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 53

post #781 of 881
^ I thought the SR001 has a more tighten bass? And no mid-bass hump. If my memory serves me right as I have sold them.
post #782 of 881
Quote:
Originally Posted by KLS View Post
^ I thought the SR001 has a more tighten bass? And no mid-bass hump. If my memory serves me right as I have sold them.
They also have similarly elevated midbass (not as much as IE8). Still they are close enough overall.
post #783 of 881
I have no luck yet selling them,I haven't even tried putting the ck10 in my ears for 5 days now,I can't stand their treble.if still no luck for a couple more days I will try to trade them with a cowon s9 or Sony X.I was thinking of trading them with se530 because I need isolation very much but I thought if the ck10 give me ear pressure after 30-45 minutes,how will I handle even deeper fit?I wish there were more reviews talking about the harsh treble before I bought them.....
post #784 of 881
well the shure iem's are a deeper fit for sure but you really dont know how you will handle them unless you buy them or try them out somewhere sadly. i guess the fx500 is a shallow fit as well?

guess it was bad luck for you then. the majority of the people who had them early like their treble :P
post #785 of 881
Well I won't risk it and get the shure because I get ear pressure pretty easily.the fx500 fit is definetly shalower than the ck10 but it can also cause ear itching after an hour or an hour and a half.the ie8 works the best for me because of their very shallow fit and I can literally wear them all day long without any discomfort.
As for the majority of people,I think it was a FOTM time and reading the posts again some of them didn't say about the ck10 problems or didnt want to acknowledge them.I am not trying to begin a war here,just saying my opinion....
post #786 of 881
i still enjoy the treble on them the reason i got them was to upgrade over the RE0 and it accomplished that for me so there are not much complaints from me sound wise. my opinion on them remains unchanged since i got them. although i do wish the triple flanges were more comfortable but thats not really related

but then again pretty much this entire place are a bunch of people opinions. if you could ever get a product where everyone agrees on the same thing please let me know :P
post #787 of 881
Haha,Thats easy,jh13 ....
post #788 of 881
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2410 View Post
tbh for me like i said i dont think of them as top table stuff but it not really up to me. i think what really makes them top table IEM's or not is the consensus opinion and they are getting pushed in that direction. they do sound excellent but im not really sure i ever listened to them enough to say they are really top tier as i felt all i ever did was fiddle with the fit. i got times of stunning sound but most of the time i didnt. in fact it took me several days before i got them to sound good and that didnt last long.

the fit issue meant i also never A B'ed them with others as i couldnt just take them out and put them back in. i just never heard the great long enough to say with any conviction exactly where i think they belong, whether its sat at the top table or just hovering around the table with the other "close but not quite" IEM's
I see. I actually have the same problem as you Mark with e-Q7 - the fit and thus sound quality is very unstable. Sometimes I get great sound, but that does not happen very often. Most of the time, the sound is quite good actually, but not really top-tier. My impression so far is that the e-Q7 definitely has top-tier bass and mids - I do not question that at all because even with a poor fit, I can sense the greatness of these IEMs at reproducing those parts of the frequency spectrum. However, I am still unsure about the treble on the e-Q7. On one hand, it can sound quite smooth and is detailed , but on the other, I often feel like it sounds too coarse and lacking subtlety that a top-tier headphone should have, which is probably because of poor fit.
post #789 of 881
its so sad, if they had stuck on a longer stalk im sure all their fit issues would have gone away
post #790 of 881
Wow, ears sure are different. I get a 100% perfect and consistent fit every time with the e-Q7. With large Super.Fi tips I can hardly get them out of my ears again due to heavy suction. They're some of the safest and easiest to fit IEMs for my ears so far (pretty much the complete opposite of the CK10).
post #791 of 881
(No offense/pun intended) How do you guys define a phone to be in the top-tiers?
post #792 of 881
Quote:
Originally Posted by KLS View Post
(No offense/pun intended) How do you guys define a phone to be in the top-tiers?
i'm beginning to wonder that too. it seems that "universal recognition" was a definition thrown around a little earlier, but what can be considered universal? in fighting game terminology, top tier means does everything well without any glaring weaknesses. how you interpret glaring is entirely up to the person using the item. like i went into this week thinking the ck10 and ck100 were top tier IEMs, but now on friday, what's been thrown around all week like, "the mids are horrible" and "the treble is overpowering" makes it seem like there are some large weaknesses in them. now the e-q7 is also gaining fotm status, and people are saying "its a 50/50 shot iem" because of the fit. when so much technology is invested into these products, i think top tier is subjective to the person using it. fit and taste vary from person to person, and when the each of the phones do so much so well, each person will find a different product to confide in because everyone is looking for different strengths.

yay, tl;dr
post #793 of 881
Quote:
Originally Posted by germanturkey View Post
i'm beginning to wonder that too. it seems that "universal recognition" was a definition thrown around a little earlier, but what can be considered universal?in fighting game terminology, top tier means does everything well without any glaring weaknesses. how you interpret glaring is entirely up to the person using the item. like i went into this week thinking the ck10 and ck100 were top tier IEMs, but now on friday, what's been thrown around all week like, "the mids are horrible" and "the treble is overpowering" makes it seem like there are some large weaknesses in them. now the e-q7 is also gaining fotm status, and people are saying "its a 50/50 shot iem" because of the fit. when so much technology is invested into these products, i think top tier is subjective to the person using it. fit and taste vary from person to person, and when the each of the phones do so much so well, each person will find a different product to confide in because everyone is looking for different strengths.

yay, tl;dr
I kind of agree with this. I am not an expert enough to say things, but in my opinion, each phone has its own characteristic and presentation.

So, is there no definite criteria to say a phone to be good or bad? In my opinion, if trying to define quality (purely on sound quality) 'universally', one shouldn't decide the phone's sound quality based on the frequencies (bass, midrange, treble, transparency, thus the sound signature, and soundstage), but should focus on resolution, instrument seperation, detail, imaging, 3D presentation, layering. This is because sound signature all come down to one's preference, and some prefer a smaller soundstage with a more intimate sound. I don't think there is any head-fiers out there who is anti-instrument seperation, anti-good imaging... That being said, I think I have read some saying phones which is good in imaging actually fatigue the brain

A very good example is like the CK10 being discussed in this thread, some like them for their details, clarity, transparency, well extended treble, but some hate them for their treble and find them fatiguing. So, isn't this preference?

If I am talking nonsense, please forgive me Again, no offense/pun intended. Sorry for my poor English.
post #794 of 881
Quote:
Originally Posted by KLS View Post
(No offense/pun intended) How do you guys define a phone to be in the top-tiers?
If they cost over $300

(LOL!!)
post #795 of 881
To me, top tier is doing what it does better than others. What do I mean by that? Let me give an example...the CK10 is top tier IMO because of the imaging it portrays, which is better than any other IEM I have heard as of yet. Is it perfect, no, but the imaging makes me enjoy them immensely. Also, even though the bass seems light compared to say the Copper, it is still very enjoyable to me and seems to be just right for the CK10 presentation. I could listen to the CK10 all day, and have. Is the Copper top-tier? IMO yes as it also does things just so right such as the bass with great instrument separation for a dynamic. And the list goes on.

Now, the biggest thing is perspective. If I was HPA and had one of each top custom, I might think all of these are 2nd rate like how I now view all the $80 IEMs that I used to like a lot more.

And it will always be open for debate. There will always be a % of people that don't like something, and a % that do. Take the TF10, some love it, I don't. And the CK10 as we all know, some love it (me), others don't.

But true top-tier would be at a much higher performance level (and I am sure price point), so either customs, or maybe the e-Q7?
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)