or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Multi-IEM Review - 352 IEMs compared (Pump Audio Earphones added 04/03/16 p. 1106)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Multi-IEM Review - 352 IEMs compared (Pump Audio Earphones added 04/03/16 p. 1106) - Page 75

post #1111 of 16803

to be honest, i thought the TF10 was pretty bad compared to the RE0

post #1112 of 16803

Wow, so the RE0 must sound way better than the PL50, because I thought the TF10 (borrowed them briefly) sounded noticeably better than the PL50.

 

Can anyone compare the RE0 and PL50? I'll have to look for threads comparing them.

post #1113 of 16803
Quote:
Originally Posted by jackson View Post

Wow, so the RE0 must sound way better than the PL50, because I thought the TF10 (borrowed them briefly) sounded noticeably better than the PL50.

 

Can anyone compare the RE0 and PL50? I'll have to look for threads comparing them.

Short answer: RE0 wins in terms of sound quality, especially detail, if that's your thing. PL50 wins in terms of build quality, fit, and comfort. Neither isolate well enough for truly noise environments like planes, but are good enough for general use. Most people here will say RE0 wins hands down, but I truly think that there's more to IEMs than simple sound quality. One should look at them as a total package.
 

post #1114 of 16803
Quote:
Originally Posted by JxK View Post



Short answer: RE0 wins in terms of sound quality, especially detail, if that's your thing. PL50 wins in terms of build quality, fit, and comfort. Neither isolate well enough for truly noise environments like planes, but are good enough for general use. Most people here will say RE0 wins hands down, but I truly think that there's more to IEMs than simple sound quality. One should look at them as a total package.
 


Thanks.  I definitely love the fit/comfort of the PL50.  I can't get over how "transparent" they feel.  I sometimes forget I'm wearing them.

 

They definitely don't isolate like the ER-6i.  Too bad the Ety flanges don't fit the PL50s.

 

Actually, the Fischer Audio DBA-02 is what I was considering. Clean sound, good bass, comfortable.  Good price, too.

 

Maybe the Westone W3 as a graduation gift to myself smily_headphones1.gif


Edited by jackson - 11/8/10 at 1:43am
post #1115 of 16803
Quote:
Originally Posted by jackson View Post

Wow, so the RE0 must sound way better than the PL50, because I thought the TF10 (borrowed them briefly) sounded noticeably better than the PL50.

 

Can anyone compare the RE0 and PL50? I'll have to look for threads comparing them.


I thought the RE0 was quite a bit better than PL50.

I couldnt get the bass impact from the BA of the PL50 and the highs of the PL50 are nowhere near as extended as the  RE0s.

The mids of the PL50s are nice, but not as nice as my RE-ZEROs.

 

RE-ZEROs > RE0 > PL50  thats my opinion.

post #1116 of 16803

Concerning the JVC HA-FXC50 I would rate them higher than they are rated here. More like a 6.5 as I feel that there only drawbacks is thier somewhat heavy bass & very slightly soft upper midband. Bass extension is excellent as is bass detail. On recordings that are recorded with capturing depth in mind they do excellent in depth but do not create excess depth that isn't in the recording. Bass with the right source material can sound open & airy even if a little over the top. Detail remains excellent throughout.

 

Bear in mind I'm not claiming these to be accurate but I do find them way more listenable than the highly accurate Etymotic Research ER4P earphones. While I do agree with the placement of the ER4P in this review the JVCs score should be higher but not above the ER4P as they truely are not as accurate but points need to be given for listenability. Concerning the treble balance JVC has done well here as they are very detailed without excess sibilance or irritation. In this they should outscore the ER4P if not for the inaccuracy in the lower spectrum. Cymble sounds are very realistic & with softly struck cymbles you can hear the sound of the stick used to strike it with & this sound is exactly how I would imagine it if seated close to the drum set. Vocals are more fleshed out than the ER4P though this is due to the upper mids being a tad soft on the JVC's but does give the vocals warmth & body the ER4Ps lack to a slight degree. Piano music definately suffers though from the excess warmth of the JVC's & as a result don't sound realistic & here the accuracy of the ER4P shines as piano music always sounds correct. Piano is one of the most difficult instruments to reproduce & admittedly the JVC's fail here in a big way due to the excess bass & warmth but I still feel that they deserve a higher score than they have been given here as most music they still sound very good & seem to always be at least listenable in spite of thier inaccuracies

post #1117 of 16803


RE-ZEROs are discontinued, no?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by paulypaul View Post




I thought the RE0 was quite a bit better than PL50.

I couldnt get the bass impact from the BA of the PL50 and the highs of the PL50 are nowhere near as extended as the  RE0s.

The mids of the PL50s are nice, but not as nice as my RE-ZEROs.

 

RE-ZEROs > RE0 > PL50  thats my opinion.

post #1118 of 16803
Quote:
Originally Posted by jackson View Post


RE-ZEROs are discontinued, no?



Not as far as I can see: http://www.head-direct.com/product_detail.php?p=89

They ARE a limited edition of 1000 (supposedly) but they don't seem to have sold out just yet. I'd imagine that there's a good few hundred left.

post #1119 of 16803

Can you include Senns IE 6 next time you update? I think I can afford one from Amazon. Nice review. Thank you..

 

 

post #1120 of 16803

Hmm... I am listening the q-jays now and if they indeed have less treble energy than CK10 and PS200, then I think those two are definitely over the top in the treble department. I would probably consider q-jays to have about the maximum treble energy that I am willing to tolerate in a headphone, as they are already north of neutral up there. Also, I feel that the mids on the q-jays are actually very, very nice and are certainly noteworthy. They may not be the focus of the presentation, but for the price I think mids don't really get much better than that if at all. I think q-jays are only a hair behind IEMs like e-Q7 and SE530 in the mids department and up there with RE0 and IE8. IE8 may have slightly better texture, but q-jays have better resolution and speed. There is a slight dip in the upper mids, nothing major, but the lower and mid mids are fantastic on the q-jays IMO - clear, articulate and generally very accurate.


Edited by Pianist - 11/10/10 at 9:23am
post #1121 of 16803

Q-jays has great treble, but for instance DBA-02 has more treble. In fact it is on the limit I can handle...
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pianist View Post

Hmm... I am listening the q-jays now and if they indeed have less treble energy than CK10 and PS200, then I think those two are definitely over the top in the treble department. I would probably consider q-jays to have about the maximum treble energy that I am willing to tolerate in a headphone, as they are already north of neutral up there. Also, I feel that the mids on the q-jays are actually very, very nice and are certainly noteworthy. They may not be the focus of the presentation, but for the price I think mids don't really get much better than that if at all. I think q-jays are only a hair behind IEMs like e-Q7 and SE530 in the mids department and up there with RE0 and IE8. IE8 may have slightly better texture, but q-jays have better resolution and speed. There is a slight dip in the upper mids, nothing major, but the lower and mid mids are fantastic on the q-jays IMO - clear, articulate and generally very accurate.

post #1122 of 16803

i am about pullthe trigger for an brainwavz M1.  Can nu force compare to the m1's? I read good reviews about them, but they are so low in the joker's board, comparing to the m1's.

post #1123 of 16803
Thread Starter 


Quote:

Originally Posted by Angelopsaro View Post

i am about pullthe trigger for an brainwavz M1.  Can nu force compare to the m1's? I read good reviews about them, but they are so low in the joker's board, comparing to the m1's.



I guess that's just the way the cookie crumbles. The NE-6 is a good earphone but if I were you I'd check the date on the really good reviews - they were extremely popular ~1.5 years ago but the budget IEM market has come a long way since then.

post #1124 of 16803
Quote:
Originally Posted by ljokerl View Post


Quote:

Originally Posted by Angelopsaro View Post

i am about pullthe trigger for an brainwavz M1.  Can nu force compare to the m1's? I read good reviews about them, but they are so low in the joker's board, comparing to the m1's.



I guess that's just the way the cookie crumbles. The NE-6 is a good earphone but if I were you I'd check the date on the really good reviews - they were extremely popular ~1.5 years ago but the budget IEM market has come a long way since then.


Yes, your right.

I am also really confused with the M1 vs the R02 (now no pre sale by mp4nation). I  think this is the noobie's dilemma.

I remember back to my first post here, where you suggested me the R02 over the M1. I understand that R02 have an advantage on the bass factor and a bit more sparkly(?). I dont know why but i am leaning to the M1. Maybe the R02 are a bit better but i feel the M1's idea grow on me. So since you stated that the differences are not so big and are simply different but equal i will go with the M1.  I also like the no strain relief's factor, silly me, but i do.

Maybe because they are 32ohm and more balanced i think i can play better with the eq of my J3 (you have one too). And also will help me start separating the sound so i go depper into the sound hobby.

 

P.S which are more laid back?


Edited by Angelopsaro - 11/10/10 at 11:46am
post #1125 of 16803
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Angelopsaro View Post

I am also really confused with the M1 vs the R02 (now no pre sale by mp4nation). I  think this is the noobie's dilemma.

I remember back to my first post here, where you suggested me the R02 over the M1. I understand that R02 have an advantage on the bass factor and a bit more sparkly(?). I dont know why but i am leaning to the M1. Maybe the R02 are a bit better but i feel the M1's idea grow on me. So since you stated that the differences are not so big and are simply different but equal i will go with the M1.  I also like the no strain relief's factor, silly me, but i do.

Maybe because they are 32ohm and more balanced i think i can play better with the eq of my J3 (you have one too). And also will help me start separating the sound so i go depper into the sound hobby.

 

P.S which are more laid back?



The R02 is actually less sparkly than the M1 as a result of their more bottom-biased balance. I would say that the NE-6 is the most laid-back, followed by the R02 and then M1, but I don't consider any of them even close to fatiguing (compared to other sets like the RadioPaq classical, JVC HA-FXC80, etc). 

 

The M1 responds extremely well to EQ so I think you may be on to something there. The R02 responds well also as you would expect since they are very closely-related but is a little less flat to start with.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Multi-IEM Review - 352 IEMs compared (Pump Audio Earphones added 04/03/16 p. 1106)