Micro-details for 200$? Same drivers as the Sendy Aivas. They’re just too muddy/bassy.
I mean, hell, for 200$, I’d try putting T50RP pancake pads on them or whatever.
Lack of detachable cable is a deal breaker for me
3:05 about details.
Why did I NOT notice the ER4s were 250$. Wow. Sorry.
Found this recently (XR version).
“With binaural records, I feel like I was in the room” (…) “far more details, far more resolving, revealing than my HD600s”
Apparently Etymotic invented IEMS so, yeah, I get it!
I have the er4sr with standard foam tips. I don’t think you can beat that in clarity without spending significantly more. Etymotic does make audio research equipment. So I trust they know what they’re doing.
1 Like
Resurrecting this thread because Shuoer Tape exists. Chi-fi IEMs with tiny electrostatic drivers. For 129$.
(From Bad Guy Good Audio, graph widened 200%)
Zeos said in this latest video “similar detail retrieval to Stax”… Yes, 129$.
( @ 23:40 )
But which stax? And also I still really wouldn’t believe that, but I haven’t tried the tapes so I really can’t say
BGGA likes these too. “More detail retrieval than P1s if you can believe it”.
I could understand the more detail then the p1. But more then a proper stax setup? Really though? I would assume the stax in ears would be much better along with the over ears
Similar detail retrieval to Stax according to Zeos. Shrugs. Still, this is way up there, and definitely belongs in this thread (with the Tin P1s too I guess).
Also, I screwed up, I had the wrong graph. It’s corrected. This is the good one now.
Also, with all this conversation in “why the pursuit of hyper detail”… Would you say Stax sound… natural? Or it’s the complete opposite and the dynamics are compressed and all the details are just magically, artificially in-your-face?
Stax don’t really sound natural imo because of the more compressed dynamic range, the strange and wonky timbre and tone, and the detail in your face approach they take. Does that make them a bad headphone? No, of course not, depends on your preference and how much you care about it.
1 Like
Welcome to the level 2 of this thread… Searching for both micro-detail retrieval and naturalness.
Good luck everyone. 
2 Likes
Well then you have to consider if you would even call lots of detail “natural” lol
1 Like
Micro-detail retrieval is still useful anyway. I mean, if not for “natural detail”… I was in a car trying full-balanced KZ earphones (AS06) and I was impressed at how the music was just jumping at me with impressive clarity, just… overcoming, beating all the ambient noise as if it all was just not there.
Also, it’s obviously useful in the studio (duh!), and for hard of hearing people.
I love the detail my Koss 95x gives. I guess this is from compression. I guess im sacrificing Dynamic Range for that. So whats a good example of dynamic range in headphones? Whats the opposite of compression that we’re giving up? They sound alright to me.
So I may sometimes make it seem like compression is a bad thing, but it really depends on the person. You actually have a headphone with great dynamic range being the elex. With a headphone with large dynamic range, the detail is there but you kinda have to listen a bit harder for it (kinda). I think that an accurate dynamic range is more natural/realistic but some might not care
Because you like the 95x, you may enjoy the ether cx if you were looking into a closed back large planar
Compression saved CD and compressed digital audio.
If you go back and listen to the early CD transfers from Masters created for Vinyl, they were almost universally terrible, the Led Zeppelin stuff is a prime example, they were full of Master Tape Hiss, and a lot of it was the use of dynamic range on Vinyl and the limited 16 bit range.
Most of those recording have since been remastered, and the bulk of what was done in the remasters was compression.
SACD/ and DVD audio really resolved the limitation, but a lot of material mastered for digital still have a lot of compression applied.
I’m not talking about music, I’m talking about headphone compression. Compression in music is very important. I have like 6 different compressors in my studio along with lots of plugins. I would say compression is needed for good mastering
For headphones imo, I prefer good dynamic range to accuracy portray the music
1 Like
Personally I don’t really hear that. To me it seems that the P1 has more detail in terms of like +10k range. Also the mids are better on the P1. But the Tape are still great and like $50 cheeper.
1 Like
i was reading the first posts in this list and i saw that someone mentioned the KSC75’s lol. Also I had the Sundara’s and they dont have that much detail. i dont know why people keep saying they do. I went from them to the Aiva and my eyes opened wide and i nearly got whiplash from the micro detail. And the Monoprice M570’s are out now for 300$ they way beat out the Sundaras 350$ If you want a wide soundstage the Sundara’s got that. but not that much detail.
But if you got 100$ more and you want micro detail get the Koss 95x Estats. Nano Detail.