Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Impressions of the Ortofon e-Q7 versus the IE8, CK100, SE530, FX500 and X10 (plus CK10 discussion from post #120)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Impressions of the Ortofon e-Q7 versus the IE8, CK100, SE530, FX500 and X10 (plus CK10 discussion... - Page 14

post #196 of 881
Good to hear, they are IMO on par with the IE8, but with a different presentation. I was surprised by the clarity and overall presentation of these the first time I heard them, even though at that time I didn't have a lot of bass. Now that I have bass also they are fantastic! While I may prefer the IE8 (or some of my others) for trance due to the exaggerated bass, the CK10 is definitely doable and is preferred for a lot of acoustic.

I think you can't lose with either the CK10 or IE8. Both work well for my listening style of random play of a ton of different genres.
post #197 of 881
i like the ie8 for trance because of the airness and fantastic soundstage but the bass in these genres with the ie8 can be overwhelming thats why i needed another iem that is bass lighter and have great clarity and airness but with smooth treble,so i think the ck10 will be my favourite iem for this genres including house and techno.
post #198 of 881
Sounds like it may work for you preference. I, on the other hand, like my head to be pounded! But then I rarely listen very loud, so the pounding isn't really that bad.
post #199 of 881
Thread Starter 
CK10 are in the house and here are my out-of-box impressions.

First of all, one caveat: I have never been able to get a deep seal with any IEM/tip combination due to an odd shape/size of my ear canals. The Shure triflanges don't fit. The closest I've come were the Atrios' largest biflanges and these are uncomfortable giants for me. So, I'm afraid, no deep seal with the CK10 either, but I get a good seal with the UE-silicons and the Sony hybrids, and a perfect seal when I stuff the UE-silicons under the Sony hybrids. This way I get very impressive isolation, only second to the SE530. So far, so good.

SQ-wise these are very nice phones and like soozieq I find their mids instantly more likable than the CK100. Of course A/Bing is still to be done but having spent countless hours trying to tune the CK100's mids I know what I'm talking about. The CK10's mids are excellent.

Treble is also very good, though not the smoothest - CK100 has the edge here, maybe also the e-Q7, but I haven't had time for direct comparison yet. Plus I find the highs a tiny bit too pronounced for my liking and also prone to some sibilance. Not that the CK10 are sibilant per se, but if even a hint of sibilance is in the recording you'll hear it more pronounced than with most other phones I know. It's not really a problem for me, as I'm not overly sensitive to sibilance. And, to give a perspective, EQing down only -2db@13KHz on my Cowon i9 they sound entirely satisfactory. Just saying folks who are sensitive to sibilance should keep this in mind.

Last, but not least: bass. Like I mentioned, I have a proper seal. Quantity and quality is there, and still the CK10's bass leaves something for me to be desired. So hard to explain, it has amplitude/impact, it is fast and precise. Is texture the right word? By measure of my perception of drums, this is simply further from how they sound in real life then with most of my other phones. I'm beginning to suspect that I may be a dynamic driver lover after all, because this is not the first BA phone to strike me this way.

But do not draw false conclusions, putting the emphasis on their few perceived shortcomings after a very first listening session doesn't do the CK10 justice. These are very impressive IEMs, from built quality to sound signature. Overall I'm happy to have them and looking forward to more listening and comparing (vs. e-Q7, CK100, HJE900).
post #200 of 881
stuffing the UE under the hybrids? if its the way i think it is..u have 2 tips in 1 pretty much?
post #201 of 881
I am glad that they don't have a powerful bass,they will work with trance extremly nice in this way,but the sibilance you are saying James is worrying me.I am sensitive to harsh treble and sibilance,is the highs ad sharp and sibilant as the fx500 or smoother and non fatiguing?I hope we see a full review soon from you....
post #202 of 881
Thanks for posting your initial impressions so promptly james444. Just how deep are you supposed to insert the CK10 in order to establish a proper seal? Would it be deeper than the SE530? I'm interested in your comment regarding how the CK10 reproduces drums. Which of your balanced armature earphones do you think render them better or more naturally?

I look forward to your comparisons with your other earphones, particularly the e-Q7. I'd also be interested in your thoughts about how the CK10 stacks up against the SE530 and the IE8.
post #203 of 881
Order them already iponderous,I have a feeling you will just as I did two days ago
post #204 of 881
^While I am not James, I do have both the fx500 and CK10. if you are not bothered by the highs on the fx500, you wont be with the ck10. while the fx500 sounds pretty good on my a845, they are unlistenable for me on the nanos and touches in my house due to the piercing highs these apple players generate. i have no such issue with them using the ck10
post #205 of 881
It's tempting midoo1990 but I'm pretty happy with what I already have. I'm attracted to these phones but I'm not in a rush to buy them. There's quite a bit of belated hype around for the CK10 at the moment, and many of the posts extolling their virtues are coming from excited new owners. I'm prepared to wait a bit longer for the dust to settle.
post #206 of 881
Quote:
Originally Posted by javajive View Post
while the fx500 sounds pretty good on my a845, they are unlistenable for me on the nanos and touches in my house due to the piercing highs these apple players generate. i have no such issue with them using the ck10
Yes, I found the highs of the FX500 intolerable too.
post #207 of 881
The fx500 have a great synergy with the touch 2g and I don't find fatiguing at all this way,but I listen at very very low volume in my touch with them,20-30% only and if I cranked the volume to 50-60%,my ears will be bleeding from the piercing highs,I hope the ck10 highs a little bit smoother than the fx500.
post #208 of 881
^ I used the FX500 unamped with the 2G ipod touch and I found its combination of sharp highs, recessed mids and very deep bass too much for my ears to handle. And I listen to my phones at low to moderate volumes. They did have remarkable clarity though.
post #209 of 881
good point about the volume levels midoo1990. My average listening volume is about 60% unless I am reading or studying Japanese. One advantage the fx500 has over the ck10 is better bass at low volumes on my walkman.

I havent tried listening to the fx500 at low volumes with ipods but I will.
post #210 of 881
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by iponderous View Post
Yes, I found the highs of the FX500 intolerable too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by midoo1990 View Post
The fx500 have a great synergy with the touch 2g and I don't find fatiguing at all this way,but I listen at very very low volume in my touch with them,20-30% only and if I cranked the volume to 50-60%,my ears will be bleeding from the piercing highs,I hope the ck10 highs a little bit smoother than the fx500.
I don't have them side by side now, but from memory the fx500's highs are harsher than the CK10's. Susceptibility to sibilance seems also a bit more on the fx500, but even that is no real dealbreaker for me. Then again I use the fx500 mainly as a night phone on very low volume due to its "inbuilt loudness effect" (emphasis on bass and treble).
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Impressions of the Ortofon e-Q7 versus the IE8, CK100, SE530, FX500 and X10 (plus CK10 discussion from post #120)