The canonical reference, from the guy who actually made it. Thank you for making this video, for all of your contributions to the IEM hobby over the last year or two, but also for being my friend
I am very much looking forward to rewatching this video 20 times because I can never remember all of the details behind this each time it's been explained to me 😂
Thank you for the fantastic explanation! This will be the default video I'll send to people who ask me about JM-. And of course, welcome to TH-cam! Looking forward to a lot more videos from you :D
Amazing video! Incredible explaination, better than many university course lectures. Thank you for your contributions to the Audio community! Looking forward to more content.
The whole time I was watching this video, I was reminded of a quote: "If you can't explain something simply, you don't know it well enough." This video demonstrates that you clearly do know it well enough and are interested in teaching people the "how and why" and not just the "what". I feel properly equipped to explain this to others now, as well as how to incorporate it into understanding of my own hearing and preference. Thanks for all that you've done, and I look forward to more. Best of luck!
The final point is crucial. The average preference (no matter how good) may not be your preference. Each person's ear anatomy is different, and that's why it's always best to try/test stuff yourself
Really awesome video and information, a lot of people have had trouble bridging the gap in understanding between speaker measurements and IEM and headphones and how they are connected, as well as how JM-1 has become the new standard in how we recognize these connections.
Hey Joel, very nice video. It ended up answering quite a few questions that I had in mind beforehand. But one thing that I still believe is going to improve the target is to reduce the ear gain by about 1-2 decibels (maybe more depending on the individual), more specifically the area around 2-3khz. What I've found is that the ear canal still has a significant boost in this area even on very deepily inserted IEMS. If you try to match the target, the ear gain will make the response go past your natural HRTF and it will sound shouty and it will mask the lower mids and the lower treble, making for a slightly claustrophobic listening experience compared to ideal. Your target already has a slight reduction compared to the sandard 5128 diffuse field, but it's not nearly enough to account for the noticeable ear canal boost, and I think with just this small ajustment it's going to sound a lot more natural and less harsh. Maybe this is very specific to my own ear and ear canal shape, but I think it's reasonable to assume that the average person will also have a slight boost in this area since it's the largest gain and IEM could possibly still receive after being inserted. And also, as far as I know, the complaint of JM-1 being overly shouty is by far the most commonly shared around, giving even more validity to my hypothesis. I would be very glad if you could investigate the matter and also thank you very for reading this. I hope you can give me a response soon enough, Take care!
Great delivery of information, although if I'm being honest this feels more like a recorded PowerPoint presentation rather than a youtube video in some ways (has a lot to do with you staring into my soul the whole time reading the script I think). Nonetheless great for a first video! Hopefully you'll keep uploading stuff like this in the future as you're someone who seems to be well informed compared to the vast majority of people in this space.
Superb video! Since you said you're looking for future video ideas, I'd love it if you could go into more detail about your own methodology EQing treble, especially since it's something a lot of established figures in the audio world describe as a "no-go" zone in some ways.
First video and already dropped an absolute nuke! Thanks for all the work, Joel! So many people will not know or appreciate what you have accomplished for the IEM space - but know that you are very much appreciated. Hope to see you in more podcasts with the headphones show crew!
Absolutely great video! It’s great when somebody can explain a complex topic in a simple way, and you definitely have that talent! I’m so interested in this topic and I would love for you to go deeper in the technical details in a future video!
Great video, and a breath of fresh air in the audiophile community, making technical stuff much more accessible without compromising accuracy. Subscribed, please do more!
This is... complicated. There's a chance I do a future video on this, but even with a detailed guide it won't be an easy process for most people to follow.
@@Sallatskiy have done a lot of EQ work, and frequency sweeps can be useful as one tool to educate this. I do have an ever evolving personal "target curve" - which currently does align broadly with JM-1. But would love to have a more objective measure of "my ears" (personal hrtf) vs population averages.
@MinimumPhaseAudio on a recent Noise Floor ep you mentioned you've measured your personal HRTF with in-ear microphones, and that this has helped you EQ headphones or iems to sound natural. I would love to see a step-by-step guide to this in a future video!
Huge thanks for the balanced and still very resolving clarification, it really brings fourth all the micro-details of the musi- ehh I mean of the topic
I'd say yes, or similar filters to Harman applied to the DF response of the rig being used. But there's plenty to learn here-pinnae which don't reflect average humans may be causing some problems with OE headphones as well, but the solution isn't as clear-cut.
