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 4

post #46 of 268
Thread Starter 

^ Ok, concerning the green thing: I slid a pair of small foamies over the rear ends of the FI-BA-SS. By pressing and releasing my fingertips to/from the foamies' openings it was easy to compare the sound without/with vents. Conclusion: the FADs sound noticably warmer and slightly muffled if you cover the vents. Don't know what this means for the BA design, but in any case no bullshit to my ears.

post #47 of 268

Well then, BA's like airflow.  Now we know.  Assuming you weren't pressing the phones deeper inside.  


Edited by Anaxilus - 7/30/10 at 9:47pm
post #48 of 268

I've just re-read your review James and I must say that the FX700 comes out of it looking very, very, good. Does it retain what I regarded as the stark presentation of the FX500?

post #49 of 268
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post

Assuming you weren't pressing the phones deeper inside.  


No, I wasn't. I even double checked by pressing against the back end without the foamies. The change in sound signature must be from the covered vents. But I'm dead certain dfkt will repeat this anyway. Hopefully he won't dissect them to get to the bottom of things.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by iponderous View Post

I've just re-read your review James and I must say that the FX700 comes out of it looking very, very, good. Does it retain what I regarded as the stark presentation of the FX500?


As far as I am concerned (and posted in the FX700 thread) they are definitely more likeable. dfkt borrowed both the FX500 and FX700 and said he only listened to the FX500 for a few minutes because the difference was so striking. Yet we both know there are others who think the FX700's treble is still a bit too friendly, mainly compared to the SM3's. My best guess is, that if you like warmer phones, you'll most likely love the SM3 - and if you don't, you presumably won't have a problem with the FX700's treble.

post #50 of 268

I need to find someone like you james here in NYC who I can rob..I mean borrow stuff :) I'm not in any rush to get a review of these since well I'm not in the market for them right now.

 

It's quite interesting that the sound changes when you block the vents. It makes me wonder what that green thing is other than their description of it. The only one BA I know of that is affected by housing is e-Q7 and I'm guessing the GR8 as well.

post #51 of 268

Maybe this would be more suited for slaters70 'custom iem' thread but my biggest problem (besides copious disposable income of course) is that iems tend not to scale up (broadly) SQ-wise compared to headphones (factoring in respective diminishing returns). Now, that would be fine if there were no glaringly obvious causes for concern in sound but this tends not to be the case with iems. We all have non-frequency response aspects of sound that take precedence; could be timbre, soundstage, refinement etc. For me, its handling of sibilance. If a $1000 iem caters to my FR needs and prolifically excels at other aspects but deeply offends on sibilance then it becomes impossible for me to enjoy my music and hence the value drops by a great margin.

 

From your review and the other guy, it seems sibilance on these things may be an issue. It may be inconsequential for others but the concept remains the same. Iems have a proven history of being prone to certain sound 'anomalies', much much more than headphones. For that reason, I would find it hard to believe that these are any much better than the £200ish iems I talk about. I suppose, though, this could also be construed as a thinly veiled 'I need more money!!!' rant.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by james444 View Post

Yep, they are only slightly better than $300-$400 IEMs and it's up to one's own discretion whether the difference is worth it or not. Pretty much the same thing as upgrading from some $30-$40 IEMs to only slightly better $300-$400 IEMs. My €20 Playaz N1 (with help of a little EQ) still sound about 90% as good as any top-tier I've heard. That's the crux.



If sound leaks from an an armature then sound can enter an armature and subsequently affect sound. Not to as great a degree as your typical dynamic but affected nonetheless. As I stated before, I have never owned an armature based iem whose enclosure was so dense it didn't leak sound. Thus, it comes as no real surprise you can hear a difference, I'm more surprised it's that obvious as my last vented iem (IE7) was an almost negligible difference vents open/closed.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by james444 View Post

^ Ok, concerning the green thing: I slid a pair of small foamies over the rear ends of the FI-BA-SS. By pressing and releasing my fingertips to/from the foamies' openings it was easy to compare the sound without/with vents. Conclusion: the FADs sound noticably warmer and slightly muffled if you cover the vents. Don't know what this means for the BA design, but in any case no bullshit to my ears.


 


Edited by communic - 7/31/10 at 2:09pm
post #52 of 268

Hi.. just joined headfi.. since i'm quite interested in this comparison.. so instead of just reading thru, .. i just had register to ask james444 something 'bout the eq7 vs fx700..

so, @james444.. i got quite a few things to ask here; hope u wont mind.. im wondering..

 

1. if i consider the eq7 to have same level of bass and treble, with slightly forward mids, and vocals about half step in front; how does it compares with the fx700 in terms of the amount and level.. er.. positioning..

