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 34

post #496 of 881
Quote:
Originally Posted by rawrster View Post
I guess the TF10 did not fit your ears They did look quite large although I was on the other side of the train.

I hope that when I get mine I hear the same things as some people here are.
With complys they fit and stayed in but they are still BIG. With all silicones as soon as you move your head they dislodge.
post #497 of 881
Can't any of the people in this thread agree on anything?




Just kidding folks.
post #498 of 881
Thread Starter 
^ Speaking of which, you appear somewhat mellowed out lately
post #499 of 881
^ Could it be the ATH W5000's that are currently enveloping me in the most beautiful sounds?

I must admit that I have been quite active in the big boys forum today.
post #500 of 881
Quote:
Originally Posted by iponderous View Post
^ Could it be the ATH W5000's that are currently enveloping me in the most beautiful sounds?

I must admit that I have been quite active in the big boys forum today.
Hi, just curious - I am going to get a pair of headphones later this year - is W5000 better or HD800? Are they as source dependent as the Stax Omega 2? What kind of headphone amp do you use for W5000? Many thanks!
post #501 of 881
^ This really is taking the thread off-track. I only received the W5000's today and tonight is my first opportunity to have a listen to them. They certainly haven't disappointed, but that's all I'm prepared to say at this very early stage. I haven't heard the HD800, although I'd very much like to and I have no experience with Stax electrostatic phones. I don't have a headphone amp as yet. Audio Technica phones are low impedance, which makes them easy to drive. I've been trying these tonight directly out of the HP jack of my stereo amplifier, CD player and even the ipod. I do intend to acquire a headphone amp for them down the track, but now felt like the right time to pick these up as prices have dropped, and I sense that their time is coming to an end. I suggest that you search around in the full-sized headphone forums where you will find an overwhelming amount of information regarding the HD800, although not so much about the W5000. And of course there is stacks relating to Stax. Now back to our scheduled programme.
post #502 of 881
Quote:
Originally Posted by james444 View Post
Quite controversial impressions, to say the least. To me the mids and rendering of vocals are a strength of these phones. Granted the highs are not the most extended and refined, but still very good IMO. But what puzzles me most is your rating of the Ortofon's bass: it is by no means weak and has so much better definition and detail than the IE8's, not to mention the latters huge upper bass hump.
Quite funny, my impression is totally different too. I tried today at the local store,

The bass is definitely 'more' than Cowon D2 unamped (but eq turned on), but it is not more precise than SE530. I was quite dissapointed, expecting to get more 'impact' than my already tight, clean, detail bass of SE530.

Midrange, SE530 wins (for me), a little forward, yes, but it is fuller, cleaner, more refined, full bodied, more delicate, complete frequency in presenting vocals and instruments. For a moment, eQ7 sounds more 'detail' due to it's 5-6 KHz 'hump', it sounds more 'silvery', but when I switch to SE530 it is actually not as lush and 'wide' as SE530. Every soft, difficult passage delivered very well on SE530, really amazing.
I actually still prefer super smooth midrange of IE8 by a bit, not super detail, but the detail is still there, good for listening to lower bit rate mp3 as it smoothen the harshness of mp3 files, still definitely enjoyable, definitely not tiring at all. I agree with some people eQ7 mid is a little Grado-ish, some people are die hard fans of Grado sound, I like it, I have Grado, I keep it, but not a big fan.

High, I still find SE530 more refined up to minute detail, not more quantity but finesee, both are roll off, which I like. For me, tf10 treble is a little too much for long hour use. IE8 rolled of the most.

Warmth, I think it's tie with different style, UM3X and HD650 is definitely warmer.

Soundstage, I still prefer SE530, but not by far.

I know it's only me, but if I have to rank them according to my preference overall, it will be:
1. SE530
2. IE8
3. Ortofone
4. UM3X
5. CK100

This is not a review, just my impression . I have a good friend who said 'yuck' for my SE530 as he prefer tf10 a lot

Disclaimer: My eq settings on D2 (default Metal setting from factory)
* BBE = 1
* Stereo Enhancer = 1
* Mach3Bass = 6
* eq = 4, 2, 0, 3, 5
I have to turned on eq as I find Cowon D2 without eq is unlistenable.
For flat listening I use iPod 5.5 -> Singularity cable -> Mustang

post #503 of 881
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedBull View Post
Quite funny, my impression is totally different too. I tried today at the local store,

The bass is definitely 'more' than Cowon D2 unamped (but eq turned on), but it is not more precise than SE530. I was quite dissapointed, expecting to get more 'impact' than my already tight, clean, detail bass of SE530.

Midrange, SE530 wins (for me), a little forward, yes, but it is fuller, cleaner, more refined, full bodied, more delicate, complete frequency in presenting vocals and instruments. For a moment, eQ7 sounds more 'detail' due to it's 5-6 KHz 'hump', it sounds more 'silvery', but when I switch to SE530 it is actually not as lush and 'wide' as SE530. Every soft, difficult passage delivered very well on SE530, really amazing.
I actually still prefer super smooth midrange of IE8 by a bit, not super detail, but the detail is still there, good for listening to lower bit rate mp3 as it smoothen the harshness of mp3 files, still definitely enjoyable, definitely not tiring at all. I agree with some people eQ7 mid is a little Grado-ish, some people are die hard fans of Grado sound, I like it, I have Grado, I keep it, but not a big fan.

