Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Victor HP-FX500 Review: World's first Wood Canalphones
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Victor HP-FX500 Review: World's first Wood Canalphones - Page 12

post #166 of 1086
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLACvest View Post
HAHAHA!! I am a recovering Speaker Whore, meaning I used to put my face in the loudspeakers which banged out like 120 dB at rock and techno concerts and my hearing is fine. Once i even sat in a carpeted bass cabinet for like an hour and a half. Thats how I got addicted to bass. Thats why I absolutely adore these phones... they sub-woof. That's also why I'm interested in those SONY FX700 cuz they go down to 4 Hz if I read their specs right.
If u're into bass heavy music, you should take a look at denon c751. They have very control and precise bass, in large quantity too. But u say you like loose bass, then maybe u might not like it.. but u shud go have a listen nonetheless. Those specs don't really mean anything anyway.. EX500 claims to go as low as 5Hz, but FX500 has more bass at 8Hz
post #167 of 1086
And don't portable players only go to 20hz anyway?
post #168 of 1086
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwang411 View Post
If u're into bass heavy music, you should take a look at denon c751. They have very control and precise bass, in large quantity too. But u say you like loose bass, then maybe u might not like it.. but u shud go have a listen nonetheless. Those specs don't really mean anything anyway.. EX500 claims to go as low as 5Hz, but FX500 has more bass at 8Hz
I have the C700, which is the same thing as the C751. I can confirm that the FX500's go much lower, and it's a cleaner bass as well. Completely different league between the two. They also go lower, while being more controlled, than the IE8's. There's absolutely NO muddying of the other frequency bands to my ears whatsoever. I've seen a couple comments about them having loose or flabby bass recently, but I just don't hear it at all. It's some of the best bass I've yet heard from any earphone.
post #169 of 1086
Quote:
Originally Posted by cn11 View Post
I have the C700, which is the same thing as the C751. I can confirm that the FX500's go much lower, and it's a cleaner bass as well. Completely different league between the two. They also go lower, while being more controlled, than the IE8's. There's absolutely NO muddying of the other frequency bands to my ears whatsoever. I've seen a couple comments about them having loose or flabby bass recently, but I just don't hear it at all. It's some of the best bass I've yet heard from any earphone.
@cn11: thanks for that. Glad my Ear isn't betraying me. Very clean bass to me. You're right it doesn't muddy up the other tones.

As for Portables and sources: I also listen from my 'puter's AUZEN X-Meridian 7.1 Soundcard with all 4 channels upgraded to the rather pricey OPA627AU opamps... I'm looking forward to when AUZEN will release the packaged Analog Devices opamps for these boards so I can switch. I usually then run with or without the iBasso T4 and sometimes even daisy chain with the FiiO E5 for added punch. Yeah well... I like to switch up tonal rendition...

I can't wait till next month as I will either be able to acquire either an iriver iHP 120 or an iBasso D10 Cobra amp/DAC to play with. YUM! Let the good times roll!
post #170 of 1086
Thread Starter 
I have not heard the flabby bass you are talking about. it could be that the slow bass is actually the low resolution bass as these phones go down very low. other phones do not. i compare them quite favourably against the atrio m5, but i think the atrio goes even lower.

if you have not heard lower bass, you will be used to fast bass as the frequency range of fast bass does not allow for 'slow' vibrations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kwang411 View Post
I do agree these phones are pretty smooth, but i think the slowness of the bass takes away the impact and excitement from the music, especially for rock and dance music. However, i find fx500 are pretty good for orchestral music. I like how u compare them to the Taeko drums, i think thats a pretty good comparison .

