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 319

post #4771 of 16803

Isn't that just a filter difference? I wonder if they would send the filter. 

post #4772 of 16803

Mine was an MX and it sounded muffled and veiled. After I removed the filter, it sounded much better already.

post #4773 of 16803

lol sounds like it acts like a PFE perfect bass filter. 

post #4774 of 16803

Could be. It sounded like a was listening to a band playing in a cave -- hence the 'cavernous sound' I mentioned after first listen --- won't even worth USD300 for me!

post #4775 of 16803
Great review as usual, Joker!
This is what I've been waiting for. And to make things more detailed for me, can you compare directly the k2 to ck10? The k2 is more analytical and unforgived, isn't it?
post #4776 of 16803

Sounds like the K2 SQ score comes with a lot of qualifiers. I doubt most people would be using it in the ideal conditions.

post #4777 of 16803
Thread Starter 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by i2ehan View Post

As always, thank you ever so kindly for the anticipated, excellent read/review. smile.gif As you know, I happened to hear the K2 in the very same regards, and I think you absolutely nailed it with the following statements:

beerchug.gif


Thanks, I normally try not to put qualifiers in my reviews and let the readers judge for themselves but there is just such a disconnect I see with the K2 between how good it is technically and how unsuited it may be for some listeners.

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by kanuka View Post

nice one joker

now we're waiting for the MX version of j-phonic review biggrin.gif

 

I wouldn't hold my breath for that tongue.gif


 



Quote:
Originally Posted by SowonAoD View Post

Great review as usual, Joker!
This is what I've been waiting for. And to make things more detailed for me, can you compare directly the k2 to ck10? The k2 is more analytical and unforgived, isn't it?


There's CK10 comparisons scattered throughout but here's the gist of it while they are still fresh in my memory:

The K2 has Flatter treble than CK10 but also more upper midrange lift/brighter mids. It is not as splashy/tizzy and integrates the top end better. The midrange itself is more forward but not as liquid as that of the CK10. Clarity is similar but the K2 is a bit more crisp and fuller-sounding. Presentation overall is a bit more forward and aggressive with the K2. Bass-wise they have similar emphasis on impact over body, though the K2 again sounds fuller and more powerful.

 

And yes, I would say the K2 is more revealing of issues. 

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by Selenium View Post

Sounds like the K2 SQ score comes with a lot of qualifiers. I doubt most people would be using it in the ideal conditions.


True - right tips, very clean source, and a preference for analytical sound. Actually, two of those things I would recommend to anyone who is even thinking of buying $400 monitors. 

 

post #4778 of 16803

 

Hi joker. The MEE A151 and CC51 are both being sold at $50 at bestbuy.  Based on your review, the CC51 has a higher sound score but the A151 has a higher overall score of 9.5.  As of right now I chose A151, but I'm wondering if this is the right choice since they are the same price.

 

This is my first time to buy a good pair of IEM so the only basis I can compare is the ipod earphones.biggrin.gif  I'm not a basshead coz when I tried the S4 at Apple store, I get fatigue after testing it.  I'm looking more of the balanced sound for all types of music.

post #4779 of 16803

Quote:

Originally Posted by ljokerl View Post

Thanks, I normally try not to put qualifiers in my reviews and let the readers judge for themselves but there is just such a disconnect I see with the K2 between how good it is technically and how unsuited it may be for some listeners.


And I'm sure that's perfectly understood by (hopefully) all, but having owned the K2 myself, I too feel that the qualifiers here are well within reason. smile.gif

post #4780 of 16803

joker

a question about the isolation score

the high isolation you get with the Crystal and the 3 audio-technica is it because the deep insertion? is it possbile to achieve the same level with a less deep insertion? 

4.5/5 is pretty high. ety's level (mc5)

post #4781 of 16803
Quote:
Originally Posted by sachiel View Post

 

Hi joker. The MEE A151 and CC51 are both being sold at $50 at bestbuy.  Based on your review, the CC51 has a higher sound score but the A151 has a higher overall score of 9.5.  As of right now I chose A151, but I'm wondering if this is the right choice since they are the same price.

 

This is my first time to buy a good pair of IEM so the only basis I can compare is the ipod earphones.biggrin.gif  I'm not a basshead coz when I tried the S4 at Apple store, I get fatigue after testing it.  I'm looking more of the balanced sound for all types of music.

 

     Definitely go for the A151. I'm now kinda straying away from the CC51 because of the very punchy and near monster bass (probably due to the Mid-Bass Lift). Gives me a headache in comparison to my darker and slightly more airy Future Sonics Atrio X (FS1 Xtrememac). tongue.gif


Edited by Niyologist - 11/14/11 at 6:03am
post #4782 of 16803

Thanks joker. The store don't allow testing so I don't know the difference between the two. Good thing you're here or else people might end up buying IEMs with too much bass. I guess I'm one of the few people who don't like too much of it.tongue.gif  It's getting more common nowadays that more bass =  good IEM so research is important.  Tried the Grado i9i and it was too bassy as well.  The store owner says that I can try looking at other brands but it won't be better than Grado. Love your own as they say.ksc75smile.gif

post #4783 of 16803
Quote:
Originally Posted by Niyologist View Post

 

     Definitely go for the A151. I'm now kinda straying away from the CC51 because of the very punchy and near monster bass (probably due to the Mid-Bass Lift). Gives me a headache in comparison to my darker and slightly more airy Future Sonics Atrio X (FS1 Xtrememac). tongue.gif



The CC51 has "monster bass" to you? I thought it was fairly even handed in comparison to real bass monsters like the DUNU Hephaes and SP51 but that's just me.

post #4784 of 16803
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGame21x View Post



The CC51 has "monster bass" to you? I thought it was fairly even handed in comparison to real bass monsters like the DUNU Hephaes and SP51 but that's just me.


     It's near "Monster Bass" Levels, but not quite there like the SP51 and the Hephaes and definitely not like the Atrio X. It has more mid bass than sub bass, but it's sort of like a bass hammer and the bass doesn't interfere with the Mid-Range. It strange that my Atrio X sounds better than the CC51. The Clarity is there and it sounds more natural with the bass, vocals and instruments, than with the CC51. It's like if it's trying to imitate the Atrio M5.

post #4785 of 16803
Quote:
Originally Posted by Niyologist View Post

 

     Definitely go for the A151. I'm now kinda straying away from the CC51 because of the very punchy and near monster bass (probably due to the Mid-Bass Lift). Gives me a headache in comparison to my darker and slightly more airy Future Sonics Atrio X (FS1 Xtrememac). tongue.gif



That's your tips and fit.  The bass should be approaching sub bass actually not mid bass.  I recall the A151 being more mid bassy.  You can get a much more neutral response from the CC51.  Try different insertion depths.  Micro drivers are pretty impressive for sub bass potential IME.  

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)