High, I still find SE530 more refined up to minute detail, not more quantity but finesee, both are roll off, which I like. For me, tf10 treble is a little too much for long hour use. IE8 rolled of the most.

Warmth, I think it's tie with different style, UM3X and HD650 is definitely warmer.

Soundstage, I still prefer SE530, but not by far.

I know it's only me, but if I have to rank them according to my preference overall, it will be:
1. SE530
2. IE8
3. Ortofone
4. UM3X
5. CK100

This is not a review, just my impression . I have a good friend who said 'yuck' for my SE530 as he prefer tf10 a lot

Disclaimer: My eq settings on D2 (default Metal setting from factory)
* BBE = 1
* Stereo Enhancer = 1
* Mach3Bass = 6
* eq = 4, 2, 0, 3, 5
I have to turned on eq as I find Cowon D2 without eq is unlistenable.
For flat listening I use iPod 5.5 -> Singularity cable -> Mustang

I think you may have a fit issue with the e-Q7. No wonder you think SE530 is superior though - I owned this IEM for over a year and I concur that it sounds amazing, but unfortunately I was unable to get a good fit with it most of the time so it sounded terrible most of the time. When fitted properly, I do agree that the mids on SE530 are better, smoother than on the e-Q7, but the e-Q7 is pretty darn close, again when fitted properly. I also agree on the treble - SE530 does sound smoother and more delicate. However, I disagree regarding the bass. I think that e-Q7 has tighter, better defined bass than SE530 - the difference is not huge, but it's quite significant to my ears. e-Q7 handles dance and trance music quite a bit better than SE530.

Also, I disagree that IE8 is better than e-Q7. I would rate IE8 below SE530 and e-Q7 in overall sound quality, because: 1. The upper bass is way too present and intrudes into the low midrange; 2. Treble is good, but not great - it's a little bit harsh and grainy compared to that of SE530 and e-Q7 and doesn't extend any further either, at least to my ears.
post #504 of 881
Um great thread guys ! been reading it all day and its given me an appitiete to try out a new iem, Not sure which to pull the trigger on ,the orfinton e7 or the ck 10
So my dilemma is which of those two above is going to give me the most difference experience to the other iems i have already ,se420/ie7/ie8/tpfi10/w3/se530/custom3 in my collection ?

sugestions welcome !
post #505 of 881
^^^ The CK10 will be more different than your current IEMs because it's so bass-light and clinical.
post #506 of 881
More misinformation from an expected source. When did you own the CK10? Just curious.
post #507 of 881
Quote:
Originally Posted by tstarn06 View Post
More misinformation from an expected source. When did you own the CK10? Just curious.
Keep the personal attacks to yourself. Thank you.
post #508 of 881
that's quite the collection you have there you can always get both and compare them for me :P

what kind of experience are you looking for actually?
post #509 of 881
what kind of experience are you looking for actually?[/QUOTE]

I gess i just like to have different ways of hearing my music, so looking for something that will sound different enough from what i already have, ie. presenting the music in a different way,i dont like very sibilant sounding phones or phones with next to no bass though !

I think my ideal iem would have the build design of the westone 3,the electro-accoustic crossover design of the klipsch custom 3 the bass and mids treble signitures of the custom 3 with just that bit more sparkle at the very top end that the tf10 provides and the soundstage of the ie8:-)
post #510 of 881
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pianist View Post
How long did you burn your e-Q7 in for? They improve after burn in and the harshness in the midrange almost disappears IMO.
Several days (about 6 hours, I guess). I do believe in burn in for dynamic phones, but these don't sound to me as a good candidates for improving. They sound like made of steel. Thanks for the tip anyway, I will continue, who knows...

Quote:
Also, I disagree that the e-Q7 has weak bass. No way! The bass is about the best I've every heard in an IEM - it is very tight, deep, fast, punchy, and ultra detialed. In comparison, my RE0 has very poor bass performance and so does IE8.
Bass is not weak, actually I have almost no complains in bass department besides quantity, and I'm talking about outdoor usage, not at home - there is a big difference in bass perception, which is often not taken in account - people compare IEMs at home. This is wrong, go outside and listen there. At home, ortofone's bass is quite sufficient.

RE0, yes, they are definitely not better in bass, it is their weak point. Still I like them more.

Quote:
Also, the mids are some of the best I've heard in an IEM, especially vocals which are even more realistically portrayed than on the RE0 with even better clarity and more micro-detail.
RE0 have slightly recessed midrange, I agree, not the best midrange, but at least not killing my ears, so I greatly prefer this recession over shrilling midrange of E-Q7.

Quote:
Treble on the e-Q7 is a tad lacking in smoothness compared to RE0, but it is better than IE8 treble IMO ...
Agree. I will burn them in for a while.... Thanks for your comments!
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)