Before i fetch my FX700, There was many unknown speculation from within myself, A friend said its close to Westone 3's sound which i really scorned but still respected otherwise.
And i always have a hard-time getting along with a V-Curve Sound Signature and its likes. Which in turn caused me sleepless nights.
But now i am having them in my ears, all those wild-guesses are for naught. Yes these have more prominent Treble and Bass than its Mids, But when properly EQ'ed, Treble is easier to handle than the Spiky and Harsh Highs of the Denon C260 & C710.
[TREBLE] is easily one of the 'meat' of the FX700's sound-signature, The FX700 boasts plentiful sparkle usually towards the Mid~Low Treble.
As a result, Female Vocals especially Jazz Vocals, sounds nothing short of a heavenly experience, Listening to Patricia Barber, Chaka Khan and Ella Fitzgerald etc, it never felt so wonderful out of an In-Ear before.
Albeit some would still prefer the airiness from Triple-Fi 10 Pro, but the sparkle of FX700's Treble has a greater sense of realism as every high note is delicate and yet an appropriate amount of smoothness at the same time.
On the other hand, The Treble of FX700 falling on the hands of a mediocre format (64~192 kbps anyone?) of a generic girl group which can sound sibilant and at times, squeaky on several occasions (Talk about K-POP Groups like KARA & T-Ara)
The treble depending on the mileage of driver burn-in, can be quite a bit of a feverish disaster on those lowly bit-rated songs, dynamics can easily get mashed up by its unintended feverish treble and make it a less ideal listening experience. So, avoid bad bit-rate format songs of Girl Groups and Squeaking High-Pitch voice at all costs when using the FX700.
All in all, The treble of FX700 is generally top-notch, crushing and intimidating several competitors even from the B.A Realms such as SM3, Westone 3 & UM3X.
And i could imagine fervent fans of CK10 / CK100's treble seeking a good dynamic IEM without a horrific step-out of their comfort zone of preferred sound, will find an unequaled solace and joy in this lovely pair of FX700.
[MID] is impossibly clean and refined, and depending on tips-selection. source-synergy and possible equalizer tweaks going right / wrong, It is possible to be very recessed.
But fortunately, most of the time I don't find that to be the case for my experience with the FX700's mids. Rather i find vocals to be extremely detailed out of it, Such as the breathings, the nasal noise, the extremely subtle vibrato were easily presented naturally by the FX700.
In fact out of the Dynamic-Driver Realm, I felt that the Mids of FX700 were one of the most true-to-life without any serious coloration other than a really measly amount of warmth to it.
And right tips with suiting source and equalizer tweaks if applicable, can still add an intimate touch to the MIDs of FX700 albeit not as warm and intimate as those of Monster Miles Davis Tributes.
[BASS] can initially sounds over-whelming on stock-tips prior to burn-in, but as the burn-in goes on, Tips changed to Sony-Hybrids, the whole matter is always much more complicated than that.
Based on my experience with the FX700 so far, The bass of FX700 sounds neither boomy and over-powering mid-bass thump or intimidating sub-bass --- The FX700 is none of those.
Instead, The Bass of FX700 prides itself on impossible accuracy and the tactile texture.
As with most Dynamic Drivers, You can definitely feel the signature air-moving sensation out of FX700's bass.
As for the amount of the Bass from FX700, its truly hard to put a definite term and quantity to it --- Because the FX700 works their best to portray and reproduce the exact amount of bass which the recordings intended to.
And the meat of the FX700's bass is how articulate and quick is their ability and dexterity in detail-retrieval within the entirety of low-frequencies, all the subtle nuances and ghost beats, and yet i have never truly heard them on the Monster Miles Davis Tributes, Westone UM3X nor the Earsonics SM3
As a result, FX700 can sound over-detail to some, usually either within the Treble or the Bass regions, but hands down the FX700 is a epitome of a Dynamic Driver Testament that, the Balance Armature in clusters need not necessary be superior than a Single Dynamic Driver.
For an instance, i felt that the FX700 is within the same league as the 6-Driver UM Miracle (Demo Set which i have auditioned) when it comes to frequency coverage and its entirety.
[SOUNDSTAGE] is another trump card up to FX-700's sleeves, The size of the soundstage is not as wide as the Sennheiser IE8, but what it trumps above all, Is the uncanny ability of the FX700 to deliver supreme and natural spatial cue and seperation with its effortless dynamic capability.
Headstage and its quality is easily surpassing than that of the Sennheiser IE8 too. Despite that its not as wide as the Ortofon e-Q7 / RE-262 or depth of the SM3, the unmatched natural headstage and presentation of the FX-700 are hard and nearly impossible to beat in the realm of IEM.
Conclusively, I would strongly recommend this to people who doesn't mind sub-par isolation and are seeking uncompromised sound-quality, frequency coverage, detailing and accuracy.
If you are reading this, considering this and have yet to give this a chance, Hop on to James' Comparative Review on the FX700, I felt that what James said and the review from ljokerl pretty much nailed the thing.
And lastly, If any biggest reason why this wood babe deserves your chance, will be its timbre, Instruments sounds big, grand and alive. When coupled with its spacious soundstage and headstage backed by its superb excellent spatial cued done accurately --- Grand Instrumental / Acoustic Compositions are a pure nirvana to enjoy listening to!
And i always have a hard-time getting along with a V-Curve Sound Signature and its likes. Which in turn caused me sleepless nights.
But now i am having them in my ears, all those wild-guesses are for naught. Yes these have more prominent Treble and Bass than its Mids, But when properly EQ'ed, Treble is easier to handle than the Spiky and Harsh Highs of the Denon C260 & C710.
[TREBLE] is easily one of the 'meat' of the FX700's sound-signature, The FX700 boasts plentiful sparkle usually towards the Mid~Low Treble.
As a result, Female Vocals especially Jazz Vocals, sounds nothing short of a heavenly experience, Listening to Patricia Barber, Chaka Khan and Ella Fitzgerald etc, it never felt so wonderful out of an In-Ear before.
Albeit some would still prefer the airiness from Triple-Fi 10 Pro, but the sparkle of FX700's Treble has a greater sense of realism as every high note is delicate and yet an appropriate amount of smoothness at the same time.
On the other hand, The Treble of FX700 falling on the hands of a mediocre format (64~192 kbps anyone?) of a generic girl group which can sound sibilant and at times, squeaky on several occasions (Talk about K-POP Groups like KARA & T-Ara)
The treble depending on the mileage of driver burn-in, can be quite a bit of a feverish disaster on those lowly bit-rated songs, dynamics can easily get mashed up by its unintended feverish treble and make it a less ideal listening experience. So, avoid bad bit-rate format songs of Girl Groups and Squeaking High-Pitch voice at all costs when using the FX700.
All in all, The treble of FX700 is generally top-notch, crushing and intimidating several competitors even from the B.A Realms such as SM3, Westone 3 & UM3X.
And i could imagine fervent fans of CK10 / CK100's treble seeking a good dynamic IEM without a horrific step-out of their comfort zone of preferred sound, will find an unequaled solace and joy in this lovely pair of FX700.
[MID] is impossibly clean and refined, and depending on tips-selection. source-synergy and possible equalizer tweaks going right / wrong, It is possible to be very recessed.
But fortunately, most of the time I don't find that to be the case for my experience with the FX700's mids. Rather i find vocals to be extremely detailed out of it, Such as the breathings, the nasal noise, the extremely subtle vibrato were easily presented naturally by the FX700.
In fact out of the Dynamic-Driver Realm, I felt that the Mids of FX700 were one of the most true-to-life without any serious coloration other than a really measly amount of warmth to it.
And right tips with suiting source and equalizer tweaks if applicable, can still add an intimate touch to the MIDs of FX700 albeit not as warm and intimate as those of Monster Miles Davis Tributes.
[BASS] can initially sounds over-whelming on stock-tips prior to burn-in, but as the burn-in goes on, Tips changed to Sony-Hybrids, the whole matter is always much more complicated than that.
Based on my experience with the FX700 so far, The bass of FX700 sounds neither boomy and over-powering mid-bass thump or intimidating sub-bass --- The FX700 is none of those.
Instead, The Bass of FX700 prides itself on impossible accuracy and the tactile texture.
As with most Dynamic Drivers, You can definitely feel the signature air-moving sensation out of FX700's bass.
As for the amount of the Bass from FX700, its truly hard to put a definite term and quantity to it --- Because the FX700 works their best to portray and reproduce the exact amount of bass which the recordings intended to.
And the meat of the FX700's bass is how articulate and quick is their ability and dexterity in detail-retrieval within the entirety of low-frequencies, all the subtle nuances and ghost beats, and yet i have never truly heard them on the Monster Miles Davis Tributes, Westone UM3X nor the Earsonics SM3
As a result, FX700 can sound over-detail to some, usually either within the Treble or the Bass regions, but hands down the FX700 is a epitome of a Dynamic Driver Testament that, the Balance Armature in clusters need not necessary be superior than a Single Dynamic Driver.
For an instance, i felt that the FX700 is within the same league as the 6-Driver UM Miracle (Demo Set which i have auditioned) when it comes to frequency coverage and its entirety.
[SOUNDSTAGE] is another trump card up to FX-700's sleeves, The size of the soundstage is not as wide as the Sennheiser IE8, but what it trumps above all, Is the uncanny ability of the FX700 to deliver supreme and natural spatial cue and seperation with its effortless dynamic capability.
Headstage and its quality is easily surpassing than that of the Sennheiser IE8 too. Despite that its not as wide as the Ortofon e-Q7 / RE-262 or depth of the SM3, the unmatched natural headstage and presentation of the FX-700 are hard and nearly impossible to beat in the realm of IEM.
Conclusively, I would strongly recommend this to people who doesn't mind sub-par isolation and are seeking uncompromised sound-quality, frequency coverage, detailing and accuracy.
If you are reading this, considering this and have yet to give this a chance, Hop on to James' Comparative Review on the FX700, I felt that what James said and the review from ljokerl pretty much nailed the thing.
And lastly, If any biggest reason why this wood babe deserves your chance, will be its timbre, Instruments sounds big, grand and alive. When coupled with its spacious soundstage and headstage backed by its superb excellent spatial cued done accurately --- Grand Instrumental / Acoustic Compositions are a pure nirvana to enjoy listening to!
(1) In direct comparison to Sennheiser IE8, which one is better WRT speed, dynamics?
(2) How does one improve the isolation of these IEMs (beyond the sub-par supplied tips)?
Thx!