on an ear simulator measure differently in your ears, such as ear canal volume or length issues (whether it's the length of your ear canals per se - above 3kHz or so passive IEMs do not vary with ear canal length in exactly the same way - or insertion depth - different effective length mode resonances for different IEMs because of their design / choice of tip / nozzle). And we should also talk about eardrum / middle ear impedance, but while it could be an important factor in terms of inter-individual variability, I am not certain that in the case of these two IEMs it would be for a given individual.

And of course the usual sample variation, but I don't think that we have any idea what it is for the Delci.

It is the same individual, it will have to do with the fit, but indeed, not necessarily lacking a seal. Yet judging from the fact that zero 2 is so harsh as to be unlistenable to them, but they also like the ie200 which likely has more treble even if the zero 2 has extraordinary ear canal resonances for them, I think the lack of a seal that obliterates the bass is very likely.

 

[MayaTlab]

It is the same individual, it will have to do with the fit, but indeed, not necessarily lacking a seal. Yet judging from the fact that zero 2 is so harsh as to be unlistenable to them, but they also like the ie200 which likely has more treble even if the zero 2 has extraordinary ear canal resonances for them, I think the lack of a seal that obliterates the bass is very likely.

Is "harsh" necessarily defined by different individuals only by the overall level of energy above 5kHz, and not either by other factors below it, or the exact distribution of peaks and dips ?
The lack of operational definition for such terms is generally why I don't bother with them .

 

[Doltonius]

Is "harsh" necessarily defined by different individuals only by the overall level of energy above 5kHz, and not either by other factors below it, or the exact distribution of peaks and dips ?
The lack of operational definition for such terms is generally why I don't bother with them .

If it is a leakage causing the harshness then clearly it need not only be about the region above 5k. It will just lose all tonal balance, even the regular pinna gain will sound harsh. Also notice that Zero 2 is otherwise rather smooth, without many large peaks.

 

[MayaTlab]

If it is a leakage causing the harshness then clearly it need not only be about the region above 5k.

If. Which again, could be possible, but may not need be involved as well to explain in situ differences.

Also notice that Zero 2 is otherwise rather smooth, without many large peaks.

That's not how you should think about peaks and dips with IEMs.

The Zero 2 solves a treble issue above 10kHz+ the original had, but the main length mode isn't damped in a particularly different fashion from other IEMs.

 

[Doltonius]

If. Which again, could be possible, but may not need be involved as well to explain in situ differences.



That's not how you should think about peaks and dips with IEMs.

The Zero 2 solves a treble issue above 10kHz+ the original had, but the main length mode isn't damped in a particularly different fashion from other IEMs.

My point is I never assumed harshness had to do with 5k+. Or else I would not have proposed leakage as the problem.

I gave my reasoning about the length mode above. They like the ie200. Just look at its response on the bk 5128 compared with the zero 2, with is attached above. Thus I doubt that it is length mode that is the problem.

 

[InfiniteJester]

It is the same individual, it will have to do with the fit, but indeed, not necessarily lacking a seal. Yet judging from the fact that zero 2 is so harsh as to be unlistenable to them, but they also like the ie200 which likely has more treble even if the zero 2 has extraordinary ear canal resonances for them, I think the lack of a seal that obliterates the bass is very likely.

I have never tried the IE 200.

Maybe you mean the EW200? I use EQ to tame the treble there. But I couldn't fix the Zero:2 with EQ.

 

[markanini]

Keep in mind, real and artificial ears are not linear systems like DACs and Amps. The resulting response is a result of a number of physical interactions, combine that will individual anatomic variation and you can be sure that individual responce will vary bettween individuals. Here is some data to consider, you can see there is significant variation to frequencies that are broadly considered harsh between 3-7kHz:

 

[KosherButcher]

It's possible, but there are other plausible mechanisms that don't involve leakage that can make two passive IEMs equalised to the same target on an ear simulator measure differently in your ears, such as ear canal volume or length issues (whether it's the length of your ear canals per se - above 3kHz or so passive IEMs do not vary with ear canal length in exactly the same way - or insertion depth - different effective length mode resonances for different IEMs because of their design / choice of tip / nozzle). And we should also talk about eardrum / middle ear impedance, but while it could be an important factor in terms of inter-individual variability, I am not certain that in the case of these two IEMs it would be for a given individual.

