How to find IEM that suits me?

[Chota]

Hey my friends. I know anyone is asking for "the best" IEM with bass, treble or metal or gaming ....
I would try to find out another way maybe.
I have the original Moondrop Aria and Starfiel, also cheap ST1.

I like them. But want to buy some new.
I bought the Simgot EM6L and Supermix 4, as both are recommanded by "millions" of guys in the internet. all with same intention.

Both are not have the right "sound" for me. (I could explain only a part not all what bothers me)
So I send them back to Amazon, thankfully thats possible.

I looked a lot at graphs from different users. Compare, read, but nope both are not right for me.

how would you choose an IEM?
Is the only way to order them, try, send back, order one, try send back over and over?

Amazon will not amused I believe. Some IEM are only available via Aliexpress or other China shops :-(
And why are all these "youtuber" "influencers" even Crinacle havent tested eg. "Hörluchs" or similar brands? Only chineese brands.

Any help how to find IEM and buy is welcome.

Thnx
Tabea

 

[staticV3]

how would you choose an IEM?

For frequency response, I use graph tools and EQ IEMs I own to demo the tuning of models I'm interested in, keeping in mind caveats WRT acoustic impedance.

But for comfort, can't really do anything but try them yourself.

And why are all these "youtuber" "influencers" even Crinacle havent tested eg. "Hörluchs" or similar brands? Only chineese brands.

Crinacle has tested over 3000 IEMs I believe from all over the world. Hörluchs as well: https://graph.hangout.audio/iem/711/?share=IEF_Preference_2025_Target,HL4300

IMO, Hörluchs have way too many models, do not publish measurements, use number of drivers as their main differentiator, and judging by Crin's HL4300 graph, don't really care about tuning.

I don't know why anyone would give them the time of day.

 

[Heinrich]

... keeping in mind caveats WRT acoustic impedance. ...

IMO, Hörluchs ...

The latter are for professional use, hence the optimization criteria are not identical to what a consumer should adhere to.
Caveat emptor, the 'acoustic impedance' may speak against the possibility to simulate the sound profile of an IEM using another with just electronic equalization.
The more I get used to the inherent problems of headphones/IEMs the more I would say, just try. Weired shapes of especially frequency response are quite unlikely to fit, though. To accept equalization as a must helps so much in this field. And a strong attitude to keep just and only personal preference as the target does wonders.

 

[kemmler3D]

I would agree that adding EQ to your existing IEMs to mimic other IEMs would be a good thing to try. Once you find a tuning that sounds really right to you, you can buy that one. It's not a perfect method but it's very cheap.

 

[Heinrich]

I would agree that adding EQ to your existing IEMs to mimic other IEMs would be a good thing to try. Once you find a tuning that sounds really right to you, you can buy that one. It's not a perfect method but it's very cheap.

Did you consider the individual acoustical impedances of a) the IEM to be simulated, b) the IEM used for simulation and c), d) of the ear canals in averaged measurement rig and individual listener? No prob/ with the outer ear, though. I'm halfway joking, of course. The problems seem not yet ready for scientific investigation. How then could one deny them?

But you're right, I said that way to often, I give it a rest ...

... caveats WRT acoustic impedance. ...

Hope you would agree with just trying different models.

 

[amirm]

how would you choose an IEM?
Is the only way to order them, try, send back, order one, try send back over and over?

You should reduce the list to a few to try. You can't use that process and go after random choice after another. Amazon will lock your account if you do.

I have tested a number of below $50 IEMs that are superb, backed by high member satisfaction. Each one is slightly different from fit point of view and to small extent, tonality.

If one fits well and sound is close, then go with that and use EQ to tailor the tonality to what you want.

 

[kemmler3D]

Did you consider the individual acoustical impedances of a) the IEM to be simulated, b) the IEM used for simulation and c), d) of the ear canals in averaged measurement rig and individual listener? No prob/ with the outer ear, though. I'm halfway joking, of course. The problems seem not yet ready for scientific investigation. How then could one deny them?

But you're right, I said that way to often, I give it a rest ...


Hope you would agree with just trying different models.

This isn't something I know a ton about. How do varying acoustic impedances cause nonlinearities in a use case like this?

