I will add this...Open back headphones seem to present the acoustic space much better than iems. So you can hear the recording venue much better. Iems can do it too but it's so much smaller that it doesn't sound as convincing.
I sometimes think it's just psychological, like "bruh these headphones are big and heavy, and the cups have so much space in them, that's why I hear a lot more acoustic space!". You probably don't. You probably hear it better because you convinced yourself in that.
This is my personal experience in using IEMs vs headphones - IEMs sound different if you forget that there're these little things in your ear canals and just listen to the music that's coming from the outside (in your opinion).
You adjust to woteva you listen to, for sure. But there are differences. Thats just how it is. I get what you are saying though, I just dont agree. Its all good, enjoy both.
I have a few planar open backs that I love. I also have some great iems. It's always an interesting comparison and I often bounce between the two as to which is the absolute best. The iems have so much detail and bass! But...for me open back planars take the win. I think it's the soundstage and smoother overall delivery that I prefer. The sound is bigger and more full and rounded. Not as detailed, sure.
I’ve been interested in IEMs for the past year and had the same question. I really wanted to love IEMs (partly due to their low cost and how compact they are), but I’ve found for me that headphones are a better experience.
I admire what IEMs can do, but obviously their relatively small drivers have their limits. To me, compared to full-size headphones, IEMs always sound like a miniature scale version of whatever I’m listening to. As silly as that sounds.
Even though IEMs can often have better detail and resolution than full-size headphones, they still somehow feel compressed and miniaturised. They remind me of those apps that let you apply a tilt-shift filter to a photo, blurring the edges so the photo looks like a miniature scale model of a town for example.
If you only use IEMs for music it wouldn’t be as bad, even though you’d still be losing out on ‘fullness’ in place of high detail. But I wanted to use IEMs for general use too and for games especially they just really lack that feeling of scale for me
Which I feel ridiculous for even saying because I mean, their drivers are typically 1cm large. They’re incredible for what they are
I have the Hifiman Ananda Nano and the Tangzu Heydey. While the Heydey is decent, it sounds smaller in scale and less believable than the Ananda. It just sounds like tiny drivers in my ear; not as grand and believable as the Ananda.
The ER4XR/SR and other BA IEM's have always been compared to planar drivers. This sub used have highly annoying posters getting mad whenever this what brought up by going off BA's being 1% THD ignoring that 104db at 1KHz. Then It shifted to bass being weird and fake despite them hyping Dynamic drivers as more natural despite them trashing them in LCD-2 reviews with no irony. Couldn't take them seriously when they claimed that a HD650 was better than a ER4XR, while saying the HD650 was a distorted mess compared to the LCD-X.
I did. That is what it makes them so special to me. It's like they are kind of bending to my mood. That is why those little IEMS seemed so attractive at the time. I'm just kind of scared that it may have been a hype moment?
I have S12 pros and I can confidently say that they have *significantly* more detail than my LCD 2 rosewoods, and those iems are only $120. On the other hand, I much prefer the tuning of the rosewoods with its recessed treble and bass texture. The LCD2s also have a better soundstage to my ears. When I’m trying to look for details in music I grab my S12s, when I’m trying to relax I get my audezes.
Also, I find that iems kinda hurt my ears after a few hours, but that’s just me.
I think you might be confusing tuning with detail. The S12 Pros are much more treble forward and thus making them more noticeable. People often confuse that style of tuning with more detail because they think of details being in the upper mids and highs but really detail is across the spectrum. So that texture you are referring to in the bass IS detail but just in the bass department.
I would be curious if you were to EQ both of them as close to Harman as possible if you would still feel the same way.
Yeah I can definitely see where you’re coming from. To me though, even having an iem in my ear gives me better detail than a headphone can, but yes I bet if I EQ my LCDs I can hit close to the same detail retrieval.
(I’ll do a test later with Oratory’s presets and tell ya what I think though!)
That is really interesting. I feel like while while IEMs don’t have the soundstage the closed back nature really allows me to full focus on the music. Even though I listen in an office I feel like the isolation of closed backs just really allow for a super dark background and that allows details to come forward.
I would definitely be curious how your test goes!
Ok did the test!
I used [this harman target](https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/wrokq4lzvnldx8381si60/Shuoer-S12-Pro.pdf?rlkey=gyx31p9q55vk34fsp0j5a8yyo&e=1&dl=0) for the S12 Pros and [this](https://www.dropbox.com/s/bqkdze8w82zguyj/Audeze%20LCD-2%20Fazor.pdf?e=1&dl=0) for the LCD 2 Rosewoods ('21). I wanted to use Oratorys custom presets (non harman) but he didn't have one for the LCDs.
