Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Sennheiser CX 300 IEM (a personal review)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sennheiser CX 300 IEM (a personal review) - Page 4

post #46 of 551
2/11/06 at 5:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Visigodo
Good question: the Senn CX300, the Creative EP630, and the Sharp MD33 look almost identical, but I don't believe they use the same drivers. I remember reading somewhere in these boards a few weeks ago that the Sharp MD33 sounded quite different from the CX300, like brighter highs and less bass.

My theory is that all these earphones are all manufactured in Chinese factories with the same parts and components, built "on demand" or "a la carte" for various brands. It's the same process with camcorders, if you check various models out there. Now the actual drivers residing in each one of the IEMS of brands may be specific for each brand. I can see Sennheiser wanting to have their signature sound in their own IEM as compared to the others.

Again, I haven't had a chance to check the Sharp or Creative models, but for what I read before, no, they don't sound the same. (If someone knows more about this, please share your experience).

Hope it helps.
Your theory seems correct. I have read today in a german magazine called AUDIO that the Sennheiser cx300 sound much better than the creative model. The creative ones, they say, sound too bright and with a weak bass, that is, the same you say about the Sharp ones.
I just thought you would like to know this.
Best regards,

Alberto
Reply
post #47 of 551
2/11/06 at 5:42pm
Had the cx300 for a couple of days now and I personally dont like them. I found them to have bloated and boomy bass much like the ex71 which i also own. They also seemed realy muffled (veiled) and i actually had to use treble booster on the ipod eq to hear the vocals. Im no expert but i have been following this forum for a while and own the e2c/er4p/sr60/ms1/hd-25-1/ex71/d66. But i really couldnt deal with how boomy they were! Luckily i got them via work and didnt pay full price!
Reply
post #48 of 551
2/11/06 at 6:24pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amateur
Had the cx300 for a couple of days now and I personally dont like them. I found them to have bloated and boomy bass much like the ex71 which i also own. They also seemed realy muffled (veiled) and i actually had to use treble booster on the ipod eq to hear the vocals. Im no expert but i have been following this forum for a while and own the e2c/er4p/sr60/ms1/hd-25-1/ex71/d66. But i really couldnt deal with how boomy they were! Luckily i got them via work and didnt pay full price!
While everyone's taste is certainly different, I have to disagree with you.

I found the CX300 way better than the EX71, more balanced, and not at all "boomy." It could be the compression level of your audio files, because the iPod produces low bass and already does screeching highs. I find it strange you would have to use treble booster... on an iPod of all devices! I did tested the CX300 heavily on my iPod... with the EQ bass booster ON, and never once did the bass become boomy. Furthermore (as I explained in my review), where the EX71 mixed and muddled the bass frequencies, the CX-300 cleanly defined all bass sources.

Sorry, but it just doesn't make any sense.
Reply
post #49 of 551
2/11/06 at 8:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Visigodo
Ahem... As I posted above, the driver specs for the Senn CX-300 and the Senn IE4 are considerable different. So, no, I don't believe we can assume the drivers in the CX-300 and IE4 are the same. Rather the opposite.

The CX-300 has a broader range both on the low and high ends of the frequency spectrum. The IE4 is more limited. It is also cheaper than the CX-300.

And if Sennheiser has confirmed that the driver in the IE4 is the same as the Sharp HPMD33S, then the Sharp model is not the same as the CX-300 either.
Sorry if it was not automatically clear, but I should of emphasized that I said IF they are the same. I did not assume they were, nor do I have any belief that they are. There's just still the possibility, regardless of the specifications that any company puts out.

As it was said by Max Minimum, there is the possibility that the specifications are fudged, which could possibly mean that they are the same. But, because of the numerous reports of them being differently sounding, this would further agree with them being different. I was purely answering another person's question on why it is possible for the IE4 to be the same as the CX300, IF the CX300 ended up being the same as the HP-MD33S.
Reply
post #50 of 551
2/11/06 at 8:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Visigodo
While everyone's taste is certainly different, I have to disagree with you.