2. if i consider the eq7 female vocals to be slightly wet, sweet, but i kinda wish a teeny bit more.. hows the vocals on fx700.. in just sweetness and wetness..

3. for me eq7 treble is very nice, anything more is not acceptable to my ears.. im very sensitive to treble pain.. how's fx700 compare to this?

4. bass punch.. this is literally punch.. some iems give very strong impact.. some just give loud volume, but lacks impact.. i prefer it to be detailed rather than impactful.. for me the eq7 is very nice in handling it.. touchy, not punchy..

 

sry for being so specific about fx700 vs eq7.. since i only have access to eq7 for comparing, and, congrats on ur fibass, i really support ur decision in finding and getting something that u really like the sound.. it might not be perfect, but from what i read here it perfectly fits ur musical preference.. and for me that counts above sonic perfection..

 

and to everyone else.. hello? xD

post #53 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by james444 View Post


No, I wasn't. I even double checked by pressing against the back end without the foamies. The change in sound signature must be from the covered vents. But I'm dead certain dfkt will repeat this anyway. Hopefully he won't dissect them to get to the bottom of things.
 


Holy crap!  He'll let the magic green gas escape!!

post #54 of 268


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaEMoNteNTAcLe View Post

Hi.. just joined headfi.. since i'm quite interested in this comparison.. so instead of just reading thru, .. i just had register to ask james444 something 'bout the eq7 vs fx700..

so, @james444.. i got quite a few things to ask here; hope u wont mind.. im wondering..

 

1. if i consider the eq7 to have same level of bass and treble, with slightly forward mids, and vocals about half step in front; how does it compares with the fx700 in terms of the amount and level.. er.. positioning..

2. if i consider the eq7 female vocals to be slightly wet, sweet, but i kinda wish a teeny bit more.. hows the vocals on fx700.. in just sweetness and wetness..

3. for me eq7 treble is very nice, anything more is not acceptable to my ears.. im very sensitive to treble pain.. how's fx700 compare to this?

4. bass punch.. this is literally punch.. some iems give very strong impact.. some just give loud volume, but lacks impact.. i prefer it to be detailed rather than impactful.. for me the eq7 is very nice in handling it.. touchy, not punchy..

 

sry for being so specific about fx700 vs eq7.. since i only have access to eq7 for comparing, and, congrats on ur fibass, i really support ur decision in finding and getting something that u really like the sound.. it might not be perfect, but from what i read here it perfectly fits ur musical preference.. and for me that counts above sonic perfection..

 

and to everyone else.. hello? xD

 

Hello to you too and welcome to Head-Fi. If I may piggy back onto your post - James, how does the e-Q7's treble presentation compare to the SM3's within the overall frequency mix? Does it appear more prominent and extended? I assume that it is not as detailed or refined. I ask this because some e-Q7 owners have described it as having a slight roll-off. I'm trying to get a sense of where the SM3's treble presentation is placed when compared to the SE530, FX700 and the e-Q7.
 

post #55 of 268

^ James what would be your preferred sound signature between the eq7 and fx700 for vocal/trance?

post #56 of 268
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaEMoNteNTAcLe View Post

Hi.. just joined headfi.. since i'm quite interested in this comparison.. so instead of just reading thru, .. i just had register to ask james444 something 'bout the eq7 vs fx700..

so, @james444.. i got quite a few things to ask here; hope u wont mind.. im wondering..

 

1. if i consider the eq7 to have same level of bass and treble, with slightly forward mids, and vocals about half step in front; how does it compares with the fx700 in terms of the amount and level.. er.. positioning..

2. if i consider the eq7 female vocals to be slightly wet, sweet, but i kinda wish a teeny bit more.. hows the vocals on fx700.. in just sweetness and wetness..

3. for me eq7 treble is very nice, anything more is not acceptable to my ears.. im very sensitive to treble pain.. how's fx700 compare to this?

4. bass punch.. this is literally punch.. some iems give very strong impact.. some just give loud volume, but lacks impact.. i prefer it to be detailed rather than impactful.. for me the eq7 is very nice in handling it.. touchy, not punchy..

 

sry for being so specific about fx700 vs eq7.. since i only have access to eq7 for comparing, and, congrats on ur fibass, i really support ur decision in finding and getting something that u really like the sound.. it might not be perfect, but from what i read here it perfectly fits ur musical preference.. and for me that counts above sonic perfection..

