Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › JVC/Victor FX700 - The Successor (early Easter Bunny brought something very nice!)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

JVC/Victor FX700 - The Successor (early Easter Bunny brought something very nice!) - Page 9

post #121 of 1742
4/9/10 at 12:21pm
Nice impressions James comparing the e-Q7 and JVC-700. To me, it read as if you were comparing the e-Q7 to the Miles Davis more so than the Copper, but I could see how one could get impressions of both. I'm Copper-lite now, as I've sold my beloved Monster to dweaver. But I think I'm sticking with the MDs and Ortos within my top tier realm. I'm a bit curious about the Etymotic MC5 (if it ever comes out), but then I'm closing me eyes to you guys - no matter what you say (lol...yeah, like that's going to happen uhn?).....
Reply

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #122 of 1742
4/9/10 at 12:54pm
Thank you Rawrster for your answer,I very much appreciate it.
I will definetly get it when I sell my d5000 although I think it's price is steep for an iem but I am very curious to hear it.I will wait for James to answer the fit question and how deep they go like fx500 or as ie8 or as the very deep ck10.

Edit:how about vocals rawrster,is it close to ck10 or different and mids are forward?
Reply
post #123 of 1742
4/9/10 at 2:02pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by midoo1990 View Post
oh its Ortofon not Qrtofon...i always thought it was a Q.
Anyway,i may pull the plunge but i am sick of selling items because there is one or more things wrong with them and i am in the process of selling d5000.so i have some questions if you dont mind:
1-is the treble fatiguing as ck10 for prolonged listening hours?i remember you answered this question but i want to make sure i dont make the same mistake as i did with the ck10.
2-does the orto recquire deep insertion as the ck10 or is it shallow like the ie8?the maximum inserion i can tolerate is something like the fx500 and anything beyond that like the ck10,i experiance ear pressure and my ears get blocked.
3-is the bass quantity close to that of ck10 or is it much bigger?
4-is it as fast as ck10?
5-is the level of detail like the ck10 or more detailed?
6-is there ANY kind of hiss with your DAPS?this is extremly important to me because i am very sensitive to hiss and i heard it on the ck10+touch combo and it was very annoying.
7-does it benefit from amping?
8-vocals are closer to ie8,fx500 or ck10?
9-timbre,is it blunt like ck10 or sound like dynamic iems?

i know thats alot of question but i greatly appreciate it if you can answer them james.thanks.
1. No, no comparison IMO.
2. No, not more so than the FX500. Please read the fit section here.
3. Definitely bigger, but nowhere near the IE8. I have no deep fit with the CK10, so maybe the difference isn't so big compared to the CK10 with deeper insertion.
4. I can't make out a significant difference.
5. The CK10 appears slightly more detailed, because it emphasizes the highs. But the e-Q7 has excellent detail across the whole frequency range.
6. None that would bother me. But I'm not overly sensitive to hiss, please PM shigzeo the hiss expert, he's currently working on an e-Q7 review.
7. Maybe a bit, but not so much that I'd care for.
8. Tough question. CK10 is missing chest, so it's somewhere between the others. IMO the closest would be a SE530 with less forward mids.
9. Closer to dynamics than to the BAs I know.
Reply
post #124 of 1742
4/9/10 at 2:04pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by rawrster View Post
james: how much more bass do you think these have compared to the e-Q7 or an IE8?
Bass-wise they're much closer to the IE8 than the e-Q7, but have more emphasis on low bass than the IE8.
Reply
post #125 of 1742
4/9/10 at 2:06pm
Sorry James,

I haven't followed your lead this time, and have gone down the MTPC route...

Whether I regret this, time will tell...

