What is a "Harman" IEM?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 23 ส.ค. 2024
- Hang around audiophile circles and you'll eventually hear someone describe an IEM or headphone as "Harman tuned." But what's that mean? And is it really Harman? Spoiler: It's usually not.
Is it Harman? Find out on Squiglink: squig.link/?sh...
----------
- Super* Shirts here: super-review-m...
- Join the Super* Discord: / discord
- Follow me on Instagram: / fakesuperreview
Music by Birocratic. Check him out on Soundcloud: / birocratic
#audiophile #IEMs #Harman #SuperReview
So many people complain about how every IEM is “Harman” tuned, while not even understanding what actually defines Harman tuning to begin with. Thank you for this.
facts
I would guess Super*Review does not himself properly understands the Harman target, how it was derived, what research went into it to devise it etc. and I am pretty sure he did not read the relevant published original research.
@@susokraut3169 True, you can really see it at 2:23, "It creates a contrast between the midrange and this very significant bass boost that Harman likes to do", no the Harman researchers "does not randomly decide" that transition rather it is derived from a common subwoofer crossing point over a main speaker, researchers also found out that extending the bass shelf over 105 Hz has an adverse effect on timbre of vocals. Plus there is the AES Convention Paper 8994 showing extended bass shelf over 105 Hz is not preferred by listeners at all.
Finally quoting Dr. Sean Olive on his statement :
[ If you take the "audio reproduction is a science in the service of art" approach (as HARMAN does) versus a "flavor-of -the-month approach", standardized performance targets based on subjective/objective measurements are prerequisites. Inevitably, this leads to products that sound similar to others. But if the criteria is to produce consistent, excellent sound based on scientific evidence, isn't that a positive trend? ]
People are so "tired" of Harman even though 90% of people have not heard an IEM that actually follows the target in any close way. Most Harman IEMs are "harman-ish", which basically means "those v-shapes we were already selling but with less offensive peaks".
Dude………spot fricken on with this! Harmon-ish is what’s out there in abundance. When I heard an actual Harmon targeted IEM I was shocked at how it sucked and was NOT what I wanted when researching IEM’s. I know what I like when I hear it, and I can kinda-sorta explain it, but after hearing what Harmon really sounds like……….I don’t give it much thought when I hear/read comments about So And So being a Harmon target.
Then there is Jay's Audio . Any iem he doesn't like will call that iem "harman diffuse field" 😂😂😂
I really try to like the guy but he creates unnecessary drama in a fairly laidback hobby.
@@alphapapa4446 true. He also gets triggered easily
He's creating content. More people will interact with polarising or strong opinions. So it helps views to be like that.
He is so petty I can’t believe it
@@KanyeWestFan69w username
Thanks for clarifying, this was really useful.
Thank you thank you THANK YOU!! I'm so tired of hearing reviewers calling anything with either sub bass emphasis or normal pinna-gain "Harman," like it's something bad. While actual Harman isn't everybody's cup of tea, it's not a bad place to start for tuning IEMs. Your points of the scooped out upperbass/lower mids, and the lower treble being elevated are exactly what makes Harman, Harman. Heck, even a sub bass tuck isn't necessarily Harman, as long as what's leading up to it is flat. While there were flaws in the actual research, it is a good starting point for the majority of people…so why do reviewers act like it's the worse thing in the world? There are some genuine bad tunings out there that are much, much worse than anything Harman.
They want "flavor" aka wonky QDC/V-shape tunings. And also because people misunderstand why harman is criticized.
Imagine mostly missing a target and still getting credit for hitting it. Also not mentioned in the video but most of the time when I see a set referred to as "Harman" it is almost always in a negative way. Not to describe the sound signature, mostly to dismiss or demean it.
Glad I’m not the only one who’s noticed that trend.
you should make more explainer videos like this for audio concepts
I’m glad you’re making this video. I hope it stems the tide of people calling non-Harman IEMs “Harman” because it’s buzzword of the year, but I won’t hold my breath LMAO
"I'm tired of Harman." < Has never actually listened to a Harman-tuned earphone >
Two other examples I feel are missing from this video :
Truthear Nova = textbook Harman. It's got the bass tuck, it's got extra lower treble.
Most simgot single dd's = not Harman. They all got a warm midrange (300hz is higher that 1000hz), but they have higher lower treble. Still, that doesn't make them Harman.
lack of midbass scoop instantly disqualifies any iem from being called harman. therefore, barely any single DD/single planar is a harman. i think it is just inherently difficult to get the midbass scoop with a single driver.
