Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › [REVIEW] Fischer Audio - For Your Ears Only
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[REVIEW] Fischer Audio - For Your Ears Only - Page 4

post #46 of 195

^^^ Good point.  I'd like to add, that while I have the utmost respect for ClieOS, and his reviews/opinions, when it comes to things like treble harshness and sibilance, even he, can only go by his ears. Two iem's I'd like to use for examples, W3.....some say harsh/sibilant, others hear none of either. TF10, again, some would say harsh and sibilant, others (like me) hear no harshness or sibilance. So keep in mind that no matter how good ClieOS is at this, he is still restricted by his hearing being different from other peoples.

All he can do, is to give the most open and honest review possible from his perspective.

post #47 of 195

Well as a review this is the reviewer's opinion and is no way the final say on anything. Also as it is is review if he gave a 5 on the treble then I expect them to be good and he can give whatever ranking he feel is appropriate. Also harshness is also dependent on the user and also on the tips. I own an earphone in the CK10 that many consider harsh and many do not.

post #48 of 195

Harshness/sibilance is a tricky thing.  People use these words to mean different things.  For example, harshness for me is more so a matter of distortion or an inability to articulate actual notes (more noise than music).  Sibilance to me is more of a resonance, a ringing.  One, the other, or both may or may not exist.  I would add a third term to describe a bump in frequency response, something like bright or hot or exaggerated, something to say that the sound isn't actually bad, but it is overemphasized.  For earphones like the Triple.Fi 10, CK10, and so on, these in my words would more so be called hot or bright or something along those lines.  For me to call something harsh, it would need to have trouble producing those notes.  for me to call something sibilant, it would need to have odd resonations from the driver or chamber.  These are my own contexts though and of course are not shared by everyone.  It's part of the challenge of using such terms to describe earphones.  Sometimes it's just people being able to or not being able to decipher the differences, and sometimes this takes a trained ear.  Sometimes other aspects overshadow key traits.  I like to EQ everything I use because it takes out a lot of the bias and dominant sounds.  With a balanced sound, it becomes easier to hear the capabilities and limitations of an earphone better as well as compare one earphone to another in core traits.  Heck, even the act of EQing an earphone shows obvious capabilities and limitation in the frequency response.  You easily recognize the top end and bottom end roll off points, find some of the crossover points and the good or not so good blending of the drivers within these points, and recognize any significant peaks and valleys or tilt of the natural frequency response of the earphone.  In some cases even the responsiveness of the earphone to EQing in a frequency band shows the limits of capability.  A broadly capable earphone will show more response and linearity to a bump or cut in EQ anywhere in the frequency spectrum including the very top end and bottom end of the spectrum.  For example, it's readily apparent that earphones like the CK10, RE252, and Triple.Fi have very pronounced treble range and outstanding extension.  Even adjustments up at 15kHz plus will readily influence the sound.  However, an earphone like the Custom 3 which still has a well extended top end shows much less sensitivity to EQing above 10kHz and a greater need for boost above this point.  Similar on the low end we can see earphones like the IE8, UM3X, or Eterna very easily change in response tuning really low notes even below 60Hz.  However, we can take midrange and treble geared earphones like the RE252 or ER4S and see significantly less sensitivity to EQing bumps and a far greater need to boost in the very low octaves.  Getting back towards topic, EQing and testing do show that earphones like the CK10, RE252, and Triple.Fi 10 to have really well defined treble information and good information way up into the top range of the frequency spectrum, and we can see these traits without the overshadow of significantly peaky response that would otherwise being a little off-putting.  We also begin to see that earphones like the IE8, RE0, or NE7M have specific limitations in response or the ability to cleanly articulate high frequency notes.

post #49 of 195

Man, you need to learn to use paragraphs. My brain experienced some sibilance trying to fathom the soundstage on that explanation. My simple view is with the OEM tips, the ssssss sound was obvious, call it what you will, with the DBAs. With the Ety tips, the sssss sound was ssssssent away.

post #50 of 195

I think the best word to describe it would be indeed 'hot' and slightly sibilant, not harsh according to mvw2's definitions of said terms.

post #51 of 195

lol..it's a bit confusing having this thread and the dba 02 review by LFF going on at the same time.

