New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audio Technica ATH-CK10 - Page 101

post #1501 of 1506

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 1506
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 1506

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 1506
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 1506

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 1506

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

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav: