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 6

post #76 of 268
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by yello131 View Post

I could share with you same trends with classical music


Thanks, I've been getting some great recommendations from the music forum and I'm always open to suggestions. My favourite pieces are mostly orchestral and I love added vocals and/or chorus, like those majestic Mahler symphonies or Vaughan Williams' Sea Symphony.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by yello131 View Post

...not that you really need another set of BA driver IEM, dont you?

 

No I don't, but unfortunately that's not the point.

post #77 of 268

At least you have some BA universal James :P For someone who prefers BA over dynamics ironically I no longer own any BA universals as all of my universals are dynamics. PL30, M9, Eterna and RE-Zero are all dynamic. Although I do own one BA at least but no universals :T

 

I forgot about it earlier but if there's nothing wrong with ride and crash then I think it's fine. It's more when you notice something odd about it that means something is wrong. That was the case with the CK10 with them although they still remain my favorite universal with the e-Q7 coming at a very close 2nd. That for some reason makes these very tempting :P

post #78 of 268

Hi james444,

 

just wanted to say excellent job on the review.  Very carefully done and quite extensive!  I like how you laid it out, too.  It was a good read.

post #79 of 268

WOW ! Great review man ! I am impressed :) How do these sound compared to Radius DDM ? Where can i buy this online ?

post #80 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by richbass View Post

WOW ! Great review man ! I am impressed :) How do these sound compared to Radius DDM ? Where can i buy this online ?

Which IEM, SM3 or Fi-BA-SS?
 

post #81 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by yello131 View Post



Which IEM, SM3 or Fi-BA-SS?
 


Hmm.. BOTH :P especially in the BASS department :P

post #82 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by richbass View Post




Hmm.. BOTH :P especially in the BASS department :P


SM3 cost $400 USD here http://www.earsonics.com/SM3%20engl.htm

Fi-BA-SS cost more then double the price around $1000 USD

you can get them from the same place where DDM sell

http://www.musicaacoustics.com/Welcome.html

post #83 of 268

What about the sound comparison :P

post #84 of 268

The SM3 have quite a bit more bass than the FI-BA-SS, both quantity- and quality wise. FI-BA-SS roll off the lowest octave and are very "polite", i.e. not very punchy. SM3 go down deeper and are very dynamic. Both of them have good bass texture and overall control, though.


Edited by dfkt - 9/5/10 at 7:16am
post #85 of 268


Hello @ dfkt. Which has better (more) bass: the FI-BA-SS or e-Q7?

Quote:
Originally Posted by dfkt View Post

The SM3 have quite a bit more bass than the FI-BA-SS, both quantity- and quality wise. FI-BA-SS roll off the lowest octave and are very "polite", i.e. not very punchy. SM3 go down deeper and are very dynamic. Both of them have good bass texture and overall control, though.

post #86 of 268
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by richbass View Post

Hmm.. BOTH :P especially in the BASS department :P

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dfkt View Post

The SM3 have quite a bit more bass than the FI-BA-SS, both quantity- and quality wise. FI-BA-SS roll off the lowest octave and are very "polite", i.e. not very punchy. SM3 go down deeper and are very dynamic. Both of them have good bass texture and overall control, though.


x2, as far as bass quantity and extension are concerned. The SM3 and FX700 are the two basshead phones in this contest. Bass on the FI-BA-SS is very similar to the e-Q7's, which is no surprise because they're both moving armature IEMs. Speaking of which, to my ears moving armature based IEMs have the best bass quality I've heard. Though not the deepest and punchiest, they have more realistic decay than other analytical phones (e.g. the CK10), but at the same time stay incredibly clean and without a trace of muddiness even with very bass heavy material.