Is the suggestion that measurements don't reflect the effective frequency response of the IEM, or that IEM FR in practice is too unpredictable vs. measured performance to get much use out of this method?

 

[Heinrich]

This isn't something I know a ton about. How do varying acoustic impedances cause nonlinearities in a use case like this?

Is the suggestion that measurements don't reflect the effective frequency response of the IEM, or that IEM FR in practice is too unpredictable vs. measured performance to get much use out of this method?

It took me a while to realize the complications, and the difficulties with a solution. How some force is translated to sound pressure level depends on the so called impedance - think of Ohm's law. An IEM itself can be described as a chain of such impedances, reactive in parts. These are attached to the ear canal, it again having impedances involved, clearly reactive, think of 'resonance'. All interact, hence it is not trivial to predict the final outcome at the ear drum. Such a prediction, though, would be needed to adjust an equalizer as to simulate another IEM despite its different interaction with - the ear's impedances.
For sure somebody else could better explain and create graphics and all. I'm not a good presenter.

 

[staticV3]

This isn't something I know a ton about. How do varying acoustic impedances cause nonlinearities in a use case like this?

Is the suggestion that measurements don't reflect the effective frequency response of the IEM, or that IEM FR in practice is too unpredictable vs. measured performance to get much use out of this method?

Different ear sims, and in turn different ears present loads of varying intensity to an IEM.

IEMs with low acoustic output impedance, just like an Amp with low output impedance, will perform consistently regardless of load.

I remember a recent video from Crinacle where he showed that the original Moondrop Blessing struggles to put bass into the 5128, whereas a more recent Moondrop model with a modern DD performed just fine into a 711 and 5128 alike.

I searched for the vid yesterday, but without success

 

[kemmler3D]

It took me a while to realize the complications, and the difficulties with a solution. How some force is translated to sound pressure level depends on the so called impedance - think of Ohm's law. An IEM itself can be described as a chain of such impedances, reactive in parts. These are attached to the ear canal, it again having impedances involved, clearly reactive, think of 'resonance'. All interact, hence it is not trivial to predict the final outcome at the ear drum. Such a prediction, though, would be needed to adjust an equalizer as to simulate another IEM despite its different interaction with - the ear's impedances.
For sure somebody else could better explain and create graphics and all. I'm not a good presenter.

Different ear sims, and in turn different ears present loads of varying intensity to an IEM.

IEMs with low acoustic output impedance, just like an Amp with low output impedance, will perform consistently regardless of load.

I remember a recent video from Crinacle where he showed that the original Moondrop Blessing struggles to put bass into the 5128, whereas a more recent Moondrop model with a modern DD performed just fine into a 711 and 5128 alike.

I searched for the vid yesterday, but without success

Thanks guys, this makes sense. So basically IEM measurements can't be assumed to correspond exactly to what we hear, so small EQ tweaks might not actually be a good simulation of one IEM for another?

 

[staticV3]

Thanks guys, this makes sense. So basically IEM measurements can't be assumed to correspond exactly to what we hear, so small EQ tweaks might not actually be a good simulation of one IEM for another?

If two IEMs have consistent frequency response deltae across various ear sims, then that legitimizes EQing one to demo the other using your ears.

 

[Heinrich]

If two IEMs have consistent frequency response deltae across various ear sims, then that legitimizes EQing one to demo the other using your ears.

Do you have seen such "various ear sim(ulator)s"? Me not. In case, please show me, as I'm without any irony quite interested.

 

[markanini]

If two IEMs have consistent frequency response deltae across various ear sims, then that legitimizes EQing one to demo the other using your ears.

Which specific tools do you use for calculating deltaE in FR comparisons?

 

[rooster81]

I've been trying the high rated, lower cost iems from various manufacturers (mostly ones available on Amazon). Then I look at the frequency charts and try to narrow down the list by removing the ones with similar measurements to the iems that I've listened to and don't care for.

 

[staticV3]

Which specific tools do you use for calculating deltaE in FR comparisons?

The usual suspects: REW, squig.link, autoeq.app etc.

 

[markanini]

The usual suspects: REW, squig.link, autoeq.app etc.

I'm sure many would find DeltaE reporting useful. I've used squg.link and autoeq.app for years, and haven't seen that feature yet. So, it remains a question how you use something nonexistent to judge the reliability of measurement systems.