 

However judging by the reviews and impressions these phones do seem to be hot and sibilant dependent on the tips. I can't say for sure since I don't own them but I'll find out eventually. The "ssss" or  "sshhhh" sounds is what I call sibilance.

post #52 of 195
Thread Starter 

Search and Rawster have made some good points, but just to add more to the explanation: A star ranking, or in fact any rating system has its limitation. In this case, if any ranking falls b/w  4.75 and 5 out of the full 5 stars will still receive a full 5 stars ranking, just as 4.4 and 4.6 will both receive a 4 and a half stars. Does this means one 5 stars IEM can sound better than another 5 stars IEM? Absolutely. Does it means 5 stars isn't an indication of perfection, but rather just a classification of tier? The answer is 'Yes'. So why didn't I just give it a numeric value that can easily show it 'worthiness'? The reason is, the more precise a ranking has became, the more subjective it will be - and potentially more misleading to those who read the ranking for the first time, believing it w/o questioning if the reviewer shares the same musical taste,  whether he/she is trustworthy enough, while ignoring important things such as the overall sound signature of the IEM. I would rather leave room for speculation and only use numeric ranking when it is unavoidable.

post #53 of 195

Great review, I'll definitely get back to this thread once I need to replace my current IEMs.

post #54 of 195
Thread Starter 

For easier reading / understand, I generally follow the sound description thread on HF. Of course sometime I will still go 'out of the box' if I feel like it.

post #55 of 195


Makes sense to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClieOS View Post

Search and Rawster have made some good points, but just to add more to the explanation: A star ranking, or in fact any rating system has its limitation. In this case, if any ranking falls b/w  4.75 and 5 out of the full 5 stars will still receive a full 5 stars ranking, just as 4.4 and 4.6 will both receive a 4 and a half stars. Does this means one 5 stars IEM can sound better than another 5 stars IEM? Absolutely. Does it means 5 stars isn't an indication of perfection, but rather just a classification of tier? The answer is 'Yes'. So why didn't I just give it a numeric value that can easily show it 'worthiness'? The reason is, the more precise a ranking has became, the more subjective it will be - and potentially more misleading to those who read the ranking for the first time, believing it w/o questioning if the reviewer shares the same musical taste,  whether he/she is trustworthy enough, while ignoring important things such as the overall sound signature of the IEM. I would rather leave room for speculation and only use numeric ranking when it is unavoidable.

post #56 of 195


Yesssss, ssssseemsssss we agree. The DBAs may be hot, but now mine are not sibiliant, using that simple description. I no longer hear that sssss sound on the worst offending tracks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rawrster View Post

lol..it's a bit confusing having this thread and the dba 02 review by LFF going on at the same time.

 

However judging by the reviews and impressions these phones do seem to be hot and sibilant dependent on the tips. I can't say for sure since I don't own them but I'll find out eventually. The "ssss" or  "sshhhh" sounds is what I call sibilance.

post #57 of 195

Seeing how you love the CK10 and others call it hot and sibilant, it'll be just what you're used to.

 

Also, I noticed something. I previously called the DBA-02 'hard hitting' and fast. This is what ClieOS describes as aggressive. Aggressive never came to mind to me before, but now that I've heard the term, I suppose could be considered a bit aggressive. However, I actually find it something I personally enjoy. Having the Coppers, I find them too smooth and polite for my tastes. I enjoy the hard hitting drums and the soaring highs personally, and that's what the DBA-02 does for me personally that bugs me the most about the Coppers.

 

Don't get me wrong, the Coppers are good IEMs, but personally I prefer the clarity, speed, and impact of the DBA-02. It's extremely subjective, and this is purely personal preference. That's why the Coppers are next to go for me. It seems that when it comes to higher end IEMs, I simply prefer the armature sound, meaning typically more clarity, better highs, less bass, and more intimacy.

