Has the meta on IEMs moved away from Harman's "pinna gain"?

[InfiniteJester]

Kiwi KE4 looks pretty good but I'm not gonna buy another set of 200$ IEMs when I can EQ.

Crinacle's 5128 Graph Tool | Hangout.Audio

Compare graphs from the world's largest public database of ITU-T P.57 Type 4.3 IEM measurements, maintained by Crinacle.

graph.hangout.audio

I wish I didn't buy the Quintet. I hate that IEM. I would spend that money on their KE4.

But I cannot justify to myself buying more sets, specially because the most expensive ones are the worst of them, and I would put the Delci and the EW300 above the Quintets, the FH9 and basically anything above 100€ that I own.

 

[digitalfrost]

I wish I didn't buy the Quintet. I hate that IEM.

The Quintet with the EQ is my default go-to. I just fits my ears very well. I agree that it is very bright out of the box.

 

[scolfaro]

I don't think the usual tracks I use to evaluate IEMs are badly recorded (except maybe the metal ones; which, to be fair, are usually the ones that show me the most glaring issues of an IEM).

But you can evaluate them yourself:

Super interesting playlist, I'm browsing through with the Hexas

1) Jakszyk, Fripp, Collins: sounds great altogether, I also cannot detect anything disturbing me in the monitoring, in general laid back, not very loud but not lacking pressure, super balanced in a kind of euro-jazz/fusion way. Vocals are mixed far back for most of the track.

2) Culprate: sounds perfect, modern and defined, cool!

3) Porcupine Tree: This sounds just bad, although the band is super cool... Very boxy, muffled even, as if it wasn't mastered at all, this is not only an old master, but a relatively bad mix, nothing feels in its right place

4) Hopkins: too much bass, jagged edges on the mid-highs, but edgy in general, cool but I'm not sure I can extract any relevant info, even the tame Hexas are booming

5) Miracle Car wash: sounds "correct", but nowhere near the first track as an instrumental, lacks polish and pressure so I cannot tell anything particular. Fun track, but sounds like a demo

6) Woolgatherer is too messy, cannot pinpoint anything, the quiet parts are cool but the movement of the track feels off.

 

[scolfaro]

I don't think the usual tracks I use to evaluate IEMs are badly recorded (except maybe the metal ones; which, to be fair, are usually the ones that show me the most glaring issues of an IEM).

I tend to go more towards edgier stuff, so that my "boundaries" for producing are put in place.

This is more or less what I consider perfect in the lows, vocals are super nicely placed and held in place by the 3kHz area, they already sort of went too hot on the EW300. There's also the limit on the highs for me, anymore hats and hi-perc and you're overdoing it, but it's close to a perfect track. Master is gorgeous, although clipped AF (youtube won't show you that, but the engineer used the cheap trick to make it feel louder of letting transients through).

This one is like the flipside of Aquemini, almost too much bass (but not quite), hats are gone (any less and the drums are off), vocals and synths have the whole higher range. Simgot also crapped out but not like the first track. Bass was overwhelming, and Kendrick was sibilant. This isn't right, he is sitting at the very edge, but not over. The Hexas sort of lack the "bam" I got on my Audeze or my monitors, but nothing is "wrong", so I take it as it is, especially the hooks which sound perfect. Verses are too soft with Hexas, but that's not "wrong."

The next one is close to what I consider a perfect track, nothing is off, nothing is too close to the edge. I get the track as it is with Hexas, just delightful. You're probably gonna get blasted by claps and baby-screams on the vocals, maybe buried under bass

The Seed is the upper range of higher drums, of edge on the vocals, and of a "hot" mix and master, I cannot listen to "phrenology" for too long, but it isn't wrong. On the Hexas I get pretty much what I've gotten all my life everywhere else, on the Simgot the track was unbearable for me, overcooked and highs over-blasting everywhere

And once again, the opposite of that track, Erikah Badu and Glasper almost going way too soft and too much bass, but not quite.

And another "perfect" but everything on the limit. The track had too much bass, piercing highs, and too sharp vocals on the Simgot. This track exposes room problems when I am visiting other studios, it's the razor's edge for me. Almost over-compressed, but not quite, almost too much high-perc, almost too much 3kHz on vocals, almost too punchy bass. Edgy and perfect. Hexas are dancing with it.