 

That's not to say that the SM3 or FX700 have subpar bass quality, IMO they just fall a tiny bit short of that moving armature's ultimate definition and clarity. Yet differences are very slight and as a basshead I'd surely pick the SM3 or FX700 over the e-Q7 and FI-BA-SS for bass quantity alone.

post #87 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by yello131 View Post




SM3 cost $400 USD here http://www.earsonics.com/SM3%20engl.htm

Fi-BA-SS cost more then double the price around $1000 USD

you can get them from the same place where DDM sell

http://www.musicaacoustics.com/Welcome.html


If you buy off of soundearphones.com, you can get the SM3 for under $310. This in turn makes the FI-BA-SS more than 3 times the cost of the SM3.

post #88 of 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericp10 View Post


Hello @ dfkt. Which has better (more) bass: the FI-BA-SS or e-Q7?


 


I returned the e-Q7 to James444 (reluctantly ;)), but from memory the e-Q7 had some more bass than the FADs, quantity- and impact-wise. They had a similar rolled off deepest octave, too.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by james444 View Post

 

 


x2, as far as bass quantity and extension are concerned. The SM3 and FX700 are the two basshead phones in this contest. Bass on the FI-BA-SS is very similar to the e-Q7's, which is no surprise because they're both moving armature IEMs. Speaking of which, to my ears moving armature based IEMs have the best bass quality I've heard. Though not the deepest and punchiest, they have more realistic decay than other analytical phones (e.g. the CK10), but at the same time stay incredibly clean and without a trace of muddiness even with very bass heavy material.

 

That's not to say that the SM3 or FX700 have subpar bass quality, IMO they just fall a tiny bit short of that moving armature's ultimate definition and clarity. Yet differences are very slight and as a basshead I'd surely pick the SM3 or FX700 over the e-Q7 and FI-BA-SS for bass quantity alone.


I certainly wouldn't call the SM3 basshead phones, especially compared to the likes of the FX700. Of course we hear things different (or hear for different things), but for me the FX700 have gigantic bass, like the Hippo VB, the SM3 have natural bass (perfect for my ear's equal loudness contour and my current state of brain-burn-in), and the FI-BA-SS I perceive as very light on bass - lighter than PFE with grey filters or RE0, maybe along the lines of Ety. For my taste it's clearly not enough without some EQing. It's a bit misleading them having "BA-SS" in the name (I know it probably stands for "Balance Armature - Solid Steel", or something). :)

post #89 of 268
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfkt View Post

...from memory the e-Q7 had some more bass than the FADs, quantity- and impact-wise. They had a similar rolled off deepest octave, too.


I can understand that impression, although my listening notes in post #1 state otherwise. I think because the FI-BA-SS have more prominent highs than the e-Q7, they tend to appear somewhat lighter in bass. But I bet if you'd A/B them and concentrated on the bass range you'd find the same.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dfkt View Post

I certainly wouldn't call the SM3 basshead phones, especially compared to the likes of the FX700. Of course we hear things different (or hear for different things), but for me the FX700 have gigantic bass, like the Hippo VB, the SM3 have natural bass (perfect for my ear's equal loudness contour and my current state of brain-burn-in), and the FI-BA-SS I perceive as very light on bass - lighter than PFE with grey filters or RE0, maybe along the lines of Ety. For my taste it's clearly not enough without some EQing. It's a bit misleading them having "BA-SS" in the name (I know it probably stands for "Balance Armature - Solid Steel", or something). :)

 

We hear things differently and equally important, we also listen to different kinds of music. Plus there's the aspect of looking at the sound signature of IEMs as a whole, versus looking specifically at a certain frequency range (bass/mids/highs).

 

The FX700 have clearly more bass quantity than the SM3, if you just look at bass alone. Yet the JVCs have also very forward highs to counterbalance that bass. In comparison the SM3 have rather laid-back upper mids and highs, and therefore (to my ears) their overall sound signature is warmer and more tipped towards the lower frequencies than the FX700's.

 

Oh and X2 on FI-BA-SS, they obviously didn't think twice about chosing that name.

post #90 of 268

   The two main earphones I've been listening too recently are my FI-BA-SS and eq-7's. Bass is pretty much equal to my ears. Highs are where the FADs are noticeably different. Better and more clear, but harsher on some recordings.

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