Yeah, Nova with foam tips is Harman 2019v2
Excellent. I think it is really important to talk about things like this, because we can't communicate effectively otherwise.
This needed to be said, and I appreciate you for taking the time to lay it out.
I feel like a lot of the people claiming that there are too many Harman-tuned iems are calling anything with a clean-ish bass boost and a recognizable ear gain region "Harman", regardless of how differently those features are implemented from the Harman target.
Harman is the new V-Shape. Seriously remember when anything slightly treble/bass boosted was a V shape and not good, now it's the same with Harman.
This was very Harman of you, Mark.
Harman today, but I aspire to double burrito.
Great question. There is a lot of confusion about this. People are now calling all kinds of IEM Harman.
If the graph looks like a women lying down, its probably Harman.
+1 for strong cultural mindset
WTF , 😂
Tell me you’ve never met a woman without telling me you’ve never met a woman.
@@SuperReviewbro got roasted hard lmao
Beth Harman
Service to the public achieved, thank you. It's become a thing on the internet now, whatever people don't like it's Harman.
Thanks Mr. Ryan. When the tuning is Harman inspired but is neither true Harman nor Harmanish, could it perhaps be called Harmanoid? 🤔
Harthey
The Dunu Glacier does follow the Harman curve in the lower treble.
However the 300Hz point is not lower than the 1000hz point. One can clearly see they dipped the 1000hz region by about 0.5-1 db with a Q value of about 0.7 to avoid that effect of mids sounding thin.
Hi, Mark. Maybe in another video you could tell a bit of your “journey” towards your target and how this is changing overtime. I’d be also curious to know how often you actually eq a given iem to match your target during regular listening sessions. Cheers!
Not sure if it'll answer all your questions, but I do have this video: th-cam.com/video/RWzBw3XBn8c/w-d-xo.html
Funny enough I end up EQing headphones much more than IEMs, usually as a diagnostic tool more than for pleasure.
@@SuperReview Spot on! Thanks a lot!
Thank you so much for this video. It helps me a lot in choosing the right iems and targets!
Very well explained!
A new Harman IE target is on the way so these Harman tuned IEMs won't be Harman compliant for long.
Haram
🙏
I learn something today! Thank you for explaining this beautifully Mark 😊
Well explained....Dr olive approved this message....
You are next on his list oh my gah...
I CAN FEEL IT COMING
You're Harman.
I’m thinking the same thing😂
i don't think he will come for this one. this is not contradicting his use of words in the first place. he uses "harman-diffuse field", which will definitely include many more sets than just "harman" because the tilted diffuse field lacks a midbass scoop and can be now applied to many single DDs in the entry market. the only weird thing he does with this term is how he does not label the simgots as harman-diffuse field. I can't think of a meaning of the term which applies to what he labeled as such without also including the simgots.
Told ya mark, every thing circles back to Harman.
Love the rant, with all the terms flying around in reviews I started to use fr graphs more and multiple reviewers descriptions of detail/nuances in how an iem sounds
Very good info to keep in mind when watching your reviews
Good! Finally Harman is fully defined. 👍🙏✌️
Very helpful! Thanks!
It need to be said finally. The amount of times people throw out the word "Harman" is baffling.
Truthears Nova is the most Harman of them all!
It do be pretty damn Harman.
Well explained. Thank you.
I agree with the characterization here, specifically defining it along those two key variables of the FR. I think there's a sense in which people use the term to describe anything with... thorough or generous ear gain, as opposed to some of the more odd or relaxed tunings in that region. But I think this is a better definition. Maybe we could say three variables and include the bass shelf.
The guitar/PRO folks may also call "scooped lower mids". 🌶 It's like Sinatra performing in falsetto. 😂
Nice job 👏
🤙
You call Moondrop Variations "Harman tuned" when its lower treble is closer to your target than Harman's. I'll will give you the credit for the mid bass dip. But for Chopin, you say the lower treble "significantly more relaxed". That argument falls apart anytime you compare Variations and Chopin, they are pretty close up there! The most significant difference is on 3k, outside your lower treble defining Harman. This video is a great way of clarifing what is Harman. But saying that Variations is Harman in the same way of others IEM such as Truthear Zero and considering the incoherence of qualifying the lower treble (Variations vs Chopin) is just a desservice and vague repetition of others say without thinking too much. But the most stunning part of the video is examplifying S8 as Harman tuned when it is so adherent tô your target! Grear video, Super. Terrible examples.
Nice video! Could you make a video discussing different tunings (from the Harman/Quasi-Harman curve) that are still intriguing, such as the SSR or T2?