And the low-end limit together with sharpest highs and honkiest vocals, but 2.1 billion play, the track is obviously perfect as the limit of what is doable. Hexas just eat it, Simgot gave me a headache...

Make sure to turn up the volume and keep loudness constant, youtube messes greatly with the loudness of masters that go too much past -13 LUFS (pretty much every good modern master...).

 

[scolfaro]

Actually @InfiniteJester thank you for the ride through both playlists, I just made minor tweaks to my Hexa EQ going between Aquemini and Wesley's Theory.

*** This is an instance of TotalMix EQ if you're into RME stuff.

 

[digitalfrost]

I tend to go more towards edgier stuff, so that my "boundaries" for producing are put in place.

I really don't like your music, but I agree with every comment you made on the playlist https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ay-from-harmans-pinna-gain.54909/post-2107376

So

 

[scolfaro]

I really don't like your music, but I agree with every comment you made on the playlist https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ay-from-harmans-pinna-gain.54909/post-2107376

So

haha that's a risk to be taken, right? it might make checking the boundaries with them tracks a bit like swallowing a bitter pill (or altogether impossible if it makes you sick to the stomach musically even before you can judge anything with that xD )... I am switching over to an 80's/90's revival record in the next few days, I can try it one more time with that playlist if you'd like

 

[InfiniteJester]

@scolfaro I disagree so much with what you said about Porcupine Tree, man. "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".

I already know most of the music you shared, but it is really not my cup of tea. I will listen to the ones I don't know yet. I shared the most tamed things I listen to, in reality I gravitate towards much more experimental stuff, but I didn't want to alienate everyone. And many experimental stuff is badly produced anyways, particularly in the metal genre.

 

[markanini]

I actually have to agree about the Procupine Tree song. The overall mix is unconvtional, I wish I could say in a good way, but...the lows are a bit unwieldy, and the mids cross the line of being too colored. I'm definitely into prog-rock, don't get me wrong. "Dream Theater - A View from the Top of the World" comes to mind as a prog-rock release with good mixing, not perfect but definitely good.

 

[InfiniteJester]

I actually have to agree about the Procupine Tree song. The overall mix is unconvtional, I wish I could say in a good way, but...the lows are a bit unwieldy, and the mids cross the line of being too colored. I'm definitely into prog-rock, don't get me wrong. "Dream Theater - A View from the Top of the World" comes to mind as a prog-rock release with good mixing, not perfect but definitely good.

For me, Steven Wilson is absolute perfection. It is also one of the most prestigious mixers in the world, bands like Gentle Giant, King Crimson, Jethro Tull, Tangerine Dream, Yes, Black Sabbath, Caravan, EL&P and many more have contracted him to remix their old albums. And the results are always spectacular in my opinion. He was also the producer behind the biggest Opeth and Anathema albums.

I'm not trying to make any kind of ad populum or ad verecundiam here, but for me this is like saying that something produced by Alan Parsons (Steven Wilson and Alan Parsons have worked together in the fantastic The Raven that Refused to Sing, btw) or Steely Dan didn't have good mixing.

Anyone can have their opinion, but I find hard to save any music whatsoever if Steven Wilson's mixes are considered subpar. For me, personally, he is the GOAT. And I think that you will see that this opinion is not uncommon nor fringe if you research about his mixing work.

Even one of the biggest channels about music in YouTube say this about his work:

 

[markanini]

For me, Steven Wilson is absolute perfection. It is also one of the most prestigious mixers in the world, bands like Gentle Giant, King Crimson, Jethro Tull, Tangerine Dream, Yes, Black Sabbath, Caravan, EL&P and many more have contracted him to remix their old albums. And the results are always spectacular in my opinion. He was also the producer behind the biggest Opeth and Anathema albums.

I'm not trying to make any kind of ad populum or ad verecundiam here, but for me this is like saying that something produced by Alan Parsons (Steven Wilson and Alan Parsons have worked together in the fantastic The Raven that Refused to Sing, btw) or Steely Dan didn't have good mixing.

Anyone can have their opinion, but I find hard to save any music whatsoever if Steven Wilson's mixes are considered subpar. For me, personally, he is the GOAT. And I think that you will see that this opinion is not uncommon nor fringe if you research about his mixing work.

If I had to praise a mixer, I do not think it's fair to talk about someone that does remixes of classic albums, because that's probably the hardest undertaking. You simply can't make everyone happy doing that.

