Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Top-Tier Universal IEM Comparison Chart, Frequency Response Charts, & Discussion
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Top-Tier Universal IEM Comparison Chart, Frequency Response Charts, & Discussion - Page 25

post #361 of 785
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pianist View Post
Sorry, I thought you had these issues with your GR8. Well, your pair is probably faulty then, because I don't hear these problems with my mine. It's true that e-Q7 has more treble than the GR8 - I think it's just better extended though, not really more emphasized. As for bass, I thought they were pretty similar. Are you amping your GR8s?

No, I don't think it's far behind, if at all. And from what I read GR8 needs to be amped to sound good. But even unamped, it sounded nice to my ears.
No problem, and yes, I wish I had a good IEM so I could do a true comparison. But to my ears, the e-Q7 is definitely brighter, or at least has a upper mid/treble peak. I have seen frequency response graphs of both, and they do sound like the graphs show. You are probably right that the e-Q7 is more extended, and I believe the graphs as much.

But what I prefer about the GR8 is the slightly more laid back feel that is much better for my trance tracks, as well as less graininess. Again, could be because mine have a channel imbalance.

GR8 frequency response:


e-Q7 frequency response:


The response of the e-Q7 does look more accurate overall with more extension. The GR8 does look like it has a little more bass, and the e-Q7 has a little peak where the GR8 has a dip in the upper mids. They both are down about 10 dB at 5K. The GR8 chart goes to 20K, where as the e-Q7 chart stops at 16K, so it is hard to tell, but the GR8 looks to be down 20 dB at about 14K while the e-Q7 is at around 16K when it is down 20 dB. So yes, the treble looks more extended in the e-Q7, and the GR8 looks warmer with more bass. That is what my ears seem to be telling me.

And what is not on the chart is my preference for the GR8 with trance music, how the GR8 sounds smoother to me, and how I think the GR8 has a little wider sound stage.
post #362 of 785
Great thread average_joe! Very informative and keep up the amazing job!

I can't believe I just read through everything.

You can add me to the list as a supporter of the CK10.
Currently own: CK10 and CK100
Previously owned/extended audition: ER4P/S, TF10, and Monster Copper


More info about the CK100:
Sound Sig: Forward mids
DAP/amp synergy: Very source dependent (can sound phenomenal or horrible depending on source)

Again, thank you for this thread!
post #363 of 785
@ average_joe - I'm so glad your' ears are telling you what my ears have been telling me about the GR8. With your knowledge and inventory people will probably be more apt listen to you.

Thanks for all your hard work on this chart. You are doing quite a service for the forum.
post #364 of 785
Thread Starter 
I updated the chart and also added some frequency response charts in post 2. Please let me know if you know where other frequency response charts are located. Thanks!

Quote:
Originally Posted by AwakenedBeing View Post
Great thread average_joe! Very informative and keep up the amazing job!

I can't believe I just read through everything.

You can add me to the list as a supporter of the CK10.
Currently own: CK10 and CK100
Previously owned/extended audition: ER4P/S, TF10, and Monster Copper


More info about the CK100:
Sound Sig: Forward mids
DAP/amp synergy: Very source dependent (can sound phenomenal or horrible depending on source)

Again, thank you for this thread!
Thanks for your input, your info has been added to the chart.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dongringo View Post
@ average_joe - I'm so glad your' ears are telling you what my ears have been telling me about the GR8. With your knowledge and inventory people will probably be more apt listen to you.

Thanks for all your hard work on this chart. You are doing quite a service for the forum.
Yes, the GR8 is great! However, I want to hear a good e-Q7. My bad one still sounds very good, but the GR8 edges it out.
post #365 of 785
I offered to send it joe. what else you want?

