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 212

post #3166 of 16803
Thread Starter 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by lazysleepyboi View Post

hey ljokerl, I'm not sure if someone asked this, but how would you compare the Westone 4 to the 1964 triples? I am still thoroughly debating between the two. I have custom tips for my sennheiser ie8s, so I'm a bit used to the whole customs process, but how would you compare the two in terms of sound, isolation, cost to value ratio, etc. Also, which one would you recommend more. Again, i'm sorry if someone has asked this before. 



Noone has asked because that's what the sound, isolation, and value scores are for. They do have different signatures and I can't clearly recommend one of the other. The W4 is smoother, a bit thicker, more liquid-sounding. It covers the frequency spectrum a little better on the whole and has a more spacious soundstage. The 1964-T is faster, tighter, cleaner, and more accurate. Its midrange and treble are crisper and clearer and have more aggressive detailing without sounding overly analytical. Both earphones place a very realistic amount of weight on the notes, which is one of their big strengths compared to much of the competition.

post #3167 of 16803

hey people.

i'd never get this ones, but im just curious. has someone tried the skullcandy Asym? from what i heard they have bad isolation and SQ doesnt match the overp-price

 

(yeah, sorry for mentioning Skullcandy in head-fi.org tongue_smile.gif )

post #3168 of 16803
Quote:
Originally Posted by ljokerl View Post


 



Noone has asked because that's what the sound, isolation, and value scores are for. They do have different signatures and I can't clearly recommend one of the other. The W4 is smoother, a bit thicker, more liquid-sounding. It covers the frequency spectrum a little better on the whole and has a more spacious soundstage. The 1964-T is faster, tighter, cleaner, and more accurate. Its midrange and treble are crisper and clearer and have more aggressive detailing without sounding overly analytical. Both earphones place a very realistic amount of weight on the notes, which is one of their big strengths compared to much of the competition.


I've been keeping up with this thread for a while, and it's always amazes me how long this thread has gotten along with how many IEMs you have reviewed. I believe that in your first post you said that the scores are not in relation to each other and that you were ranking them on how you felt during the time with them. Your answer to my dilemma is still kind of foggy because I have no idea which one i would prefer. If I were to get a 1964 custom IEM it would most likely be the quads, but the westone 4 seem very appealing also. Also given the fact that they're 200 dollars apart in terms of the 1964 needing impressions and mailing, I'm still not sure which one i would prefer. Only time will tell, but thanks joker for the insight. I'm sure my decision will be an impulsive buy

post #3169 of 16803
Quote:
Originally Posted by lazysleepyboi View Post




I've been keeping up with this thread for a while, and it's always amazes me how long this thread has gotten along with how many IEMs you have reviewed. I believe that in your first post you said that the scores are not in relation to each other and that you were ranking them on how you felt during the time with them. Your answer to my dilemma is still kind of foggy because I have no idea which one i would prefer. If I were to get a 1964 custom IEM it would most likely be the quads, but the westone 4 seem very appealing also. Also given the fact that they're 200 dollars apart in terms of the 1964 needing impressions and mailing, I'm still not sure which one i would prefer. Only time will tell, but thanks joker for the insight. I'm sure my decision will be an impulsive buy


I don't see how he could give you any more info to go off of. It's all based on personal preference and what we hear ourselves at the end of the day. 

 

Impulsive shopping is the best shopping.

 

post #3170 of 16803

What is the general recommendation for gaming with the astro mixamp? I'm in UK so not everything is available but preferable under £50. Maybe get the MC5's as I'm not that bothered about mic.. Thanks for any info/help :)

post #3171 of 16803
Quote:
Originally Posted by tibble89 View Post

What is the general recommendation for gaming with the astro mixamp? I'm in UK so not everything is available but preferable under £50. Maybe get the MC5's as I'm not that bothered about mic.. Thanks for any info/help :)



I don't think the MC5's would be very good for gaming. I own them and I certainly wouldn't use them for that. I stick to using them for mowing. Great isolation.. Kind of meh sound quality. Very sterile, with the mids very forward and the bass very light. Not much detail on the upper end either. 

post #3172 of 16803

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by vinay2070 View Post

Joker, you need to review the CX55 from deal extreme - http://www.dealextreme.com/p/genuine-sennheiser-cx55-in-ear-stereo-earphone-with-carrying-bag-3-5mm-jack-120cm-cable-34760

 

I got the so called genuine version and they ROCK. Still at 30 hours of break in and the mids getting better, they sounded better than my friends old HD 201. For the 11.xx $ shipped price, they simply ROCK. They may actually land at a good "value" position on your list. My only complain is that the left ear piece is slightly(15%) louder than the right ones. I had ordered one more considering the price ;) Hope that ones fine and genuine too.

 


Quote:


There are no genuine Sennheiser product on dealextreme. This has been discussed out on the forum a dozen times (which is not to say that the fake ones don't sound good). Also, fake IE8s and my reasons for not reviewing any counterfeit items were discussed a couple of pages back in this thread. 

 

A 15% channel imbalance would bother the crap out of me redface.gif.


 


Hi Guys, 

 

Received my HD 595, fiio e11, turbine coppers, clip+ 8 gb today. The best IEM that I previously owned was the Senn CX55 from Dealextreme as mentioned above.

 

There is no 15% channel imbalance in the cx55. I was using my old signal broken Sonyericsson k550i as media player, which was the culprit. Works well with clip+ :)

 

The HD595 are 8+hrs broken in, coppers 1 hour, and my old CX55 for 70 Hour.

 

Makes no difference if I use the E11 with CX55 or coppers.

 

Here is what I feel. Sound quality wise:

 

HD595+ e11 > CX55 > Coppers. The Hd595 still lacks bass for my taste. should have gone for m50 I guess.

 

The cx55 sound very full and warmer compared to the coppers.

 

1) How  many hours burn in minimum required for coppers to sound better? Will there be any difference? I was infact shocked to hear them sound worser than my DE CX55, considering that I paid 20X more.

 

2)Any good/best link for burn in process?

 

3)My clip+ skips part of the tracks when I hold it in hand, It just squeks and skips whole tracks some time. But If I keep on table, it plays well. I have a silicone cover on it. Any static issues? I cant send it back though as I bot it in US, but dont stay in US.

 

 

Thanks,

Vinay

 

 

 

 


Edited by vinay2070 - 6/10/11 at 11:50am
post #3173 of 16803

Just wanted to thank the original poster (ljokerl) for this round up -- amazingly detailed and useful research and writing!

 

I found the lowend IEM reviews very helpful -- the local discount retailer near me sells many of these and I do not want to throw down major cash for something that will break or get lost eventually.  

 

THANK YOU!

post #3174 of 16803

Sigh....another day with just my M9 and SP51. I need to build my collection. I guess the MTPG and Sennheiser IE8 is next on my list. rolleyes.gif

post #3175 of 16803
Thread Starter 

Shure SE530 and SE535 added. Planned review list updated.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by vinay2070 View Post

Received my HD 595, fiio e11, turbine coppers, clip+ 8 gb today. The best IEM that I previously owned was the Senn CX55 from Dealextreme as mentioned above.

 

There is no 15% channel imbalance in the cx55. I was using my old signal broken Sonyericsson k550i as media player, which was the culprit. Works well with clip+ :)

 

The HD595 are 8+hrs broken in, coppers 1 hour, and my old CX55 for 70 Hour.

 

Makes no difference if I use the E11 with CX55 or coppers.

 

Here is what I feel. Sound quality wise:

 

HD595+ e11 > CX55 > Coppers. The Hd595 still lacks bass for my taste. should have gone for m50 I guess.

 

The cx55 sound very full and warmer compared to the coppers.

 

1) How  many hours burn in minimum required for coppers to sound better? Will there be any difference? I was infact shocked to hear them sound worser than my DE CX55, considering that I paid 20X more.

 

2)Any good/best link for burn in process?

 

3)My clip+ skips part of the tracks when I hold it in hand, It just squeks and skips whole tracks some time. But If I keep on table, it plays well. I have a silicone cover on it. Any static issues? I cant send it back though as I bot it in US, but dont stay in US.


See the head-fi burn-in FAQ for burn-in info. I suppose I should add a link to that in the OP at some point... on the to-do list it goes.

SQ changes are best noted retrospectively. Put the CX55 aside for a week or two and just use the Coppers. You'll hear a larger difference when you switch back.



Quote:
Originally Posted by thatladude View Post

Just wanted to thank the original poster (ljokerl) for this round up -- amazingly detailed and useful research and writing!

 

I found the lowend IEM reviews very helpful -- the local discount retailer near me sells many of these and I do not want to throw down major cash for something that will break or get lost eventually.  

 

THANK YOU!


Awesome - glad the thread was useful!

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by Niyologist View Post

Sigh....another day with just my M9 and SP51. I need to build my collection. I guess the MTPG and Sennheiser IE8 is next on my list. rolleyes.gif


The SP51 is like 1.5 earphones in one wink.gif

 

post #3176 of 16803

Nice reviews, sounds like a very good take on those Shures. Funny how bloated the FOTM was when the SE535s came out, but that luckily has calmed. 

 

I take it you've already heard the EX1000s? What do you think of those so far (and CKM99s)? Currently using the EX600s and they are proving to have extremely good value in terms of SQ and build, though isolation and fit is only decent. 

post #3177 of 16803
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

Nice reviews, sounds like a very good take on those Shures. Funny how bloated the FOTM was when the SE535s came out, but that luckily has calmed. 


Well, remember the 535 has a very long lineage going back to the 500.  It's a very entrenched model much like the ER4.  If you like it you love it, otherwise.....

post #3178 of 16803

It was great that he had them side by side. I've heard both but not like that. Makes for a good contrasting perspective. They were actually quite good reviews so it's still a flavor thing. I've said it before, Joker seems able to set aside a sonic bias better than most. Even though I've moved from Shure, I'd personally rate them higher than some other more v shaped sigs due to my need of natural mids more than bandwidth but that's my bias. It's still horses for courses even at this level. I also didn't care as much for the new ergonomics of the 535 vs the 530 though it's fine overall. Great job and thanks, again.

post #3179 of 16803

Great review of the SE530, I pretty much agree with all the points. Your recent reviews of the GR07 and the SE530 have helped me get a better idea of where I need to look, even after trying out so many IEMs and reading the first post (yes, the entire thing - every single review...) who knows how many times over. Looks like I need a balanced and mid-centric sound, but with extended bass and highly detailed and crisp treble, and less "thickness", like how the CK10 presents its highs and mids, but not with its tonal balance. I'm not sure if at this point I can afford the IEMs that can actually match all of these qualities, if one even exists. The 1964T/Q look very interesting and will probably hit every one of my points but cost too much for me. This darn hobby!

post #3180 of 16803
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

Nice reviews, sounds like a very good take on those Shures. Funny how bloated the FOTM was when the SE535s came out, but that luckily has calmed. 

 

I take it you've already heard the EX1000s? What do you think of those so far (and CKM99s)? Currently using the EX600s and they are proving to have extremely good value in terms of SQ and build, though isolation and fit is only decent. 


I think the EX1000 is much more neutral than the CKM99. The Audio-Technicas are a little bright, even for me. Maybe I need to find some foam tips. I agree on the build - EX1000 is quite good though the cable connectors are a bit unwieldy and the cables themselves are pretty thin. Isolation is fine - more than most of the other high-end dynamics. Fit is only so-so. Basically a straight-barrel with a vertical bulge. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by goodvibes View Post

It was great that he had them side by side. I've heard both but not like that. Makes for a good contrasting perspective. They were actually quite good reviews so it's still a flavor thing. I've said it before, Joker seems able to set aside a sonic bias better than most. Even though I've moved from Shure, I'd personally rate them higher than some other more v shaped sigs due to my need of natural mids more than bandwidth but that's my bias. It's still horses for courses even at this level. I also didn't care as much for the new ergonomics of the 535 vs the 530 though it's fine overall. Great job and thanks, again.


Thanks, the Shures were actually pretty challenging to review. They are not my signature but closer to it than the Earsonics sets. I just didn't feel that the performance was there, especially with the SE530.

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aflac View Post

Great review of the SE530, I pretty much agree with all the points. Your recent reviews of the GR07 and the SE530 have helped me get a better idea of where I need to look, even after trying out so many IEMs and reading the first post (yes, the entire thing - every single review...) who knows how many times over. Looks like I need a balanced and mid-centric sound, but with extended bass and highly detailed and crisp treble, and less "thickness", like how the CK10 presents its highs and mids, but not with its tonal balance. I'm not sure if at this point I can afford the IEMs that can actually match all of these qualities, if one even exists. The 1964T/Q look very interesting and will probably hit every one of my points but cost too much for me. This darn hobby!


The whole thing? That's over 100,000 words. Your dedication is admirable. Oh and you'd probably like the e-Q5 wink.gif


Edited by ljokerl - 6/11/11 at 8:00pm
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)