[Pictorial Review] Head-Direct's RE2
Jun 3, 2008 at 9:13 PM Post #32 of 103
I had a friend of mines take it home to compare with his collection of headphones out and he came to the same conclusion. He loaned me his e3c's and they have the fullness that is missing from the RE2s. I do have to say that the e3c's seal a lot easier for my ears then the RE2s, but I'm sure I have a proper seal when doing a comparison.

Ive noticed in other reviews that many preferred the RE2s over the e3c, I know it's all subjective, but I find that the e3c is noticeably better (much better then the ep630s)

Could I possibly have a defective pair?
 
Jun 4, 2008 at 1:07 AM Post #33 of 103
Could be the fact that you have a different musical taste.

I don't like my E3c too - dull sounding as both the bass and the treble roll off too early.
 
Jun 4, 2008 at 2:10 AM Post #35 of 103
Quote:

Originally Posted by 00seven /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I just got my pair of re2's and I have to say I'm disappointed after the great reviews on this forum. While I wouldn't classify myself as an audiophile, the sound coming from my pair just sound really cheap... The best way to describe it is that there is no depth to the music. I think the biggest reason is that there doesn't seem to be any bass whatsoever? (And I'm not a huge bass person)

I tried them off my laptop as well as a creative zen v plus and the sound is about the same on both. No bass, and the highs are really harsh. I'll try to get my friend who is more of an audiophile then I am to take a look at them and see what he thinks, but so far, the ep-630s sound way better then this one.

I'm thinking either I got a bad pair or maybe my hearing sucks... but I'll report back in after fiddling with them a bit more.


Yeah, I'm getting the same thing as you. But I'm wondering if you allowed the 'phones to burn in? The two reviews I read said that they allowed 50 hours of burn in time before they did the review. I'm still in "burn in" mode, so I'll wait awhile before passing judgement. But so far, I'm not impressed either. And I'm coming from a JVC HA-FX66, which has come along rather nicely SQ wise.
 
Jun 4, 2008 at 4:05 AM Post #36 of 103
If you like your IEM to be warm sounding (Shure like), I doubt you'll find RE2 to be your cup of tea. RE2 is a pair of fairly analytical sounding IEM, which is in the line of Etymotic sound.

I just did a short 5 minutes comparison b/w my RE2 and E3c, and I do find E3c to be fuller sounding (mid ~ bass region) but less detail / treble. RE2 has more treble / airier and focus more on mid ~ high rather than mid ~ bass region like the Shure. It depends on how you like your music to sound but I won't say which is definitely better than the other - it is more of a question of taste.
 
Jun 5, 2008 at 9:12 AM Post #37 of 103
Nice review! though I still can't make up my mind
smily_headphones1.gif


I am tossing up between these and X3i's. I'm currently using MX400's for portable and listen mostly to electronica and rock. Your comments about bass has me a little concerned, I'm not a basshead but I like to tap my foot. Would you recommend these over the X3i's?
 
Jun 5, 2008 at 9:34 AM Post #38 of 103
I find the X3is to be thin sounding. My mod IM716 sounded more spacious. The X3is do have a fuller bottom end. Coming from analytical phones, you will perceive the warmer sound for sure. They sound like the Audio Technica CK-32, which, I enjoy for casual listening and club music. I am willing to bet that given enough time, you'll acclimatize to the X3i sound.

From reviews, the RE2 comes close to the IM716 sound. Even if it were a tad short, it's good enough for me given the price. Of course the verdict is still out. I have weeks to wait for my iems.
 
Jun 12, 2008 at 11:55 AM Post #39 of 103
My Re2 arrived. This is such a relief having been using the Apple buds since my IM716 broke. Sound is so much fuller, rich mids, decent but obviously present bass unamped though my iPod Touch. Top end and airiness is a bit shy of the modded Im716. But I don't miss it at all. If sound improves with burn-in that will be a bonus.

This is better sounding than the Crossroads X3i I auditioned unamped. Notches higher than the Audio technica CK-32 iems. I am glad I came across this review when my IM716 broke.
 
Jun 15, 2008 at 7:23 PM Post #41 of 103
Sorry to bump this thread but I'm not sure about a little piece of the review. Are the default biflange tips that come with the RE2 more isolating than the ER6i biflange tips (and thus written more bass) or the other way around? Also just how isolating are the Comply T400 tips with the RE2? Any changes to sound? Worth upgrading it from the default RE2 biflange tips or not? TIA.
 
Jun 15, 2008 at 7:24 PM Post #43 of 103
Quote:

Originally Posted by jinx20001 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
i think the re2 look pretty tacky but thats first impression, sound is number 1


Yeah, I really don't give two *****s about looks, only SQ.
 
Jun 15, 2008 at 9:08 PM Post #44 of 103
Quote:

Originally Posted by chinesekiwi /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Sorry to bump this thread but I'm not sure about a little piece of the review. Are the default biflange tips that come with the RE2 more isolating than the ER6i biflange tips (and thus written more bass) or the other way around? Also just how isolating are the Comply T400 tips with the RE2? Any changes to sound? Worth upgrading it from the default RE2 biflange tips or not? TIA.


Sorry to bump this but I would like an answer for this
smily_headphones1.gif
 
Jun 16, 2008 at 12:11 AM Post #45 of 103
I find the clear silicon biflange to be very good in isolation. I can't even hear my car horn if that offers a clue. I think it offer same or better isolation than my IM716.

Bear in mind that fit has a lot to do with it. So what isolates for one may not do so well for another.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top