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 125

post #1861 of 16803


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mootookang View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

 Having patience will pay off, besides there's plenty of TF10 coverage outside of this thread anyways, there's more interesting stuff coming up that peaks more interest. 




+1

It really isn't difficult to find TF10 impression because of the two Amazon deals, it's more fun to get coverage on something that is either completely new or overlooked by the community.


But don't forget, for many people who own nothing else on the list, a TF10 review may help give a relative gauge of where the other headphones sit in relation to it.

post #1862 of 16803
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bcwang View Post

I sure hope you get to the TF10s soon and not keep putting it off.  I wish you had more UE and Shure coverage, maybe someone needs to send you some, but not at the cost of delaying the TF10 review any further of course.


Well I've got reviews of the SuperFi 3, SuperFi 4, SuperFi 5 / UE600, SuperFi 5 Pro, SuperFi 5 EB, UE600, UE700, and TF10 in the works. I think that should just about cover UE tongue.gif



Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

How does the SF4 compare to the M6s? What's the SF4s sound signature and how does it rate against it in technical aspects? thanks. 



The SF4 is dry and slightly warm/dark/bassy for an armature-based earphone. I don't know what kind of driver it uses but after listening to them I wouldn't be surprised if it was a Knowles Siren (also found in the SM PL50, MEE A151, Fischer SBA-01, s-JAYS, NOX Scouts, etc etc). It does two things right - bass texture and soundstaging - but I like it less than any of the other UE earphones (including the SF3/Altec UHP336). Its balance is bottom-tilted and there's a bit of extension missing at the top. I think UE tried to compensate for that by boosting it somewhere in the 4-7k range but all they added was a bit of sibilance with a couple of tracks (M6 is guilty of this on occasion as well). Technically I rate it just above the M6 but preferentially I don't like it very much. I think it has the type of sound signature that's done right by the A151 and q-JAYS but with the SF4 it's not quite there.

post #1863 of 16803

hi joker

 

if i were to get either the m3 or xcape, which is better in terms of overall sq? how about the new meelec armature?

id like something neutral with a little bit of warmth and a hint of sparkle

post #1864 of 16803
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcwang View Post

But don't forget, for many people who own nothing else on the list, a TF10 review may help give a relative gauge of where the other headphones sit in relation to it.
TF10's placement can never be cemented, since the IEM depends heavily on the fit and seal.

Since TF10 is so fit dependent, the review would be very subjective. In this case, having someone who's interested in them search for multiple impression on them might give them more information about whether TF10 is right for them or not. They really are the wildcard of the universal realm, and I can't help but think having a set review on them would do more harm to the reputation than good. (Since it is possible that someone might be disappoint in them from the poor seal, or someone who could get a good seal avoiding them due to the fear of achieving poor seal)
post #1865 of 16803
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mywallethurts View Post

if i were to get either the m3 or xcape, which is better in terms of overall sq? how about the new meelec armature?

id like something neutral with a little bit of warmth and a hint of sparkle


For me that would be the Xcape but personal preferences could push it either way. The Xcape is a little dry for my taste but it does have that slightly warm sound with a touch of treble sparkle. The A151 is quicker and just a tad less thick-sounding but there's really no sparkle to speak of. The M3 is slightly brighter but it's got a relaxed high end. It's got my favourite mids of the three but I like the Xcape's treble better as it just has more bite and crispness.

post #1866 of 16803

Hey ljokerl,

 

 thanks for helping... i am still confused little bit ... just give me an ideal choice which has both bass n isolation... monster turbine or eterna or klipsch s4 or shure se115 ?? ... not over bass .. but should not lack in bass at all... 

post #1867 of 16803
Quote:
Originally Posted by joe24 View Post

Hey ljokerl,

 

 thanks for helping... i am still confused little bit ... just give me an ideal choice which has both bass n isolation... monster turbine or eterna or klipsch s4 or shure se115 ?? ... not over bass .. but should not lack in bass at all... 



you cant rely entirely on what one person is telling you because sound preferences are different.  very different.  at some point you are going to have to take a chance and buy one.  I suggest picking one of the popular models so you can resell it if you arent happy.

post #1868 of 16803

actually, looking back on the response, he gave you a clear single preference...the eterna.
 

Quote:


Quote:
Originally Posted by joe24 View Post

what would you prefer based on sound quality, bass and isolation ...  meelectronics a151 , sunrise sw-xcape , nuforce n700, shure se115, fischer audio eterno v1 or v2 , or should i just replace monster s as it was for only 59$ ... if you think any other headphone are good based on my priorities , also let me know,,

 

thanks in advance... :)



Of those the A151 will have the most isolation but it's not a bassy earphone - just a bit above baseline when it comes to mid-bass. Same goes for the Xcape. Eternas have a hair more bass than the Turbines and the Nuforces are about on-level with the Monsters (the way I hear them). I generally prefer the Eterna to the Turbine so that would be my choice for bass assuming you can't just exercise the warranty on the Turbines and get a new one.

post #1869 of 16803

Just wondering if anyone has had the chance to compare maybe the turbines with the teknines.

 

I currently have the turbines and also have the teknines on order (store has them on pre-sale so order won't come until february)

 

 

I've read good things about the teknines, but I have just read in some other thread that ljokerl was unimpressed by them.  I know SQ is subjective but since I'm still a newb to this hobby I have a lot of trust on ljokerl and you guys.

 

Just wondering if you guys have some quick 2 minute comments so I can go ahead and cancel my order if teknines turnes out to be bad :D

 

thanks guys

post #1870 of 16803

I have A/B'd the Munitios to the Turbines.  That was actually one of the first comparos I did because they are of similar cost and have similar reputations (great bass). 

