Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Ultimate Ears triple.fi 10 pro versus Sleek SA6 - my comparison
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ultimate Ears triple.fi 10 pro versus Sleek SA6 - my comparison - Page 2

post #16 of 32
interesting stuff....I love my triples BUT I also have the UE 11pro and 10pro so I guess I like UE stuff...
post #17 of 32
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterDLai View Post
I'm actually surprised that it's a pretty unsubstantial 5% of your music that bothers you. I would've expected a higher number to make it a decision to switch over, but alas it appears that that 5% really sounds wrong to you, so it seems logical.
I have questioned that same thing, but I'm one of those people who will notice a flaw over a strength. I may listen to 12 songs in a row that sound fanstastic, but when track 13 in a playlist comes up and the treble is piercing to the point of distraction, that's what stands out in my mind above those twelve flawless songs I just heard. On top of that, I place a premium on getting to avoid micromanagement. I want the gear to match my listening habits - mostly lots of smartlist generated music mixes or random albums - rather than needing to change my listening habits to match the gear.

Besides, for this latest twist in my audio journey, I never set out to get the absolute best IEM money can buy, I just wanted to do noticeably better than my super.fi 5 pros, and both of these succeed at that; the SA6 just fits my needs a bit better.
post #18 of 32
interesting, i'd just EQ those songs to an easy B+ and keep my A+'s

...if everything else was the same (fit, isolation, etc)
post #19 of 32
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoomzDayz View Post
interesting, i'd just EQ those songs to an easy B+ and keep my A+'s

...if everything else was the same (fit, isolation, etc)
Ignoring that fit, isolation, and cost were all in favor of the SA6, that might seem reasonable, but I have over 32,000 music tracks. If you assume my ballpark of 5% of tracks that would need equalisation, that's over 1600 tracks that's I'd have to identify, experiment with, and then embed EQ presets for. Then consider that I use iPods as my source. and I'm not changing that, so custom equalisation is problematic at best. Then consider that I still use earbuds, full size headphones, and play music through my car and full size stereo, and what you've got is a logistical nightmare.

Like I said, I put a premium on avoiding micromanagement, and if only getting most of my music played at A caliber versus A+ caliber saves me that micromanagement, that's an easy choice. While I can audition the gear side by side and find the differences, those differences are subtle, and without having the TF10s to keep plugging in and going back over the same passage and going back, I will never miss the difference.
post #20 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by channum View Post
Ignoring that fit, isolation, and cost were all in favor of the SA6, that might seem reasonable, but I have over 32,000 music tracks. If you assume my ballpark of 5% of tracks that would need equalisation, that's over 1600 tracks that's I'd have to identify, experiment with, and then embed EQ presets for. Then consider that I use iPods as my source. and I'm not changing that, so custom equalisation is problematic at best. Then consider that I still use earbuds, full size headphones, and play music through my car and full size stereo, and what you've got is a logistical nightmare.

Like I said, I put a premium on avoiding micromanagement, and if only getting most of my music played at A caliber versus A+ caliber saves me that micromanagement, that's an easy choice. While I can audition the gear side by side and find the differences, those differences are subtle, and without having the TF10s to keep plugging in and going back over the same passage and going back, I will never miss the difference.
Sometimes the differences in taste and preferences is amazing. I say this because after receiving the HD650 and listening for the first time to Michel Camilo's trio, i found myself listening to his albums and reripping most of my jazz collection because it was simply breathtaking. Right now I just dont find myself listening to jazz with the HD555. It is just not as entertaining. This makes me think that it is likely that I will eventually end up with several high end cans, one for each genre or group of genres they excel at.
post #21 of 32
sounds more like a problem with individual recordings when something does 95% of something perfect and then slips up in random genres, seems like a post-production error more than an equipment error.

you just needed something with more rolled off highs.
post #22 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by channum View Post
Ignoring that fit, isolation, and cost were all in favor of the SA6, that might seem reasonable, but I have over 32,000 music tracks. If you assume my ballpark of 5% of tracks that would need equalisation, that's over 1600 tracks that's I'd have to identify, experiment with, and then embed EQ presets for. Then consider that I use iPods as my source. and I'm not changing that, so custom equalisation is problematic at best. Then consider that I still use earbuds, full size headphones, and play music through my car and full size stereo, and what you've got is a logistical nightmare.

