or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › [Review] Impressions of the Final Audio Design FI-BA-SS versus the SM3, FX700 and e-Q7
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Review] Impressions of the Final Audio Design FI-BA-SS versus the SM3, FX700 and e-Q7 - Page 13

post #181 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by james444 View Post

"earphone equivalent of an unretouched hi-res image".


I guess I'm seeing more as a coloration from the phone itself.  That perceived transparency or rawness is on every track and not track dependent when using my tracks and gear.  With the other two phones I can more easily tell which tracks or albums have been mastered better or more cleanly.  With the SS they all sound the same so far.  Until that changes I have to presume it's the phone and not the track I'm hearing.  I just don't hear it as finding new information that was lost on the ES5, UERM or HD800.  As for air, well, that's something different altogether.  They are vented afterall.  

 

For those that haven't heard these phones we are talking about rather minute discrepancies here so I don't want to give the impression any of these phones aren't up to snuff.  The SS is cool as heck.  It takes the ER4 and kicks it in the nutz.     

 

post #182 of 268
Thread Starter 

That's why I said it depends on interpretation (of transparency). Mine is that the FI-BA-SS are best in making me feel like I'm attending the live concert and not listening to IEMs. Everything, even most subtle ambient sounds like page turning (of sheet music) or subdued coughing is presented with amazing clarity and a terrific sense of realism, like being actually there.

 

As for detail, again, no I don't think they have an edge in resolution over the UERM. It's just their extraordinary signature that makes detail more apparent in my book. But I admit you may be on to something in seeing it more as a coloration, or maybe an elaborate trick. In fact I've never thought about it that way before.

post #183 of 268

@Anax. Those modded Hybrid tips James speaks of are included in the other FADs. They actually worked pretty well for me as well, pretty good idea for straight barrel IEMs. 


Edited by Inks - 8/8/11 at 6:31pm
post #184 of 268

Alright after playing w/ the stock tips, modded Sony Hybrids and UE single flanges I've settled on old reliable.  Meelec Bi-Flanges worn over the ear w/ deep insertion just like my MD's and other straight barreled designs.  That kicks it up a notch.  Now I can see what you are saying James.  This is the gamma knife you mentioned.  Definitely the most resolving and transparent apart from my customs.  Very comprehensive information retrieval.  Among the best I've heard.  Top 3 for sure.  So how to get the EX1000 woofer in a hybrid w/ the FAD SS armature and maintain coherency and imaging.  That would be something.  Then again the SS has excellent bass.  The timbre and imaging on some percussion like kick drums is superb.  Amazingly good for a single BA.  

 

I'm a fan.  Good pick up James!   


Edited by Anaxilus - 8/8/11 at 4:35pm
post #185 of 268

Wow, sounds intriguing.  I'd love to hear something that resolving but it's unlikely I'll get the opportunity to hear these, so I'll just live vicariously through you guys. 

post #186 of 268

I live vicariously through james444 :)

 

The FI-BA-SS definitely was an interesting earphone that I've heard and probably the most unique. It had a transparency that was pretty unreal and of course the revealing character of them was pretty unreal and imo it was a bit much.

post #187 of 268

It's addicting for me.  I just heard the EQ7 for the first time.  I wonder how much flack I'll get calling them a bit warm and veiled.  tongue_smile.gif  

post #188 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post

It's addicting for me.  I just heard the EQ7 for the first time.  I wonder how much flack I'll get calling them a bit warm and veiled.  tongue_smile.gif  



The e-Q7 veiled? I won't give you any flack - just laugh at you.....beyersmile.pngpopcorn.gif

post #189 of 268

I agree actually, it's a veil ala SM3. It's still transparent in macro aspects thought but it hides finer stuff and the warmth seems like it was added somehow. 


Edited by Inks - 8/8/11 at 7:17pm
post #190 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post

It's addicting for me.  I just heard the EQ7 for the first time.  I wonder how much flack I'll get calling them a bit warm and veiled.  tongue_smile.gif  

 

They are, but so is e-Q5 IMO. Only slightly though.
 

 

post #191 of 268

Yup same for the EQ5, except it takes away your attention from it with an edgier character. Still, I like the EQ7 a bit more than the EQ5 since it at least textures the note but both are forgiving and hide finer stuff. 

post #192 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

Yup same for the EQ5, except it takes away your attention from it with an edgier character.


Agreed, the extra treble presence helps.  

post #193 of 268

When I think veiled I think IE8 or IE7. My recollection is that the e-Q7 came nowhere near those two, which seemed like they had a cloth thrown over the sound. I would consider the W4 veiled more so than the Ortofon. Oh well, interesting nonetheless how we hear things.

post #194 of 268

 Veil is hard to define at times, but I think one factor is the lack of an adequate ~6k peak the ear needs. EQ7s have that issue, but the driver makes up for it with good clarity but it resolves fine stuff, I think that's the nature of the driver. My problem with the EQ7 is that while there's a good texture, fine information is lost in the treble and the midrange to a lesser extent. The frequency presentation is fairly balanced but the driver seems to resolve a lot of fine stuff and it's presentation is almost too smooth and raspy throughout the range.  The EQ7 is one of the most clear IEMs when it comes to the macro-details or the apparent stuff but once you reach the micro stuff, fine details are lost. Like the SM3 and IE8, I think the EQ7 misses that peak the ear needs at around 6k and that makes the midrange sound almost too smooth. And also like the SM3, the lack of treble presence doesn't help it's case, though having that will make it run the risk of sounding edgy and warm at the same time which the EQ5 seems to do at times. 

 

The SM3s are a bit different though, all the fine details as there, they just get presented with that "veil" darkness due to the missing peak. IE8s were a bad case of too much midbass-hump that gathered too much attention and missing that ~6k peak. All 3 have different "veils".


Edited by Inks - 8/8/11 at 11:08pm
post #195 of 268
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by shotgunshane View Post

Wow, sounds intriguing.  I'd love to hear something that resolving but it's unlikely I'll get the opportunity to hear these, so I'll just live vicariously through you guys. 


I've no objections against passing the loaner on after Anax is done. I know you US guys lost your Triple-A lately, but you're still good enough for me. wink.gif

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › [Review] Impressions of the Final Audio Design FI-BA-SS versus the SM3, FX700 and e-Q7