SSR is i guess Warm-DF, and the T2 is a warm-neutral-ish tuning. The T2 is so old that I forgot what it sounded like so I'm just reading graphs.
Agree. Peak needs to occur around 3K then drop off. Harman carries way too much energy from 3-8K and is hard for me to listen to. When I tune by ear to flatten all of my resonances I end up with a tune close to yours but with more bass (but not starting until 100 Hz, no bloat here). Similar to the Zero: Red, actually.
Ain't no one ever said no to more bass below 100Hz 👍
QC issues aside I love my Variations.
What kinda issues?
@@SuperReview I had heard about the faceplates falling off, so I've been REALLY carefull with my pair. And the included cable I would personally consider a QC issue in it's own right. Damn do I hate that thing.
Super*Haircut
Super*AboutTime
I don't mind Harman but honestly I prefer a more neutral tuning, like Moondrop VDSF. Moondrop's own graphing tool has both and clearly shows the differences between something like the Variations and the Beautiful World's tuning. Besides the treble being almost the same the mid bass tuck is different and the sub bass is drastically changed.
Moondrop has it's own graph tool?
@@juanblanco7898Yes go on their website and click graph. It has all their products with accurate graphs for each. I love it, makes comparing so easy.
Jay is taking L after L this week🤣
Great video Mark!
🤙
Now i know what makes iems sound thin ( on fr) !!!!
How much does it matter? Putting two different headphones up there, which sounds so different they can’t even be compared, look almost the same on the graph. It’s only a couple decibels in different spots. Does that make a difference?
Yes, a couple dB in various spots makes a huge difference. You can try with EQ.
A lot of of people don't know this: The entire point of the Harman target is to tune the frequency response of headphones such that they recreate the sound of perfectly flat speakers in a dead room **edit** (partially reverberant room). Following the Harman target is done in order to somewhat unify mixing/mastering on headphones with that of mixes made on speakers. whether or not that's a preferable experience on headphones is subjective (it usually isn't (although kind of close)). Also, there's multiple variations of Harman, specific to the sub-bass region with a variations including higher/lower sub-bass targets. **To conclude, the Harman target is for audio engineers / musicians to create mixes (on headphones) that are compatible with most speaker systems/devices , not necessarily the absolute most enjoyable experience (on headphones) for listeners or enjoyers of music. However, many people do enjoy this target simply because of the fact that it makes many songs heard closer to the way they were mixed (for the most part).**
I don't think that's right, Harman is about listener preference. Diffuse field is about recreating the sound of flat speakers.
While harman is technically based on a speaker response to a microphone in an almost DF room, the research is very much a statistical exercise for preference along with marking out key frequencies that can be problematic and unnatural. DF is closer to recreating the sound of a flat speaker. Harman has deviated quite a bit from a tilt (2016 IE was close to DF tilt) and has became more of the average of what was prefered.
What iem would you recommend acording to your target under 150$?
Hexa
One important thing to note is how it graphs and it sounds. Zero:Red for me sounds Harman enough to call it Harman. Thin with bass tuck and too much treble.
That might be true in some aspect but if you go by memory for IEM sounds then a lot of IEM's will come up sounding similar or to this subjective opinion in your head that it sounds like "Harman" for example. The only way to really test is to A/B with volume matched IEM's. Not something many people can do because the few who have stated the Blue and Red Zero sound different, meaning at most the Red is Harman like. Not a true Harman because then it'd sound like the Blue in an A/B.
@@burns0100 I don't think it makes a lot of sense to volume match. In practice you're going to be listening to different -phones at different volume anyway, depending on the general tonal balance and more intricate frequency response features.
@@juanblanco7898I mean you can't truly tell the difference between two IEM's unless they are volume matched because if you try and A/B from the same device then the louder one will just sound better with more punchy bass and such. They need to match volumes so you know they are on equal ground. (This is not just setting your device to 50% either, this is a DB measurement of them both at the same DB level).
You can tell slightly differences without like more bass, harsh treble and recessed mids but you really can't get the maximum level of critical comparison without. Much like trying to compare an IEM from memory. It's never as accurate.
I very much try to find things that are tuned differently, but many IEMs are pretty close to the Harmon target. I tend to think of it is having sub-bass over mid-bass, and the typical pinnn gain. I actually find the stuff with flatter treble tuning way more appealing for Rock and Classic Rock.
The problem with defining "Harman tuned" like that is let's say something like the moondrop Chu, subbass over mid bass, sure, but there are a certain amount of warmth and midbass boost under 400hz still that is clearly not executed like the "tucked mid bass" in the Harman target. And then the subbass contrast to counteract the potential thinness isn't as well emphasize. These are pretty audible differences while still falling under the description of subbass over mid bass. Same with pinna gain. An IEF neutral or DF based pinna gain cuts the lower treble much sooner and doesn't roll off upper treble as quickly. Very audible and still falls under "typical" pinna gain. Where does the pinna gain peak could lead to various timbral difference.