And of course the usual sample variation, but I don't think that we have any idea what it is for the Delci.

One more huge variable is the type, and diameter, of the ear tip. I find the Zero2 to be one of the most difficult to fit IEMs because they have one of the shortest nozzles in my collection, and I've heard other people have this same issue (I'm aware that for some people the short nozzle works better with their ear shape). This caused me to try many, many, different ear tips. I did finally find some that worked for me (AZLA Origin, with their long stem), but in the process I tried a few tips that have wider bores, and in general, I find that wide bore tips seem to accentuate higher frequencies. I recall that I did manage to get a seal with one set of wide bore tips, and the treble was almost piercing with those, and I don't have that problem with the AZLAs that don't have as wide an opening. In fact, the Truthear RED comes with two different sets of tips, one with narrow bore, and one with wide, and they have very different tonalities, at least to my ears. So, given how much of an impact just the bore diameter of the ear tips makes, I'm sure different ear anatomies and insertion depth must also make a massive difference in how people hear their IEMs.

 

[Doltonius]

I have never tried the IE 200.

Maybe you mean the EW200? I use EQ to tame the treble there. But I couldn't fix the Zero:2 with EQ.

Not you, but @IAtaman likes the ie200.

You can’t fix it with eq because it is due to leakage for you. the harshness becomes from the absence of bass rather than too much treble. If there is good seal, the zero 2 will have more bass and less treble than the ew200, resulting in less harshness, if any. see attached graph.

 

[InfiniteJester]

Not you, but @IAtaman likes the ie200.

You can’t fix it with eq because it is due to leakage for you. the harshness becomes from the absence of bass rather than too much treble. If there is good seal, the zero 2 will have more bass and less treble than the ew200, resulting in less harshness, if any. see attached graph.

WOW.

I would have never imagined that they were this close, given how different they sound to me.

I misunderstood the "they".

 

[CedarX]

One more huge variable is the type, and diameter, of the ear tip. I find the Zero2 to be one of the most difficult to fit IEMs because they have one of the shortest nozzles in my collection, and I've heard other people have this same issue (I'm aware that for some people the short nozzle works better with their ear shape). This caused me to try many, many, different ear tips. I did finally find some that worked for me (AZLA Origin, with their long stem), but in the process I tried a few tips that have wider bores, and in general, I find that wide bore tips seem to accentuate higher frequencies. I recall that I did manage to get a seal with one set of wide bore tips, and the treble was almost piercing with those, and I don't have that problem with the AZLAs that don't have as wide an opening. In fact, the Truthear RED comes with two different sets of tips, one with narrow bore, and one with wide, and they have very different tonalities, at least to my ears. So, given how much of an impact just the bore diameter of the ear tips makes, I'm sure different ear anatomies and insertion depth must also make a massive difference in how people hear their IEMs.

Fit is indeed a very important characteristic for IEMs, and the ear tip is a significant part of it. Getting a good seal (no leak) is the first goal, and what works for an individual may not work for another individual. Beyond that, I am not sure the ear tip material & geometry are that important: in your example, is it really the tip bore size & stem length that cause the difference in perceived response, or the fact that different tips result in different IEM positions relative to your ear drum?

I have some IEMs where I could choose between a large tip resulting in shallow insertion, or a smaller tip resulting in deeper insertion. Subjectively, I hear differences (well... I think I hear differences!), but I suspect it has more to do with the tip enabling different insertion depth than the tip itself (material, construction, bore size & geometry).

How do you separate and determine the contributions to the perceived response of all these tip parameters?