Like I said, I put a premium on avoiding micromanagement, and if only getting most of my music played at A caliber versus A+ caliber saves me that micromanagement, that's an easy choice. While I can audition the gear side by side and find the differences, those differences are subtle, and without having the TF10s to keep plugging in and going back over the same passage and going back, I will never miss the difference.
i have more music and am surprised that you say only 5% sounds less than great. I guess a lot of my music can come from more "underground" sources but they aren't mastered the best. but all my sources have some sort of customizable on the go EQ and i EQ slightly to taste because I think some people can't master correctly. As for the different sound signatures of headphones, thats the reason i aim for neutrality, but that is for home setups. for portable setups, isolation, portability, etc all play a much larger role because as different types of noise are added in, different kinds of compensation are needed.
post #23 of 32
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoomzDayz View Post
i have more music and am surprised that you say only 5% sounds less than great. I guess a lot of my music can come from more "underground" sources but they aren't mastered the best.
You're either confusing my issue, or I'm not being clear. What you mention is a completely different matter. These are tracks that sound noticeably different than their source, at least as reproduced on everything else I ever heard them on. I've got plenty of stuff that's hardly pristine recordings, but that has nothing to do with whether a set of drivers reproduces them accurately. An old John Lee Hooker recording with background hiss isn't going to sound like it was recorded last week at Sony, but it should still be reproduced closely to the source by good drivers. When Jerry Garcia's sweet finger picking occasionally verges on sending the same sort of shiver up your spine as nails on a chalk board, there's a problem with the reproduction: it's over emphasizing those high ranges and creating an undesireable artifact that isn't part of the original source.

It's not like any of this should be surprising, just look at the frequency response graph for the TF10 on UE's website, it's a series of three sharp peaks and valleys with roughly a 7 dB range. That is going to be audible in the right circumstance; if you hit the right combination of frequencies, you're going to get a perfect storm of simultaneous over and under emphasis in the high range and hear what I did, whether that bothers you as much as it did me is a whole other matter.

The low range complaints, on the other hand, I'm sure are 100% working as intended, I just didn't care for it.
post #24 of 32
pristine recordings and how they master it in the end aren't exactly the same. the system is a chain, the drivers reproduce what is given to them from the source. people used different equipment to master things, especially back then. the recording overemphasized those high ranges because the difference of the equipment that was used to master it and the system that is playing it. there will always be differences, and i consider what is used today as more neutral and its pragmatic anyway and old recordings are thus badly mastered for today. what you believe the "source" sounds like, everything else you've heard them on, is probably closer to what they used to master. i was using the low ranges as another practical explanation for adjustments.

as for the frequency response, take a look at any of the other headphones that people consider flat: k701, dt880, ety, etc. for one, up to a certain frequency (dependent on driver size), the graphs become somewhat inaccurate/misleading. and if you don't have what you're comparing it to or can compare it to right on the same graph on the same exact equipment, all bets are off. if you really believe tfp10's treble is that peak and valley oriented, i'm surprised you even bought them.
post #25 of 32
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoomzDayz View Post
as for the frequency response, take a look at any of the other headphones that people consider flat: k701, dt880, ety, etc. for one, up to a certain frequency (dependent on driver size), the graphs become somewhat inaccurate/misleading. and if you don't have what you're comparing it to or can compare it to right on the same graph on the same exact equipment, all bets are off. if you really believe tfp10's treble is that peak and valley oriented, i'm surprised you even bought them.
That's kind of the point, I assumed they wouldn't exhibit such a peak and valley audibly, and frankly, I don't really care why they performed the way they did. This is all a bunch of arguing over angels on the head of a pin type stuff. The point is that I can reliably find certain instruments that they come off sounding artificial with in their reproduction, the underlying cause is irrelevant. I'm not the first person to post that their high end can sound artificial, I won't be the last. It doesn't matter if it's the peak and valley response, a source flaw that only they are so wondrous as to be able to reproduce, or flying monkeys, that's what they sound like to my ears.