I do admire Andy Wallace for popularizing a coherent mixing style with full bodied drums. His mixes always translate well to various systems, even the ones he made in the 90s. No wonder musician-influencer Rick Beato talks about him all the time.

EDIT: I saw your edit. "Rocks greatest producer" is very kind of Rick to say. Considering Nirvana, Rage Against the Machine, Slipknot, System of a Down, and Ghost are just a few bands on Any Wallace credits list I honestly think Andy deserves it more. Anyway, we strayed off topic so let's leave it at that.

 

[scolfaro]

For me, Steven Wilson is absolute perfection. It is also one of the most prestigious mixers in the world, bands like Gentle Giant, King Crimson, Jethro Tull, Tangerine Dream, Yes, Black Sabbath, Caravan, EL&P and many more have contracted him to remix their old albums. And the results are always spectacular in my opinion. He was also the producer behind the biggest Opeth and Anathema albums.

I'm not trying to make any kind of ad populum or ad verecundiam here, but for me this is like saying that something produced by Alan Parsons (Steven Wilson and Alan Parsons have worked together in the fantastic The Raven that Refused to Sing, btw) or Steely Dan didn't have good mixing.

Anyone can have their opinion, but I find hard to save any music whatsoever if Steven Wilson's mixes are considered subpar. For me, personally, he is the GOAT. And I think that you will see that this opinion is not uncommon nor fringe if you research about his mixing work.

I know some of Steven Wilson's work and have honestly never been a fan. Personally I don't think any of his work in this vintage prog vein holds a candle to anything Eddie Offord did in his heyday, some of his records (around Tarkus, Fragile days) I've just listened to death since I started playing in bands and still think they are great nowadays. If I turn towards more modern prog-rock, records like "Awake", "Images and Words" and "Metropolis 2" from Dream Theater are also leagues ahead in terms of sound and translation alone, I am not considering the music in these comments.

Now where I've noticed Steven Wilson excels is he connects with his audience. I've had friends who swore by him and thought he was the greatest genius ever, listening to his stuff on repeat, while I was underwhelmed next to them not quite getting what they thought was so fantastic. But he ellicits that kind of reaction.

Also, I gave another shot to the track you posted, and I probaly got why you'd like it so much. It's excellent in creating an atmosphere, if you listen to the whole thing then the parts start to make more sense. But two factors are at play here, one is that once you let your ears adjust, the sonic space you're in becomes "reality" and you start judging everything through that perspective, so given Wilson's excellent ability to tell a story and have it gradually evolve through a song, you're caught in that space and accepting it for what is, and it does become engaging. HOWEVER, if you A/B into it, disregarding how different every section in that long song is, it is sonically quite weak, with the exception of most guitar sounds (especially acoustic ones) and some vocals, particularly the more creatively processed wide ones. If you give it time and dive into its universe, it makes sense, but as a listenable product you won't learn anything from it as a reference, there's nothing "outstanding" aside from the story-telling to my ears.

If what we're doing is quickly A/B'ing in and out of tracks to understand our monitoring, I assure there's very little to be learned from it (from an objective POV). If it's about your enjoyment, quite the opposite, liking the source comes first, and I am sure the EW300 fits that track quite well (it cuts where it's bloaty, and boosts where it's lacking, from memory). But that doesn't make neither better than what they are, preferences aside

 

[InfiniteJester]

I know some of Steven Wilson's work and have honestly never been a fan. Personally I don't think any of his work in this vintage prog vein holds a candle to anything Eddie Offord did in his heyday, some of his records (around Tarkus, Fragile days) I've just listened to death since I started playing in bands and still think they are great nowadays. If I turn towards more modern prog-rock, records like "Awake", "Images and Words" and "Metropolis 2" from Dream Theater are also leagues ahead in terms of sound and translation alone, I am not considering the music in these comments.

Now where I've noticed Steven Wilson excels is he connects with his audience. I've had friends who swore by him and thought he was the greatest genius ever, listening to his stuff on repeat, while I was underwhelmed next to them not quite getting what they thought was so fantastic. But he ellicits that kind of reaction.

