Ah, graphs. Those ubiquitous things with a horizontal X-axis and a vertical Y-axis, providing a visual representation of the relationship between at least two sets of data.
I was made aware of graphs in junior high school (as middle school used to be called) math classes. Graphs dominated my Economics studies in college. I especially remember the marginal utility graphs presented in Microeconomics classes.
Before I retired, exactly nine years ago, I tested the performance of storage area network systems under a simulated database load. I used the resulting spreadsheet data to generate graphs that compared the number of read and write operations per second to the latency required to perform those actions. Such fun!
Not wanting to miss an opportunity to get in a dig at Trump, here’s a graph of crude oil prices over the past five years, up to yesterday. (Brent is the premium grade of oil from the North Sea region.)
After being introduced to graphs, it wasn’t until the 11th grade that I came to appreciate, and even like, graphs. It didn’t happen in a math class; instead, it was when I started reading hi-fi magazines and seeing frequency response curves that compared amplitude against frequency in loudspeakers.
Lately, I’ve been having fun by comparing the frequency response curves of inexpensive in-ear monitors. These two super sounding Chinese IEM models each cost less than $20.
Between 400 Hz and ~2800 Hz they measure essentially identically. They diverge below and above that frequency range. It’s amazing how seemingly minor discrepancies result in such significant differences in overall sound.
If anyone were to ask me which IEM I prefer, based purely on sound I’d favor the Wan’er. But I would recommend the Gate to others over the Wan’er, because it has the better and more comfortable fit, a better cable, and it comes with a case.