Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Review: Clash of the Titans (3D) - JH16 Pro vs. JH13 Pro
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Review: Clash of the Titans (3D) - JH16 Pro vs. JH13 Pro - Page 11

post #151 of 184
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadphoneAddict View Post

I heard the JH16Pro demo pair at RMAF this weekend, and enjoyed them.  The bass was NOT overblown as I feared it would be and was actually simply fuller sounding than my JH13pro, and the JH16 demo had better focus and instrument placement in the bass than that of my JH13Pro.  

 

The 3 sound tubes also seemed to improve the mids, and in my opinion the mids were more present and even level with the bass.  I know the demo units can sound a little different than the custom fit version, but I would want that they would sound exactly the same if I ever got a pair.

 

 

That is my impression as well, so I'm using them interchangeably source/interconnect-matched.  For example the WhipMOD/Fat Boy Reference WhipLOD combo is simply too much with the JH16s because of how that giant LOD handles low frequency punches, so with that I always switch to the 13s.  

 

For those of you haven't yet seen it, here is a very nice, succinct interview with Jerry Harvey about the JHA top-end product lineup and differences between them.

 

post #152 of 184

Re:  JH13 versus JH16

 

One point I did not see addressed in the original review (and sorry if I missed it) is the EQ factor.  It would certainly be no surprise that with EQ "off", JH16 would sound fuller and more musical and with adding some EQ (particularly low end) I presume it starts to bloat where this would not happen with JH13.

 

Due to the amount of drivers, I would presume the sound of JH13 is very malleable through EQ.  If I play my JH13's on my Ipod Classic on "rock" setting it thickens up quite a bit and the bass is booming, yet with no distortion. Pretty full sounding where more bass would not be a good thing.

 

Is it fair to say that through EQ'ing the JH13, you can narrow the sound gap quite a bit between it and the JH16? 

 

 


Edited by Spyro - 3/10/11 at 11:59am
post #153 of 184
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spyro View Post

Re:  JH13 versus JH16

 

One point I did not see addressed in the original review (and sorry if I missed it) is the EQ factor.  It would certainly be no surprise that with EQ "off", JH16 would sound fuller and more musical and with adding some EQ (particularly low end) I presume it starts to bloat where this would not happen with JH13.

 

Due to the amount of drivers, I would presume the sound of JH13 is very malleable through EQ.  If I play my JH13's on my Ipod Classic on "rock" setting it thickens up quite a bit and the bass is booming, yet with no distortion. Pretty full sounding where more bass would not be a good thing.

 

Is it fair to say that through EQ'ing the JH13, you can narrow the sound gap quite a bit between it and the JH16? 

 

 


EQ is a landmine.   I avoid it at all cost even when using the full version of Amarra on my MBP and that's the best EQ implementation I've ever seen or heard.  I suppose you could simulate the 6dB midbass hump curve of the JH16s to boost that octave, but in the end the JH13s will never ever sound quite like the JH16s, which are quad-bass--as you correctly point out--but they are also slightly more sensitive.  Then there is a fact of them being triple-bore vs. dual-bore design with the triple being more complex and can yield slightly better instrument separation and detail.  But all of this is dependent what your recording, source and amp can pump into it.  The iPod Classic with or without an amp is a decent source, but nowhere near as clean and detailed as the one you can get from an iMod/WhipMOD or an Algorithm Solo-based portable system (narrowing the field to iDevices).

 

Proof of this is that most JH-3A orders are reportedly JH16-based, because of the fact that you can simulate a JH13 sound signature by a DSP setting, however, no DSP tuning will make a JH13 sound exactly like a JH16.  

 

I use both models selectively, based on recording quality, source (WhipMOD or HM-602), LOD type and genre I happen to be in the mood to be listening.

 

post #154 of 184

A very short reply, nevertheless I appreciate Jerry's input.

 

(when asked if you could make the JH13 sound like the JH16 via EQ)

 

Hi Steve,
 
The 16 already has a rock bass hit. The 13 needs 6 db of bump at 50/60 to match the 16. With the eq in iTunes you can get somewhat close.
 
Cheers,
 
Jerry
 

So the answer sounds like, yes, you basically can!
post #155 of 184
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spyro View Post

A very short reply, nevertheless I appreciate Jerry's input.

 

(when asked if you could make the JH13 sound like the JH16 via EQ)

 

Hi Steve,
 
The 16 already has a rock bass hit. The 13 needs 6 db of bump at 50/60 to match the 16. With the eq in iTunes you can get somewhat close.
 
Cheers,
 
Jerry
 

So the answer sounds like, yes, you basically can!


I'm sorry, but "somewhat close" doesn't equal "the same" in my book, because being an audiophile is about the subtleties and details.  If you prefer the JH16's sound signature, you should buy a JH16.  If Jerry thought the two were equal with a simple EQ adjustment on the JH13s, he would not have developed the JH16 in the first place.

 

I would also say, though, is that if you're using an iPod from the HP-out, then it really doesn't matter.  In that scenario, Jerry's statement of "somewhat close" is entirely valid.  Using a much better source like a WhipMod/amp or an Algorithm Solo-based transport will highlight the differences between the two.

 

post #156 of 184

I think you give too much credit to "better" sources and different cables and equally overly dis-credit a stock player with headphone out.  The incremental differences between the two will be just as relevant whether using $500 equipment or $2,000

It was a valid question to ask and I didn't expect it to sound the same but "somewhat close" sounds much closer than, "no they are two completely different products."

post #157 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spyro View Post

It was a valid question to ask and I didn't expect it to sound the same but "somewhat close" sounds much closer than, "no they are two completely different products."


Dude this is high end audio, nothing is a world apart...

post #158 of 184

Spyro: are you hoping to get the JH 13 and EQ it when necessary?

post #159 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spyro View Post

I think you give too much credit to "better" sources and different cables and equally overly dis-credit a stock player with headphone out.  The incremental differences between the two will be just as relevant whether using $500 equipment or $2,000

It was a valid question to ask and I didn't expect it to sound the same but "somewhat close" sounds much closer than, "no they are two completely different products."


I think it's somewhere in between. Cables and black gates amount to voicing as much as anything else, Tants can sound better than electrolytics here anyway. Not that those bits aren't better as they are but a bit too much mystique over it. Touches with their solid state drives tend to sound better anyway. The whole, 'who's DAC do you use?" is overstated. I also have some I prefer but utilization is everything. Wolfson isn't on the top of my list but I very much like sme products that use them for instance. I tend to favor BB with outboard filtering and their ladder dac in particular but some of the wolfsons with built in selectable filters or even not can be right for a purpose and price point.

 

 I think if you asked Jerry if he could make a 16 and a 13 sound exactly the same with crossover work etc, he'd say no but at the same time they could be very close and equally good. What makes the 13 special is that it's made to sound as accurate and natural as possible. EQing it will allow to take it somewhere else. If you want a bit of a different flavor, why not choose your own? I think we all understand that no 2 different product will sound exactly the same but if you've got a good enough EQ circuit and headroom for it, EQ can get them close enough to give the same satisfation in a given sig and isn't that all that matters? For practical purposes that amounts to same even if the 16 may always sound a bit rounder or otherwise.

 

I think many suffer from tunnel vision and don't use enough different sources for evaluation for instance. It doesn't make their choices wrong as they are personal but if you have built and voiced a setup for one phone and introduce another of different tonal character, it won't work as well even if it's more neutral. While a twag may be a slam dunk on one phone, it can be trade offs on another for instance. Portable kit is always somewhat limited and earphone listening very unnatural in general. Doesn't make it bad or not worthwhile. Quite the opposite but perfection? Na.
 

 


Edited by goodvibes - 3/24/11 at 6:41am
post #160 of 184
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spyro View Post

I think you give too much credit to "better" sources and different cables and equally overly dis-credit a stock player with headphone out.  The incremental differences between the two will be just as relevant whether using $500 equipment or $2,000

It was a valid question to ask and I didn't expect it to sound the same but "somewhat close" sounds much closer than, "no they are two completely different products."


Based on my own gear including quality interconnects, I can say there is a considerable difference.  And no, I do not believe you do fully exploit your $1,2K custom IEM's capabilities with a $10 Chinese cable, but that's me and probably every TWag owner or Moon Audio Silver Dragon owner who upgrade.   Whether a simple iPod with stock cable JH13 is good enough--and it does sound pretty good---isn't the issue here.  Audiophile listening is a quest for perfection; and about how far can you enhance the sound by various tweaks or upgrades from a given platform.  Everything is source-dependent, no headphone or IEM will put out more than goes into it.  The difference is that in an iPod-JH13 setup , especially with the stock JHA cable, you can make the two sound pretty much alike by EQ-ing, because your source-constrained.  Hook the JH13 or the JH16 to a reference SACD player and say, an RSA Apache in balanced mode, and the difference will widen dramatically.

 

I have never said the JH13 and 16s were completely different products, however, there are differences in their design.  The JH16 is triple-bore and uses different BA bass drivers than the 13, if I recall correctly.  I use and love both of them, but for different genres and applications.

 

I respect when somebody exhibits discipline and limits their spending below a certain level.  But that doesn't mean that all higher-priced upgrades are window-dressing and serve little to no practical benefit.  The trick is to find the ones that do vs. the wanna-be placebo products and that can sometimes be hard.

 

post #161 of 184

Great review!

post #162 of 184

Hi.

What I miss,having the UM3Xs,instead these JH16 Pro?

As we all know there is a exponential relation,between quality and price,so how far is in quality these very expensive IEMs?

Theodore.

post #163 of 184

Having read through all 11 pages of this, everyone has their own point of view and all of them are valid.

 

If you can justify/afford spending a couple of thousand $$$$ on your headphone audio kit and it produces the results that you want, that's great.

 

If your audio set up is more mainstream, and that also produces the results that you want, that too is great.

 

If tweaking the sound via EQ improves the sound of your music for you, tweak away my friend!

 

In the end, one's Chateau La Tour is another's bottle of vinegar.

 

If what we listen to gives us pleasure, lets enjoy that rather than criticise others for what is, all things considered, a hobby for most of us.

 

------------

 

Thanks for the review btw.

 

This and several other reviews made me go down the route of the JH16s rather than the 13s.

 

I prefer a flat-ish sound that leans towards full, and from all my research the JH16s were the ones. My Sony Eggos are really full sounding, and I've been listening to them regularly for more than a decade now.

 

Had my fit issues as most people have, but once hooked up to any source, I just enjoy the music. For those that haven't tried, find yourself a decent Discman. The sound from that is phenomenal.

 

Bought a RX Mk2 from a fellow head-fier and I'm finding out what decent IEMs are truly capable of.

 

Here's to the music L3000.gif

post #164 of 184

I was torn between ordering the JH-13s and JH-16s so I wrote a letter to Mr. Harvey asking for his advice.

 

I told him that I listened mostly to blues, rock, with the majority of my listening being live recordings of the Grateful Dead. I expressed my concern that the low end would be too overpowering.

 

His response was:

 

Even though the 16 has more low frequency output than the 13, the low end is not overpowering. This is because the bass bump is at 50hz down low and back to accurate by 125hz.
 
The type of music you listen will be best on the 16.
 
Cheers,
 

Jerry

 

 

With that recommendation in mind I was 99% sold on the 16s. With that in mind I made an appointment to see an audiologist.

 

I had the pleasure of going to see a local Los Angeles audiologist today (Frances Miranda - http://www.hearingandmusic.com/) whom I head about from the JH-Audio Website under their recommended audiologists.

 

If anyone is in the Los Angeles area I would highly recommend seeing her. She had the complete line of JH Audio demo units and I sat down with my Cowon X7 to do a head to head of the JH-13 vs JH-16.

 

First, I demo'd the 13s and they sounded beautiful on everything I through at them.

 

Next, I plugged in the 16s and after about 20 seconds I was sold. I continued listening to the same tracks and the extra bass just made everything so much more enjoyable for me. As Jerry prophesized the bass was not overpowering at all. For me the experience was just more complete with that extra umphh when Phil Lesh was laying down the bass.

 

I'll add that I do not consider myself an "audiophile." I just don't have the experience to review these IEMs as an audiophile can.

 

I thoroughly enjoyed getting my butt kicked by the 16s and placed an order right then and there.

post #165 of 184

I MUCH prefer the 16's over the 13's.  Everything sounds more natural and yes, more balanced.  I know Jerry prefers the 16's as well.

 

While I was blown away by the transparency, speed and detail of the 13's, the low bass often sounded dis-jointed from the other frequencies and the treble almost seemd a bit to much.  JH16 just sounds so completely good from top to bottom and everything in between.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Review: Clash of the Titans (3D) - JH16 Pro vs. JH13 Pro