You can return the favor and send me the GR8 after you've had enough time with them.
post #366 of 785
I was at 32 Ohm again today to check out a Burson 160 ss amp and wanted to check out the e-Q7, but didn't have the time and didn't have my portable rig. Maybe next weekend.
post #367 of 785
Listening to some really bass heavy music on the orto's right now.....lot's of bass, not quite the impact of a dynamic, but it's better layered and detailed. Quoting you Joe "you give, you take"

I will take the orto's, over a dynamic, it's just too damned detailed.
Sure that low wallop is a little less than the MD's ie8, etc, but in the end, I opt for the way the orto's do it. Your orto's are clearly messed up. Now, maybe I'll sell off some stuff, since your impressions have me thinking they sound just different enough for a good pair.
post #368 of 785
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by the search never ends View Post
I offered to send it joe. what else you want?

You can return the favor and send me the GR8 after you've had enough time with them.
PM sent my friend!

Quote:
Originally Posted by dongringo View Post
I was at 32 Ohm again today to check out a Burson 160 ss amp and wanted to check out the e-Q7, but didn't have the time and didn't have my portable rig. Maybe next weekend.
Looking forward to your listening experiences.

Quote:
Originally Posted by the search never ends View Post
Listening to some really bass heavy music on the orto's right now.....lot's of bass, not quite the impact of a dynamic, but it's better layered and detailed. Quoting you Joe "you give, you take"

I will take the orto's, over a dynamic, it's just too damned detailed.
Sure that low wallop is a little less than the MD's ie8, etc, but in the end, I opt for the way the orto's do it. Your orto's are clearly messed up. Now, maybe I'll sell off some stuff, since your impressions have me thinking they sound just different enough for a good pair.
I have not had enough time to come to a conclusion as to what I plan on listening to primarily, but the GR8 isn't a bad option. I do love how it does what it does!
post #369 of 785
heh..i was going to offer mine since mine is currently in cali but looks like search beat me

can you return your e-Q7 and get it fixed? unless of course you bought it off another head-fier or something like that.
post #370 of 785
oh yeah..here's TF10's FR

post #371 of 785
Just got through listening to the IE8, fx700 and fx500 5 minutes ago and posting from my phone so please excuse any typos.

unlike the fx500, the fx700s mids are in no way recessed. listening to the opening of keith richards wicked as it seems, the snare drum is nice and forward with alot of snap and punch as on my ck10. with the the fx500 it has no snap and is quite recessed. compared to the fx500 the bass quantity is pretty much the same but the quality is better and did not muddy out at higher volumes as I thought the fx500 was prone to do on some tracks. the treble is just as prominent on the fx700 if not more so as the fx500 but like everything else has better clarity so my guess is that those who think the treble on the fx500 is hot will find the treble on the fx700 same or even more so but as mentioned with better clarity. as for
soundstage and positioning I think they are pretty much the same.


compared to the IE8 they are a completely different cup of tea. the IE8 is more bass heavy and the highs are rolled off less bright compared to the fx700.


my guess is that those you think the highs on the fx500 are too hot would not be happy with the ck700 while those who think the fx500 would be the perfect phone if the mids were not recessed and overall clarity throughout the entire range could be slightly better will be.

one thing about the fx700, the housing is much wider and for those who like to insert the housing of the fx500 into their canal as i do may find it next to impossible. I took some pics of the two together and would be happy to post them if anyone asks.


hope this helps.

oh one more thing....the thingy (hossle or tube?) that you attach the tip to is a few mm longer on the fx700 than the fx500 so a relatively deep insert is atainable
post #372 of 785
I just want to add my vote for top-tier status for the e-Q7s. They don't appear to have any weaknesses to me, and the treble is quite smooth to my ears. I have owned TF-10s and RE0s, and my fav IEMs until now were my RE1s with a good amp. I'm still breaking them in, but they seem remarkably well-balanced, with great detail and effortless extension in all frequency ranges. They did require a bit more re-positioning than usual to get a good fit at first with my hybrid tips, but that was just at first. I'm very happy with them so far, this is probably it for me as far as universals go for a while even though I like the MDs, IE8s, and SE530s from a distance
post #373 of 785
Thread Starter 
I did buy the e-Q7 used and am working to get it replaced, but they are in the UK, and I in the US. Looking at the frequency response charts, it seems like the left channel has the GR8 response and the right channel has the e-Q7 response.
post #374 of 785
Thread Starter 
@ rawrster: I did see that chart, but was hoping for on with just the TF10. I guess that works for now. Looks like the bass is rolled off, and that treble peak...

