Latest Thread Images

Top-Tier Universal IEM Comparison Chart, Frequency Response Charts, & Discussion
Apr 27, 2010 at 6:53 AM Post #421 of 785
@average_joe, I remember reading somewhere regarding micro and macro detail...I have forgotten their 'definition'
tongue.gif
Mind explaining to a noob like me
regular_smile .gif
 
Apr 27, 2010 at 9:32 AM Post #422 of 785
Ok.So i have this SENNHEISER CX 550 STYLE II.Is it low end,mid end,(i know it is not high end) or just an IEM for a noob?because it is the best sound i've ever heard so far and the most expensive IEM i bought so far (156usd).
angry_face.gif


What do you guys think?

I also bought a SENNHEISER HD 238(for 125$), a week before this CX 550,but it tend to distort so MUCH when crank to high volume.
 
Apr 27, 2010 at 10:02 AM Post #423 of 785
^ I hate to say this, but...You could get the CX550 and HD238 cheaper than what you have paid...Just enjoy them
regular_smile .gif


Anyway congratulation as you have came to the right forum!
 
Apr 27, 2010 at 10:16 AM Post #424 of 785
Quote:

Originally Posted by average_joe /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Quick comparison (because I don't have much time tonight) of the SM3 with the FX700...

Used the output from my iPod -> Arrow (which the SM3 now sounds better with since I switched to the Ety tips) and the HUD-MX1.

First, the FX700 has nice bass impact and a nice wide presentation. The mids are filled in compared to the FX500, and the treble has been tamed. But that is a $150 vs. $330 IEM. How about a $330 vs. a $425 IEM?

Both can bring out the bad in bad masters/bitrate songs, but the SM3 is more sensitive to poor recordings.

OK, the FX700, while sounding great, has a leaner sound. Soundstage seems wide, but the SM3 actually exceed the FX700 in width. Then tack on a much better 3D space from the SM3 and it goes from the good presentation of the FX700 to better. For example, Live - Lakini's Juice sounds very different on the two. Presentation of the SM3 is more upfront and around your head while the FX700 is more laid back.

The FX700 has nice detail. Instruments have nice micro-detail, and especially the bass with it's nice natural sounding reverb. It only makes sense though that the SM3 is even more detailed and allows you to easily hear those details since it is more sensitive to poor recordings. I was A/Bing and hearing the clear details of what the FX700 wasn't presenting. The detail is made available IMO due to the better placement within the 3D space, placing everything so well.

To my ears, when going from the SM3 to the FX700, it just doesn't sound 'natural' with acoustic instruments (for example Blues Traveler - Hook). The mids of the SM3 are much fuller and while I don't think the FX700 has recessed mids, when switching to the FX700 they do sound kinda sucked out. And there is a treble emphasis with the FX700 that makes it sound a little off also. The naturalness of the SM3 in comparison with the FX700 is probably due to the FX700 sounding flatter in soundstage depth (and height).

The FX700 bass is awesome. Great impact, reverberation, and detail. Out of time already? Yep...more later!

NOTE: Please don't read this as the FX700 being bad, it is not and I do like the FX700. Also, I have not yet come to a conclusion!


Interesting impressions, thanks Joe! Sounds to me like the SM3 have more forward mids, because you're saying they sound fuller and calling the FX700 lean in comparison. This cannot be due to bass presence, because the JVCs have plenty of upper bass and give vocals enough chest. To my ears the mids on the FX700 are quite natural (a main ingredient of their great timbre) and neither lacking nor obtrusive. That's why I wonder, is the SM3's midrange comparable to the SE530 or CK100 (read: very forward)?
 
Apr 27, 2010 at 3:32 PM Post #425 of 785
Quote:

Originally Posted by KLS /img/forum/go_quote.gif
^ I hate to say this, but...You could get the CX550 and HD238 cheaper than what you have paid...Just enjoy them
regular_smile .gif


Anyway congratulation as you have came to the right forum!


yeah.It suck here when it come to imported item such as this one as it become much more expensive here.I live in Malaysia.There is no other way to buy classy IEM except go to local retailer WHICH is expensive.
mad.gif


If i wants to buy online such as from amazon,their delivery service don't deliver it to my place.
frown.gif
 
Apr 27, 2010 at 6:45 PM Post #426 of 785
Quote:

Originally Posted by average_joe /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Quick comparison (because I don't have much time tonight) of the SM3 with the FX700...

Used the output from my iPod -> Arrow (which the SM3 now sounds better with since I switched to the Ety tips) and the HUD-MX1.

First, the FX700 has nice bass impact and a nice wide presentation. The mids are filled in compared to the FX500, and the treble has been tamed. But that is a $150 vs. $330 IEM. How about a $330 vs. a $425 IEM?

Both can bring out the bad in bad masters/bitrate songs, but the SM3 is more sensitive to poor recordings.

OK, the FX700, while sounding great, has a leaner sound. Soundstage seems wide, but the SM3 actually exceed the FX700 in width. Then tack on a much better 3D space from the SM3 and it goes from the good presentation of the FX700 to better. For example, Live - Lakini's Juice sounds very different on the two. Presentation of the SM3 is more upfront and around your head while the FX700 is more laid back.

The FX700 has nice detail. Instruments have nice micro-detail, and especially the bass with it's nice natural sounding reverb. It only makes sense though that the SM3 is even more detailed and allows you to easily hear those details since it is more sensitive to poor recordings. I was A/Bing and hearing the clear details of what the FX700 wasn't presenting. The detail is made available IMO due to the better placement within the 3D space, placing everything so well.

To my ears, when going from the SM3 to the FX700, it just doesn't sound 'natural' with acoustic instruments (for example Blues Traveler - Hook). The mids of the SM3 are much fuller and while I don't think the FX700 has recessed mids, when switching to the FX700 they do sound kinda sucked out. And there is a treble emphasis with the FX700 that makes it sound a little off also. The naturalness of the SM3 in comparison with the FX700 is probably due to the FX700 sounding flatter in soundstage depth (and height).

The FX700 bass is awesome. Great impact, reverberation, and detail. Out of time already? Yep...more later!

NOTE: Please don't read this as the FX700 being bad, it is not and I do like the FX700. Also, I have not yet come to a conclusion!


@avarage joe, great impressions ,thanks joe
 
Apr 27, 2010 at 7:19 PM Post #427 of 785
What are some iems that have good bass? I was thinking about getting the monster turbine pro copper but i was wondering if anything could compare to those.
 
Apr 27, 2010 at 7:21 PM Post #428 of 785
Quote:

Originally Posted by twrmnd /img/forum/go_quote.gif
What are some iems that have good bass? I was thinking about getting the monster turbine pro copper but i was wondering if anything could compare to those.


Coppers, MD's, or FX700's should all satisfy in that regard....
 
Apr 27, 2010 at 7:49 PM Post #429 of 785
i would vote for westone um3x
 
Apr 27, 2010 at 8:03 PM Post #430 of 785
Quote:

Originally Posted by twrmnd /img/forum/go_quote.gif
What are some iems that have good bass? I was thinking about getting the monster turbine pro copper but i was wondering if anything could compare to those.


monster pro golds, monster pro copper, westone 3, tf10, klipsch custom 3
 
Apr 27, 2010 at 9:49 PM Post #431 of 785
Ok folks, Concerning the Trile.fi's old and new.......The only changes made were the following. First logitech wanted a new boxing that they considered an apgrade, the wires did change, but were at least inteneded to be more durable, and finally, the double flange tips were dropped eventually. The vi version hs a different cable and no slider (for obvious reasons). as far as drivers or any other inside components, no chamges have been made. (the outside finish is slightly different) This is UE's official stand, so take it for what it's worth. TBH.........my impressions were this, many sets of the triples marked "PRO" still linger, and at much higher prices, and I'm guessing those unscrupulous sellers are behind the "change for the worse" in the newr version. This was repeatedly the answer I got from UE, seems legit.
 
Apr 27, 2010 at 9:59 PM Post #432 of 785
Quote:

Originally Posted by the search never ends /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Ok folks, Concerning the Trile.fi's old and new.......The only changes made were the following. First logitech wanted a new boxing that they considered an apgrade, the wires did change, but were at least inteneded to be more durable, and finally, the double flange tips were dropped eventually. The vi version hs a different cable and no slider (for obvious reasons). as far as drivers or any other inside components, no chamges have been made. (the outside finish is slightly different) This is UE's official stand, so take it for what it's worth. TBH.........my impressions were this, many sets of the triples marked "PRO" still linger, and at much higher prices, and I'm guessing those unscrupulous sellers are behind the "change for the worse" in the newr version. This was repeatedly the answer I got from UE, seems legit.


@ search , well i never got the double flange tips with my set and have had no problems with the cable , so im gessing i got one of the newer sets last year when i got mine.
 
Apr 27, 2010 at 10:23 PM Post #433 of 785
Yes, you got a newer set then.......I've never had any problems with my triples, and if the double flanges were to be a big deal to some, Earplug supersrore sells set of 5 pairs for 9 dollars (they only come in one size) said to be medium/large..I have always had good luck with the folks myself.
 
Apr 27, 2010 at 10:36 PM Post #434 of 785
Quote:

Originally Posted by james444 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Interesting impressions, thanks Joe! Sounds to me like the SM3 have more forward mids, because you're saying they sound fuller and calling the FX700 lean in comparison. This cannot be due to bass presence, because the JVCs have plenty of upper bass and give vocals enough chest. To my ears the mids on the FX700 are quite natural (a main ingredient of their great timbre) and neither lacking nor obtrusive. That's why I wonder, is the SM3's midrange comparable to the SE530 or CK100 (read: very forward)?


I agree with you. And I hear the FX700 as similar to the Coppers in that respect, since the Copper's vocals are also neither lacking nor intrusive. They're just nicely balanced (for my preferences). I'm not actually a fan of overly forward mids, so anything more forwards than the Coppers or FX700 would probably be borderline annoying for me. If the FX700 vocals sound lean in comparison to the SM3 - I know for a fact I would hate the SM3.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top