Obviously in terms of how an IEM is tuned, it should be what sounds good to your taste. But when defining tuning styles, it should be more specific and streamlined especially with something that is as universal and controversial as the Harman target that has papers written about it.
Man the iem market moves so fast --
Batman>Harman
Is Harman DC or Marvel?
Harambe
Man and Jonkler
Team 1 = crinacle
Team 2= Jay
Mark = Referee 😁
Nah let's not learn from the US political system. We don't need teams, we need different opinions that all count
other than the bass tuck / lower mid range recession, before the Harman IEM target, was the pinna gain and curve thereafter tuning of iems quite similar to that post Harman target? If not, then all of the iems you showed in the video follow the target to a great extent... also, the IEM target is a preference target based on a small number of trained Harman people.. it is not meant to be a gospel and neither is the OE target where they had more people participating in the research.. moreover, the target is heavily smoothed.. i believe the "less smoothed" Harman low/mid treble is actually very close to your target..
Harman 2017 (slightly unsmoothed 2019v2) is actually even brighter (iirc by around 1.5-2dB), 2019v2 is already less thin and less bright. 2016 is the least bright but also pretty heavily scooped.
I have seen a version of the target in forums that has less low / mid treble, quite a bit less in fact.. it actually looks like super review or project red in that region.. thanks for the response.. i will look into it@@kaeroseon
@@jackjack3874 could be dB scaling, frequency normalization differences, line thickness, optical illusions, or older versions of Harman like 2016, 2017, 2019v1 or a tilted Harman in room flat.
Que opinas sobre el 7hz sonus ?
That's another main theme, Rigs Calibration, or properly calibrated targets
There is almost none 💀
I can use 2 targets at once? How? 😮and can I default my Squig for it?
Yeah, either pin one and click the second, or you can use middle-click to add a target (or IEM) without replacing the others.
You can set both as defaults in your config.js file.
@@SuperReview that’s amazing! Thanks! Also, ya I agree with the two main components of harman
Haram tuned iem
Hm, don't think I've ever thought of it this way. I've always considered those two features of Harman to be its weaknesses and not its fundamental characteristics. So I've been very generous calling iems "Harman-ish" for a long time, mostly based on the position and boost of the pinna and bass regions... But even then, I think I'm less generous with the term than many iem reviews haha
Back in my day, we called IEMs with sub+mid bass boost and upper midrange boost "v-shaped."
I wish there was an option for open back, close back and even iems that are completely ruler flat frequency response from 20hz to 20 khz frequency response even when being shown in a frequency response graph that the frequency repronse is completely ruler flat from 20 hz to 20 khz.
There are (kinda). But being ruler flat isn’t exactly a good thing (hrtf leading to pinna gain/1-7khz boost being required).
How come?
It's not that it's not a good thing, rather that it's very hard to pull off in my understanding. Would have made for a great option for EQ adepts.
@@juanblanco7898 With IEMs, they should be easy to achieve. Especially with BA and coupler improvements. But it also depends on different rigs I guess. With headphones yeah it's tougher but stuff like the thie ghost is quite close, audeze stuff can be somewhat considered ruler flat-ish. Also depends on pinna used for headphones.
@@juanblanco7898 A ruler flat IEM to a 711 coupler might measure a little upwards tilted from left to right on a 5128 and a perfectly flat headphone measured on a pinna that boost to a max of 8dB would be not flat when used with a pinna that boost to 12dB. So I guess it's not as easy as I thought but it has been done before on a 711 coupler with a somewhat standard pinna.
Whenever I see a bass tuck, flat-ish 300-1khz (no matter it goes upwards or downwards), and a hill at around 3khz, I call it Harman. Is this wrong? Or we need a strict definition to call something Harman nowadays?
The bass tuck is definitely a harman trait, but I'd say Harman treble is more around 4-7kHz relative to the pinna gain peak. 1-3kHz is more personal taste in pinna gain intensity, though harman i guess is on the more intense side, but how much it cuts out afterwards is more important. Like harman doesnt cut by much at all but rolls off above 8k, while DF immediately cuts after 3k and IEF neutral is just a simple peak then slow roll. The lower mids needs to be tilted down to be harman as the subbass contrast is a lot clearer and having any sort of warmth when the lower mids are tilted upwards goes directly against the research that was set out by Harman (though might just be overly cautious estimations).