One thing ive been annoyed with about the new graphs is that they dont use a flat line like the old ones did. Yes, you can always flatten the graph, but ive always felt that the pinna bump was a great instantaneous reference for where my expectations lie. While i found out pretty quickly that the old neutral didnt have the warmth i needed, the flat graph was still easier and more comfortable to compare measurements to. I get why people use the slope, probably because you might confuse it with the old neutral otherwise, but i think we should have our new neutral as a flat line with pinna gain and an old neutral reference that has the changes applied to it, not the other way around.
Because Etymotic's target was also based on the 711 measurements, you end up with a result that is quite far off from what their actual design goal was. Additionally, because a lot of Etymotic IEMs use a single BA driver, we now know they roll-off in the bass significantly more than you'd see in a 711 measurement. If you like the bright signature of the Etymotic target, I'd try JM-1 with less of a slope and bass shelf than is normally used.
Great video! What I am wondering is what population they got the average HRTF from - how are different ages, sex and ethnicities considered? I would assume these all have significant influence on the pinna‘s shape.
Cool video! Been enjoying EQ’ing to your target and slight deviations from it to better understand my targeted hearing paint points and preferences. Makes the hobby fun!
See this right here is why EVERYONE should EQ. What we want is the most naturally average human neutral we can get. Natural meaning as close to an end user (consumer not production) reference speaker system. Neutral meaning as close to that reference as preferred. Preferred meaning as average human preference. Since IEM's technically can't reproduce this preference on their own for every ear, there should be THE standard and you EQ to preference. This EQing should be very minor, within 3 db at whatever frequency that needs to be adjusted to be accurate to a specific preference. Otherwise you'd know that the IEM (or speaker for that matter) is colored in some way. Some coloration can be preferred and I know of speakers and IEMs that require little to no EQ adjustment. But they are very far and few between and most if not all of those speaker systems are in the thousands to tens of thousands of dollars to achieve. Now, IEM's are different costs wise. They are much less expensive overall to achieve that perfect preferred neutrality to your ears. For my preference I prefer a little more bass performance as the music I listen to, Metal, is very rich and fast, thick. And the highs can't be too peaky but still detailed. A hard to find IEM that can be both. Mids should be revealing but not too forward and overall, should have a wide soundstage if possible. An even harder overall IEM combination to find. But if IEM makers follow this JM1-2 DF standard I think we could get very close at less and less expensive IEM's.
One way or the other, gotta keep people chasing new IEMs. Now the new word 'META' makes me feel like I'm REALLY MISSING OUT. So I wana spend more cash.
I love JM-1, but I still have some questions. Firstly, if I were using an IEM that was perfectly tuned to my DF HRTF, would every frequency sound like it's at the same volume if I listen to sine waves, or would equal-loudness get in the way of that? At what volume was the 5128's DF measured at? Awesome video btw
They wouldn't sound the same volume still, you're right that equal-loudness would get in the way. This is part of what makes equalization with sine-sweeps very tricky.
Thanks for the explanation. Been trying to find the most neutral and settled with Truthear Hexa. Would love to know what your opinion on which iems are Neutral. And even more so if we can have customs then does it make it even more neutral since we are illuminating even more of the human ear.
The Dusk totally changed how I see (hear) IEMs. Everything that I felt was pretty neutral before sounds V-shaped and closed in comparison, but some genres like metal still feel to lack mid-bass especially for a comfortable listen. I wonder if with IEMs there is not a single target that works as well as Harman for over-ears for some reason? Could HRTF balance something out in general or just for me for example. Could be a personal preference quirk as well, but I feel there are two massively different targets I've enjoyed best for different music. Oluv's mainstream preset for the EarFun Free Pro 2's for example is a massive improvement over the Dusk (any preset) for metal and isn't far off for anything else as well. Need to spend a few days playing with EQ to see if I can find a way to modify the Dusk in a way that doesn't ruin it's strengths while having a good deal more oomph so to speak.
Adding a tilt to the JM-1 target is unnecessary. Yes we listen to music in rooms but the best sound is heard near field, and thus the early reflections almost have zero impact to the sound. The tilt is present if we measure loudspeakers far field performance. Try eqing your headphones or IEM's to the JM-1 with a tilt and you will notice that the sound will be muffled. The only thing necessary for the JM-1 target is the low shelf which is a matter of taste and essentially emulates having a pair of speakers and dialling in the amount of power you want the subwoofer to have.
