The Etymotic Target (R.I.P. Harman)

[Jimbob54]

According to exactly who? That's the problem.

The scientists, apparently

 

[solderdude]

Most sense? To exactly which particular part of the population? An arbitrary, plucked out the air, ficticious group of individuals from exactly how many decades ago? They gave them a bass and treble control- and that's it? Incredible. Tell me, I misread the entire thing.

That's how I see it too but it looks like they went the extra mile and researched all kinds of listeners. Yes they found differences.
This research was to increase sales so the general public (so not audiophiles but the youngsters on their phones)

Now they could have used 2 or 3 target curves and aim for that to the intended public for sure. Might have been the best solution.
Less bass for audiophiles but well extended (luxury segment), a target with thumping bass and subdued 3 to 6kHz for the flashy young ones (expensive phones and look at me headphones) for instance and something else again for studios.

I figure they wanted to settle on just '1 is supposed to fit all' curve.
Just remove some of the 'extra bass' in your mind if one wants and ignore everything measured above 8kHz and I think you have a decent curve better than diffuse field for sure. I suppose that would be close to the Etymotic tonal balance.

 

[Chromatischism]

If Harman target accurately replicates the perception of anechoically flat speakers in a treated room, why have 82% of professional mixing engineers voted for flat bass? Harman target should be the dream of any mixing engineer, no? https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...onal-mixing-engineers-only.26450/#post-904692
Harman advocates instead make excuses when the target leads to thin sounding mixes saying that headphones should not be used for mixing. A bit contradictory, no?

I have a good system in a room. Speakers are +/- 1.5 dB.

To get similar sound with headphones, in my experience, the measured FR is going to resemble Harman. To what degree the bass and treble curves rise varies. However it is clear to me you do not want flat. It will sound nothing like my system.

 

[restorer-john]

That's how I see it too but it looks like they went the extra mile and researched all kinds of listeners. Yes they found differences.
This research was to increase sales so the general public (so not audiophiles but the youngsters on their phones)

Now they could have used 2 or 3 target curves and aim for that to the intended public for sure. Might have been the best solution.
Less bass for audiophiles but well extended (luxury segment), a target with thumping bass and subdued 3 to 6kHz for the flashy young ones (expensive phones and look at me headphones) for instance and something else again for studios.

I figure they wanted to settle on just '1 is supposed to fit all' curve.
Just remove some of the 'extra bass' in your mind if one wants and ignore everything measured above 8kHz and I think you have a decent curve better than diffuse field for sure. I suppose that would be close to the Etymotic tonal balance.

I think you are more realistic and balanced.

I am (unfortunately) more purist and uncorruptable. Whether that is a good or a bad thing, whatever.

 

[Sharur]

DC=0 Hz.

So if not, why should they aim for headphones that sound tonally different than the control room?

To be fair, ER4SR is not flat to 0 Hz. And I wouldn't consider information from 0-20 Hz important anyway.

 

[Sharur]

Most sense? To exactly which particular part of the population? An arbitrary, plucked out the air, ficticious group of individuals from exactly how many decades ago? They gave them a bass and treble control- and that's it? Incredible. Tell me, I misread the entire thing.

It's a BS result and the so-called "preference curve", derived from a limited set of individuals, limited controls and variations, along with constrained controllable variables and, at the end of it all, driven by corporate direction, desire for profit, is just a self serving mess.

Until ASR and all its denizens stop mindlessly salivating at the high altar of Harman, Toole, et al. and start actually independently thinking, questioning and testing for themselves, this fiasco of misinformation and corporate brainwashing will continue.

Music live does not remotely sound like the "Harman Curve". Not even close. It's a horrible, bass heavy, treble rich, super bright equivalent of the smiley curve on a 1/3 octave graphic EQ from the 1980s...

Preach

 

[Sharur]

Thats quite variable. Because it depends of the definition every individual has for “to sound good”. For some people that means literally it just sounds good mesning it won’t hurt your ears, and somebody else could say “to sounds good” for the most accurate and precise sound reproduction available.

Ah, well, there again lies a problem. If some folks like (for example) the DT990 stock and others find it a horrid mess , who decides it is broken? Which is why some agreed benchmark for "decent" is needed. Like it or not, Harman is as good as anyone has got to that. Buyer beware anything that deviates significantly from that as there is a chance you will not like it. This is why , as he has explained many times, @amirm shows that target and partly issues recommendations on that basis.

The buyer should buy a headphone that will sound good to them. If they have to EQ the headphone they bought to make it sound good to them, I consider it broken for them because they could get a headphone that measures how they want. Obviously this isn't an objective statement, there are other variables. But in a general sense, I don't think it makes any sense to buy a headphone you don't like without EQ.

 

[Jimbob54]

The buyer should buy a headphone that will sound good to them. If they have to EQ the headphone they bought to make it sound good to them, I consider it broken for them because they could get a headphone that measures how they want. Obviously this isn't an objective statement, there are other variables. But in a general sense, I don't think it makes any sense to buy a headphone you don't like without EQ.