Also, I gave another shot to the track you posted, and I probaly got why you'd like it so much. It's excellent in creating an atmosphere, if you listen to the whole thing then the parts start to make more sense. But two factors are at play here, one is that once you let your ears adjust, the sonic space you're in becomes "reality" and you start judging everything through that perspective, so given Wilson's excellent ability to tell a story and have it gradually evolve through a song, you're caught in that space and accepting it for what is, and it does become engaging. HOWEVER, if you A/B into it, disregarding how different every section in that long song is, it is sonically quite weak, with the exception of most guitar sounds (especially acoustic ones) and some vocals, particularly the more creatively processed wide ones. If you give it time and dive into its universe, it makes sense, but as a listenable product you won't learn anything from it as a reference, there's nothing "outstanding" aside from the story-telling to my ears.

If what we're doing is quickly A/B'ing in and out of tracks to understand our monitoring, I assure there's very little to be learned from it (from an objective POV). If it's about your enjoyment, quite the opposite, liking the source comes first, and I am sure the EW300 fits that track quite well (it cuts where it's bloaty, and boosts where it's lacking, from memory). But that doesn't make neither better than what they are, preferences aside

Maybe knowing that it is an album recorded as live improvisations and then stitching parts together may increase the appreciation of the track. I still think that Fear of a Blank Planet is his best work sonically and from a compositional point of view.

I'm one of those who think that Steven Wilson is a genius. One of my favorite artists, for sure.

At any rate, any competent track that you are very used to listen to would allow you to A/B IEMs with some degree of success, particularly if you have listened to said track before through very well calibrated speakers.

I listened to that Porcupine Tree album first on high quality speakers and I was completely blown away by the sound.

 

[scolfaro]

Maybe knowing that it is an album recorded as live improvisations and then stitching parts together may increase the appreciation of the track. I still think that Fear of a Blank Planet is his best work sonically and from a compositional point of view.

I'm one of those who think that Steven Wilson is a genius. One of my favorite artists, for sure.

At any rate, any competent track that you are very used to listen to would allow you to A/B IEMs with some degree of success, particularly if you have listened to said track before through very well calibrated speakers.

I listened to that Porcupine Tree album first on high quality speakers and I was completely blown away by the sound.

Oh for sure, it makes a lot more sense, definitely more impressive. Skimming through parts destroys it, that's why my first impression was so negative, but again just listening to it on my monitors, and having to push my usual levels up 5db to get it to "pop" just made me think about the whole thing again. He's reaching peaks of -0.6db, but with an average loudness (even on the loud parts) of only around -15 LUFS, what instantly makes my more pop or hiphop oriented ears not accept it is the lack of density.

So my initial impression, that the lack of "movement" (as in dynamic work on the sum or master) makes me write it off, somewhat unjustly because underneath it all the track is great, is confirmed. If you A/B it against the Dream Theater track up on the thread you will get it, it has beauty in itself for sure (and that's why if you really know it you can judge things by it after adjusting levels way up), but it lacks mostly compression to even everything out. Probably a creative decision, that I dislike to the point of "rejecting" the track's unconventional finishing.

I was then looking for mastering credits and it might indeed be unmastered, because I couldn't find anyone other than Wilson signing it, maybe that's it...

 

[InfiniteJester]

Oh for sure, it makes a lot more sense, definitely more impressive. Skimming through parts destroys it, that's why my first impression was so negative, but again just listening to it on my monitors, and having to push my usual levels up 5db to get it to "pop" just made me think about the whole thing again. He's reaching peaks of -0.6db, but with an average loudness (even on the loud parts) of only around -15 LUFS, what instantly makes my more pop or hiphop oriented ears not accept it is the lack of density.

So my initial impression, that the lack of "movement" (as in dynamic work on the sum or master) makes me write it off, somewhat unjustly because underneath it all the track is great, is confirmed. If you A/B it against the Dream Theater track up on the thread you will get it, it has beauty in itself for sure (and that's why if you really know it you can judge things by it after adjusting levels way up), but it lacks mostly compression to even everything out. Probably a creative decision, that I dislike to the point of "rejecting" the track's unconventional finishing.

I was then looking for mastering credits and it might indeed be unmastered, because I couldn't find anyone other than Wilson signing it, maybe that's it...

Steven Wilson and Alan Parsons believe in preserving high dynamic ranges, they have an interview together where they talk about this. Having myself listened and produced classical music for years, I'm very fond of that choice. My own albums have DRs of around 14. I find DRs of 5 fatiguing.

That track by Dream Theater is really good, I used to listen to them a lot in the past. I think that they usually have great production. You may also like Haken if you like that kind of sound.