I feel like people hyperfocus on tuning targets a bit too much. I have different preferences, my two favorite iems that I own are the Aful Performer 5 and the Thieaudio Hype 4. The Hype 4 I bought after selling the Davinci, which I ended up really not liking, and I LOVE it. I decided to get it because I just liked the look of the fr graphs and reviews sounded like the sound profile was up my alley and that performance of the set was very good
Great video! I'm still a bit confused regarding the correct usage of the term to describe certain IEMs and if the current meta IEMs in the market is the way to go. There's a frequent complaint in listener and other reviews that some of the touted meta IEMs have too much bass for this midrange tuning (and too much upper treble too, though that seems more personal and subjective). I wonder if applying the Harman bass adjustment to this baseline when tilted might actually be a bad idea. For example, JM-1 DF baseline with a 10 dB tilt versus only Harman filters sound very different, yet both could be considered 'new meta,' right? That's a bit confusing if I were looking to buy something 'neutral'. Davinci also had a bit of elevation at 5-6 kHz (and a somewhat sharp peak in the upper treble) that I didn't find it very pleasant and I wouldn't call it 'neutral' so the more I learn, the less excited I get about "new meta" IEMs. It feels much easier (and cheaper) to achieve a better experience with EQ.
These are all excellent questions and my avoidance of them in the video was somewhat on purpose. The specific filters applied to the HRTF are definitely going to have a huge impact on the overall tonality. But, I find something which is a bit warm, a bit bright, a bit bassy, etc to be far more enjoyable than when I hear a distinct peak at 5-6khz. I personally agree that most of the "meta" IEMs available right now are too bassy-I would describe most of them as "bass-boosted neutral"-but I don't make any claim to have the final word on that. For now, my recommendation is that people adjust their preference filters to taste using EQ. New Harman work may shed some light on good starting points for a set of preference filters? We'll have to wait and see.
Oh come on, many years ago the Audiosense DT200 hits this fckn target that you explain in 20 mins long .. aaaaaand no one raving about it *ruuuuuuuunnnnn* 😁✌🏻🏃🏻💨💨💨
JM1 is garbage, it is extremely large. The only people who like it are those that haven't listened to flat on axis speakers. The best iem target is H2019 with reduced eargain to match preference and upper treble boost.
The canonical reference, from the guy who actually made it. Thank you for making this video, for all of your contributions to the IEM hobby over the last year or two, but also for being my friend
For a first video the quality is impeccable.
This is really well presented and should definitely be shared around. Thanks for making this, and also for all your work!
This man just described the meta to me. Very Meta of him.
Excellent vid! Thanks for making this Joel
I am very much looking forward to rewatching this video 20 times because I can never remember all of the details behind this each time it's been explained to me 😂
That's a great explanation. As a 5128 owner, the JM-1 concept is super interesting.
Thank you for the fantastic explanation! This will be the default video I'll send to people who ask me about JM-.
And of course, welcome to TH-cam! Looking forward to a lot more videos from you :D
Amazing video! Incredible explaination, better than many university course lectures. Thank you for your contributions to the Audio community! Looking forward to more content.
Wow, thank you for all of the amazing works. This will be my default "essay" video I would recommend to other people when starting the hobby.
In hindsight I see why it was not the wisest thing to get our target from 7-Eleven :/
You know, maybe you are right? 😮
The whole time I was watching this video, I was reminded of a quote: "If you can't explain something simply, you don't know it well enough."
This video demonstrates that you clearly do know it well enough and are interested in teaching people the "how and why" and not just the "what". I feel properly equipped to explain this to others now, as well as how to incorporate it into understanding of my own hearing and preference. Thanks for all that you've done, and I look forward to more. Best of luck!
The final point is crucial. The average preference (no matter how good) may not be your preference. Each person's ear anatomy is different, and that's why it's always best to try/test stuff yourself
Agree-sorry I sound much more combative above, your point is more or less what I wanted to convey in far less words.
Excellent video. Thank you for explaining the details in such an easily digestible manner
What an insanely well made video, you explained everything so well. I love you Mr.JM1
Thank you for this video! since some people get confused often about the "New Meta"
Thank you so much for this video! It's so helpful to have this video as a reference point and to explain beginners about this sort of tuning
Great stuff, Joel! Such a great way of presenting a lot of really complex information!
