While my preferences for over-ears roughly match with the Harman curve I found its in-ear equivalent mostly too bright and biting. I tried to adjust my UE900 (which has a quite "wild west" response) to Harman - it was a different kind of bad.
I would bet that more will prefer adjustments different for what's currently offered. More highs is something I prefer myself. I don't need a lot of bass, but when I want some bass it works better, relative to JM-1, if the mids have some V-shape to them, and highs are a bit elevated. Otherwise, the overall presentation comes off too wooly to me.I've found the JM1 with a -.8dB/Oct works well for me from 3-10kHz, but I like more highs cuz I like the sense of "sparkle" and "air" and I also prefer no tilt down to 200Hz. I don't know if I fully agree with the idea of tilting the response to match speakers in a room because, well, IEMs aren't really in a room, but I am pretty confident that research will show in time that this is "the right idea."View attachment 393326
I might be wrong but I dont think what you've done in your first graph is "right"Now I know why I like it especially compared to other (bad) attempts I made with the "meta" tuning, I have always liked the Harman target with -2dB or so less of highs, as it turns out the JM-1 target properly displayed and adjusted (tilt and bass) to my preference is not that far off (just a few dB less than I'm used to).
View attachment 393187
Somehow I always missed it when comparing targets in other squigs and tools, it might have been that for most it's a fixed target (or a variation) and trying to add a bass shelf, tilt and then center and overlay it over the Harman target was not as intuitive as with this one (there is also the small difference in tilt in my preference).
View attachment 393189
And there is the so called "meta" tuned IEMs like the Aful Explorer that are not tuned to the JM-1 they just have a general lower pinna gain or Mega5EST that are DF tuned and some other variations and that makes "meta" much more difficult to judge.
I tried and returned the Explorer thinking "meta" is not for me but are they "meta" because they are vastly different from other "meta" IEMs. Is the JM-1 target "meta"?
View attachment 393194
Yes you are correct, each target is designed for an specific coupler, I should have exported the 5128 measurements and EQ based on that, I'm going to try and see how much different the curves end up being.I might be wrong but I dont think what you've done in your first graph is "right"
You cant overlay a 711 based target on a 5128 target and simply compare- the rigs have different responses.
Variations and Nova are about the most Harman 2019v2 compliant IEM out there. Your first graph indicates a pure H2019 compliant IEM should align to your JM1 +10 -0.8 curve apart from the deviations 2-8k (below) and 8+ (above)
But that aint so on Crins 5128 measurements of those IEM. But I will admit my grasp of this, especially when using the different rigs is shaky at best!
For reference the Project Meta is pretty much bang on JM1 +10 -0.8, shown graphed on the 711 vs the more Harman Nova and VAriations. The midrange hump is way lower in the JM1 meta
View attachment 393334
View attachment 393336
I've found the JM1 with a -.8dB/Oct works well for me from 3-10kHz, but I like more highs cuz I like the sense of "sparkle" and "air" and I also prefer no tilt down to 200Hz. I don't know if I fully agree with the idea of tilting the response to match speakers in a room because, well, IEMs aren't really in a room, but I am pretty confident that research will show in time that this is "the right idea."View attachment 393326
Youre right that the 4-8khz area is too high on Harman, and the 3k summit is too much too. (Caveat- for my ears and listening levels)Yes you are correct, each target is designed for an specific coupler, I should have exported the 5128 measurements and EQ based on that, I'm going to try and see how much different the curves end up being.
I was just fooling around with the tool and completely blank out on that.
Youre right that the 4-8khz area is too high on Harman, and the 3k summit is too much too. (Caveat- for my ears and listening levels)
My suspicion is Harman might sound good to people that listen comparatively quieter but when you notch it up- things go sideways. Zero evidence to base that on of course.
Bassheads like Harman 2019 too. Look at what Hawaii Bad Boy says about Truthear Zero Red vs Blue. He also says a bunch of good things about Truthear Nova.Youre right that the 4-8khz area is too high on Harman, and the 3k summit is too much too. (Caveat- for my ears and listening levels)
My suspicion is Harman might sound good to people that listen comparatively quieter but when you notch it up- things go sideways. Zero evidence to base that on of course.
Youre right that the 4-8khz area is too high on Harman, and the 3k summit is too much too. (Caveat- for my ears and listening levels)
My suspicion is Harman might sound good to people that listen comparatively quieter but when you notch it up- things go sideways. Zero evidence to base that on of course.
Like I say, Im shaky at best with this.There is a problem with the tilt of the JM-1 target and the various sources, which one is the correct one?
View attachment 393411View attachment 393415
Yellow is the one used by majority of Squig pages and it should have a tilt of -1, the other two I took form AutoEq target section in GitHub.
Also there is the problem with the measurements, both the 5128 (converted?) and 711 (uploaded) for the CCA Trio are practically the same, aren't they suppose to be different?
View attachment 393413
EDIT. I added the graph with bass boost.
Exactly.There are clearly 4 very different curves there and I think they are all intended to be different- either by tilts or bass/ treble filters or both (this is part of the problem with new "standards"- they arent standardised.
I also think Crin ones are some of most reliable at the time, the down side is there is a limited selection of measured IEMs (considering the amount of available models).Re the measurements that purport to be compensated from 711 to 5128- think youve just shown how that might not be reliable. Which is why I am sticking to Crins 5128 measurements and target for 5128 and squig generally for 711 measurements and targets.
I tried but I ended with a huge mid-bass hump and dark sound I still think the tilt is not implemented correctly.The JM-1 curves are different because they account for coupler difference. The correct one is the one is the one used for the individual database. In other words, use the selectable JM-1 with Paul Wasabis squig link, use the selectable JM-1 with Gizaudios squig link and so on.
That means you don't like JM-1 with 10dB tilt. Nothing strange, JM-1 is just a starting point to add your preference adjustments on top of.I tried but I ended with a huge mid-bass hump and dark sound I still think the tilt is not implemented correctly.