Impressions of the Ortofon e-Q7 versus the IE8, CK100, SE530, FX500 and X10 (plus CK10... - Page 7

To which, I snort and flick my hair.

You have enough 'hair to flick'? I would have to just brush my head. Heh.

Treble is good on the Ortofon. It's not as refined as on RE0 and cymbals don't quite have as much air and are not as clearly separated from each other as on RE0. However, treble detial is still very nice - I think better than on UM3X for example, or SE530. But Triple.fi and RE0 do have better treble.

Soundstage is very wide - much wider than RE0 and UM3X and also has a good amount of depth to it. Depth is not quite as apparent as with, say, Triple.fi, but about on par with UM3X and SE530 I think. Also dynamic range is excellent, but I must say that dynamics, soundstage and especially imaging of the e-Q7 seems to be largely dependent on the music. With some very well recorded music, the e-Q7 can put out amazingly superb depth and dynamics and very realistic imaging. With other music that's not as well recorded with more compression, e-Q7 can sound unimpressive with blobs in your head. Perhaps source also plays a big role with e-Q7, but right now, I can't say for certain. They sure seem to sound better out of a good soundcard than they do out of my Sansa Clip or Samsung U2 for example, but their sound quality seems to be affected much more by recording quality and also how good the fit is. Regarding fit BTW - these are actually harder for me to get a good seal with than most other IEMs I tried. I think fit is easier with UE Super.fi/Triple.fi than these mostly because with Triple.fi cable you can make earhooks, but you can't f do that with Ortofon cable. However, you can get separate silicone earhooks for it from Phonak Audeo or Senn IE series.

Ortfon e-Q7 does sound more engaging because of all the extra micro-detial and richness than RE0 doesn't have. Like I said, the sound of these is very recording and fit dependent though and sometimes the vocals do sound a bit forward. I do think the overall signature is a bit forward, like Grado - very immediate. Compared to UM3X, e-Q7 is not quite as neutral and has a peak centered around 5.5-6 kHz that makes it sound more atmospheric and exciting than UM3X. I actually think UM3X can sound a bit overly laid back with some music and lacks essential treble sparkle and energy that is supposed to be in the recording. Vocals can sound in your face, but treble can sound dull on UM3X. e-Q7 doesn't have that issue and treble is always sparkly and exciting when it needs to be. Also, bass definition and precision is truly great with e-Q7 - UM3X is not quite up there and neither is any other IEM I've tried, except for Etymotic ER4 maybe. This makes listening to any kind of dance or trance or hip-hop very fun.

BTW, here are very high quality recordings that simply blew my mind when listening to them through the e-Q7. They do sound best in loseless though:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OP-NflapTU4&fmt=18

Oh damn, the other one, Rendez Vous A Paris is not on youtube. Woot. I will upload that one myself later because it must be on there!

Oh, here's another one by Paul Mauriat that also sounds astounding through the e-Q7:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sv1FIWa-GVc&fmt=18

Ok, I just realized that that upload is of crappy quality - there are lots of popping sounds that are not there on the original recording. Oh well, you get the idea.

I was referring to my comb over.

Thanks for your reply Pianist, which was most helpful.

I agree whole heartedly with pianist's comments.

^ x4 and ordering a pack of sony hybrids trying to get more comfortable fit

Oh and one more important thing I forgot to mention - e-Q7 is quite dry sounding. More so than other IEMs I've heard so far. It reminds me a lot of my ATH-CM700 earbuds actually. This is not a flaw - at least it doesn't sound like it is to my ears. But instead it just seems to be a part of e-Q7 sound presentation that some people may like and others may not. This dryness seems to suit some music well and other music not quite as well. I find that with electronic and dance or trance for example, it works very well, but with smooth jazz and mellow, atmospheric pop music, the sound can seem a bit "rough." Not subtle enough I guess. Right now, I am still trying to figure out how much of a problem this is.

Ok, after some more listening, I must say that e-Q7 is sufficiently smooth throughout the spectrum if the fit the right, Perhaps additional burn in also helped. They now work just fine for all my music and I do not feel that they sound too dry or lack smoothness at all anymore. They just sound wonderfully balanced, extremely natural and crystal clear. Listening to them yesterday, I realized that the level of clarity that e-Q7s put out is indeed remarkable - better than that of any other IEM I've tried. This, coupled with great detail and superb timbral accuracy, gives their sound a great sense of presence. With many recordings, I can almost feel like being there at the studio or concert with the musicians and this feeling is more vivid that with any other IEM I've tried. This realism applies to pretty much the whole frequency range, but I would say that the vocal reproduction is probably the e-Q7s strongest point. Yesterday, I was listening to some of my favorite 80s pop music and with certain songs, the vocals on the e-Q7 stood out with such great clarity and lifelike tone that I got an extremely vivid sensation, unlike anything I experienced before, that the singer was in the room with me. It was an amazing experience. When I closed my eyes, it almost felt like I got transported.

At first I was a bit skeptical about whether the creation of a BA-dynamic hybrid driver was a step forward. But after spending about 2 months with the e-Q7, I no longer doubt that these are revolutionary IEMs and that the BA-dynamic hybrid driver (which is actually called "siren armature" if I am not mistaken) is indeed a revolutionary technology. The tonal accuracy that these drivers are capable of producing is just incredible - no regular BA or dynamic can do this IMO.

James, I notice a new listing in your "best SQ" rankings>> HJE900 So buddy, how does mid-range and bass match up with the e-q7 and ie8? Just curious.

My limited experience with Orthofon allows me to say that they do benefit from extended burn in. Some people complain about their brightness and somewhat harsh highs, but after 300 hours of burn-in using XLO and taralabs cascade noise, they have lost this harsness, and sound perfectly fine. Whether this is due to driver burn in or cable burn in I dunno and don't care, but the fact is - if you like almost evertyhing about them except for somewhat harsh HF - give em 300+ hours of good burn in using quality burn in tracks.

lol Ok, here's the thing. Unfortunately I am not able to get a good fit with the e-Q7 all the time. My ear canals are unusually narrow and it can be very hard for me to insert an IEM in such a way so that the sound is directed into my ear canals properly. So there are times, when they don't sound all that great - the highs are more muffled than they should be and the bass can become boomy. And then there are also times when getting a bad fit with my e-Q7 coincides with me being in a very bad mood and that's when I get the urge to sell/trade the e-Q7.

But anyway, I just made up my mind - I am NOT going to sell/trade the e-Q7 no matter what, because yesterday I fully realized how damn great these IEMs are and that I am not going to get better listening experience out of pretty much any other IEM out there for under $1000, except for maybe UM Mage and JH11 and I can't afford those. So yeah, forget it - I am removing that e-Q7 FS/FT add right now. My e-Q7 are here to stay.

That's great to hear! I haven't burned mine in for that long yet. Mine have maybe around 100 hours on the so far. But I do notice that the treble and overall sound seems to become smoother now during the past few hours than it was before. I am really curious how the sound may continue to change/improve with additional burn in time.