...Then again, I'll probably still end up with the FX700 anyway
Reply
post #126 of 1742
4/9/10 at 2:12pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chinesekiwi View Post
So I'm guessing the JVC FX's can't really be beaten for on timbre? I'm guessing the eQ-7 has less timbre than the FX700? If so, how much?
I'm not sure I understand this question. Timbre is not a quantitative attribute. JVCs having great timbre with acoustic instruments means their coloring is very true to life. The Ortofons have good timbre too, but IMO the JVCs rule.
Reply
post #127 of 1742
4/9/10 at 2:36pm
James, great thread as always. If they do indeed improve on the FX500, I'd imagine their timbre is simply excellent as natural/acoustic instrument on that iem are lovely.
Reply
post #128 of 1742
4/9/10 at 3:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by james444 View Post
please PM shigzeo the hiss expert
haha,this one really made me laugh to tears,good one
thank you very much for your answers,definetly I will get it as soon as I get rid of d5000.,there are couple of ones for sale with a good price,I will try to snatch one.
Shigzeo please report on hiss if there is any with the touch.thanks.
Edit:very sorry for derailing the thread,shigzeo you can report back in the eq7 appreciation thread to keep this thread on track.
Reply
post #129 of 1742
4/9/10 at 3:08pm
@midoo: I can't really compare vocals to the FX500 or the IE8 since I have never heard the FX500 and my time with the IE8 was not long enough to make a comparison with. I do find the mids on the e-Q7 a bit more forward but not overly so. The way I see it so far with the CK10 and e-Q7 is that they both shine in the areas the other one doesn't do as well in so they complement each other well imo of course.

Thanks James. The FX700 is for some reason getting tempting after spending some time lately with some bass heavier iem's than I usually am accustomed to.
Reply
post #130 of 1742
4/9/10 at 3:35pm
Question about the FX700...how does the soundstage width compare with the IE8? With a good DAC/source and 24 bit material, the IE8 can sound incredibly wide, yet also articulate the inner details well (maybe not great, but pretty good).

And I do like the vocals on the IE8 better than the FX500. I do have to say I was impressed with the FX500 in many ways, and per what James has said, the FX700 has improved/eliminated the weaknesses. My biggest gripe with the FX500 was the recessed mids, and I am looking forward to hearing the FX700's improved mids!

Oh, and the GR8 has many of the same qualities as the e-Q7, but a different sound sig with more forward mids ala the SE530. But great coherence across the spectrum, transparency of the e-Q7, and smoothness with all the detail.
Reply
post #131 of 1742
4/9/10 at 6:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by midoo1990 View Post
haha,this one really made me laugh to tears,good one
thank you very much for your answers,definetly I will get it as soon as I get rid of d5000.,there are couple of ones for sale with a good price,I will try to snatch one.
Shigzeo please report on hiss if there is any with the touch.thanks.
Edit:very sorry for derailing the thread,shigzeo you can report back in the eq7 appreciation thread to keep this thread on track.
hahaha I chuckled a bit when I saw that as well. Shigzeo is very fastidious when it comes to hiss; for good reason.
Reply
post #132 of 1742
4/10/10 at 4:43am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by average_joe View Post
Question about the FX700...how does the soundstage width compare with the IE8? With a good DAC/source and 24 bit material, the IE8 can sound incredibly wide, yet also articulate the inner details well (maybe not great, but pretty good).

And I do like the vocals on the IE8 better than the FX500. I do have to say I was impressed with the FX500 in many ways, and per what James has said, the FX700 has improved/eliminated the weaknesses. My biggest gripe with the FX500 was the recessed mids, and I am looking forward to hearing the FX700's improved mids!
I am one of those who think the IE8 have fantastic soundstage for IEMs, even though I'm wearing them with a pretty good (not loose) seal, but there are others who say it's nothing special. The FX700 and FX500 have about the same soundstage, pretty wide and spacious, but a tad below the IE8. I'm a sucker for good soundstage, because it makes overall presentation more realistic to my ears, and I don't feel it lacking on both JVCs.

Regarding vocals, they are certainly quite recessed on the FX500 and noticably improved on the FX700, but you can bring out the mids nicely on the FX500 with a simple foam mod. So, considering it's $140 for the FX500 vs. $320 for the FX700, if my main gripe would be recessed vocals I'd foam mod the FX500 and be done. However, taking into account better controlled bass and vastly improved treble on the FX700, I'd recommend choosing the FX700 over the FX500 to anyone who can afford it, even though the price spread is substantial.
Reply
post #133 of 1742
4/10/10 at 8:02am
I wonder how does the driver of FX700 differs from that of FX500...looking at the pictures there seem to be quite a lot of changes.

FX500:


FX700:
Reply
post #134 of 1742
4/10/10 at 8:13am
Thread Starter 
^ Thanks for the pics, driver size is 8.5mm (FX500) vs. 10mm (FX700).
Reply
post #135 of 1742
4/10/10 at 8:32am
Congrats on a nice thread... are the cables of the FX700 detachable?
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home

Gear mentioned in this thread:

Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › JVC/Victor FX700 - The Successor (early Easter Bunny brought something very nice!)