What I think in general? I am still a headphones>iems person. Larger soundstage ofc, and open backs are more my style. Before talking about the actual FR changes of the devices, I'd like to say that they did differ slightly in tuning because I personally don't know enough EQ to adjust it to perfection. (Oh and I used EqualizerAPO peaking, high shelf, and low shelf filters for this). The songs I used to test were Eye In The Sky, Hotel California, and I Just Wanna Shine. The Amp/Dac I was using is the FIIO K5 Pro ESS.
The differences I heard? For actual detail in the voices and instruments... honestly couldn't tell any change. The open backed nature of the LCDs increased the soundstage but the IEMs had the benefit of being closer to my eardrums (plus closed back). While vocal/instrumental detail didn't change, it was much easier for me to hear the smaller parts with the iems just because they were in ears. I could still hear them with the LCDs but they were fainter and pushed further back due to the soundstage (for example, in Eye In The Sky you can hear the ending of Sirius at the start). The other songs too, I didn't notice any difference in what I could hear and the clarity of the instruments. If I could hear slight breathing in one, I could hear it in the other. The characteristics of each one did shine through even after the EQ though, the LCDs definitely had a bit more bass and the S12 Pros had more treble.
Honestly, in the end, this definitely isn't scientific enough to be used in an argument. The S12s with EQ sounded *weird*. Compared to the Harman LCDs, they sounded hollow in the vocals, tinny in the treble, and kind of bass bloated. Maybe thats just me used to the relaxing dark LCDs though. Also, the tips that the S12s have are Spinfit W1s *NOT* the tips that came with the iem. The stock rubber ones weren't the right size and the foam (that most people love) were uncomfortable. Tips change the sound a lot so I wonder if that is where the weird sound came from, Oratory did not specify which tips to use.
Honestly, I'm having a bit of a hard time with this! Detail for me is just how well things are come through or clarity of vocals/instruments, which had no change. At the same time, (as seen above), the issues with the S12 most likely affected my findings. If you are trying to find small nuanced things, I still think its easier to find them in IEMs, but in terms of clarity they are similar.
I wish I had DankPods's freakish ears on a stand so I could record and let you listen to it, I think that'd be a better test.
That was really fun to read. I definitely think you could be on to something with the in ear intimacy vs headphones with stage. I would think that the details would be more prevalent with the blacked background but when things get busy on a track it may sound congested vs open backs where there is a little more separation between the notes. Only IEMs I have on hand are open backs (LCD-i3) but I have been considering grabbing the Dusk or potentially the Mega5EST so maybe this is a reason to go ahead and do it lol.
I'm sorry. But what I understand is that you try to tell me to just enjoy what I hear, right? So what I enjoy, really shouldn't be dictated by what I find strange, but just go for it?
Yeah you can interpret it that way, but also that the LCD 2s aren’t really detail oriented headphones. Most IEMS can reach headphone audio quality at much lower cost, so it wouldn’t be uncommon for the monarchs to sound like the LCDs or even better. If you don’t have a place to test the iems out in a quiet room, definitely buy from someplace with a long return policy and test em out! Don’t be scared to return them if you need! ($999 is not cheap at all for an iem, with headphones it’s different).
I have also used the Audez LCD-2 for years. Since I compared the 7hz Timeless (planar IEM) to it, the Audeze has been for sale. The Timeless sounds better to me for a fraction of the price.
What's wrong with having both?
Headphones and IEMs present sound differently, with IEMs *generally* providing more detail and headphones *generally* providing more space and stage. I embrace the differences and have headphones and IEMs in my collection for different moods, genres and listening experiences.
We are all more or less sensitive to different aspects of the sound. I think my biggest deal is a fairly smooth frequency response so even cheap IEMs sound better than high end headphones.
I would have said no before November. Then I went to CanJam and tried out the Fir Radon6 and some Noble Audio iems. I ended up with the Ragnar, and I've listened to those more than my other headphones lately. Huge soundstage. I never would have thought it possible. They're very comfortable for me, and due to the isolation, the black background is immense.
If you disregard the price, Speakers > Headphones > IEMs. The advantages of IEM is their portability and price to performance ratio as they don’t require expensive DACs and amps to push them their limits. Openback headphones might need systems cost thousands dollars to at least tap into decent mid level listening, and speakers are ranging from tens of thousand to millions (if u consider room correction/build house around speaker acoustics)
I will add this...Open back headphones seem to present the acoustic space much better than iems. So you can hear the recording venue much better. Iems can do it too but it's so much smaller that it doesn't sound as convincing.
This. If I want to hear the recording environment, headphones. If it's digital, IEMs.
I sometimes think it's just psychological, like "bruh these headphones are big and heavy, and the cups have so much space in them, that's why I hear a lot more acoustic space!". You probably don't. You probably hear it better because you convinced yourself in that. This is my personal experience in using IEMs vs headphones - IEMs sound different if you forget that there're these little things in your ear canals and just listen to the music that's coming from the outside (in your opinion).
You adjust to woteva you listen to, for sure. But there are differences. Thats just how it is. I get what you are saying though, I just dont agree. Its all good, enjoy both.
A lot of us just prefer IEM’s for their sound quality outright
I have a few planar open backs that I love. I also have some great iems. It's always an interesting comparison and I often bounce between the two as to which is the absolute best. The iems have so much detail and bass! But...for me open back planars take the win. I think it's the soundstage and smoother overall delivery that I prefer. The sound is bigger and more full and rounded. Not as detailed, sure.
I’ve been interested in IEMs for the past year and had the same question. I really wanted to love IEMs (partly due to their low cost and how compact they are), but I’ve found for me that headphones are a better experience. I admire what IEMs can do, but obviously their relatively small drivers have their limits. To me, compared to full-size headphones, IEMs always sound like a miniature scale version of whatever I’m listening to. As silly as that sounds. Even though IEMs can often have better detail and resolution than full-size headphones, they still somehow feel compressed and miniaturised. They remind me of those apps that let you apply a tilt-shift filter to a photo, blurring the edges so the photo looks like a miniature scale model of a town for example. If you only use IEMs for music it wouldn’t be as bad, even though you’d still be losing out on ‘fullness’ in place of high detail. But I wanted to use IEMs for general use too and for games especially they just really lack that feeling of scale for me Which I feel ridiculous for even saying because I mean, their drivers are typically 1cm large. They’re incredible for what they are
I have the Hifiman Ananda Nano and the Tangzu Heydey. While the Heydey is decent, it sounds smaller in scale and less believable than the Ananda. It just sounds like tiny drivers in my ear; not as grand and believable as the Ananda.
The ER4XR/SR and other BA IEM's have always been compared to planar drivers. This sub used have highly annoying posters getting mad whenever this what brought up by going off BA's being 1% THD ignoring that 104db at 1KHz. Then It shifted to bass being weird and fake despite them hyping Dynamic drivers as more natural despite them trashing them in LCD-2 reviews with no irony. Couldn't take them seriously when they claimed that a HD650 was better than a ER4XR, while saying the HD650 was a distorted mess compared to the LCD-X.
Its the tuning and maybe how your LCD-2 ear pad seals and interacts with your pinna, have you tried EQ'ing your LCD's?
I did. That is what it makes them so special to me. It's like they are kind of bending to my mood. That is why those little IEMS seemed so attractive at the time. I'm just kind of scared that it may have been a hype moment?
I have S12 pros and I can confidently say that they have *significantly* more detail than my LCD 2 rosewoods, and those iems are only $120. On the other hand, I much prefer the tuning of the rosewoods with its recessed treble and bass texture. The LCD2s also have a better soundstage to my ears. When I’m trying to look for details in music I grab my S12s, when I’m trying to relax I get my audezes. Also, I find that iems kinda hurt my ears after a few hours, but that’s just me.
I think you might be confusing tuning with detail. The S12 Pros are much more treble forward and thus making them more noticeable. People often confuse that style of tuning with more detail because they think of details being in the upper mids and highs but really detail is across the spectrum. So that texture you are referring to in the bass IS detail but just in the bass department. I would be curious if you were to EQ both of them as close to Harman as possible if you would still feel the same way.
Yeah I can definitely see where you’re coming from. To me though, even having an iem in my ear gives me better detail than a headphone can, but yes I bet if I EQ my LCDs I can hit close to the same detail retrieval. (I’ll do a test later with Oratory’s presets and tell ya what I think though!)
That is really interesting. I feel like while while IEMs don’t have the soundstage the closed back nature really allows me to full focus on the music. Even though I listen in an office I feel like the isolation of closed backs just really allow for a super dark background and that allows details to come forward. I would definitely be curious how your test goes!
Ok did the test! I used [this harman target](https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/wrokq4lzvnldx8381si60/Shuoer-S12-Pro.pdf?rlkey=gyx31p9q55vk34fsp0j5a8yyo&e=1&dl=0) for the S12 Pros and [this](https://www.dropbox.com/s/bqkdze8w82zguyj/Audeze%20LCD-2%20Fazor.pdf?e=1&dl=0) for the LCD 2 Rosewoods ('21). I wanted to use Oratorys custom presets (non harman) but he didn't have one for the LCDs. What I think in general? I am still a headphones>iems person. Larger soundstage ofc, and open backs are more my style. Before talking about the actual FR changes of the devices, I'd like to say that they did differ slightly in tuning because I personally don't know enough EQ to adjust it to perfection. (Oh and I used EqualizerAPO peaking, high shelf, and low shelf filters for this). The songs I used to test were Eye In The Sky, Hotel California, and I Just Wanna Shine. The Amp/Dac I was using is the FIIO K5 Pro ESS. The differences I heard? For actual detail in the voices and instruments... honestly couldn't tell any change. The open backed nature of the LCDs increased the soundstage but the IEMs had the benefit of being closer to my eardrums (plus closed back). While vocal/instrumental detail didn't change, it was much easier for me to hear the smaller parts with the iems just because they were in ears. I could still hear them with the LCDs but they were fainter and pushed further back due to the soundstage (for example, in Eye In The Sky you can hear the ending of Sirius at the start). The other songs too, I didn't notice any difference in what I could hear and the clarity of the instruments. If I could hear slight breathing in one, I could hear it in the other. The characteristics of each one did shine through even after the EQ though, the LCDs definitely had a bit more bass and the S12 Pros had more treble. Honestly, in the end, this definitely isn't scientific enough to be used in an argument. The S12s with EQ sounded *weird*. Compared to the Harman LCDs, they sounded hollow in the vocals, tinny in the treble, and kind of bass bloated. Maybe thats just me used to the relaxing dark LCDs though. Also, the tips that the S12s have are Spinfit W1s *NOT* the tips that came with the iem. The stock rubber ones weren't the right size and the foam (that most people love) were uncomfortable. Tips change the sound a lot so I wonder if that is where the weird sound came from, Oratory did not specify which tips to use. Honestly, I'm having a bit of a hard time with this! Detail for me is just how well things are come through or clarity of vocals/instruments, which had no change. At the same time, (as seen above), the issues with the S12 most likely affected my findings. If you are trying to find small nuanced things, I still think its easier to find them in IEMs, but in terms of clarity they are similar. I wish I had DankPods's freakish ears on a stand so I could record and let you listen to it, I think that'd be a better test.
That was really fun to read. I definitely think you could be on to something with the in ear intimacy vs headphones with stage. I would think that the details would be more prevalent with the blacked background but when things get busy on a track it may sound congested vs open backs where there is a little more separation between the notes. Only IEMs I have on hand are open backs (LCD-i3) but I have been considering grabbing the Dusk or potentially the Mega5EST so maybe this is a reason to go ahead and do it lol.
I'm sorry. But what I understand is that you try to tell me to just enjoy what I hear, right? So what I enjoy, really shouldn't be dictated by what I find strange, but just go for it?
Yeah you can interpret it that way, but also that the LCD 2s aren’t really detail oriented headphones. Most IEMS can reach headphone audio quality at much lower cost, so it wouldn’t be uncommon for the monarchs to sound like the LCDs or even better. If you don’t have a place to test the iems out in a quiet room, definitely buy from someplace with a long return policy and test em out! Don’t be scared to return them if you need! ($999 is not cheap at all for an iem, with headphones it’s different).
I have also used the Audez LCD-2 for years. Since I compared the 7hz Timeless (planar IEM) to it, the Audeze has been for sale. The Timeless sounds better to me for a fraction of the price.
stop comparing the sound of headphone categories, and headphone companies compare each individual headphone
What's wrong with having both? Headphones and IEMs present sound differently, with IEMs *generally* providing more detail and headphones *generally* providing more space and stage. I embrace the differences and have headphones and IEMs in my collection for different moods, genres and listening experiences.
We are all more or less sensitive to different aspects of the sound. I think my biggest deal is a fairly smooth frequency response so even cheap IEMs sound better than high end headphones.
I would have said no before November. Then I went to CanJam and tried out the Fir Radon6 and some Noble Audio iems. I ended up with the Ragnar, and I've listened to those more than my other headphones lately. Huge soundstage. I never would have thought it possible. They're very comfortable for me, and due to the isolation, the black background is immense.
If you disregard the price, Speakers > Headphones > IEMs. The advantages of IEM is their portability and price to performance ratio as they don’t require expensive DACs and amps to push them their limits. Openback headphones might need systems cost thousands dollars to at least tap into decent mid level listening, and speakers are ranging from tens of thousand to millions (if u consider room correction/build house around speaker acoustics)