Agree totally. The issue being auditioning the majority of headphones for the majority of people is a non starter. A partial fix is a no quibble online return policy such as Amazon, but for smaller manufacturers or those with no distribution chain in your home country, thats not going to work. Failing that, everyone is free to pick their own preferred FR curve and judge any half decent measurement against that that. I suspect many would be happy if Amir plotted the HD600/650 curve against the one for the DUT. But of no use for those that havent heard the Senns.

 

[Sharur]

Agree totally. The issue being auditioning the majority of headphones for the majority of people is a non starter. A partial fix is a no quibble online return policy such as Amazon, but for smaller manufacturers or those with no distribution chain in your home country, thats not going to work. Failing that, everyone is free to pick their own preferred FR curve and judge any half decent measurement against that that. I suspect many would be happy if Amir plotted the HD600/650 curve against the one for the DUT. But of no use for those that havent heard the Senns.

I feel like almost everyone into headphones has heard the HD6X0. For someone brand new to the hobby, it's really a fine choice and it makes sense why it's always recommended.

 

[Sharur]

Just found my Etymotic ER4SR.
I had forgotten how nice they sound and how inefficient they are!

Etymotic is one of my favorite companies having produced one of the first in-ear-monitors that had high transparency. I had my first unit for some 15 years until I replaced it with their newest one, the ER4SR
Great products and great people. If you use an in-ear monitor, do yourself a favor and get one of theirs.

What??? They deviate so far from Harman, how could they sound good?

 

[Thomas_A]

To be fair, ER4SR is not flat to 0 Hz. And I wouldn't consider information from 0-20 Hz important anyway.

As is known for a long time, typical room responses implies increasing levels below 100-150 Hz.

 

[Sharur]

As is known for a long time, typical room responses implies incresing levels below 100-150 Hz.

or decreasing levels in the rest of the response.

 

[Thomas_A]

or decreasing levels in the rest of the response.

And? The point being that room boundary effects are effecting the curve. If I have binaural recordings or recordings in free-field that is another story.

 

[Sharur]

And? The point being that room boundary effects are effecting the curve. If I have binaural recordings or recordings in free-field that is another story.

 

[Thomas_A]

View attachment 152492

A curve that has no compensation for room boundary below 100-150 Hz.

 

[Sharur]

Just remove some of the 'extra bass' in your mind if one wants and ignore everything measured above 8kHz and I think you have a decent curve better than diffuse field for sure. I suppose that would be close to the Etymotic tonal balance.

And this was over 30 years ago

 

[Sharur]

Until ASR and all its denizens stop mindlessly salivating at the high altar of Harman, Toole, et al. and start actually independently thinking, questioning and testing for themselves, this fiasco of misinformation and corporate brainwashing will continue.

NOTE: my company, Madrona Digital is a dealer for Harman...So please read as much bias as you like into this review.

perhaps every headphone review should start with this

 

[Sharur]

Additionally, using EQ presets for headphones makes zero sense if you take the time to verify the measurement with a tone generator. More often that not, peaks and dips will be in different locations than what the measured response indicates. Etymotic IEMs don't suffer from this problem.

 

[jae]

perhaps every headphone review should start with this

I really don't think that's necessary unless he's reviewing an actual Harman product or one that he sells; I see no conflict of interest. If anything, Harman loses money by funding said research and having the findings published for anyone to emulate. A competitor could further this research or furthur implement these findings into various products would certainly increase their own product appeal and increase revenue.

Olive's work is peer-reviewed study. Amir's company selling Harman products has very little to do with this research itself and many Harman products don't even adhere very strictly to this curve. His use of this target is not arcane and I'm sure those that even dislike or disagree with Harman tuning can see why it would be appropriate to use it as some sort of standard for reviews intended for the general public. If you don't like Harman tuning you have the option of simply ignore the remarks on target adherence and adherence scoring. You can even create your own measurements or use others' measurements and calculate the adherence score to whatever target you wish and weigh the variables accordingly with your own arbitrary standard.

Additionally, using EQ presets for headphones makes zero sense if you take the time to verify the measurement with a tone generator. More often that not, peaks and dips will be in different locations than what the measured response indicates. Etymotic IEMs don't suffer from this problem.

The most significant reason why this may be the case is by virtue that they are deep insertion IEMs and it is simply easier to have results closer to the intended measured FR because you are negating most of the contributions of an individuals anatomical transfer function with the deep insertion, which is what accounts for most of these differences in the first place when using various test equipment. This is a feature of all the Etymotic products and IEMs in general because they are IEMs, and that's not really a feature of the "Etymotic target" per se.

 

[Sharur]

Etymotic products and IEMs in general because they are IEMs, and that's not really a feature of the "Etymotic target" per se.

Etymotic could be making headphones that adhere to their target curve, but I'm assuming they recognize that this won't necessarily translate to a peak free response for the user. Not that they care about measurements much anymore. The Evo is nowhere near as good as ER4SR or ER2SE and they took all the useful information off of their website. The genius of Etymotic's design is the deep insertion which basically negates all peaks. I am pretty sure shallow insertion IEMs still suffer from peak variation.