Impressions of the Ortofon e-Q7 versus the IE8, CK100, SE530, FX500 and X10 (plus CK10... - Page 9

Looking forward to both of your comparisons james444 and soozieq!!!

^ ++ I am also very interested in the comparison between CK10 and e-Q7 from you guys. There is one member on head-fi, jant51, who compared CK10 to RE0 and wrote that they sound very similar. If that's the case, then I would say that the e-Q7 is a definite step up from CK10 in most aspects, becuase it sure trumps my RE0 in almost every way. I tried amping RE0 and tried different tips, but there's just comparison - RE0 always looses every time I compare it to e-Q7. RE0 is more neutral and has more extended treble, but e-Q7 has a much richer, powerful, dynamic sound. RE0 just sounds anemic and lifeless by comparison. And so does almost every other IEM and full-sized headphone I've tried so far actually.

The e-q7 and the CK10 are two quite different sounding IEMs. The e-q7 delivers much more punch in the lows and mids but the CK10s are more natural sounding and offer better separation and soundstage which is why I went with the CK10. With these two phones, I think it comes down to a matter of preference rather than which one is better.

Living in Tokyo, I have the luxury of being able to audition every IEM on the market but for some one taking a flier on one of these, I would suggest going with the CK10 as there is nothing to take serious issue with about these phones such as comfort, fit and presentation which could be issues for some with the e-q7.

Another thing to consider is that lying on your side with the e-q7 is a non-starter which the CK10 comfortably allows. Another factor is price. While both are comparatively priced here with the e-q7 only costing about $30 or $40 dollars more, the price difference seems to be much more considerable elsewhere

I wouldn't base my comparison of the CK10 with the RE0 on one person, since Joker says he sold his RE0 because the CK10 outperformed it. So thate vens that score. Not saying the Ortofons are not a better phone, just saying...

Interesting points. And that steers me away from the e-Q7, not that I would lay out $329 for them anyway. Rather spend it on an amp.

Interesting points. Could you please expand a bit more on why you think CK10 is more natural sounding and has better soundstage than e-Q7? Specifically, do you mean that CK10 is more natural becuase it has a flatter frequency response or becuase it has a more accurate timbre? Also, does it have better soundstage becuase it images better and/or becuase the soundstage is larger?

Thanks

BTW, I know many people who dislike CK10 due to "overemphasized treble" Apparently those folks cannot get a good fit with the supplied tips. So CK10 is not for everyone either.

Pretty much all of the above except I would say the CK10 is more natural sounding because it has a flatter frequency response and becuase it has a more accurate timbre. As for better soundstage, I mainly meant in terms of height/depth rather than in width which I didn't notice much of a difference. For me the imaging is tighter and more precise (maybe the same thing?) on the CK10. Having said that though, there is no doubt the e-q7 is a great phone and one that I would take any day over everything I've listened to except the CK10.

I didn't expect that. I cannot imagine an armature IEM having a more accurate timbre than the e-Q7. How exactly is the timbre on the CK10 more accurate in your opinion?

Not that I'm touting for business but I created a CK10 v e-Q7 comparison thread. I think it would be helpful if comparisons of these two phones are posted there.

Yikes less than 30 posts here and I've already been thrown a "How exactly..." question. Any chance of being able to get away with a "Well, it just is!" answer?

For me, things like snare drums and acoustic guitars sound more like the real thing on the CK10 than on the e-q7.


BTW, the e-q7 is also basically an armature phone, is it not?

No, it is a newly developed driver that is sort of like a dynamic-BA hybrid. It combines the best of each type IMO.

And how do the acoustic guitars and snare drums sound on the e-Q7 compared to CK10 - less clear, less defined, less detialed...? Thanks.

Oh and BTW, e-Q7 need at least 100 hours of burn in to open up IMO. Out of the box they sound unimpressive.

I wouldn't say less detailed per say but because the CK10 is not as thick sounding as the e-q7, the CK10 sounds clearer and thus in a way more naturally detailed. Not sure if this makes sense but for now its about the best I can do in trying to articulate the differences between the two in terms of things like acoustic guitars and snare drums.

Well I don't have nor have I heard the CK10, but if you're saying it's an earphone leaning heavily toward treble, then I know it's not for me. I have to have my bass and mids, than treble can fall in there somewhere. It's really hard to believe, however, that guitar and snare drum can sound more natural with the CK10 as the natural sound of instruments is one thing I truly love about the e-q7s. And I have yet to hear any earphone with a better natural sound for strings (It's safe to say I've heard most of the top tier earphones in the U.S.> TF10, E530, IE8, IE7). I have no doubt, however, based on reviews, that the CK10 isn't a nice earphone for those who like treble. But I've read too many reviews about them being sort of light on the bass (don't attack me @tstarn)...lol .. In the end, we all like what we like...

Thanks for the explanation. Regarding clarity, the e-Q7 is as clear as it gets IMO, so by "sounds clearer", you probably mean something else. Also, I don't think e-Q7 sounds too thick or too warm, but just about right. On the other hand, my RE0 does seem a bit thin by comparison, even though it's technically more neutral. So to each their own.

++ I am totally with you on this point. e-Q7 has more natural reproduction of real instruments as well as vocals than any other IEM and most headphones I've heard so far.