New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Sweden

The overall sound is rather inoffensive without sibilance. It doesn't do much wrong. I like to EQ down the mid bass and turn up the deep bass though. Not sure I agree it's on the technical or resolution level of some of the more expensive in-ear mentioned but it's not that for behind.   Even though the cable is better than the MH1C it's still sub par. The ergonomics of the housing is seemingly much better for an around the ear fit than straight down but the stiffness...
 I and many with me don't have a sibilance problem. The treble is slightly thin but never harsh or sibilant. From Tyll:"I find these earphones quite good, but a bit unusual. They're a tad bright for me (which means they're probably just right for most), but are not harsh sounding. (I liked them WAY more then the AKG K3003.) They do have an interesting sparkle to them, and initial measurements reveal some unusual artifacts" From Joker's innerfidelity review:"To me, however,...
Having owned a great number of headphones of which I have listened to out of the box with my test tracks and then put on "burn-in" for a day or two and then listened to again I can from my experience say that the effect of burn in exists to some degree but is not at all present with all headphones. Big changes are rare.   Audio Technica CKS77 (a very bass-heavy in-ear) is perhaps the clearest and most dramatic example.   Out of the box the bass was noticeably...
Still the best universal I've heard. ASG-2, CK100Pro, K3003 can't compete overall either technically or how good they can portray a true diverse selection of genres. It's a masterpiece with a slight (only slight) too boosted bass that work perfect when using them outside(where they are meant to be used). My big problem is the microphonic cable. I just don't understand how Sennheiser can make such a huge blunder. I'm one of the lucky few who can wear them around the ear...
 With the cable right? Otherwise it's 100 grams more than the LCD-3 and 160 grams more than the LCD-2 Bamboo.Weak of Audeze not to put the weight of the X on their website under specs.
 If it works for you good, it's a subjective pleasure we are talking about here after all, but 600 dollar feet for a device that don't have moving part is snake oil if the expression snake oil mean anything.I bet dem feet look good though. It's because of stuff like this I will never call myself an audiophile. The term comes with too much baggage. It's like feminist.
1.1  is rather good. I'm not a believer that the damping factor have to be 10 times for a headphone to sound good, but with these armature in-ears with wildly swinging impedance characteristics you will get a screwed up tonal balance, sometimes for the better, most times for the worse, with that high output z. Good to see this company making a little effort this time. How they could release a product made for portable headphone with that big a flaw and that high a price...
What is the output impedance of this thing? The AK100 had way too high output impedance at 23 ohm with low and fluctuating impedance multi driver in-ears.
Both 6.35mm and 3.5mm jacks is a good idea.
I would love to see an open, light weight(under 200 g), ergonomically perfect planar with a super fast transient, visceral textured extended bass, effortless transparent clear mids and a refinement in the treble only found in electrostats with soundstage capabilities and imaging never before seen in a stock headphone to date, perhaps with the aid of advanced tailor made DSP. Yeah that sh@t aint gonna happen.    
New Posts  All Forums: