Im pretty stunted past 14k so I hear you there. I too have found deep cuts in the 6-8k cause a lack of clarity or even just a sense of completeness in vocals while too much of an abrupt pinna gain causes a forward and somewhat blunted sound to me (such as on the Moonlight). I think I prefer a peak around 2500-3k and gradual decline down to 8k. maybe a small cut in the 6.5k - 8k just so vocals dont feel to unnatural to me.
I present a play in 4 parts: all using HBB’s squish normalized to 700hz
Part 1: how I started
These were my first IEMS, as I just got my feet wet. I genuinely wouldn’t call any of them bad, but only the CRA would get any listen if I still had it. That is about the most ideal 6-8k cut for me. But I thought T3+ was better cause it’s better tuned except for that spot.
Part 2: learning I know nothing
Hearing popular IEMs like Olina and Zero, and then finding my still favorite IEM, really grew my opinion on that late-presence cut. Olina and Zero are both better than T3+ because of the superior upper-mids energy, but both of their flaws are that there’s not enough below 300hz to balance it. It’s too emphasized in the upper-mids and not neutral enough. Enter Starsea: The sub-bass isn’t as elevated as the graph says, it’s similar to T3+. It’s as clean as the others in the mids but the BAs don’t overdo the upper-mids, and leaves room for a little elevation notch right where everyone else dips. I love this tuning!
Part 3: almost there
Going through each of these HBB collabs pushes me closer to my ideal: Olina led to Kai - more bass presence, less aggressive pinna gain, smoother but less detailed treble. It’s a favorite of mine but I saw Olina SE and knew this would be a winner for me: the bass and note-weight is just a little more present, the pinna gain is slightly adjusted, and that treble glide to the coupler resonance is smooth as butter for me. I do not need to buy another sub $100 set after that, to hit a neutral-brightish target. That’s it, I’m done!
Part 4: where I’m at now
TL;DR: Kai and Starsea graph super similar until the upper mids then Kai is relaxed and energetic in the lower end, Starsea is balanced. Olina SE is the energetic in the upper end.
But all the way through, you can see my preferences lol!
4 Likes
yes, we can call that neutral but what people think as being neutral is not…perhaps natural, but not flat.
tho, I am also fond of a W shaped fr. 
1 Like
I was thinking about your “my tastes are all over the place” and I was thinking you’re not as crazy as you think. As evidence:
When normalized to 300hz, to compare the bass levels, you get this. The Up has a clear bass shelf compared to DM, but then they have an almost uncanny amount of similarity through the rest of the FR.
And if you normalize to 800hz:
I think I can make some sense as to why you like the EJ07 so much….
So no, you’re not crazy my friend
3 Likes
You are so right! People often confuse flat graph with non dynamic / linear sound but it just gives you what the record is playing 
W is okay or ____/ anyway. Not a V please
1 Like
what IEM’S would you say have a flat fr?
Having a perfect flat line is both master tuning work and undesireable related your sales but AFIK the flattest is Ety er4s. Some of the others I loved are below.
And last minute addition is Kinera Hodur. I believe in its amateur looking graph because I finished reviewing it and found joy while in the process.
1 Like
know of any w shaped IEMs?
Its a hard question because they are hard to locate but Meze Advar is a recent example. Audiosense preferred that tuning too.
1 Like
yeh… not too keen on spending that much on IEMs. I scored a screaming deal on sone lightly used ER4XR for $130 CAD.
Wow! Go Marzi go its a mind blowing price for such an iem if you accept its elevated lows and highs.
1 Like
Oh interesting observation. I don’t understand exactly what normalization is and why it changes the graph. I’ve always seen it at the top and never looked into it. Need to do some research. Might help my future journey with purchases.
It just means you are picking a point on the graph that all the IEMs hit the same point on the x/y axis.
For squigs, normalization at 300hz means every graph will hit 60db at 300hz. If you set it for 1000hz, all the graphs will hit 60db at 1000hz. It just changes the point of interpretation. I personally look at 300/500/700/1000hz to assess graphs
4 Likes
Yep normalizing a graph is valuable imo because not everyone focuses on the same frequency when listening to music. Some people turn up the volume until the bass is a certain lvl, some turn it up until the mids hit a sweet spot and some turn it up until they can’t take the treble any higher. Normalizing at thos e points helps tell you what the rest of the FR is going to look like at your desired bass, mids and teble levels
2 Likes
I’m not grasping this fully. For me treble seems to be the area that is of most concern. It’ll definitely make or break an IEM. Hit the treble right and the bass and mids I can adjust to for the most part. So say I prefer to listen at 70-75 decibels. Would I input that decibal on squigs and then set normalization to 1000Hz to see how everything after 1000 would be perceived at set decibal? Sorry if this is getting of topic can move to another thread or PM.
I guess the first question is when you say you listen at 70-75 dbs are you measuring that at a certain frequency? I usually normalize my listening around vocal clarity since I want to hear those at a certain level so for me I try to volume match on vocals and not a specific frequency. After that you might notice that the bass or mids are lower on one IEM.
For instance the mids are more prominent on the Moonlight vs the IE600 for me. When looking at the graph normalized at 1k it seems like the mids are more prominent on the IE600 than the moonlight.
but if you normalize at 2500k to match vocal harmonics it changes drastically since the moonlight is more neutral so now the lower end of the vocals is wayyyy more forward and the mids are drastically raised up which is closer to how I hear them when listening
Also if we match these two IEMs at some point in the main vocal range, say 210. You can see the Moonlight has again elevated mids and the same forwardness in the pinna gain region, albeit less extreme than at 2500k
5 Likes
Seems to be from around 1k to 3.5k which makes sense to me as when I EQ around that area that’s when you can get the song to sound “wonky”
At the end of the day, kick drums hitting soft or cymbals crashing soft is not so much a deal-breaker as a guitar sounding like a banjo or (fe)male vocals sounding artificial and unrealistic.
Of course, if kick drums hit too hard or cymbals pierce your ears that’s also a huge problem…
2 Likes
@VIVIDICI_111
I’m going to use HBB’s squig because he has all of the sets I referenced before (except Rosefinch):
Big sub-bass with good low-mids: QKZ x HBB
Big mid-bass with good upper-mids: KBear Rosefinch
Balanced warm: CCA CRA
My interpretation of neutral: 7Hz Zero
Neutral-bright: Moondrop Chu
Harman bright: Truthear Zero
We’re going to look specifically at the last four, normalized at 500Hz, which is the point where CRA’s bass boost levels off. Chu and 7Hz are obviously related. The thing that makes Zero more neutral to me is the cut in the upper-mids and treble. The energy that is there from 2-10k in Chu is what makes it a brighter set. Note that Crin’s Zero actually played brighter and thinner than Chu to my ear, even with the sub-bass boost.
I tend to call CRA bass boosted neutral, or balanced warm, because as you can see, once you’re in the mids, CRA follows along with 7Hz Zero, but has a more gradual pinna gain, with a bit more treble energy but not peaking as high as Chu or Crin’s Zero.
CRA is more of a U-shape than a V-shape because of how gradually it rises into the mids and treble.
2 Likes
Now I see what you’re saying - yeah the CRA definitely seems to be a warm neutral considering the FR.
A graph will give you a good idea how a set will replay but not the whole story…
