New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audio Technica ATH-CK10 - Page 101

post #1501 of 1523

I tested these out with instrumental music.  I think in instrumental music, the vocals are not pushed forward as more vocal focused recordings.  It doesn't sound very exciting with instruments.  I think these are great for vocal focused recordings, but not for instrumentals.  I think for better instrument sound you need iems that outputs sound more naturally, and these seem to be more for electrical sounds.

 

Not sure, but I think it's the treble that is quite overbearing for the instrumental sounds.  


Edited by SilverEars - 3/30/14 at 11:54am
post #1502 of 1523
Silverears. So you think the 846 is over rated ?? I was thinking about grabbing a pair. But I listened to them last for only about five mins mind you. But to me they just sounded like the 535 with more bass and extended highs. But to me that's not worth the double the price of the 535. The 535 will eq pretty good.. If that someone's thing to eq,, not mine. But you could and probably come close to the 846. Maybe not have that subwoofer effect but you get the idea. Just don't think they are worth that much more compared to the 535. Which I kinda likesd to be honest. But I like the ck10 much more. These are pretty much the only iem I listen to rite now
post #1503 of 1523

I don't agree with the pricing of SE846, but it does sound different from SE535.  

 

The 846 differs in that in that there is more treble and bass than the SE535.  Which provides more levels of the sound than the 535 providing same level hump on the mids, but there is more dimention to the vocals since the highs add to the definition.  Imaging is different than 535, as it sound like there is more layering to the sound.  The vocals have more grainy sound(sharper grains), which is Shure's signature.  I think you can find same level of 836 at a way lower pricing, it's nothing special have nice mids with more bass and treble(most iems have good amount of treble), it's just making up for what Shure usually lacked with previous iems(the highs and bass).  836's improvements were not enough to justify the pricing.  

 

What I like about the CK-10 is the vocals comes out in detail without the grainyness which sounds harsh on the Shures.  There is still a bit of harshness on the CK-10 though, it's the sibilance.  Other than that it's quite neutral, but more fun sounding than the ER4P.  There seems to be better and more bass and wider sound than the ER4, but yet sound neutral.  No bloat what so ever with these, tight and fast.

post #1504 of 1523
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverEars View Post

I don't agree with the pricing of SE846, but it does sound different from SE535.  

The 846 differs in that in that there is more treble and bass than the SE535.  Which provides more levels of the sound than the 535 providing same level hump on the mids, but there is more dimention to the vocals since the highs add to the definition.  Imaging is different than 535, as it sound like there is more layering to the sound.  The vocals have more grainy sound(sharper grains), which is Shure's signature.  I think you can find same level of 836 at a way lower pricing, it's nothing special have nice mids with more bass and treble(most iems have good amount of treble), it's just making up for what Shure usually lacked with previous iems(the highs and bass).  836's improvements were not enough to justify the pricing.  

What I like about the CK-10 is the vocals comes out in detail without the grainyness which sounds harsh on the Shures.  There is still a bit of harshness on the CK-10 though, it's the sibilance.  Other than that it's quite neutral, but more fun sounding than the ER4P.  There seems to be better and more bass and wider sound than the ER4, but yet sound neutral.  No bloat what so ever with these, tight and fast.
I agree on everything you just said. Like I said I had about five mins on the 846 which wasn't enough time. But I could tell it was better them the 535 most defenitly. But ya you can get a better sq for that pricing. And yes the ck10 can be a little siblent but it's not that bad. That's mostly on very trebly recording. Other then that very smooth. I'm seriously thinking about buying another pair there on eBay just to have. Cause I'm gonna cry when these die. Lol which probably won't be for a few years yet. I think they are very well built specially the cable. I was also looking at the 3003 and for the price the cable just looked and felt horrible to me. Well for the money anyways. Think you'd have to be very carful with them. Where the ck10 cable is just fantastic. One of the best I've seen.
post #1505 of 1523

I just read joker's review, and I totally agree with it.  I see why it was a benchmark iem before he started reviewing more expensive iems.  

 

I'm so happy I've ordered Hidition NT6 which he gave 9.9/10 sound quality, which I have high hopes for.  Unless you are going all out, CK-10 will keep you happy for a long time.:p

post #1506 of 1523

how is ck-10 compared to the ortofon eq-5 ?

the sibilance thing is frightening , i saw a used ck-10 sold last week for 120$

i was almost ready to get it , but then i remembered that i had to sell one of my 3 iems (re262/re272/eq5) and i decided to stay put - this place is a madness yard :p

post #1507 of 1523

Does anyone know where I can get a pair of CK10 :( ? My GF got angried and snapped my pair, oh I missed it so much!!!

post #1508 of 1523

been using the CK10 for past 3-4 years roughly, went and bought it due to the high recommendation from this website

 

 

well here are my thoughts

 

they are not that durable: mine broke straight after warrantee expired, the cables are nice and leaves me great first impression of sturdiness but regardless of how good others reviewed it, mine broke. Other reviewers did not test their ck10 over a year in order to test their durability (but hey, who would lol ), they would ASSUME they are durable by just comparing to the different material used comparing to cheap ones and how good it feels.