Besides, it's not as though they're not great earphones. In the absense of UE's bad customer service, I'd have never looked elsewhere and would have been happy with them with or without these "flaws" because I wouldn't have cared enough to buy something else when they sounded so great most of the time. Since I was prompted to look elsewhere for reasons completely independent of sound quality, I found a better fit for my standards is all.
post #26 of 32
This thread has become very interesting to read through and digest. I like thinking, assessing and understanding on that deeper, beneath-the-surface level and I've found this assessment of the triples sound and what may cause its sonic character v stimulating. I think there is definitely some relevance to probing this deep but, ultimately, as far a being a satisfied and happy end-user of a product is concerned, do you really need to keep scouring away at something? Channum's made an informed descision (thats become abundantly apparent), and is happy with the SA6 and on many levels. Thats ultimately, in the end, all you want, is to have made a final descision, settle on something you like, relax, kick back, spend time with em and enjoy em.
post #27 of 32
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodSugar00 View Post
I think there is definitely some relevance to probing this deep but, ultimately, as far a being a satisfied and happy end-user of a product is concerned, do you really need to keep scouring away at something?
Not that you don't have my back, but I don't even know that I give the probing that much credit. The underlying technical explanation is irrelevant to my repeated observation that there is music that the TF10 do not sound so good with to my ears, but the same music with the SA6 sounds fine, because it's really that simple.

As soon as I knew that there was a good chance I might be returning the TF10 for reasons other than their sound quality, I wanted to make sure that I had an acceptable replacement in place. I made a long list of test tracks that either sounded particularly spectacular or particularly off on the TF10. Then I played these tracks with the SA6. I fiddled with the ports and tubes until the spectacular tracks sounded similarly good. I found the off tracks sounded fine unless I intentionally replicated the same sort of overdone treble with the treble++ tubes. Then I went back and forth on those same test tracks using both earphones until I was certain that, yes, the TF10 sounded the way they did and the SA6 sounded the way they did. Then I did a whole bunch of listening to other music with the SA6 and before long I knew what I was going to do, send the TF10 back.

I was surprised the choice was so clear and painless because, in spite of my critique of some aspects of their sound reproduction, I had been extremely impressed with the TF10, so impressed I was expecting the SA6 to be at best acceptable. I certainly never expected them to be so close that I taped up the TF10s to go back without so much as a farewell listen once I had made my choice.

In as far as comparing the sound quality, that's a done and done in my book. Whether I have correctly sussed what aspect of the drivers or crossover or the resonance with the driver pod or what brand of headphones the sound engineer was wearing the day he mastered that track is responsible for this difference doesn't matter.
post #28 of 32
[quote=channum;4445729]Not that you don't have my back, but I don't even know that I give the probing that much credit. The underlying technical explanation is irrelevant to my repeated observation that there is music that the TF10 do not sound so good with to my ears, but the same music with the SA6 sounds fine, because it's really that simple.
quote]

You're right mate. The underlying technical explanation isn't really relevant to your practical findings and differentiation of sound between the two phones. I suppose I just find it interesting to look into and analyse and consider anyway, for what it is. This thread went quite heavily into questioning your descision and findings but ultimately you've explained and detailed just how thoroughly and informedly you reached your conclusions. That make your findings pretty fool-proof (at least realistically in how you will put them to use) in personal application, so just put it to bed and enjoy the superb qualities of the SA6
post #29 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by elnero View Post
Great impressions! I just borrowed a pair of Triple.fi's from a friend yesterday so I haven't had much time with them but many of your impressions mirror my own.

One area where we differ fairly dramatically is in the top end of the triple.fi's, I find the upper mids and treble to sound a bit recessed in compariosn to the SA6's using the + treble tube. I'm curious if this might be due to tips, I'm using a pair of comply tips, what are you using?

Those Comply tips can easily block the treble. The foam needs to be pulled back from the end when inserting in your ear so it doesn't block the tube.

I do that and I agree that the Triple.Fi has what I consider somewhat harsh highs. I just got a pair of SE530s today and so far I like them better than my Triple.Fis for that reason alone.
post #30 of 32
what u mean with "Harsh highs"?
i own super fi 5 pro and the high are like disturbing to me, my ears hurts for the high frequencies, high are really too much.
I'm going for triple fi is that a good idea?
shall i go for the shure 530?
I want more bass and a little less highs, or at least highs that doesnt hurts my ears.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Ultimate Ears triple.fi 10 pro versus Sleek SA6 - my comparison