Hope to see you at CanJam SoCal!
Thanks! Unfortunately I don't think I'll be at SoCal this year.
Really awesome video and information, a lot of people have had trouble bridging the gap in understanding between speaker measurements and IEM and headphones and how they are connected, as well as how JM-1 has become the new standard in how we recognize these connections.
Thanks for Covering the topic.
glad to see the real explanation out there in a clear way
Hey Joel, very nice video. It ended up answering quite a few questions that I had in mind beforehand. But one thing that I still believe is going to improve the target is to reduce the ear gain by about 1-2 decibels (maybe more depending on the individual), more specifically the area around 2-3khz. What I've found is that the ear canal still has a significant boost in this area even on very deepily inserted IEMS. If you try to match the target, the ear gain will make the response go past your natural HRTF and it will sound shouty and it will mask the lower mids and the lower treble, making for a slightly claustrophobic listening experience compared to ideal. Your target already has a slight reduction compared to the sandard 5128 diffuse field, but it's not nearly enough to account for the noticeable ear canal boost, and I think with just this small ajustment it's going to sound a lot more natural and less harsh. Maybe this is very specific to my own ear and ear canal shape, but I think it's reasonable to assume that the average person will also have a slight boost in this area since it's the largest gain and IEM could possibly still receive after being inserted. And also, as far as I know, the complaint of JM-1 being overly shouty is by far the most commonly shared around, giving even more validity to my hypothesis. I would be very glad if you could investigate the matter and also thank you very for reading this. I hope you can give me a response soon enough, Take care!
Great delivery of information, although if I'm being honest this feels more like a recorded PowerPoint presentation rather than a youtube video in some ways (has a lot to do with you staring into my soul the whole time reading the script I think). Nonetheless great for a first video! Hopefully you'll keep uploading stuff like this in the future as you're someone who seems to be well informed compared to the vast majority of people in this space.
Superb video! Since you said you're looking for future video ideas, I'd love it if you could go into more detail about your own methodology EQing treble, especially since it's something a lot of established figures in the audio world describe as a "no-go" zone in some ways.
this video is presented extremely well and its so helpful
Pewdiepie and Linustechtips had a baby, it's you
JOEL
I was new meta before it was cool 😎
First video and already dropped an absolute nuke! Thanks for all the work, Joel! So many people will not know or appreciate what you have accomplished for the IEM space - but know that you are very much appreciated. Hope to see you in more podcasts with the headphones show crew!
It still has way too much ear-gain to sound neutral to me. Fun to see that you somewhat agree.
This is the most understandable explanation I've come across. Thanks for taking the time to explain it to us.
Absolutely great video! It’s great when somebody can explain a complex topic in a simple way, and you definitely have that talent! I’m so interested in this topic and I would love for you to go deeper in the technical details in a future video!
Didn't realise PewDiePie was part of the audio hobby
Great video, and a breath of fresh air in the audiophile community, making technical stuff much more accessible without compromising accuracy. Subscribed, please do more!
Is there an accurate way to measure personal hrtf, and if so, is there a service provider that makes this available?
This is... complicated. There's a chance I do a future video on this, but even with a detailed guide it won't be an easy process for most people to follow.
Sweep tone eq
@@Sallatskiy have done a lot of EQ work, and frequency sweeps can be useful as one tool to educate this. I do have an ever evolving personal "target curve" - which currently does align broadly with JM-1. But would love to have a more objective measure of "my ears" (personal hrtf) vs population averages.
@MinimumPhaseAudio on a recent Noise Floor ep you mentioned you've measured your personal HRTF with in-ear microphones, and that this has helped you EQ headphones or iems to sound natural. I would love to see a step-by-step guide to this in a future video!
Excellent video. Carry on making insightful videos containing actual data points. Might start a trend!
Incredibly informative. Directly on point. A much needed clarification IMHO. Thank you so much for this.
Huge thanks for the balanced and still very resolving clarification, it really brings fourth all the micro-details of the musi- ehh I mean of the topic
H/T to you, good sir!
Great vid Joel, excited to see more and to watch your channel grow!
What is the meta for headphones (over-ears) then? Is it still Harman Target?
I'd say yes, or similar filters to Harman applied to the DF response of the rig being used. But there's plenty to learn here-pinnae which don't reflect average humans may be causing some problems with OE headphones as well, but the solution isn't as clear-cut.