 

and to everyone else.. hello? xD


Hello DaEMoNteNTAcLe (what a nickname, I'm so glad there's copy/paste), welcome to Head-Fi! I'm honored that you registered to ask me about the FX700 vs. e-Q7, yet at the same time sorry because I lent both out two days ago, so I have to answer from memory:

The FX700's mids are less forward than the Ortofon's, I consider them pretty much neutral. Female vocals are gorgeous because the FX700 has excellent timbre, but from memory I'm not so sure about the wetness (sorry, but I'd have to A/B again for that one). Anyway, if you feel the e-Q7 has the maximum acceptable amount of treble for you, I would not recommend the FX700. Don't get me wrong, I don't perceive the JVC's treble as obtrusive at all, but it is slightly more apparent than the e-Q7's. As for bass, the e-Q7 is still my favourite phone in the way it handles bass, so there's no upgrade option IMO.

 

Overall I'd rather think the SM3 would be more suited for you than the FX700, because of their rich and forward mids and very unobtrusive treble, but it depends on whether you could handle their warmth.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by iponderous View Post

Hello to you too and welcome to Head-Fi. If I may piggy back onto your post - James, how does the e-Q7's treble presentation compare to the SM3's within the overall frequency mix? Does it appear more prominent and extended? I assume that it is not as detailed or refined. I ask this because some e-Q7 owners have described it as having a slight roll-off. I'm trying to get a sense of where the SM3's treble presentation is placed when compared to the SE530, FX700 and the e-Q7.
 


It does have a slight roll-off, you can check the FR graph I posted in the other thread. And I'm pretty sure even without a FR graph that the SM3 are more extended. However, the Ortofon's roll-off is not severe to my ears and due to their leaner mids their treble feels ironically more prominent and (despite the roll-off) less lacking than the SM3's. Just in terms of treble prominence as compared to overall presentation I'd say it's SE530 < SM3 < e-Q7 < FX700.

post #57 of 268
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by rskbug View Post

^ James what would be your preferred sound signature between the eq7 and fx700 for vocal/trance?


No easy question, IMO they are very close. The FX700's bass impact, 3D soundstage and airiness with trance is stunning, but the e-Q7 have fantastic bass texture and are a tiny bit faster. Overall I think I'd still pick the Ortofons, because too much bass pounding (even from great quality bass like the FX700's) tends to give me a headache after prolonged listening.

post #58 of 268

^ Helpful and much appreciated as usual thanks James.

post #59 of 268

thx 4 d answer and suggestion. daemon is just fine.. i'd like to keep my nick standard.

but.. similar 2 u.. i dont like to be standing on stage, and i dont like warmth that can be heard.. out of those i tried, i already crosses westone, um2,um3x, sm3, and a few others  from my list..

so does means the treble on the fx700 are still very smooth, refined, and just more prominent than the eq7?

as long as the mids are mostly the main attention, followed by bass, and lastly treble.. i guess it'll be fine for me tho..

shure just happen to be too 'fat' for my liking.. :D

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by james444 View Post


Hello DaEMoNteNTAcLe (what a nickname, I'm so glad there's copy/paste), welcome to Head-Fi! I'm honored that you registered to ask me about the FX700 vs. e-Q7, yet at the same time sorry because I lent both out two days ago, so I have to answer from memory:

The FX700's mids are less forward than the Ortofon's, I consider them pretty much neutral. Female vocals are gorgeous because the FX700 has excellent timbre, but from memory I'm not so sure about the wetness (sorry, but I'd have to A/B again for that one). Anyway, if you feel the e-Q7 has the maximum acceptable amount of treble for you, I would not recommend the FX700. Don't get me wrong, I don't perceive the JVC's treble as obtrusive at all, but it is slightly more apparent than the e-Q7's. As for bass, the e-Q7 is still my favourite phone in the way it handles bass, so there's no upgrade option IMO.

 

Overall I'd rather think the SM3 would be more suited for you than the FX700, because of their rich and forward mids and very unobtrusive treble, but it depends on whether you could handle their warmth.
 


It does have a slight roll-off, you can check the FR graph I posted in the other thread. And I'm pretty sure even without a FR graph that the SM3 are more extended. However, the Ortofon's roll-off is not severe to my ears and due to their leaner mids their treble feels ironically more prominent and (despite the roll-off) less lacking than the SM3's. Just in terms of treble prominence as compared to overall presentation I'd say it's SE530 < SM3 < e-Q7 < FX700.


 

post #60 of 268
Thread Starter 

^ Treble quality on the FX700 is fine. It's just a bit more prominent than on the e-Q7. The FX700 are my favourite DD IEMs, IMO they have only two weaknesses, lack of isolation and a smidge too much upper bass (but nowhere near the IE8's hump).

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