Custom IEM's being discontinued?

[Alathea]

Ha! Thanks-my degree is infosystems management (systems analysis/programming) but what my glorified title means at work is that I support at the table and sometimes code level a set of accounting/cash management/land management programs written for county assessors and treasurers. Our old app is a weak relational database written in something called Smartware from about 15 years ago, and our new one is all Sql Server 2008 based and MS.net. So I get to support both, fixing broken stuff, T/Sing reports and fields, and sometimes procedurally helping some official that call and can't manage to drive the program via the menu. I wear about 5 hats, but I actually don't have do a lot of the mundane case-ing, and actual analysis, except for SQL efficiency.

Thanks for the list! Ill get to digging!

CAS

cedrics@gmail.com

[DrWho]

As to the other post pertaining to the laws of physics playing in to this scernerio, thus creating a need for multiple drivers.... Yes, there is some truth to this, but one should also consider other limitations, such as what frequency ranges are actually used in making recordings of music, the dynamic range of the average cochlea in lets say 16yr + male etc etc. These limitations may at times, actually proceed the limitations created by the laws of physics.

I think you might want to look at the real numbers for the other limitations you mention. Most people spending more than $100 on IEM's aren't listening to pop culture music, and have much stricter standards when it comes to distortion - especially of the IMD variety.

I've seen no shortage of data showing strong preferences towards multiple-driver solutions when using the MUSHRA test approach. As an engineer, I have to worry more about results, than understanding why something works, or shouldn't work. That's not to imply that knowledge is ever detrimental, but I would argue that it is always incomplete.

So if you're saying that your understanding of audiology points to single drivers as being ideal, then I would ask why the opposite seems to be true? I'm not sure I buy the economic argument about Sonion or Knowles because the company I work for can and has designed our own drivers from scratch...

[AuD]

I never stated my "understanding of audiology points to single drivers being ideal" what I said was it is more economically advantageous for Knowles and Sonion to never offer/build/or provide a single driver that offer a full spectrum of sound... (or something on those lines)

BTW: I could design a driver with my sons etch n' sketch, but that does not mean the driver would ever be built by Knowles or Sonion.

and regarding looking at the real numbers... who provides the real numbers, and how does any one even know if they are "real" to begin with. Any one got a B n' K sound level meeter in a drawer some where? http://www.bksv.com/ and what are the standardized specs on freq. response, is it 10 dB drop, 5 dB, 20 dB?

hard to look at the real numbers if there is no standardization, and no real un-biased "watch dogs" out there.

at least that is my 2 cents

[DrWho]

I never stated my "understanding of audiology
points to single drivers being ideal" what I said was it is more
economically advantageous for Knowles and Sonion to never offer/build/or
provide a single driver that offer a full spectrum of sound... (or
something on those lines)

Maybe you can help me out with
what you meant by the following:

I don't
understand why some folks want more drivers, when the emphassis
should be placed on a full range driver with fantastic sound quality.
This would theoritically decrease costs & keep the housing small. I
prefer the x5 over the x10 too.

I get the
impression that you're fairly gung-ho about a single full-range driver,
but then you start flexing an intellectual arm about the audiology
involved without actually stating any facts....just implications that
the dynamic range of the cochlea or the frequency response of our source
material nullifies any imagined advantage to using multiple drivers.

Maybe
I'm just totally misreading what you wrote, and if so, then I do
apologize and maybe you could help clarify your views on multiple versus
single driver IEMs.

and regarding looking at
the real numbers... who provides the real numbers, and how does any one
even know if they are "real" to begin with. Any one got a B n' K sound
level meeter in a drawer some where? http://www.bksv.com/
and what are the standardized specs on freq. response, is it 10 dB
drop, 5 dB, 20 dB?

Well the numbers I was specifically
referring to were actually the measurements you mentioned yourself:

"such as what frequency ranges are actually used in making recordings of

music, the dynamic range of the average cochlea in lets say 16yr + male
etc etc."

There's plenty of other "numbers" we can throw around too if you're
interested. Many of my favorite recordings, for instance, actually have
frequency content that extends beyond the audible range.



For what it's worth, I think half of the art of engineering is figuring
out where you want the numbers to be...and then the other half is
getting the numbers there in a manufacturable and cost-effective manner.
If you're suggesting that the single-driver approach hasn't been
maximized yet, then I would totally agree, but the physics are gonna
dictate higher levels of distortion when compared against the
multi-driver solutions. Of course, that's not to imply that multi-driver
solutions aren't without compromise either.

[AuD]

Numbers, Why yes I am interested in numbers, such what is the resonant frequency of the EAC, and what influence does it have as sound hits the tympanic membrane. Further more, what do engineers, like yourself, do to compensate for the resonant frequency of the EAC? Is there even a sollution for this enigma in the first place, because realistically every one's ECV & shape of their EAC is going to be different, (to some degree) which will ultimatley influence the sound signature.

more about numbers,

" Specifically in humans, we have a maximum aural range of 12 Hz under ideal laboratory conditions^[2] to 20,000 Hz in some individuals, but the range shrinks during our lifetime, usually beginning at around the age of 8 with the higher frequencies fading. There is a difference in sensitivity of hearing between the sexes, with women typically having a higher sensitivity to higher frequencies than men (Gotfrit 1995).

If we know that the cochlea can not respond out to 20K in the average male, then why do IEMs specs state that their products hit sub hearing ranges.... I mean really what are we paying for? http://ultimateears.com/products/18-pro#specifications Imagine if Baskins and Robbins advertized "Tasteless Chocolate" would peiople stand in line to purchase their new ice cream?

And further more, if some one can make this http://www.knowles.com/search/prods_pdf/TWFK-30017-000.pdf hit 18K Hz, I would be very amazed.

and while u are at it, please explain to me why UE or JH audio needs 6 drivers packed away in to their IEMs. I mean really, what is the dynamic range of each driver? I would think it would have to be very narrow, if not then they are just redundant speakers... thus increasing costs, and to what advantage is that?

"For what it's worth, I think half of the art of engineering is figuring out where you want the numbers to be...and then the other half is getting the numbers there in a manufacturable and cost-effective manner. If you're suggesting that the single-driver approach hasn't been maximized yet, then I would totally agree, but the physics are gonna dictate higher levels of distortion when compared against the multi-driver solutions. Of course, that's not to imply that multi-driver solutions aren't without compromise either."

Agreed, but I also think it is worthy to note, every capacitor and every resistor placed in an IEM etc, will create artifact (to some degree) and that is just the nature of the beast. Also worth mentioning, capacitors have a limited life, they do degrade over time and for 1300$ I would want something more for my money. So again, and this is just my humble opinion, Keeping It Simple, and keeping the number of drivers as low as possible, is the way to go.