Thanks!
Great Video!
Now we just need a software that converts a 3D scan of your head into an HRTF.
Stellar job! Thanks for putting this out, Joel.
I like how this vid just popped up in the first row of my recommendation feed. Thx for explaining the "META", Mr. PewDFie
One thing ive been annoyed with about the new graphs is that they dont use a flat line like the old ones did. Yes, you can always flatten the graph, but ive always felt that the pinna bump was a great instantaneous reference for where my expectations lie. While i found out pretty quickly that the old neutral didnt have the warmth i needed, the flat graph was still easier and more comfortable to compare measurements to. I get why people use the slope, probably because you might confuse it with the old neutral otherwise, but i think we should have our new neutral as a flat line with pinna gain and an old neutral reference that has the changes applied to it, not the other way around.
The man, The Legend himself casually popping up in my YT feed out of nowhere.
yay
How is it compared to df neutral of etymotic?
Because Etymotic's target was also based on the 711 measurements, you end up with a result that is quite far off from what their actual design goal was. Additionally, because a lot of Etymotic IEMs use a single BA driver, we now know they roll-off in the bass significantly more than you'd see in a 711 measurement. If you like the bright signature of the Etymotic target, I'd try JM-1 with less of a slope and bass shelf than is normally used.
Great video. What tips would you give on how to eq treble?
Great video! What I am wondering is what population they got the average HRTF from - how are different ages, sex and ethnicities considered? I would assume these all have significant influence on the pinna‘s shape.
I would love to hear more about how ear features affect HRTFs and the current state of the over-ear target
Very intriguing and interesting. A great video, watched it all through. You‘ve gained a subscriber :)
Cool video! Been enjoying EQ’ing to your target and slight deviations from it to better understand my targeted hearing paint points and preferences.
Makes the hobby fun!
If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.
When's the merch dropping??
This is the most useful video on new Meta. Answers all my questions precisely.
Great video.Can you tell how to measure HRTF?
amazing video ty so much
You can even start doing IEM reviews and we would be craving your takes 😂😂
Pewdiepie?
Audiophile PewDiePie
@@jdargui1537 PewDie-Fi?
I want to learn! Do more videos! Thank you for the infos!
See this right here is why EVERYONE should EQ. What we want is the most naturally average human neutral we can get. Natural meaning as close to an end user (consumer not production) reference speaker system. Neutral meaning as close to that reference as preferred. Preferred meaning as average human preference.
Since IEM's technically can't reproduce this preference on their own for every ear, there should be THE standard and you EQ to preference. This EQing should be very minor, within 3 db at whatever frequency that needs to be adjusted to be accurate to a specific preference. Otherwise you'd know that the IEM (or speaker for that matter) is colored in some way. Some coloration can be preferred and I know of speakers and IEMs that require little to no EQ adjustment. But they are very far and few between and most if not all of those speaker systems are in the thousands to tens of thousands of dollars to achieve. Now, IEM's are different costs wise. They are much less expensive overall to achieve that perfect preferred neutrality to your ears. For my preference I prefer a little more bass performance as the music I listen to, Metal, is very rich and fast, thick. And the highs can't be too peaky but still detailed. A hard to find IEM that can be both. Mids should be revealing but not too forward and overall, should have a wide soundstage if possible. An even harder overall IEM combination to find. But if IEM makers follow this JM1-2 DF standard I think we could get very close at less and less expensive IEM's.
One way or the other, gotta keep people chasing new IEMs.
Now the new word 'META' makes me feel like I'm REALLY MISSING OUT. So I wana spend more cash.
the video ever
I love JM-1, but I still have some questions. Firstly, if I were using an IEM that was perfectly tuned to my DF HRTF, would every frequency sound like it's at the same volume if I listen to sine waves, or would equal-loudness get in the way of that? At what volume was the 5128's DF measured at?
Awesome video btw
They wouldn't sound the same volume still, you're right that equal-loudness would get in the way. This is part of what makes equalization with sine-sweeps very tricky.
Thanks for the explanation. Been trying to find the most neutral and settled with Truthear Hexa. Would love to know what your opinion on which iems are Neutral. And even more so if we can have customs then does it make it even more neutral since we are illuminating even more of the human ear.
This is awesome, please continue :)
Are the Westone Mach 80 with the perfomance Foam neutral to you?