It's not my goal to police terms and language beyond usefulness. I think there is a significant and useful difference between Harman as I've described it and the wider net you've described.
For me it seems Harman tuning is advertised for the mainstream audience. Of course due to all the scientific research to make it an "average Joe" preset... but if you check all the expensive / kilobuck IEMs you hardly find any IEM following the Harman target. I had they joy to test MEST Mk2 which is insanely tuned yet completely opposite of Harman.
I feel like its due to a few reasons. 1. Audio hobbyists has grown to show liking to so many "flavors" and there are valid reasons for all tuning styles to exist. 2. The harman tuning style being done analog is still relatively difficult especially if the bass driver or driver consistency isnt good. It requires at least 2 drivers to be achieved and at least 3 drivers to be done well, or requires the use of DSP/EQ. 3. There are many criticisms of the Harman target being overly cautious and the in-ear target being under developed. 4. It's the kilobuck range where placebo and snakeoil start to run wild.
🌶 Harman or K-Pop tuning? 🌶
Something tells me Sean Olive doesn't listen to a lot of Stray Kids.
I'm an ex-Harman frfr. trust me bro on god
Harman target is the result of their research right? Did they change something in the target before setting it as the "preference"?
Also, Harman sells headphones but not all of them have the FR of their target right? 😋
Harman is just audio related research for brands associated with Samsung iirc. But I'm pretty sure all brands within that umbrella has their own flavor and some don't use the research at all.
@@kaeroseon from what I see, some Samsung Buds are pretty close to the target
@@1337sim1 Samsung and JBL tends to follow the Harman research fairly close. JBL tends to give a little bit extra bass while samsung tends to mess around with the treble.
@@kaeroseon most of the audio brands associated with Samsung like AKG, JBL, Mark Levinson, were Harman subsidiaries long before Samsung was in the picture. Then Samsung bought Harman and got all these other brands from that acquisition. Harman/Kardon was the original company that actually made physical stuff under the name, I had a Harman/Kardon amp years ago. The holding company Harman International came later, after Harman/Kardon bought other companies (Harman/Kardon bought JBL in the 1960s, Harman International was founded in the late 1970s, Samsung purchased it in 2016).
@@blorg8206 Yeah I’m only talking about modern day brands in relation to the Harman research and how it’s implemented.
I enjoy Harman. Yeah, I said it.
What's interesting is how much variance I hear between IEMs that graph similarly Harman. Like Glacier sounds significantly warmer and fuller than Nova, even though all the difference in bass is below 150Hz.
@@SuperReview I think that’s part of the research. Since warmth above 200hz is volatile, while subbass contrast can add a lot of perceived warmth while keeping the mids as clean as possible, I do think the research didn’t tilt enough but the subbass seems to be intentional placed that way and recommended to be adjusted due to this reason.
@@SuperReview I tried with my Nova, Zero and B3, all with various bass levels and contrast (reducing the scoop vs scooping further) and I’ve found that adding subbass can consistently add some warmth, perhaps due to some audio masking or bleed that doesn’t quite get into the mids but bleeds just enough to add warmth. It’s very interesting and made me revisited a Harman style EQ many times. Maybe I’m just inexperienced and talking placebo.
it annoys me too
Iron Man > Harman
There is a lot of research behind the Harman target, especially for headphones, less so for IEMs. But still, there exists a lot evidence and listening test that back it up. So it is much more valid than the target of any random reviewer, like Super*Review.
Me, multiple times: This video is not about me saying my target is better.
susokraut3169, a genius: ...
@@SuperReview you referenced it several times (“the mids are below my target”…) as like this were any valid information. Your target is just random noise nobody cares about.
Genius.
Mutaharman > Harman
Harman = boring for me.. Harmon is the missionary of tunings. If all she does is harman I’m not buying. I pay to get different.
Which Harman IEMs have you had?
"My target", haha, nobody cares about that, just random BS, weak bass and muddy midrange.
actually I find his target to be close to a flat speaker without subwoofer
@@quochuynguyen764 yes, without a subwoofer, so not correct.
@@susokraut3169 "not correct", do you think in studio people mix and master with subwoofer? It just comes down to taste, a guy I know who make subwoofers said that he only use subwoofer for casual listening and for movies, but not for critical listening.
@@quochuynguyen764 if you would follow the research, you should know that for earphones and IEMs the Harman target is considered flat, mimicking a speaker in the room, based on research by Toole and Olive and others. A flat extension down to 20Hz usually is only possible with a subwoofer in-room, which IEMs much more easily with almost any kind of driver.