ATH-EW9 Review - Page 3 - Head-Fi: Covering Headphones, Earphones and Portable Audio

Superbaldguy · #31 (**permalink**) 03-18-2004, 08:32 PM

How would these (EW9's) work with Sony MD units? Anyone try this, yet?

blux · #32 (**permalink**) 03-18-2004, 09:39 PM

Could you take some "real life" pictuers of the EW9?

DJGeorgeT · #33 (**permalink**) 03-19-2004, 12:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by JML
The KSC35 sounds pretty nice for the money, granted, but I wouldn't put them anywhere near the AT-EW9 as far as refinement, midrange transparency, and top end delicacy. They're throw-away junk as far as build is concerned. And I find the bass overwhelming, wooly, and very annoying. For the price, they have few peers, granted, but since when was this only about price?

I think the intent of the KSC-35 to be a well rounded kickass headphone that sounds good. It is certainly not audiophile, but I did not buy the ksc-35 because of the price. Everyone was raving about the ksc-35 and I had to try it. There are a lot more expensive portables that I could use, but they fall short in comparison to the ksc-35. When the price is in the $150-$220 range, I would consider something audiophile. The EW9 is overpriced...just my opinion. But hell since when was this about price?

blux · #34 (**permalink**) 03-19-2004, 02:06 AM

I agree, EW9 are overpriced IMO..

You can get the A900s for the same price..

I'm going to go with the CM7ti once I get back from vacation! They will be my GYM/Work/on the go phone.

Zuerst · #35 (**permalink**) 03-19-2004, 02:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by blux
I agree, EW9 are overpriced IMO..

You can get the A900s for the same price..

I'm going to go with the CM7ti once I get back from vacation! They will be my GYM/Work/on the go phone.

The CM7ti aren't that greatly priced at $150+... Might as well go for the EM9r/d...

blux · #36 (**permalink**) 03-19-2004, 02:52 AM

$150 is not that bad IMO. Once you break $200 for some clipons is bad..

I could spend a lot more on fullsize phones, but after I spent a good $160 on my E3 I can spend $159 on the best earbuds money can buy.

DJGeorgeT · #37 (**permalink**) 03-19-2004, 02:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by blux
$150 is not that bad IMO. Once you break $200 for some clipons is bad..

I could spend a lot more on fullsize phones, but after I spent a good $160 on my E3 I can spend $159 on the best earbuds money can buy.

damn $160 on earbuds, what does it have that the MX500 does not give and is it worth the extra loot? I can see why ety er4's are 200+. Those earbuds at $160 better be the best of them all.

Takashi · #38 (**permalink**) 03-19-2004, 04:48 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by visia
Takashi,
WHich would you say is more balanced with or woithout amp:
EM9r or EW9? Also, which has better bass and less sharp highs?

With amp, I think EM9r sounded flatter than EW9, but EW9 sounds more "balanced" to me. But my ears don't function as spectrum analyser so "balance" is actually a personal/musical preference.
Bass is almost the same on both, highs are less sharper on EW9. (Again, that's a matter of balance. EW9 has more mids.)

Quote:

Originally posted by blux
Could you take some "real life" pictuers of the EW9?

I posted some lousy pics before but seems like links are broken, so I post them again.

Lastly, I think it's pointless to discuss if somethings are overpriced or underpriced unless you share your opinion of how you put value on things.

visia · #39 (**permalink**) 03-19-2004, 05:04 AM

Great, thanks a lot for the reply.

Wmcmanus · #40 (**permalink**) 03-19-2004, 05:44 AM

blux said, “The EW9 is overpriced...just my opinion."

Your opinion is based on what? Since you've asked to see "real life" pictures, one can only assume that you have not heard the EW9, unless you had your eyes closed at the time.

DJGeorgeT said, “I agree, EW9 are overpriced IMO.."

Again, until you've heard the EW9 (or any other audio product) how can you determine that it is overpriced?

I'm really not trying to be argumentative or disrespectful here. It is simply my view that unless you have had direct experience with a particular audio product (be it a pair of headphones, an amp, a CD player, cable, or some esoteric tweek) you really shouldn't offer any value judgments about it.

Takashi said, ”Lastly, I think it's pointless to discuss if somethings are overpriced or underpriced unless you share your opinion of how you put value on things.”

Now this I agree with!

blux · #41 (**permalink**) 03-20-2004, 01:08 AM

I said they are overpriced because they are clip-on earphones, that cost $200. The same price as the ATH A900 full size can. How can you put that same price tag on the clip-ons when its not possible that they sound the same, because of driver size, enclosure...

$150 direct from Audiotechnica isnt bad, but its a shady site, and they dont have anything "in stock."

Audiocubes wants $199 for them, and that is too much for me to spend considering I just bought the A900's for $199..

dokebi · #42 (**permalink**) 03-20-2004, 01:35 AM

Then don't buy them.

On the other hand, I would buy those beautiful woodies in a second if I had the cash to spare.

greenhorn · #43 (**permalink**) 07-17-2004, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blux

I said they are overpriced because they are clip-on earphones, that cost $200. The same price as the ATH A900 full size can. How can you put that same price tag on the clip-ons when its not possible that they sound the same, because of driver size, enclosure...

Wrong logic. How much should then cost a:

a) earbud;
b) clip-on;
c) canalphone;
d) full-sized headphone

in order not to be considered, according to this a priori logic, as overpriced?

Most canalphones discussed here sound better than full-sized cans priced at the same level. Size doesn't necessary matter in this area.