PewDiePie flashbang
The Dusk totally changed how I see (hear) IEMs. Everything that I felt was pretty neutral before sounds V-shaped and closed in comparison, but some genres like metal still feel to lack mid-bass especially for a comfortable listen. I wonder if with IEMs there is not a single target that works as well as Harman for over-ears for some reason? Could HRTF balance something out in general or just for me for example. Could be a personal preference quirk as well, but I feel there are two massively different targets I've enjoyed best for different music. Oluv's mainstream preset for the EarFun Free Pro 2's for example is a massive improvement over the Dusk (any preset) for metal and isn't far off for anything else as well. Need to spend a few days playing with EQ to see if I can find a way to modify the Dusk in a way that doesn't ruin it's strengths while having a good deal more oomph so to speak.
Adding a tilt to the JM-1 target is unnecessary. Yes we listen to music in rooms but the best sound is heard near field, and thus the early reflections almost have zero impact to the sound. The tilt is present if we measure loudspeakers far field performance. Try eqing your headphones or IEM's to the JM-1 with a tilt and you will notice that the sound will be muffled.
The only thing necessary for the JM-1 target is the low shelf which is a matter of taste and essentially emulates having a pair of speakers and dialling in the amount of power you want the subwoofer to have.
Great explanation
I feel like people hyperfocus on tuning targets a bit too much. I have different preferences, my two favorite iems that I own are the Aful Performer 5 and the Thieaudio Hype 4. The Hype 4 I bought after selling the Davinci, which I ended up really not liking, and I LOVE it. I decided to get it because I just liked the look of the fr graphs and reviews sounded like the sound profile was up my alley and that performance of the set was very good
Audiophiles still don't know about the audio circle of confusion?
Wow, great video!
GIVE US MORE PLEASE!!! MORE MORE MORE :)
Great video!!!
Please make an additional video.
Great video! I'm still a bit confused regarding the correct usage of the term to describe certain IEMs and if the current meta IEMs in the market is the way to go. There's a frequent complaint in listener and other reviews that some of the touted meta IEMs have too much bass for this midrange tuning (and too much upper treble too, though that seems more personal and subjective). I wonder if applying the Harman bass adjustment to this baseline when tilted might actually be a bad idea.
For example, JM-1 DF baseline with a 10 dB tilt versus only Harman filters sound very different, yet both could be considered 'new meta,' right? That's a bit confusing if I were looking to buy something 'neutral'. Davinci also had a bit of elevation at 5-6 kHz (and a somewhat sharp peak in the upper treble) that I didn't find it very pleasant and I wouldn't call it 'neutral' so the more I learn, the less excited I get about "new meta" IEMs. It feels much easier (and cheaper) to achieve a better experience with EQ.
These are all excellent questions and my avoidance of them in the video was somewhat on purpose. The specific filters applied to the HRTF are definitely going to have a huge impact on the overall tonality. But, I find something which is a bit warm, a bit bright, a bit bassy, etc to be far more enjoyable than when I hear a distinct peak at 5-6khz. I personally agree that most of the "meta" IEMs available right now are too bassy-I would describe most of them as "bass-boosted neutral"-but I don't make any claim to have the final word on that.
For now, my recommendation is that people adjust their preference filters to taste using EQ. New Harman work may shed some light on good starting points for a set of preference filters? We'll have to wait and see.
Play at 1.75x speed
Oh yeah !
Looks like an ai generated video (in a good way)
New meta is just the new cheese flavor in the mice trap. A couple of years ago, many of these traps had a _Harman_ taste.
Woww
JM1 ALPHA DESTROYS BETA HARMAN ENJOYERS 🔥
PewDiePie
Duy busk
Oh come on, many years ago the Audiosense DT200 hits this fckn target that you explain in 20 mins long .. aaaaaand no one raving about it
*ruuuuuuuunnnnn* 😁✌🏻🏃🏻💨💨💨
JM1 is garbage, it is extremely large. The only people who like it are those that haven't listened to flat on axis speakers. The best iem target is H2019 with reduced eargain to match preference and upper treble boost.
Jm1 sounds far more natural
20:17 i had one doubt, why do we need to add preferences to the JM-1 raw data? Doesn't that color the neutrality? Thanks..
Check 11:09 till 12:24
Pewdiepie is into the Audiophile hobby now? Aint no wayyyy