Quote:
Originally Posted by javajive View Post
Just got through listening to the IE8, fx700 and fx500 5 minutes ago and posting from my phone so please excuse any typos.

unlike the fx500, the fx700s mids are in no way recessed. listening to the opening of keith richards wicked as it seems, the snare drum is nice and forward with alot of snap and punch as on my ck10. with the the fx500 it has no snap and is quite recessed. compared to the fx500 the bass quantity is pretty much the same but the quality is better and did not muddy out at higher volumes as I thought the fx500 was prone to do on some tracks. the treble is just as prominent on the fx700 if not more so as the fx500 but like everything else has better clarity so my guess is that those who think the treble on the fx500 is hot will find the treble on the fx700 same or even more so but as mentioned with better clarity. as for
soundstage and positioning I think they are pretty much the same.


compared to the IE8 they are a completely different cup of tea. the IE8 is more bass heavy and the highs are rolled off less bright compared to the fx700.


my guess is that those you think the highs on the fx500 are too hot would not be happy with the ck700 while those who think the fx500 would be the perfect phone if the mids were not recessed and overall clarity throughout the entire range could be slightly better will be.

one thing about the fx700, the housing is much wider and for those who like to insert the housing of the fx500 into their canal as i do may find it next to impossible. I took some pics of the two together and would be happy to post them if anyone asks.


hope this helps.

oh one more thing....the thingy (hossle or tube?) that you attach the tip to is a few mm longer on the fx700 than the fx500 so a relatively deep insert is atainable
@ javajive: thanks for the info...looks like they now may have a winner! I suspect the treble will tame with burn in, do you know how many hours the FX700 has on it (ball park, is it new, or has it been there playing music for a long time)? I thought the FX500 was pretty unlistenable until extended burn in (they didn't have much time on them when I got them).

Quote:
Originally Posted by grokit View Post
I just want to add my vote for top-tier status for the e-Q7s. They don't appear to have any weaknesses to me, and the treble is quite smooth to my ears. I have owned TF-10s and RE0s, and my fav IEMs until now were my RE1s with a good amp. I'm still breaking them in, but they seem remarkably well-balanced, with great detail and effortless extension in all frequency ranges. They did require a bit more re-positioning than usual to get a good fit at first with my hybrid tips, but that was just at first. I'm very happy with them so far, this is probably it for me as far as universals go for a while even though I like the MDs, IE8s, and SE530s from a distance
Thank you for the info.
post #375 of 785
Quote:
Originally Posted by average_joe View Post
No problem, and yes, I wish I had a good IEM so I could do a true comparison. But to my ears, the e-Q7 is definitely brighter, or at least has a upper mid/treble peak. I have seen frequency response graphs of both, and they do sound like the graphs show. You are probably right that the e-Q7 is more extended, and I believe the graphs as much.

But what I prefer about the GR8 is the slightly more laid back feel that is much better for my trance tracks, as well as less graininess. Again, could be because mine have a channel imbalance.

GR8 frequency response:


e-Q7 frequency response:


The response of the e-Q7 does look more accurate overall with more extension. The GR8 does look like it has a little more bass, and the e-Q7 has a little peak where the GR8 has a dip in the upper mids. They both are down about 10 dB at 5K. The GR8 chart goes to 20K, where as the e-Q7 chart stops at 16K, so it is hard to tell, but the GR8 looks to be down 20 dB at about 14K while the e-Q7 is at around 16K when it is down 20 dB. So yes, the treble looks more extended in the e-Q7, and the GR8 looks warmer with more bass. That is what my ears seem to be telling me.

And what is not on the chart is my preference for the GR8 with trance music, how the GR8 sounds smoother to me, and how I think the GR8 has a little wider sound stage.
Google Translate
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Top-Tier Universal IEM Comparison Chart, Frequency Response Charts, & Discussion