I've been wondering something for sometime that seems to concern measurements like HD, impulse response and square waves.  People seem to judge them in absolute terms but to my ears, if I tried to imagine correlating my experience to visualized data, it seems to me that the overall behavior is just as significant.  In other words, even though something appears to measure better absolutely, it may exhibit sporadic or odd/unpredictable behavior even if it performs better below a noise floor or within a specified time domain.


I'll bring over my IEM collection next week to keep you busy.

3rd, 5th order (odd) harmonic distortion


This tells me the BA drivers produce waves a little bit more square. Maybe partially accounts for how they sound, a little bit faster with artificially higher slope rises.

Just taught myself how to read the graph. Heh, so simple. Still can't fully correlate with other measurement data, such as square waves etc.

Very nice to see these though. Relatively high odd harmonic distortion. You mentioned that it in your experience results in atonality (pitches of notes less distinguished?). Do you feel that's the case with these IEM's?

Also, to teach a newb, how much of a difference is between 0,1% and 1% in dB?

Also, to teach a newb, how much of a difference is between 0,1% and 1% in dB?

20dB

10dB is considered to sound twice as loud, 20dB = 4 times as loud

Is the effect of harmonic distortion which is impactful on sine-waves actually visible in square-waves?  It seems to me like square-waves are so convoluted / directly paralleled to FR - which varies wildly in transducers - that actually seeing sine-wave differences in square-wave response is impossible since the universal shape of the square-wave is determined explicitly by the FR, and thus the square-wave response in transducers is unrelated to sine-wave response, which is only 'visible' in harmonic distortion measurements such as these if anywhere, is that actually the case?