I found the CX300 way better than the EX71, more balanced, and not at all "boomy." It could be the compression level of your audio files, because the iPod produces low bass and already does screeching highs. I find it strange you would have to use treble booster... on an iPod of all devices! I did tested the CX300 heavily on my iPod... with the EQ bass booster ON, and never once did the bass become boomy. Furthermore (as I explained in my review), where the EX71 mixed and muddled the bass frequencies, the CX-300 cleanly defined all bass sources.

Sorry, but it just doesn't make any sense.
Perhaps his view on the canalphones is skewed by the fact that he owns many high-end IEMs as well. What sounds good to someone upgrading could sound horrible to someone who is downgrading. At least, I hope so.
Reply
post #51 of 551
2/11/06 at 10:45pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterDLai
Perhaps his view on the canalphones is skewed by the fact that he owns many high-end IEMs as well. What sounds good to someone upgrading could sound horrible to someone who is downgrading. At least, I hope so.
That's a good point. I know musicians that, depending on the type of instruments they play, they tend to find earphones either too boomy or too sibilant. In the end, I guess personal preference and usage plays a great deal on how we perceive audio gear.
Reply
post #52 of 551
2/12/06 at 1:11am
I wonder if the CX300 will come out in white. That would be great for a lot of the iPod owners.
Reply
post #53 of 551
2/12/06 at 1:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoMoreNIU
I wonder if the CX300 will come out in white. That would be great for a lot of the iPod owners.
lets hope not otherwise they might charge an extra 10 dollars for the black version (!!!datavision!!!)
Reply
post #54 of 551
2/12/06 at 1:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by xlEnt
lets hope not otherwise they might charge an extra 10 dollars for the black version (!!!datavision!!!)
haha that is so true. black is what I ordered and black is what I wanted
Reply
post #55 of 551
2/12/06 at 2:44am
I ordered mine at 8th street and 4 hours later the price rose from $39.99 to $42.99. LOL!
Reply
post #56 of 551
2/12/06 at 4:03am
Quote:
Originally Posted by xlEnt
lets hope not otherwise they might charge an extra 10 dollars for the black version (!!!datavision!!!)
The black one is fine, but I think they're missing a market going with silver instead of white. I know if they offered the white one I would've bought it days ago even at $10 more.
Reply
post #57 of 551
2/12/06 at 6:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Visigodo
While everyone's taste is certainly different, I have to disagree with you.

I found the CX300 way better than the EX71, more balanced, and not at all "boomy." It could be the compression level of your audio files, because the iPod produces low bass and already does screeching highs. I find it strange you would have to use treble booster... on an iPod of all devices! I did tested the CX300 heavily on my iPod... with the EQ bass booster ON, and never once did the bass become boomy. Furthermore (as I explained in my review), where the EX71 mixed and muddled the bass frequencies, the CX-300 cleanly defined all bass sources.

Sorry, but it just doesn't make any sense.
Indeed it actually really surprised me that i had to use the treble booster on an ipod of all things haha!
Reply
post #58 of 551
2/12/06 at 8:44am

impressions

I expected an impression such as Amateur's.

For its price, I can't see how the cx300 can sound any better than the px100 or px200. That is, from a marketing point of view. Sennheiser still has its upscale product ranges to protect. I can only wait and wonder if higher models in IEMs are in Sennheiser's future.

As soon as the cx are available in my country, I shall give them a go. Oh, Philips has an IEM within the same price range. Anyone heard this?
Reply
post #59 of 551
2/12/06 at 1:12pm
I'm hoping the cx300 will be a bit better than the panasonic I have.
Reply
post #60 of 551
2/12/06 at 4:54pm
Can anyone compare these to the Shure E2c's?
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Sennheiser CX 300 IEM (a personal review)