Jerry Harvey (JH) Custom IEM Review

[amirm]

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Jerry Harvey / JH Audio custom made IEM. It was kindly donated to the forum by a member and cost starts at US $2,299.

The multidriver IEM feels quite substantial. I was pleasantly surprised in how well it fit my measurement artificial ear. Alas, my own ears were not so fortunate as I could not even get them to stay there let alone seal. So no listening tests for this review.

I am told these were "the" go-to custom IEM for live music until competition arrived in the last few years. The review sample was made for a band member.

If you look to the top left, you see a set of trim controls that are supposed to change the bass response. I tested that and what they call "bass" extends up to 1 kHz! Shame as I was hoping it would boost < 100 Hz. On the other hand, I needed the controls to equalize the left and right channels. Setting them to the middle (by eye) produced a response in the right channel which was well below that of left.

JH Audio Roxanne IEM Measurement
Let's start with our frequency response measurement:

The story is told right there. We can forgive the flat bass but what is up with the treble shortfall and to that degree? Is it optimized for vocals?

Equalization should be relatively easy given the broad areas that need to be filled in:

Distortion is kept in check:

That is likely due to deep insertion which brings with it, very high sensitivity:

EDIT: forgot the impedance plot:

The deployment of crossover and bass filtering means uneven/low impedance:

Conclusions
Is high accuracy needed for monitoring the rest of the band while doing your thing? I would think so. Sadly the Roxanne doesn't remotely deliver on that. If my testing is accurate, the difference in the two channels is quite high below 1 kHz. Matching requires instrumentation which likely few have. So likely they have been listening to a soup mismatched frequency responses. Hopefully whoever is dominating this field today does better than Jerry Harvey Roxanne IEM offering.

The only positive thing I could say is that the fit in my fixture was excellent. Better than any normal IEM in the way it sat and locked into the cavities of the artificial ear. If that is managed in the users ears, then there is positive result there.

On the very high cost, I am told this is reasonable for custom IEMs.
------------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

 

[amirm]

Reserved for @AdamG to kindly post the specs.

Manufacturer Specifications:

 

[LIΟN]

It's interesting to see custom iem review in asr. Thank you.
Is it a characteristic of that IEM? FR is interesting.
I've also looked at other measurements of that IEM, but it's like a tone balance that looks similar to Amir.

 

[kyuu]

That's interesting. The FR of those JH Audio IEMs are so similar to the Jerry Henrys that one would have to assume it's intentional.

 

[Mr Swing King]

Maybe it’s for fans of the LCD-X? Looks pretty awful to me. Then again I’ve seen a good deal of people on here who prefer a more shy ear gain tuning. This is perhaps pushing the boundaries of that imho.
I think I’ll just stick with my Zero 1-2, Tanchjim One and Moondrop Chu ll.
Thanks for the review.

 

[Maiky76]

Here are some thoughts about the EQ.
Please report your findings, positive or negative!

Notes about the EQ design:

• The average L/R is used to calculate the score.
• The resolution is 12 points per octave interpolated from the raw data (provided by @amirm)
• A Genetic Algorithm is used to optimize the EQ.
• The EQ Score is designed to MAXIMIZE the Score WHILE fitting the Harman target curve (and other constrains) with a fixed complexity.
  This will avoid weird results if one only optimizes for the Score, start your journey here or there.
  There is a presentation by S. Olive here.
  It will probably flatten the Error regression doing so, the tonal balance should be therefore more neutral.
• The EQs are starting point and may require tuning (certainly at LF and maybe at HF).
• The range around and above 10kHz is usually not EQed unless smooth enough to do so.
• I am using PEQ (PK) as from my experience the definition is more consistent across different DSP/platform implementations than shelves.
• With some HP/amp combo, the boosts and preamp gain (loss of Dynamic range) need to be carefully considered to avoid issues with, amongst other things, too low a Max SPL or damaging your device. You have beed warned.
• Not all units of the same product are made equal. The EQ is based on the measurements of a single unit. YMMV with regard to the very unit you are trying this EQ on.
• I sometimes use variations of the Harman curve for some reasons. See rational here and here
• NOTE: the score then calculated is not comparable to the scores derived from the default Harman target curve if not otherwise noted.
• Occluding IE devices generally must have very good fitting/seal in the user's ear canal for best performance.
  please spend a few minutes to pick up the best ear tip... Be sure to perform this step otherwise the FR/Score/EQ presented here are just worthless.
• 1. more bass = better seal
  2. More isolation from the outside world = better fit
  3. Comfort

Good L/R match.

I have generated one EQ, the APO config file is attached.

Score no EQ: 47.9%
Score with EQ: 95.3%

JH Audio Roxanne Harman EQ
September112024-160723

Preamp: -11.70 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 22.0 Hz Gain 9.65 dB Q 0.30
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 252.2 Hz Gain -2.73 dB Q 1.00
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 2282.5 Hz Gain 10.04 dB Q 1.11
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 4576.4 Hz Gain 9.00 dB Q 1.48
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 7312.7 Hz Gain -5.01 dB Q 4.41

 

[solderdude]

Monitoring instruments/voices during live performances ≠ hifi music enjoyment nor creating a final mix.

Bass on a podium is 'felt' and is not attenuated as much as mids and treble and given the present SPL during a performance one does not want boosted lows anyway (equal loudness contours) as it will muddy that what they want monitored.
One also does not want to hear 'harsh, shrill or sibilance' at higher SPL either (at high volumes) so a bit less 'clarity' is not a bad thing either.
Granted this appears to be a bit too much of a good thing, perhaps, but when the user is used to the presentation he also knows how that will turn out it may well be fine for monitoring.

These are not intended for enjoying, listening to music but a tool for a performer. A bit like the NS10 being a tool for sound engineers. It serves a purpose.
It think it is important to emphasize that.
CIEM's are important (and the word custom means expensive) tools for musicians.

 

[pLudio]

Isn't it Jerry Harvey Audio, not Henry, although these Roxanne look different?

 

[LIΟN]

These are not intended for enjoying, listening to music but a tool for a performer. A bit like the NS10 being a tool for sound engineers. It serves a purpose.
It think it is important to emphasize that.
CIEM's are important (and the word custom means expensive) tools for musicians.

I think it will be an IEM suitable for special purposes. Nevertheless, the price of US $2,299 seems to be very expensive.

And it seems to be different for each purpose and design of CIEM.
The CIEM I use follows an easy target.

 

[solderdude]

Yep, there certainly are cheaper (C)IEM's around.

Not defending the price or anything... just mentioning these are not intended for music enjoyment but for monitoring which are different things and have different 'build quality' requirements. They must be utterly reliable, have perfect fit for the owner, must have the desired sound for their purpose.

For music enjoyment there are much cheaper and better IEM solutions for sure.

 

[Matias]

@amirm name of the company is Jerry Harvey Audio. Thanks for the review though.

 

[LIΟN]

Not defending the price or anything... just mentioning these are not intended for music enjoyment but for monitoring which are different things and have different 'build quality' requirements. They must be utterly reliable, have perfect fit for the owner, must have the desired sound for their purpose.

You're right. I agree. It was just a joke =)
Personally, if you're a person who enjoys Iem, I'd like you to choose your response characteristics and experience them.
It's so quiet and so comfortable like an anechoic chamber, and it's so immersive.

(Disadvantage: Once I've made a ciem, I watch a concert or a singer's video, but I don't listen to the song and I'm looking at their ears. Which one I use and what molding it is lol)

 

[Robbo99999]

Very poor IEM, about the only positive factor is the low distortion, and even the smooth frequency response isn't a bonus because Amir noted that the trim controls are unreliable and require a measurement fixture to align them properly, so even EQ is not a reliable way of saving this IEM for somebody that doesn't have a measurement rig. Very poor, not to mention the price! What year was this IEM manufactured, trying to get a feel of how competitive it was for it's time?

(OK, it's custom made IEM for fit for an individual, so price is gonna be pretty high, but still it seems a lot, and it's still a poor measured result)

 

[LTig]

Regarding the fit: if this IEM is custom made for the buyer you cannot expect it to fit well on other people's ears.

 

[RandomEar]

@amirm The impedance graph seems to be missing. It is hinted at in the text, but the image shows the group delay

 

[CedarX]

Monitoring instruments/voices during live performances ≠ hifi music enjoyment nor creating a final mix.

Is the FR target even relevant here? I rated it “poor” based on FR, but it may be the best tool for the job…

Besides the fit, is the FR also a “custom-target”?

 

[LearningToSmile]

One also does not want to hear 'harsh, shrill or sibilance' at higher SPL either (at high volumes) so a bit less 'clarity' is not a bad thing either.

so why is there still a significant 7-8k peak? it's not like that's a crucial area to monitor during a live performance and if you raise levels overall enough it will start becoming an issue. It's still there on measurements from other couplers, just shifted, so it doesn't seem to be measurement artifact.
if not for that you might have an excuse that it's an "intentional" tuning but as is I'm calling bs. Yeah, maybe it's well made, yeah, it's not like you need harman bass for the intended purpose, but there's no excusing that poor channel matching and treble rollercoaster at anywhere near that price.

 

[sq225917]

It's a stage monitor, most likely tuned to highlight the musicians instrument. Usual monitoring is you, click track and a tiny bit of the band.

 

[frix]

JH audio has filed for bankruptcy and it's a rather old model afaik. Not sure harman was a thing at the time of release.

 

[rank]

Ourk.