But if what you seek is "density", I must recommend this madness:

 

[scolfaro]

Steven Wilson and Alan Parsons believe in preserving high dynamic ranges, they have an interview together where they talk about this. Having myself listened and produced classical music for years, I'm very fond of that choice. My own albums have DRs of around 14. I find DRs of 5 fatiguing.

That track by Dream Theater is really good, I used to listen to them a lot in the past. I think that they usually have great production. You may also like Haken if you like that kind of sound.

But if what you seek is "density", I must recommend this madness:

A+ for both those tracks, thank you for that, it's another direction than what I'm normally doing, but those are reference tracks undoubtedly, massive, super interesting, and somehow not obnoxiously grinding my brains with high-mids which is usual when things get that thick. And indeed, madness but not overcompressed, closer to wizardry
*** had to edit because the first track sounds just absolutely perfect on the Hexas, top to bottom. Impressive ish.

 

[WalterW]

Here you go. I also included Harman IE 2019v2 with JM-1 DF as the compensation, so that we're just seeing the "preference adjustment" of Harman IE against a human-like HRTF. I think it's a helpful in illustrating just how weird and unnatural the Harman IE target really is.

And, just so we're clear, the preference adjustment I've applied here to JM-1 is not my "official target" by any means. It's an adjustment I personally enjoy, and is consistent with the general trends we see in the literature, but I really encourage people to experiment and adjust to their own taste. We'd need to do proper method of adjustment testing to dial in the tilt and bass that is preferred on average.

Wasn´t the result of Sean Olive´s recent talk that there is no simple and general transfer function from the 711 Harman target to the 5128, but that it depends on the specific IEM/headphone being used ("A single correction curve cannot account for the measurement differences between Type 3.3 and 4.3 test fixtures because the error changes with headphone model.") ?

 

[WalterW]

So what would be a cheap IEM that is close to JM-1?

I'm probably a strange person because I like to be at the lower end of the preference bounds for ear gain and treble: https://graph.hangout.audio/iem/5128/?share=JM-1_Target&bass=4&tilt=-1&treble=-4&ear=-2

This sounds good to me with my Kiwi Quintets.

Well it is not exactly cheap, but the Dunu DaVinci is quite close to the JM-1 target with tilt -0.8dB/Oct and bass +8dB. But I personally don't give much about the JM-1 target. I also don't think that the Harman2019IEv2 target is too thin in the mids. It just needs to lower the ear gain a little and than it is right for me.

 

[markanini]

Well it is not exactly cheap, but the Dunu DaVinci is quite close to the JM-1 target with tilt -0.8dB/Oct and bass +8dB. But I personally don't give much about the JM-1 target. I also don't think that the Harman2019IEv2 target is too thin in the mids. It just needs to lower the ear gain a little and than it is right for me.

View attachment 400352

I haven't heard it. To me immersion is better when JM1 tuning with less elevated bass. With bass elevated to Davinci levels it's better with a V shape in the mids, similar to Harman 2019. To me Harman 2019 is essentially a bass elevated tuning. Crinacle calls Harman 2019 tuned sets like Nova and Supermix "undeniably bass elevated". And bass afficianado HBB has good things to say about Harman tuned sets. The extra lower treble does have a use for balancing out the elevated bass. But it can probably be refined with 6kHz being tamed a little.

 

[scolfaro]

I haven't heard it. To me immersion is better when JM1 tuning with less elevated bass. With bass elevated to Davinci levels it's better with a V shape in the mids, similar to Harman 2019. To me Harman 2019 is essentially a bass elevated tuning. Crinacle calls Harman 2019 tuned sets like Nova and Supermix "undeniably bass elevated". And bass afficianado HBB has good things to say about Harman tuned sets. The extra lower treble does have a use for balancing out the elevated bass. But it can probably be refined with 6kHz being tamed a little.

And in that explanation you pretty much summed why I think personally HBB is way off the mark (and whose taste and ears I don't trust at all), and why the target has moved.

Because to make it work as a tuning you have to cut and boost multiple areas of the spectrum until you're left with a husk (which is what I feel it sounds like in IEMs), completely unnatural sounding no matter what you feed through it.

That would've been the job of a daring producer/mix/master engineer, not a IEM designer. If you manage to create something that sounds dull but at the same time pierces your skull with exaggerated highs, you overdid it somewhere 20 steps back and it's better to start from scratch, you can't save that mess.