Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Multi-IEM Review - 314 IEMs compared (Olasonic Flat-4 Nami added 04/13/14 p. 894)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Multi-IEM Review - 314 IEMs compared (Olasonic Flat-4 Nami added 04/13/14 p. 894) - Page 10

post #136 of 13439
Thanks for the update(s)!

I'm not surprised that the CK6 didn't impress since they're a rather old product. The phones were released in Japan in late 2006 and were discontinued in that country sometime in 2008. One Japanese reviewer stated that he felt the CK6s were worth about $30 but not the $45 or so he paid for them. Its spiritual successors are the CKS line, at least in the sense that they're among the bassier AT canalphones.

As for the J-Jays: Well, at least now I know that Jays products are available from Amazon. Hooray!
post #137 of 13439
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mvw2 View Post
Yep. It's got thick notes. It's actually pretty nice with deep strings where you get nice, heavy reverberation and presence, but that thickness of note comes at a price, a loss of fine detail. It's noticeable when being able to directly compare to other options like the CK10. It's less noticeable when you don't. Personal preference will play a role in how you like such aspects.

I think the biggest benefit of the Custom 3 is the sound stage. The sense of size and space is great, and it has good linearity to it. It does sound stage better then a heck of a lot of other earphones.
They are pretty relaxing to listen to. I guess I've been spoiled in the past few days by the Audio-Technica IEMs. I'll have to equalize myself with some budget sets and then come back to the C3.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kjk1281 View Post
Thanks for the update(s)!

I'm not surprised that the CK6 didn't impress since they're a rather old product. The phones were released in Japan in late 2006 and were discontinued in that country sometime in 2008. One Japanese reviewer stated that he felt the CK6s were worth about $30 but not the $45 or so he paid for them. Its spiritual successors are the CKS line, at least in the sense that they're among the bassier AT canalphones.

As for the J-Jays: Well, at least now I know that Jays products are available from Amazon. Hooray!
Well, to be honest I paid about $15 for the CK6 and I still feel like I got ripped off. Even the CX300 is a better-sounding set. Worst thing is that the US MSRP is listed at $99.99.

As for the Jays, the one thing they do better than any other brand is packaging. If I had to give an earphone as a gift, the J-Jays would be near the top of the list. High hopes for my incoming Q-Jays!
post #138 of 13439
Quote:
Originally Posted by ljokerl View Post
They are pretty relaxing to listen to. I guess I've been spoiled in the past few days by the Audio-Technica IEMs. I'll have to equalize myself with some budget sets and then come back to the C3.



Well, to be honest I paid about $15 for the CK6 and I still feel like I got ripped off. Even the CX300 is a better-sounding set. Worst thing is that the US MSRP is listed at $99.99.

As for the Jays, the one thing they do better than any other brand is packaging. If I had to give an earphone as a gift, the J-Jays would be near the top of the list. High hopes for my incoming Q-Jays!
They are one of my favourite IEMs. Very precise and musical sounding. You should like them, but give them at least 20 hours of burn in to relax the treble a little. It's quite hot out of the box. After burn in, they are only slightly sibilant sometimes, but nothing major. I would rate them around RE0 level out of a good source like AMP3. Each has their strengths and weaknesses but unamped q-jays sound much more lively and controlled in the bass.

Anyway, I am awaiting your impressions. It will be interesting to hear to what you think of them.
post #139 of 13439
Q-Jays I remember looking at these sometime around when they came out. They definitely seemed like good iem's but their price turned me off. Now I own one that is much more expensive :P I look forward to that review but I guess it won't be for a while since it looks like you got lots of reviews ahead of you.
post #140 of 13439
Quote:
Originally Posted by ljokerl View Post
As for the Jays, the one thing they do better than any other brand is packaging.
You obviously didn't have the "unboxing" experience with the e-Q7's you reviewed, lol
post #141 of 13439
he pretty much did :P it came with the box and everything the black box the e-Q7 it comes with is impressive. the stuff that the e-Q7 comes with however is not too impressive.

however the jays do pack in a lot of stuff in their iem's. all they need to do now is release xjays and have it relatively low price.
post #142 of 13439
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by grokit View Post
You obviously didn't have the "unboxing" experience with the e-Q7's you reviewed, lol
Au contraire, I did. But there's a fine line between style and excess, and for me the Ortofons cross it.

The Jays packaging is the epitome of swedish design principles - incredibly simple and straightforward and yet so complete (unlike the ortofons). For example the replacement filters are attached right to the instruction manual where the procedure of replacing them is described. Pretty cool. And the number of accessories per unit volume is just off the charts. It's really how Ikea would've packaged a set of earphones, and more.
post #143 of 13439
Quote:
Originally Posted by ljokerl View Post
Au contraire, I did. But there's a fine line between style and excess, and for me the Ortofons cross it.

The Jays packaging is the epitome of swedish design principles - incredibly simple and straightforward and yet so complete (unlike the ortofons).
But you were speaking of packaging in the original quote and not accessories, yes?

For me there is no contest on the packaging; one is a very good job of retail plastic and the other elevates above that entirely, into the realm of a fine watch.
post #144 of 13439
Would be cool if you get to review old heavyweights like the shure s530 or UE Triple fi 10.
post #145 of 13439
Thread Starter 
Added Sennheiser CX300 and CX250. CX300s should make a good baseline for those familiar with them while the CX250s are quite good in their own right.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post
Would be cool if you get to review old heavyweights like the shure s530 or UE Triple fi 10.
I have the TF10 but they've been reviewed to death so I wasn't planning on adding them, at least not until I'm done with all of the interesting stuff. I will eventually .
post #146 of 13439
looks like the cx250 is better than the cx300. kinda strange how the model numbers dont look that way :P

oh you got a bold tag messed up in the cx250 section in the value area i think.
post #147 of 13439
Hey |joker|!

I have nothing valuable to add (except, to tell you that your writeups are excellent, as usual), but I was curious about your ADDIEMs.

I was lurking, and clicked your profile, and did a double take (or three). Did you re-cable out of necessity, or in the hopes of getting a better sound?
post #148 of 13439
Ah, the update I've been waiting for!

Actually, I really enjoyed your assessment of the CX300. Even though I'm not too crazy about them myself, I've always felt that most reviews of that particular canalphone have always gravitated toward two extremes: either "This is worst I've ever heard" or "OMG awesome!" It seems that yours and ClieOS' reviews are the only two on the Internet that are objective.


Quote:
Originally Posted by rawrster View Post
looks like the cx250 is better than the cx300. kinda strange how the model numbers dont look that way :P
Sennheiser should of called it the CX320 or something similar (since CX350's already taken). Once I achieved the right fit, I was quite pleased at how much better the CX250 sounded when compared to the CX300, at least to my ears.

To make the numbers even more confusing, there's another Sennheiser, the CX150, that sounds very similar to the CX250, and therefore also better than the CX300.
post #149 of 13439
well their model numbers dont make sense. its like they put numbers in a hat and drew from it to determine what it should be. I don't have too many iem's at that price range but I enjoyed the CX300..until I got something better (so more expensive)but they are one of my 3 or 4 iem's that I had that was in the 20 dollar or so range.
post #150 of 13439
Oh, the big 60. You're getting old.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Multi-IEM Review - 314 IEMs compared (Olasonic Flat-4 Nami added 04/13/14 p. 894)