 

i could get mine fixed at an authorized retailer but it would cost me the exact same price of the iem, i got it fixed at third party that specialized in fixing headphones, though getting it fixed at third party would harm the aesthetics of the look but i dont really care since it costs me only 15-20.

 

the rubber wrapping around the whole driver piece on the ck10 wears off overtime, i wouldnt say badly but considerably, still its not like they said in the review that its extremely durable, the texture on the marble wears off becoming overall silverish. but hey ive been using it alot its my main headphone for 3-4 years and i listen to music daily.

 

over the past 3-4 years i probably taken it to the technician to get it fixed 3-4times, one of the driver becomes silent, but thats because of the cable, after being fixed it would take 4-5 months before it starts breaking up on u again.

 

okay enough of the negatives here are some positives.

 

they sound superb

bass quality 9/10

bass quantity 6.5/10      (this is quantity of the bass 10/10 does not reflect on how good this is)

mids 7/10                       (compared to shure 535, yes they are recessed a bit)

treble is 8/10                  (nice clean airy)

isolation 10/10                (cant hear anything when ur using those except ur music, blocks everything)

comfort 10/10                 ( small driver = perfect fitting, the shures are too big, people would think u are wearing a hearing aid)

 

i like the sound of shure 846, i have tried it, the sound actually gave me a wow factor, however its too expensive and too complex

by complex i mean different filters, cables, amps/dacs combinations possible of altering sound, with ck10 u dont have to.

 

 

people judge sound too much on their clarity and quality, but i enjoy some graininess in my music. lol this is getting off topic hope this helps seeya

post #1509 of 1523

@couch: I used mine hard: bicycling in minus 16 to plus 34 all year round in Canada, then Korea, then in Japan. They are very very well done. There are no indestructable earphones, but the CK10 are made very very well.

post #1510 of 1523
Quote:
Originally Posted by shigzeo View Post

@couch: I used mine hard: bicycling in minus 16 to plus 34 all year round in Canada, then Korea, then in Japan. They are very very well done. There are no indestructable earphones, but the CK10 are made very very well.
I agree. I've put mine through hell and they are still in great shape. The only thing is the one face plate came off and I heard that that was common with these. A little glue and problem solved. I also like I had said in my older post that I was playing around cleaning them and pushed and broke the filters. My stupidness lol but I cleaned them carefully with a magnifying glass and put in the green filters from my etymotic er4's. They sound great still but I bought them used and the one side was kinda unbalanced so that why I thought I'd clean them cause looking inside they were really dirty from ear wax I take it. Anyways not quit knowing how they would sound if that unbalance was there and with the new filters in them,, they still sound great. Very detailed and very fast. They take a while for your brain to adjust due to the treble and stuff they sound great. I have tried to find out what kinda of filters they do use in them but no one seems to know lol
post #1511 of 1523

tbh i love the ck10 due to small and how it fits to ear and the overall discrete appearance, ones from shure makes me look like im wearing a hearing aid ( no offense but true)

post #1512 of 1523
The only thing I dislike about the CK10 is the metal cap that rubs my ear. I can't wear them day in day out.
post #1513 of 1523
Quote:
Originally Posted by shigzeo View Post

The only thing I dislike about the CK10 is the metal cap that rubs my ear. I can't wear them day in day out.
Really huh? I find them one of the most comfy iems that I own. The way I wear them the metal cap doesn't really touch any of my ear. They do insert a little differnt then one would think. Once I found how to insert them properly it made a world of difference in sound for sure. At first I didn't really like them and they did take a while for I think my brain to adjust but then I figured out how to insert them properly and wow what a difference. Still one of my favorate iems for sure smily_headphones1.gif
post #1514 of 1523

My ears canals are very very narrow. The CK10 is uncomfortable for me. I've had them since 2008, so I am probably the most CK10-experienced headfier. I didn't start this thread, but I have the unique privilege of tipping of our OP and a number of people back in the day. I am proud of my accomplishments, and I love this earphone. But... it never has been comfortable for me.

post #1515 of 1523
Listening to music at work by the Hip....who say rock don't sound great on these.. smily_headphones1.gif Lol
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav: