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 280

post #4186 of 16802

Quote:

Originally Posted by kiteki View Post

So it seems like the new Sony BA's don't have nozzles, which means they won't be able to be reshelled into custom IEM's, thank heavens et dominus patri et spiritus sancti.

 

 

Excuse my ignorance, but why do you need a nozzled IEM to make a remold?
 

 

post #4187 of 16802

Hey there, both of my IEM's busted, both right feeds gone, maybe I have an evil right ear or something. :(

 

As such, I've been listening to my ESW9 cans on the road at present, which I love - but would still like to have a good IEM alternative. Have got about £15 of vouchers for amazon, and would like to put these towards some IEMS from the Amazon UK site.

 

My maximum outlay (after voucher) is £70, which leaves me quite a few options, and was hoping for your thoughts on which to go for from the following:

 

Shure SE215s - have owned SE210's in past, and really like them.

Klipsch S4s

Phonak Audeo PFE 012

Ultimate Ears 700 Noise Isolating Phones

Beyer Dynamic DTX101

Ultimate Ears Superfi 5

 

Ideally I'm looking for a shallow V shape to the sound (I've tried RE0's and these were too thin for my taste); very warm and engaging and fun without being bass monsters. I love the ESW9 sound signature, so something similar to that would be cool. I really liked my Shure SE210's when I had them, so am inclined towards them, but was looking for some advice as to which of the others in my price bracket above, may be worthy contenders.

 

Particular interested in the Klipsch, Phonak and Ultimate Ears as have read good things about all.

 

Thanks in advance for your thoughts...

post #4188 of 16802
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkAndroid View Post

wow!!! I'm looking to buy an IEM to complement my HD 598 and SRH 940 cans and was looking around the forums for opinions on the best IEM but after stumbling on this thread I think I dont have to look further! good work to the OP!



 



Quote:
Originally Posted by kiteki View Post

 

 

best of luck, you'll need it tongue_smile.gif


emmm kiteki why do you say so?

 

post #4189 of 16802

     Quote:

Originally Posted by Benjamin6264 View Post

 

Excuse my ignorance, but why do you need a nozzled IEM to make a remold?
 

 

OK technically you might not have to but every custom IEM I've seen has sound-tubes attached to the nozzles of the BA drivers, the Sony BA shoots the sound out at a 90 degree angle in a chamber coated with LCP or magnesium.

 

Sony said they've been working on their new BA's for over three years and they are publicly flaming the other companies for not using their own technology i.e. "it's all the same".

 

Sony balanced armature.jpg

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkAndroid View Post

emmm kiteki why do you say so?

 


Because the SRH-940 is really good.
 

post #4190 of 16802

Klipsch makes their own BA drivers as well...though yes, it's most likely designed like your typical BA. 


Edited by Inks - 9/16/11 at 11:23am
post #4191 of 16802

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

Klipsch makes their own BA drivers as well...though yes, it's most likely designed like your typical BA. 


Yep and Final Audio too apparently in a factory in a jungle in Indonesia?

 

Here is a better picture:

 

350x177px-LL-9cdbc127_hat7029_1_16_09660b0fa6d738e924764c5a329e50db.jpeg
 

 

post #4192 of 16802
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkAndroid View Post

wow!!! I'm looking to buy an IEM to complement my HD 598 and SRH 940 cans and was looking around the forums for opinions on the best IEM but after stumbling on this thread I think I dont have to look further! good work to the OP!


Thanks, glad the thread has been useful.


 



Quote:
Originally Posted by infernojim View Post

Hey there, both of my IEM's busted, both right feeds gone, maybe I have an evil right ear or something. :(

 

As such, I've been listening to my ESW9 cans on the road at present, which I love - but would still like to have a good IEM alternative. Have got about £15 of vouchers for amazon, and would like to put these towards some IEMS from the Amazon UK site.

 

My maximum outlay (after voucher) is £70, which leaves me quite a few options, and was hoping for your thoughts on which to go for from the following:

 

Shure SE215s - have owned SE210's in past, and really like them.

Klipsch S4s

Phonak Audeo PFE 012

Ultimate Ears 700 Noise Isolating Phones

Beyer Dynamic DTX101

Ultimate Ears Superfi 5

 

Ideally I'm looking for a shallow V shape to the sound (I've tried RE0's and these were too thin for my taste); very warm and engaging and fun without being bass monsters. I love the ESW9 sound signature, so something similar to that would be cool. I really liked my Shure SE210's when I had them, so am inclined towards them, but was looking for some advice as to which of the others in my price bracket above, may be worthy contenders.

 

Particular interested in the Klipsch, Phonak and Ultimate Ears as have read good things about all.

 

Thanks in advance for your thoughts...


To be honest I don't think any of the ones you're looking at have a v-shape curve except for the S4 (and that's definitely not shallow). The S4 is really a step below the others you've listed in overall refinement. The SF5 (non-Pro, I'm assuming) is pretty mid-forward. The UE700 has slightly rolled-off bass and a bit of a treble tilt. I don't think it's what you're looking for. The SE215, PFE012, and DTX101iE are all a bit bass/mid-centric. The Phonaks are a touch on the dark side and pretty hard to drive. The SE215 doesn't sound much like the old SE210 but it's warm and not too thin. There are build issues with the cable so far so I'd rather have a DTX101 personally. If you want something a bit more v-shaped I think the MEElec CC51 is available on amazon.co.uk. It's not very thick-sounding but it's warm and lively and not a bass monster. The ECCI PR401 is another one with a slight v-shape but I'm not sure about availability with that.

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

Klipsch makes their own BA drivers as well...though yes, it's most likely designed like your typical BA. 


The Klipsch ones do have sound tubes but there are some pretty common ones that don't such as the Knowles Siren.

post #4193 of 16802

Being a full-sized headphone, is there a very large difference in SQ between the Sennheiser HD600 and DBA-02? (yeah, apples and oranges, but I'd like to know)

 

Which handles complex passages with the best detail?

post #4194 of 16802
Thread Starter 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by lukeskymac View Post

Being a full-sized headphone, is there a very large difference in SQ between the Sennheiser HD600 and DBA-02? (yeah, apples and oranges, but I'd like to know)

 

Which handles complex passages with the best detail?


With a proper amp I'd definitely give the overall SQ edge to the HD600 but the detail resolution of the DBA-02 is very good. If that's what you're after they should more than do it for you. They really don't break down on busy passages.

 

post #4195 of 16802

OP is awesome, can't thank enough.

post #4196 of 16802

Hi ljokerl,

 

you think RE-262 isolation good enough for train and/or bus commuting?

 

thanks for any reply.

post #4197 of 16802
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arfan View Post

OP is awesome, can't thank enough.



Thanks biggrin.gif



Quote:
Originally Posted by IndieScent View Post

Hi ljokerl,

 

you think RE-262 isolation good enough for train and/or bus commuting?

 

thanks for any reply.



If you are comfortable with the thick HiFiMan biflanges they actually isolate well. Not sure if the current-rev 262s come with the channel swap adapter or not but the 272 worn over-the-ear (channels swapped) with the bi-flange tips is a 4/5 on my scale. Not Ety-like isolation but more than reasonable.

post #4198 of 16802

@|joker|: did you hear? The RE252 has officially been discontinued, now that they've revamped the entire head-direct site. I'm definitely hanging onto mine.

post #4199 of 16802

Thanks! I'll get the DBA, since it's more practical and costs half the Senns.

post #4200 of 16802
Thread Starter 

Added Fischer Audio FA-788 and Skullcandy Smokin'
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ljokerl View Post

(3C19) Skullcandy Smokin’ Buds

Skullcandy Smokin Buds 400x300.jpg
Reviewed Sep 2011

Details: Aging Skullcandy earphone with a familiar form factor
Current Price: $13 from amazon.com (MSRP: $29.95)
Specs: Driver: Dynamic | Imp: 16Ω | Sens: N/A | Freq: 18-20k Hz | Cable: 4' I-plug
Nozzle Size: 5mm | Preferred tips: generic single flanges
Wear Style: Straight down or over-the-ear

Accessories (2.5/5) – Single-flange silicone tips (3 sizes) and soft carrying pouch
Build Quality (3/5) – The plastic housings are similar to those found on the VSonic R02ProII and Grado iGi. The rubber strain reliefs are long and soft but the cable itself is thin and plasticky. An in-line volume control is present below the y-split
Isolation (3/5) – Adequate for an entry-level dynamic-driver earphone
Microphonics (4/5) – Low with cable-down wear; nonexistent otherwise
Comfort (3.5/5) – Typical of a lightweight straight-barrel in-ear and similar to the other IEMs utilizing the same housing

Sound (3/10) - Like the lower-end Ink’d model, the Smokin sounds decent but hardly impresses even next to the age-old JVC Marshmallows and MEElec M2s. The bass is reasonably impactful but tends to sound boomy and has poor depth. Detail resolution is average – about on-par with the MEElec M2. The M2 sounds warmer and fuller, however, so it is more difficult to fault for not offering up much detail.

Bass bleed into the midrange is minimal but the Smokin’ can hardly be called ‘controlled’. The midrange boasts mediocre clarity and a fairly thick veil but isn’t particularly bothersome on the whole. The top end is similarly inoffensive but again neither the clarity nor the detail impress. Overall balance is decent but the Smokin’ buds are hardly flat or level. Noticeable top-end roll-off leads to a darker overall tone and a slight lack of air. The soundstage is small, causing congestion, and the imaging is poor. Though not fair from a price perspective, there is really no comparison between the presentation of these and a decent entry-level set from a Hi-Fi brand, such as the Sennheiser CX300 or Ultimate Ears 350.

Value (6/10) – One of Skullcandy’s first in-ear models, the Smokin’ was originally slotted above the Ink’d in the lineup but has since dropped to a similar price point, more in line with the quality of sound it produces. With proper strain reliefs and a generic, reliable housing design, the Smokin’ is better-built, better-isolating, and less microphonic than the Ink’d. The sound is a bit more colored but at this level it really doesn’t matter – there are worse earphones out there and there certainly are better ones. In contrast to the higher-end FMJ, I wouldn’t caution against the Smokin’ for the asking price in all possible situations.

Pros: Low cable noise, lightweight and comfortable
Cons: Mediocre sound quality

 


 



Quote:
Originally Posted by ljokerl View Post

(3B29) Fischer Audio FA-788

Fischer Audio FA-788 400x300.jpg
Reviewed Sep 2011

Details: Entry-level half-in-ear earphone from Fischer Audio
Current Price: N/A (est. $23)
Specs: Driver: Dynamic | Imp: 32Ω | Sens: 101 dB | Freq: 20-20k Hz | Cable: 4.1’ -plug
Nozzle Size: 5mm | Preferred tips: Stock single-flanges; generic bi-flanges
Wear Style: Straight down

Accessories (1/5) – Single-flange silicone tips (3 sizes)
Build Quality (2.5/5) – The housings are a combination of metal, rubber, and plastic. None of the bits are glued together particularly well but for the price the construction is reasonably good. Metal bits are used at the I-plug and y-split as well but the strain reliefs are too hard and the cable itself is a bit thin
Isolation (2.5/5) – Not bad for a half in-ear earphone but nothing to brag about
Microphonics (3/5) – the FA-788 can only be worn cable-down and the cable noise can be bothersome
Comfort (4.5/5) – The half in-ear housings of the FA-788 are lightweight and sit well in the ear. The long stems provide something to grip while inserting or removing the earphones but I wouldn’t use them in that capacity too often for durability reasons

Sound (6/10) – The FA-788 is one of Fischer’s numerous entry-level models but that’s not what makes it special; what sets this one apart from most other sets I’ve heard in the sub-$25 bracket is the analytical nature of its sound. The bass is not very rumbly but it is punchy and extremely well-controlled. Extension is good and the note thickness being slightly on the lean side helps keep the low end quick and resolving. Clarity is excellent across the range, accentuated by the bright top end but still very impressive without the treble emphasis.

The midrange is free of bass bleed and tends to err on the cool side tonally. It lacks the fullness and warmth of sets such as the Klipsch S3 and UE350 but isn’t recessed next to the bass. The FA-788 makes the similarly-priced H2O Audio Flex sound a bit muddy but lacks the more realistic note thickness of the H2O. The sound of the Fischers is very clean – almost clinical – and runs into some of the problems common to analytical entry-level earphones. The treble is slightly emphasized over the midrange and not entirely smooth. It is well-extended but sounds a touch sharp and edgy on some tracks. Harshness is not left completely out of the equation either and as a result the FA-788 works best at lower volumes. Plenty is sacrificed for class-leading clarity so those looking for a smooth, forgiving in-ear for relaxed listening won’t find it here. That said, the closest sets to these in sound signature would probably be JVC’a FXC-series microdriver monitors, which I quite like as well.

When it comes to presentation, the FA-788 is a bit of a mixed bag. On the one hand it sounds airy and spacious, with good soundstage width and impressive instrument separation. On the other hand the stage lacks a bit of depth, the layering isn’t class-leading, and the sound isn’t really fleshed out enough to fill the sonic space. The earphones end up sounding a bit cavernous and – oddly – seem to place the sonic image a bit higher up than I’m accustomed to, as if the listener is underneath the stage. The similarly-priced H2O Audio Flex has a larger headstage and gives a better sense of 3-D space, though its sound is not as clean and accurate as that of the FA-788. Ditto on the pricier Soundmagic E10. On the whole, the presentation of the FA-788 is for those who want the coherence of an in-ear earphone with the lateral width and air of a conventional earbud.

Value (8/10) – The Fischer Audio FA-788 is an entry-level earphone that offers the comfort of a shallow-insertion IEM along with surprisingly crisp and accurate sound. Good end-to-end extension and a very clean note presentation complete the picture and make the FA-788 worth recommending on sound quality alone. It may not be particularly well-built and there are certainly sets with less cable noise and better isolation but it sounds as good as anything else I’ve heard in the price range.

Pros: comfortable half-in-ear form factor; clean, spacious, and controlled sound
Cons: mediocre build quality, isolation, and microphonics

 

 


 



Quote:
Originally Posted by i2ehan View Post

@|joker|: did you hear? The RE252 has officially been discontinued, now that they've revamped the entire head-direct site. I'm definitely hanging onto mine.


Yep, someone mentioned it a few pages back. I'll wait a bit and then gray it out in the table. A shame, really, as it was different enough from the 262 and 272 in sound. Perhaps they'll bring the signature back in the future.

 

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)