Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Ortofon e-Q7 Appreciation Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ortofon e-Q7 Appreciation Thread - Page 4

post #46 of 754
yeah..i was thinking about getting the westone 3 since i saw some ads in the FS but then I would always be wondering about these iem's. however i am pretty excited but i decided to save some cash by going through japan. it helps that im studying for exams so these wont be on my mind as much as it would if i was doing nothing.

I blame Pianist for this. always recommending them in threads and comparing them with the westone 3 a bit a couple posts earlier
post #47 of 754
you can let me know how they roll compared to the ck10s
post #48 of 754
oh i wouldn;t worry about that. i will just dont hold your breath. i dont expect to get them until the middle of march.
post #49 of 754
^ After comparing them and if you said e-Q7 is better than CK10 in terms of bass, imaging, instrument seperation, and soundstage, I will blame you just like how you are blaming Pianist

And don't worry I have the patience to wait until mid-March.
post #50 of 754
Ok........ I really am a dirty player. I just now plugged my eq7's in to a portable, to get the ball rolling for tomorrow. The very quick (under a minute) ilisten left me with one impression, these things will need burn in. A rough sound that I'm use to hearing from dynamics out of the box. Am I the only one that thinks this? Anyway, they slipped onto my ocean sixe canals like dream. The largest sleeves fit all the way to the stress relief, or as orto calls them "handles"......Are my canals freaks or what?
post #51 of 754
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burma Jones View Post
Hi Pianist, Thanks for the reply, your insight has been extremely useful . I'm currently using the Triple.fi 10 pro and happy with the fit and sq. Between the Eq-7 and the W3 which one would you think will be a better compliment to my Triple.fi 10 pro (the more contast of the sound sig. the better) ? Thanks in advance.
e-Q7 sure differs more from the Triple.fi than W3 does. Triple.fi and W3 have similar V-shaped signatures. e-Q7 is a lot more polite in the bass and treble with a more prominent and higher quality midrange.
post #52 of 754
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by the search never ends View Post
Ok........ I really am a dirty player. I just now plugged my eq7's in to a portable, to get the ball rolling for tomorrow. The very quick (under a minute) ilisten left me with one impression, these things will need burn in. A rough sound that I'm use to hearing from dynamics out of the box. Am I the only one that thinks this? Anyway, they slipped onto my ocean sixe canals like dream. The largest sleeves fit all the way to the stress relief, or as orto calls them "handles"......Are my canals freaks or what?
They do need burn in. Out of the box, the sound is indeed quite rough. Give them at least 100 hours. They should begin to sound noticeably smoother after that, although the unpleasant harshness in the upper mids almost disappears after the first 20 hours or so.

That being said, the e-Q7 is not exactly a butter smooth IEM but it should sound sufficiently smooth with good recordings and out of half decent sources.

BTW, here is my final verdict on the e-Q7 vs. UM3X from another post I made in a different thread a few days ago:

"I listened more to UM3X last night and I changed my mind about them - I am actually quite impressed with them now. The thing about UM3X is that they are very revealing of source and recording quality, more so than any other IEM I've heard so far. Even with my Audigy 2 ZS which is silent with all my other IEMs I can hear hiss with the UM3X. It also easily shows problems with recordings including compressions artifacts. At the same time, it's not exactly a brutally revealing monitor - the highs sound very gentle and smooth, while mid bass and low mids are a bit boosted which gives the sound a nice, even somewhat euphoric sense of warmth. They do sound a bit boring, but that is mostly due to them being so revealing I think. With good recordings and out of a decent source like my Audigy 2 ZS, they can sound really great actually. I can hear nuances in the midrange that I could not hear with any other headphone before. For some reason they even seem more detailed than the ES3X I used to have. Also, I do not feel that the soundstage is small - I think it is quite spacious, especially the depth is very nice.

Anyway, I now understand how some people love the UM3X. I also love many of its great qualities, like a very faithful, extremely detailed midrange reproduction, flat frequency response (they have the least amount of peaks and/or dips in the frequency response of any IEM I've heard, with RE0 being close second), superb separation and excellent imaging, and a pleasant warmth in the bass and lower mids. At the same time, I still feel that the e-Q7 has a more accurate timbre, better dynamic range, better clarity and more treble energy and so I still prefer my e-Q7 overall I think. But I can easily see how one could gravitate towards one or the other - both have outstanding qualities and it's just a matter of personal preference which qualities one considers more important. For me clarity, dynamics and realistic reproduction of real instruments are more important than great separation, flat frequency response and super detail, so I will keep my e-Q7. But in the future, when I will have the money, I may buy UM3X as a reference 'phone for checking source and recording quality, and just for times when I feel like picking out the smallest of small details in my music - there's really no better universal IEM than UM3X for these purposes IMO."

BTW, I forgot to mention that e-Q7 is actually more accurate in the bass - it is tighter and faster than that of the UM3X. UM3X is more accurate in the mids and a little recessed, but still accurate in the treble. e-Q7 has less detail in the mids and is not as smooth in the treble, but it has a more organic tonality, while UM3X sounds a little plasticy by comparison. Also, another observation in regards to soundstage presentation of the two - UM3X images better and has more apparent depth to the stage, while e-Q7 sounds more open due to more prominent treble and clearer mids and also has more apparent depth and dynamics to the actual sounds, not the soundstage if that makes sense.
post #53 of 754
^^^ thanks for that pianist....
post #54 of 754
Ok folks, after some run in and listening, I have little to say, the ortofon's are "very different" and I am not sure what to make of it, this is a positive impression, but it is so different from what I'm used to, I find myself reevaluating every iem I have, never heard so much detail in the mids and upper mids, with no sibilance added. that's all I can say for now, except to warn once again, these are not for anyone with small canals
post #55 of 754
does that mean its in another league compared to ur other iems?
post #56 of 754
Another league? I won't be proclaiming anything like that, the orto's are a different breed though, and are clearly not going to be for everyone, that's my opinion. Don't bait me like that rawster..lol
I hope you enjoy yours, I expect a love it or hate it type of reception from many
Are they for me long term? too soon to tell, if these stay, I will not be listening to many others. I find them a very unique set indeed. @ eric... you know what you can do? @ pianist... I dig your notes on these, although I don't quite think as highly of the um3x as you.
post #57 of 754
Quote:
Originally Posted by the search never ends View Post
Another league? I won't be proclaiming anything like that, the orto's are a different breed though, and are clearly not going to be for everyone, that's my opinion. Don't bait me like that rawster..lol
I hope you enjoy yours, I expect a love it or hate it type of reception from many
Are they for me long term? too soon to tell, if these stay, I will not be listening to many others. I find them a very unique set indeed. @ eric... you know what you can do? @ pianist... I dig your notes on these, although I don't quite think as highly of the um3x as you.
Sup search......I'm working on it for you.. I don't have that one artist you asked about, but plenty of music with piano.. I'll let you know my thoughts soon. I think you're in trouble though @ search......lol
post #58 of 754
lol by using terms such as different breed you're trapping yourself i don't have to bait you at all
post #59 of 754
Why...what did I do now? yeah yeah rawster, I know, these are different though.
Can I get some help here?
post #60 of 754
Quote:
Originally Posted by the search never ends View Post
Why...what did I do now? yeah yeah rawster, I know, these are different though.
Can I get some help here?
Well, the ortofon's use a different driver than almost all other iems, so calling them a different breed seems a perfectly accurate and neutral description.

I have all the iems that I'm going to buy, but it's fun to read people's impressions of iems like the ortos. The new driver is particularly interesting. I wonder if it will become popular?
Cheers.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Ortofon e-Q7 Appreciation Thread