 

The Turbines have a "thinner" sound sound signature that some may prefer, the treble is a bit more forward so it has a bit more of a "detailed" and brighter sound.  Personally, I really hate "bright" sound so I found the treble a bit harsh.  Others may not.  The Turbines do have excellent bass output but I found it a bit boomy / flabby. 

 

The Munitios have smoother, less fatiguing treble and significantly better bass performance.  Overall a "thicker" sound.  It's deep, extended sub bass and with more overall output.  With some types of music (e.g. rock / metal) it can a bit sound "congested" because there is SO MUCH bass that midrange gets overwhelmed.  This is really easy to EQ out though (e.g. the "treble boost" setting on the iPod EQ cleans it right up). 

 

Overall the Turbines are like mating a pair of decent, bright speakers with an OK subwoofer.  The Munitios sound more like a pair of smooth, "warm" speakers paired with a monster subwoofer.

 

One small side note -- the build on the standard Turbines is kinda cheesy, a thin plastic cord and I didn't think the fit was as comfortable (they kept falling out).  The Turbine Pros are better in this respect. The Munitio 9's have a much nicer cord and better fit/isolation. 

 

here is another post comparing them (and you can see myself repeat nearly similar comments two posts later redface.gif) : http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/528553/dba-02-vs-munitio-teknines/60#post_7201012

 

Hope that helps!  They aren't for everyone but if like huge bass and a "warm" sound signature with non-fatiguing treble, they will be great.

post #1871 of 16803
Joker , would you mind briefly comparing the ecci pr401 and the hje900? Do their sound signatures bear anything more than a passing resemblance to each other?
post #1872 of 16803

I'll go for the Meelectronics SP51. The Housing, Comfort, Isolation and Sound should be very similar to the Hippo VBs. biggrin.gif

post #1873 of 16803
Thread Starter 

Quote:

Originally Posted by kitkat12012 View Post

Just wondering if anyone has had the chance to compare maybe the turbines with the teknines.

 

I currently have the turbines and also have the teknines on order (store has them on pre-sale so order won't come until february)

 

I've read good things about the teknines, but I have just read in some other thread that ljokerl was unimpressed by them.  I know SQ is subjective but since I'm still a newb to this hobby I have a lot of trust on ljokerl and you guys.

 

Just wondering if you guys have some quick 2 minute comments so I can go ahead and cancel my order if teknines turnes out to be bad :D

 

Yes, and also with the Monster Jamz. I really don't like the Jamz very much but even they compete well with the Teknines. I don't currently have either on hand as I passed the Turbines on to their new owner and the Jamz died again (3rd time in four months...) but I have plenty of other bassy phones - Meelec SP51, Thinksound TS02, Fischer Eterna, Senn IE6, SuperFi5EB, etc. In terms of bass quantity the Teknines lag slightly behind the real bass Monsters (SF5EB and Eterna) but beat the reasonably bass-heavy IE6 and TS02, which is also approximately where the Turbines fall for me. The problem is definition - there just isn't much with the Teknines. Listening to them on their own it isn't particularly noticeable but when compared to something with properly-defined bass (such as the IE6 or Turbine) they sound flabby. The bass is of the soft type and notes lack edge and attack. The Eterna, which really isn't the most sprightly earphone out there, does a better job of relating texture and detail, especially down in the sub-bass region and especially when things get busy. There is a lot of bass bleed and the midrange veil is one of the thickest and most distracting I've heard on a higher-end earphone. They've gotten better with the 150+ hours of burn-in I've put on them but I still have a hard time adjusting to them after using any other earphone. One thing I can't complain about is smoothness - the veil really irons out the sound signature to the point where nothing pops out whatsoever - but the strong bass keeps them from becoming dull and lifeless (which is what happens with the Monster Jamz). They also sound better at higher volumes but I value my hearing too much to 'enjoy' them that way.
 

On this note I should say that when I figure out the 'sound quality' score for an earphone, I do so by pitting it in a series of A:B comparisons against the rest of my collection. Usually it starts off being compared to a benchmark like the RE-ZERO or Eterna and if I feel that it is worse, I will move down a bit (to the Brainwavz M2 or Thinksound TS02, for example) and repeat until I get to an A:B where the earphone in question 'wins'. With the Teknines I got all the way down to the Earsquake SHA before I felt that it was the clear winner mostly because clarity is easily the most (immediately) noticeable aspect of an earphone's technical proficiency and there really is no way for me to compare these to other earphones without feeling that clarity is being thrown out the window, so I won't - they are what they are.

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by JxK View Post

Joker , would you mind briefly comparing the ecci pr401 and the hje900? Do their sound signatures bear anything more than a passing resemblance to each other?


Yeah, there's definitely a resemblance. I still think that the HJE900 is the slightly better earphone - it's a little more crisp, generally quicker, and more tonally correct - but the PR401 is a little more spacious and the midrange recession is a bit less noticeable. I actually sent my PR401s off to someone who has (and loves) the HJE900s and was hooked by my ECCI review so maybe that person will chime in with some direct comparisons. 

post #1874 of 16803

^-Thanks for that Joker, I also wanted to know how it compared to the 900; great review on the pr401 as well. If they do drums/percussion anywhere near as well as the 900s I think id really enjoy them =)

post #1875 of 16803

hey guys,

 

custom 3, TF10, normal turbines, RE0, or westone 1s for the most clarity in  metal?

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)