I've not heard the EX700, but from what i've read, it has very harsh highs will *finally* disappear with about 1000 hrs of burn in....
EX500 is in ear monitor, so treble, mid, bass are all fairly balanced. The mids are about the same level as FX500, but highs are brighter, and bass tighter. It's a bit colder than FX500, but I think they have better clarity. Detail-wise FX500 is better. I acutally immediately liked the EX500 when i auditioned them, maybe because i really enjoy clear, transparent sound signature.. and thats why i love my ck100 so much!
post #171 of 1086
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClieOS View Post
Thanks for the review. It is strange to see that not much attention is spent on this little baby: c'mon people, it is a WOODY!
They look like Grados for rats.
post #172 of 1086
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zalithian View Post
And don't portable players only go to 20hz anyway?
Seriously, what's worth hearing beyond 15hz? Anything? Mosquitoes getting randy?
post #173 of 1086
Quote:
Originally Posted by shigzeo View Post
I have not heard the flabby bass you are talking about. it could be that the slow bass is actually the low resolution bass as these phones go down very low. other phones do not. i compare them quite favourably against the atrio m5, but i think the atrio goes even lower.

if you have not heard lower bass, you will be used to fast bass as the frequency range of fast bass does not allow for 'slow' vibrations.
yea, i think u're right. I'm not too used to rly low bass, and now that i listen carefully to it, i can hear the reverb at the very low end. Maybe its the reverb creating the illusion of it having slow bass... my bad :P
post #174 of 1086
Thread Starter 
not your bad at all. it is just that many dynamics don't actually reverb down low which is the fault of both headphone design and of driving hardware. i am demoing a few iems now and they don't reverb nearly like the fx500. the atrio goes lower, but it actually does have either a slower response than the fx500 as it seems to recover more slowly in trance or a bad echo.

the fx500 was the first dynamic i was impressed with for echo quality. it simply does not have the problem. i wish it was a little smoother in the treble, but overall, quite a killer iem.
post #175 of 1086
Quote:
Originally Posted by shigzeo View Post
not your bad at all. it is just that many dynamics don't actually reverb down low which is the fault of both headphone design and of driving hardware. i am demoing a few iems now and they don't reverb nearly like the fx500. the atrio goes lower, but it actually does have either a slower response than the fx500 as it seems to recover more slowly in trance or a bad echo.

the fx500 was the first dynamic i was impressed with for echo quality. it simply does not have the problem. i wish it was a little smoother in the treble, but overall, quite a killer iem.
shigzeo: thanks for this bit of clarification and insight. I feel like I understand what's going on with the functionality of these headphones much more intricately now. This degree of insight is something I love about Head-Fi.org...
post #176 of 1086
Thread Starter 
wow: i read my post again and consider it one of the 'greatest hits' with shigzeo. i mean that, it is almost unintelligible. anyway, glad you found something good from it!
post #177 of 1086
Quote:
Originally Posted by shigzeo View Post
wow: i read my post again and consider it one of the 'greatest hits' with shigzeo. i mean that, it is almost unintelligible. anyway, glad you found something good from it!
I should have mentioned I kinda lumped the last two messages from you together into one, mentally. LOL. together, they really told me a lot about your impression of the headphone // IEM. and I hardly find your wonderful snippets unintelligable!! Glimpsey, to be sure, but unintelligable, NO. Insightfully focused, sure. Particular, definitely. But its no biggie, I can scatterbrain a tad too! LOL *grin*
post #178 of 1086
Just in case any of you are interested, I just bought the FX500 in Akibahara today and most places are selling them around JPY13500 which is about USD$139 or at even higher prices than that, so the price from Seyo Shop is pretty good actually. However, I walked around and managed to find them for JPY9980 or about USD$104.

I like them so far and I'll be doing a shoot out between them, the new Audio Technica CKS70 and Turbines when I've returned home.
post #179 of 1086

MORE beauty Shots...

I have put some of the Large Phonak Audeo Silicone Sleeves on the Victor HP-FX500's due to their excellent shimmy shimmy shake properties and have taken some fun fotos with my Android G-1 phone...

Here's the gallery:









I hope you all can overlook the poor lighting at 05:29am PST! I did my best to correct the colors programatically... The last one was pretty unpretty tho..... compositonally its still interesting!

Anyway, I hope you all enjoy the amusement!
post #180 of 1086
MY EYES.... IT'S HUGE..... Kindly resize, it hurt for certain forumers, especially those on mobile browser and netbook.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Victor HP-FX500 Review: World's first Wood Canalphones