When you get to this level, unless you have the $$$ to spend for the FX700 and SM3, it's 90% personal preference and 10% price and price:value.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rawrster View Post

lol..it's a bit confusing having this thread and the dba 02 review by LFF going on at the same time.

 

However judging by the reviews and impressions these phones do seem to be hot and sibilant dependent on the tips. I can't say for sure since I don't own them but I'll find out eventually. The "ssss" or  "sshhhh" sounds is what I call sibilance.

post #58 of 195

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClieOS View Post

Before I begin the review I would like to make it clearer as to how I review IEM: A review is not more than a personal assessment which may or may not be agreeable by others. My goal of review is not to simply tell you what is ‘better’ to buy. ‘Better’ is such a complicated words that we all must agree that we can’t really agree on what standard of reference is, as it is all personal. Yet the idea of the review is to give you a glimpse of what may be more/less fitting to your need as to avoid wasting time and money. Thus I don’t want to just telling you what sounds the best, but more importantly what they sound like and how well I feel about each of them as a whole, as objective as I can from a subjective POV. As I have said before, putting a great treble, a great mid, a great bass and a great soundstage together can easily give you the worst of sound as to the best of sound – it is ‘the blend’, the coherence, the synergy and most importantly, the ‘factor of taste’ that determine how an IEM matches you. That is, do the IEM sound signature fits your taste of music? If not, why bother? Trying to be Hi-Fi is one thing, but trying to enjoy the music is another. Fidelity serves no purpose when there is no enjoyment in the music. They are equally significant elements in the quest to a ‘better sound’, or perhaps it is ‘the better enjoyment of sound’. That is the goal.

 

 

I like this :)

 

Thanks for the review @ClieOS!

 

Haven't tried them but it seems that DBA-02 is not my cup of tea...

 


Edited by KLS - 5/21/10 at 12:38am
post #59 of 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by ethan961 View Post

Seeing how you love the CK10 and others call it hot and sibilant, it'll be just what you're used to.

 

Also, I noticed something. I previously called the DBA-02 'hard hitting' and fast. This is what ClieOS describes as aggressive. Aggressive never came to mind to me before, but now that I've heard the term, I suppose could be considered a bit aggressive. However, I actually find it something I personally enjoy. Having the Coppers, I find them too smooth and polite for my tastes. I enjoy the hard hitting drums and the soaring highs personally, and that's what the DBA-02 does for me personally that bugs me the most about the Coppers.

 

Don't get me wrong, the Coppers are good IEMs, but personally I prefer the clarity, speed, and impact of the DBA-02. It's extremely subjective, and this is purely personal preference. That's why the Coppers are next to go for me. It seems that when it comes to higher end IEMs, I simply prefer the armature sound, meaning typically more clarity, better highs, less bass, and more intimacy.

When you get to this level, unless you have the $$$ to spend for the FX700 and SM3, it's 90% personal preference and 10% price and price:value.
 


 



"Hard Hitting"? I listen to a lot of Jazz and, I think was as...can't recall his name, 'Piano' seemed to be in the handle he uses, mentioned that when someone uses terms like 'punchy' or maybe he said 'hard hitting' or agressive (I should have bookmarked the thread) to beware since that kind of headphone may not lend itself very well to the smoother aspects of Jazz. Can anyone comment on that?


Edited by Leavenfish - 5/21/10 at 10:07am
post #60 of 195

Listening to Joe Henderson, Lush Life (track is Johnny Come Lately), highly recommended for jazz fans, and it sounds superb. The only "hard" thing about is Wynton's bebop trumpet and Joe's alto... hard-hitting. The DBA 2s are more than suited for jazz and in no way take away from the lushness/smoothness of the genre. Of course, that's IMHO. Oh, listening via the S:flo2, no EQ (set to normal).

 

next track, Johnny A's Sway a Little, from the Get Inside CD. Amazing sound (another recommended CD).


Edited by slaters70 - 5/21/10 at 12:07pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › [REVIEW] Fischer Audio - For Your Ears Only