hmm, while they are dark, it shouldn't be by that much. try different tips, because sometimes, your ear canal can sort of bend and close off the tips

most common program is EqualizerAPO, with the Peace GUI added on. There are videos and other resources here that are really helpful too.

no problem! Do give them a try for a couple of days, you'll probably get used to them. if it's still not to your liking, then you could return them or try some EQ.

tons of factors at play here.

A major common mistake when reading these graphs is taking each part individually as their own section, when in fact, it is all related. Treble can influence bass perception, and you should take into account the whole FR instead of just focusing purely on amplitude at certain frequencies

There's also your music choice that might influence how bass is perceived. Bass covers quite a wide range of frequencies, and different genres will emphasize different frequencies.

imo, the truthear zero has noticeable bass presence because of its elevated upper midrange combined with a midbass tuck. This creates a sense of contrast with the clear midrange/treble of the iem, which makes the bass seem more prominent.

the s12 (not the pro) had more note weight and midbass in my experience, but that does come with a lack of bass separation/impact that the zero has.

Do whatever suits your needs best. If the differences are minor and spotify is more convenient, then change.

There is the EQ, but unless you are constantly tweaking profiles, just use Wavelet

That is perfectly valid, a lot of people buy technically capable headphones and EQ its mediocre tonality to something they like. But like others said, that isnt always possible.

Frequency response is also NOT subjective. Perception of FR is, but the measurement itself is objective. Whether people listen to the reviewer's subjective interpretation of the graph is up to them.

It is important because it is the (one of) the only objective metric with which one can evaluate headphones.

If you look at forums, reviews, videos, etc, you quickly realize how everyone likes different things. Worse is that people often hear the same gear differently as well. For example, you might like that "wild looking graph" headphone, but someone else might dislike it.

Soundstage, detail, imaging, dynamics, transients; what do they actually mean? Again, no solid definition, and again, people perceive these differently.

It all comes down to having at least one thing that is objective and (mostly) consistent across every reviewer. And most reviewers dont base their opinions just on the graphs, i have not seen one reputable reviewer do as such. They still rely on their hearing for those mysterious technicalities.

it is hard to know what causes them to sound different because they are two extremely different products.

But even then, what metrics could cause them to sound different? Ignoring variables that affect perception (price, physical sensation, build quality, hearing, etc), we find that the most important objective metric is FR.

i think we are agreeing, but theres a slight misunderstanding. I interpreted his saying of "loudness at different frequencies" as how he used graphs. I thought he meant basic stuff like "oh, theres more bass", which is true but limited in use. i agree with your statements tho, it technically is loudness at different frequencies, but interpreting graphs can go (a little) beyond that

do not use sine sweeps for flatness. as u/The_D0lph1n said, the brain perceives different frequencies as louder or not. Sine sweeps might be useful for dips/peaks and channel matching, but thats pretty much it. Use music (or pink noise) and adjust using a reference if you want flatness

for the most part, yes, but there are other things that come into play. elevated treble can sometimes create a sense of detail, certain peaks can mask surrounding frequencies, etc. Truth is, there are a lot of things that seem not related to loudness at different frequencies but actually are.

It is 100% the most important metric for sound quality in headphones. There is no denying that. A lot is contained in FR, and simplifying it to "loudness at different frequencies" is not quite right.

What exactly is different from the 10$ earbuds compared to nicer headphones?

Big K.R.I.T. - Justin Scott

James Blake - Air & Lack Thereof

Takako Mamiya - Love Trip

Yosi Horikawa - Bump

That is the most logical, but the wording in their twitter post makes me think is a separate earphone. I hope im wrong

Not sure if they do the witchcraft in the earphones or they'll use a small chip on the cable that does the bulk of the work (dsp to dac to analog signal to earphone)

Digital signal processing, so anything changing the digital signal before the DAC. This includes anything from EQ to crossfeed, room virtualization, compressor, etc

Their twitter post says earphones, so im assuming its a separate product.

A standalone DSP cable would be incredible tho

Chu or Quarks would make the most sense with the non-detachable cable, but it could be something completely different too

Mostly a non issue, but DSP allows for more options and fancy audio tricks/gimmicks.

Most basic would be EQ, but it can also involve crossfeed, surround virtualization, etc

I dont think so. They explicitly mention DSP, which leads me to believe they will at the very least include an app with basic EQ.

If it is just a simple usb c version of either, then that would be the most underwhelming release in a while.

Seems like Moondrop just announced a new DSP wired earphone. Yes, wired. Quite interesting, if any asian forum members have more details, do post them!

Those EQ presets seem quite unique, interested to see what they do

Just search that question + reddit on google and you'll get dozens of the exact same thread, repeating the same arguments, with the exact same vitriol you would expect from audiophiles.

What 1 class of literature does to a mf 💀

But yeah, nice description. Wouldnt recommend this for a newcomer, its too analytical and theres not enough warmth